noelindublin wrote:

---

Doing some 'research' on YouTube I got to wondering what was the most uncool, naff band ever and just about remembering their 'work' from the 1970's my award goes to the Brotherhood Of Man.

I had completely forgotten about Figaro, one of their hits and it suddenly brough back vague memories, and also their hit Angelo from around 1977/78. Who actually bought these records to make them Top 10 hits? What were they on?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CN314Fy8Yw4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wngCttY0Kc

---

 I really liked the Brotherhood of Man!  And Angelo was on my Xmas list (ok I was only about 11) so have to admit some responsibility for record sales!  I admit Figaro wasn't quite so good and I subsequently lost interest in them, though always quite admired the man with the moustache ........

But thanks for the links - brought back some happy memories

One of the 'lost' pop stars of the 1970's was Noosha Fox who released lots of really good singles and also worked with a band called Fox in the earlier part of the decade.

Alison Goldfrapp is a big fan, and admits that part of Goldfrapp's image is 'borrowed' from Noosha Fox. Noosha Fox is really strange and a bit of a cult figure. She's got a really great voice. This song from 1979 is called The Heat Is On, plus If You Don't Want My Peaches from 1981.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujF6COoUqBg&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlCKgdVOXcI&feature=related

Tough question. Depends how you define cool. For me it's partly about having a genuine talent that majority haven't, something to be admired whether it's fashionable or not, but mostly about having courage of your convictions, where the opinions of the majority don't particularly influence you (ergo all Rats fans are uber cool ).

Think in the immediate consciousness we home in on whatever was popular but not trendy just before you hit about 14 years old, the point at which you start to formulate your own views and identity, hence many of us no doubt selecting Brotherhood of Man, Genesis etc. Could add Paper Lace, Goldie, maybe even ELO, though clearly not Boney M (my faves...apparently). I'd grudgingly admit though they were all at least musicians, who no doubt worked the circuit for years to get their break, so therefore for me deserve more credit than they get. 

There's also the couldn't give a monkeys factor to consider, for those bands who never ostensibly wanted to be fashionable or cool, or act like it, which immediately brackets them as uncool with the fickle masses, but doesn't to my mind mean they're not cool. I'd put Rats, Pulp, Take That and any bands who inject a bit of humour and have ability to laugh at themselves in that bracket. For me, being secure enough to do that is coolness personified.

I glaze over when it comes to things like prog rock and overly earnest musicians who take themselves far too seriously; might be deemed 'uncool' but I just find them predominantly tedious.

So, in terms of all time uncool I'd probably have to go for one of the relatively recent reality show groups, more interested in celebrity than creativity, geared up for fashion and short lived fame, no experience, nothing to say, hand picked for looks and dance moves and not an instrument in sight.

Take your pick.  

ArrGee wrote:

---

ArrGee wrote:

---

 I nominate U2. 

---

Thinking about it, this is unfair, because up to Achtung Baby, U2 were pretty cool. 

I had forgotten about Genesis.  There were stupendously uncool in their own right yet managed to produce the devil's spawn of Peter Gabriel, Phil Collins and Mike & The Mechanics (The Living Years must be a contender for the lamest rock song ever).    They are responsible for the naffest collection of songs foisted on planet earth. 

I think it's unfair to consider acts like Brotherhood of Man as they never had any pretentions of being a rock band and were simply just put together to enter Eurovision.  Whereas Genecide (sic) actually believed they were a bonafide rock band, along with the multitudes who bought the records and attended the concerts.

Trust me, if someone has a Genecide (or a  Peter Gabriel, Phil Collins, Mike & The Mechanics) record/CD in their collection they are highly likely to be as dull and pretentious as the band.

---

 oh yes phil collins = pretty naff

Lisa wrote:

---

Re: Dire Straits, love the music but saw them live many years ago - and it was very disappointing as they never talked to audience or had any rapport with them, just played the songs, not sure if that was an attempt to seem cool - if it was, it didn't work! Just seemed a bit rude! And pointless - could have stayed at home and listened to the CD

---

 Always considered the "Straits" part a bit superfluous myself....right up there with those tedious prog rockers. Too dull to be rated on coolness either way.

Lisa wrote:

---

 Will bring some of my CD collection along on Friday in an attempt to educate you!  Plus a mallet if that fails to impress .......

Regards

Mrs Too Dull To Be Cool

---

 Wouldn't bother, I've got a Ford. The designers put in an engine cut off as soon as CD player detects a Dire Straits disc.

Apparently it's a safety measure to prevent driver falling asleep at wheel.

Some random observations....

I've never taken fully to The Strokes who are considered 'cool'. They always have that studied cool look, like an authentic New York band from the late 1970's but I find their music weak, though not necessarily bad. They come across to me as a bit contrived, musically as well as in 'supercool' looks. I call this look 'designercool'. Geldof's line  from Don't Talk To Me sums them up -'You seem so real/ but you feel so fake...'

Prog Rock might be ok if the songs were a bit shorter, but one of my pet hates is overlong pieces of music that just meander on and on after they have made their point. Prog Rock can be quite interesting if the pieces are less than six minutes but that rarely happens. I think the punk rock retort to prog was having songs that generally lasted three minutes. Recently The Vaccines released a song which was 1 m 45 secs long called Wrekin Bar as a single.

Finally did you hear about the Irish comedian who complained that he wasn't being taken seriously?  (groan)

noelindublin wrote:

---

Finally did you hear about the Irish comedian who complained that he wasn't being taken seriously?  (groan)

---

 Yep, apparently everyone laughed at him when he told them he was going to be a comedian.  No one's laughing at him now...

Lisa wrote:

---

Still think it depends on whether you think being cool in itself is desirable....

Re: Genesis/Peter Gabriel - not overly keen on stuff released as singles but some of album stuff is good or maybe just grows on you after being brainwashed by listening to it over years! Always remember a friend of mine whose wife loved the single Kayleigh by Marillion (another band I have had played at me a lot in the past!!) and then bought the album and was shocked at all the expletives as it wasn't what she had expected. So maybe bands sometimes mislead people into thinking they are something they are not in reality. But I guess that's how they make money!

---

 Kayleigh was from the album Misplaced Childhood, which didn't have any expletives. But the previous album, Fugazi, did in the song "She Chameleon", so that must have been the album she bought.

BTW, for me there is one band that is surely the least cool band in the world, and that is Marillion, who I think have to be even less cool than Genesis. I could give numerous reasons why they are the least cool band ever (a prog-rock band in the '80s when prog was supposed to be dead and buried, trying to sound like Genesis when even Genesis didn't want to sound like Genesis), but I think the keyboardist Mark Kelly summed it up perfectly:

We have got a bit of a reputation. I had a conversation with Noel Gallagher at a party once and said to him, 'I'm in a band but it's the most uncool band in the world - Marillion'. He went, 'Yeah, you're right.' Deadpan! Not even smiling.

End of debate I reckon.

ArrGee wrote:

---

 Not having that.  They ain't famous enough to be uncool.   

---

 They were famous enough in the '80s. They played a packed Milton Keynes Bowl in 1986.

Most young people today have probably never heard of them (but that's only because they've been totally frozen out by the media and music press since the '80s because of the very fact they were so uncool) but they still sell albums (I spotted at least seven in my local HMV store recently) and to people who remember the '80s music scene, Marillion will always be one of - if the most - embarrassing band to admit to ever liking.

I maintain that back in the '80s, they were the most uncool band around by quite some stretch. Do you know any other band that has to put on their website a statement like this:

Marillion are used to fighting misconceptions. Marillion are not what you think they are. No, really, they're not.

An undisputed fact that is worth repeating. Marillion are not what you think they are.

Just remember that whatever your pre-conceptions are about this band, chances are they are wrong.

Listen!...find out for yourself.

http://www.marillion.com/band/pressroom.htm

THAT is uncool!!!

Matthew Wright wrote:

---

ArrGee wrote:

---

 Not having that.  They ain't famous enough to be uncool.   

---

 They were famous enough in the '80s. They played a packed Milton Keynes Bowl in 1986.

---

 Think I might have seen that - unless my addled brain has confused dates again Did it end up with a firework show?  Or maybe I'm imagining that   Anyway have to admit I saw them a fair few times and they did a bloody good live show, very entertaining, lots of energy and charisma (from Fish at least).  Maybe it was just the fans that were uncool.  I mean some bands just seem to attract a certain kind of weirdo   Maybe I should leave it there .......

ArrGee wrote:

---

I don't think Marillion are an uncool band to like.  

---

Bollocks. They've even described themselves as the most uncool band in the world. They have printed T-shirts called "Uncool as ****".

From Wikipedia:

Marillion in the media

By their own admission, the band have never been fashionable in the eyes of the media. On the subject of joining the band, Steve Hogarth once said: "At about the same time, Matt Johnson of The The asked me to play piano on his tour. I always say I had to make a choice between the most hip band in the world, and the least." In the same interview, he claimed: "We're just tired of the opinions of people who haven't heard anything we've done in ten years. A lot of what's spread about this band is laughable."^[20]

Much of the bands enduring and unfashionable reputation stems from their emergence in the early 1980s as the most commercially successful band of the neo-progressive rock movement, an unexpected revival of the progressive rock musical style that had fallen out of critical favour in the mid-1970s. Some early critics were quick to dismiss the band as clones of Peter Gabriel-era Genesis due to musical similarities, such as their extended songs, a prominent and Mellotron-influenced keyboard sound, vivid and fantastical lyrics and the equally vivid and fantastical artwork by Mark Wilkinson used for the sleeves of their albums and singles. Lead singer Fish was also often compared with Gabriel due to his early vocal style and theatrical stage performances, which in the early years often included wearing face paint. In fact, Marillion's influences were more diverse than that. Fish was heavily influenced by Peter Hammill, two of guitarist Steve Rothery's biggest influences were David Gilmour and Andrew Latimer, keyboard player Mark Kelly's biggest inspiration was Rick Wakeman, Pete Trewavas especially loved Paul McCartney's bass lines and Mick Pointer was fond of Neil Peart's drumming.

As Jonh Wilde summarised in Melody Maker in 1989: "At the end of a strange year for pop music, Marillion appeared in November 1982 with "Market Square Heroes". There were many strange things about 1982, but Marillion were the strangest of them all. For six years, they stood out of time. Marillion were the unhippest group going. As punk was becoming a distant echo, they appeared with a sound and an attitude that gazed back longingly to the age of Seventies pomp. When compared to Yes, Genesis and ELP, they would take it as a compliment. The Eighties have seen some odd phenomena. But none quite as odd as Marillion. Along the way, as if by glorious fluke, they turned out some singles that everybody quietly liked "Garden Party", "Punch and Judy" and "Incommunicado". By this time, Marillion did not need the support of the hip-conscious. They were massive. Perhaps the oddest thing about Marillion was that they became one of the biggest groups of the decade. They might have been an anomaly but they were monstrously effective."^[40]

The band's unfashionable reputation and image problem has often been mentioned in the media, even in otherwise positive reviews. In Q in 1987, David Hepworth claimed: "Marillion may represent the inelegant, unglamorous, public bar end of the current Rock Renaissance but they are no less part of it for that. Clutching at Straws suggests that they may be finally coming in from the cold."^[41] In the same magazine in 1995, Dave Henderson wrote: "It's not yet possible to be sacked for showing an affinity for Marillion, but has there ever been a band with a larger stigma attached?" He also claimed that if the album Afraid of Sunlight "had been made by a new, no baggage-of-the-past combo, it would be greeted with open arms, hailed as virtual genius."^[42] In Record Collector in 2002, Tim Jones claimed they were "one of the most unfairly berated bands in Britain" and "one of its best live rock acts."^[43] In 2004, Classic Rock's Jon Hotten wrote: "That genre thing has been a bugbear of Marillion's, but it no longer seems relevant. What are Radiohead if not a progressive band?" and claimed Marillion were "making strong, singular music with the courage of their convictions, and we should treasure them more than we do."^[32] In the Q & Mojo Classic Special Edition Pink Floyd & The Story of Prog Rock, an article on Marillion written by Mick Wall described them as probably the most misunderstood band in the world.^[44] In 2007, Stephen Dalton of The Times stated: The band have just released their 14th album, Somewhere Else, which is really rather good. Containing tracks that shimmer like Coldplay, ache like Radiohead and thunder like Muse, it is better than 80 per cent of this months releases. But you are unlikely to hear Marillion on British radio, read about them in the music press or see them play a major festival. This is largely because Marillion have how can we put this kindly? an image problem. Their music is still perceived as bloated, bombastic mullet-haired prog-rock, even by people who have never heard it. In fairness, they did once release an album called Script for a Jester's Tear. But, come on, we all had bad hair days in the 1980s."^[45]

Despite publishing a very good review for their 1995 album Afraid of Sunlight and including it in their 50 Best Albums of 1995, Q refused to interview the band or write a feature on them. Steve Hogarth later said: "How can they say, this is an amazing record... no, we don't want to talk to you? It's hard to take when they say, here's a very average record... we'll put you on the front cover."^[20]

In 1999, DJ Simon Mayo commented on BBC Radio 1: "Marillion ... where are they now? And who cares anyway?" Fans objecting to the comment brought the station's computer system to a standstill with thousands of emails of complaint. Mayo subsequently apologised for his comment to keyboard player Mark Kelly when he phoned the show to take part in a quiz.^[46]

To accompany the release of Anoraknophobia in 2001, the band issued a press release asking critics to review the album in "a manner that is both accurate and fair. So, our challenge to you is to firstly listen to the album. Then write a review without using any of the following words: "Progressive rock", "Genesis", "Fish", "heavy metal", "dinosaurs", "predictable", "concept album". Because if you do, we'll know that you haven't listened to it."^[46]

Reviewing the band's appearance on BBC Two's The Future Just Happened in 2001, Gareth McLean of The Guardian described the band as "once dodgy and now completely rubbish" and their fans as "slightly simple folks". He also dismissed the band's efforts to continue their career without a label by dealing directly with their fans on the Internet, claiming: "One suspects that their decision occurred round about the time that the record industry decided to shun Marillion."^[47]

Rachel Cooke, a writer for The Observer and New Statesman, has repeatedly referred negatively to the band in her articles. She has characterized the band's fans as "geeks" and as "repulsive, bedroom-dwelling, ball-scratching, Y-front-wearing and sock-masturbating".^{[48][49][50][51]}

In an interview in 2000, Hogarth expressed regret about the band retaining their name after he joined: "If we had known when I joined Marillion what we know now, we'd have changed the name and been a new band. It was a mistake to keep the name, because what it represented in the mid-Eighties is a millstone we now carry. If we'd changed it, I think we would have been better off. We would have been judged for our music. It's such a grave injustice that the media constantly calls us a 'dinosaur prog band'. They only say that out of ignorance because they haven't listened to anything we've done for the last 15 bloody years. If you hear anything we've done in the last five or six years, that description is totally irrelevant... It's a massive frustration that no-one will play our stuff. If we send our single to Radio 1 they say: 'Sorry, we don't play music by bands who are over so-many years old... and here's the new U2 single.' I suppose it's something everyone has to cope with every band are remembered for their big hit single, irrespective of how much they change over the years. But you can only transcend that by continuing to have hits. It's Catch 22." However, Hogarth was still able to be optimistic: "You know, at some stage, someone has to notice that we're doing interesting things. Someday someone will take a retrospective look at us and be surprised."^[52]

The band have been prepared to send up their unfashionable status, naming their 2001 album "Anoraknophobia" and printing T-shirts with the logo "Marillion: Uncool as F*ck."

Despite a return to the Top 10 of the UK Singles Chart with 2004's "You're Gone", the media's perception of Marillion failed to soften.^[53]

 I think "repulsive, bedroom-dwelling, ball-scratching, Y-front-wearing and sock-masturbating" is my favourite line.

-- Edited by Matthew Wright on Sunday 5th of May 2013 08:13:08 AM

Lisa wrote:

---

noelindublin wrote:

---

Doing some 'research' on YouTube I got to wondering what was the most uncool, naff band ever and just about remembering their 'work' from the 1970's my award goes to the Brotherhood Of Man.

I had completely forgotten about Figaro, one of their hits and it suddenly brough back vague memories, and also their hit Angelo from around 1977/78. Who actually bought these records to make them Top 10 hits? What were they on?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CN314Fy8Yw4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wngCttY0Kc

---

 I really liked the Brotherhood of Man!  And Angelo was on my Xmas list (ok I was only about 11) so have to admit some responsibility for record sales!  I admit Figaro wasn't quite so good and I subsequently lost interest in them, though always quite admired the man with the moustache ........

But thanks for the links - brought back some happy memories

---

 Ooh, now I'm happy!  Not only is it Friday, but they've just played Save All Your Kisses For Me on radio 2  I'm just SO cool