I have been watching clips from the festival all week and what is there to say? There are dozens of huge festivals all over the world each year, but playing at Glastonbury carries a certain gravitas and historical importance that other festivals can't match. I think the artists have bought into this too.
A lot has changed over the years. Miley Cyrus got into the Glastonbury spirit with a kitchen sink set of her songs, covers, and guest appearances. Can you imagine Mariah Carey or any of her contemporary female solo stars playing Glastonbury in the 90's? Or even Alanis Morrissette, to name a 90's artist more similar to Miley? It was unthinkable. When it came to festivals, Americans only knew Woodstock, which was a one off. In the post Woodstock era, festivals were the domain of hippies who liked folksy, countercultural bands that flew under the radar and were never heard on the radio. Festivals weren't the place for real stars. Today, Glastonbury is truly a global festival, on everyone's radar.
Glastonbury used to be a platform for underappreciated artists. Those 90's lineups are littered with bands who were ascending and "deserved" their chance to break through by headlining somewhere. Pulp's headlining set in 1995 (replacing the Stone Roses who cancelled after guitarist John Squire broke his arm mountain biking) is legendary. Radiohead's headlining set in 1997 is legendary for different reasons -- they held a huge crowd in a rapture, and made them forget their weekend of misery in horrendously muddy conditions -- and cemented the status they enjoy today. Skunk Anansie, Ash, and Carter USM all headlined (all three had huge hit albums in the UK but were never quite mainstream).
This year, that artist in that position was Stormzy. The Killers were arguably in that position when they headlined ... in 2007. What changes over twelve years these days? Didn't that used to be an eternity? The basis of The Killers' set list hasn't changed a whole lot since 2007, they still sculpt their gigs biggest moments around the hits from their first two albums. The Killers were classic rock almost upon arrival. Kylie had to pull out of her headlining spot in 2005 and here she was in 2019, still a legend, and attracting the biggest crowd of the festival and on TV. When the Stone Roses cancelled in 1995 they lost their chance to regain their spot at the peak of British rock. That chance was gone forever, the industry changed too quickly in those days, and they were broken up less than two years later.
Speaking of never changing, take The Cure. This year, everyone was in reverence over how brilliant they still sound after all these years. NME readers voted them the best headlining set of the weekend. The last time, they headlined, in 1995, nobody was talking about The Cure, least of all NME readers. I know because I read the NME nearly weekly in those days and The Cure's headlining set drew about two lines of coverage. People were giddy about Pulp stealing the festival, and whether Oasis were cracking under the pressure of the spotlight. The Cure had been inactive for about two years and already felt like antiques from a different era. They were giants who you had to respect in their spot, but they could no longer define the narrative.
This year, The Cure are still antiques from a different era, but it scarcely matters. They can play headlining sets at whatever festivals they want under the earth falls into the sun. Each time they blow away a festival crowd feels like the first time. They're as legendary as the Stones, but with a key difference. "Disintegration" could be released tomorrow, as is, and would still be a huge phenomenon. The lyrics, music, and production have all stayed current. Think about that, "Disintegration" is thirty years old (!!). When it was released in 1989, which 1959 rock god could have had a hit single or album in the then contemporary climate? Can you even imagine it?
No comments:
Post a Comment