Jump to content

Glasto


huncamunca

Recommended Posts

Surely Bono was more of a cock than CM? That bit where he pretended to be a bull, made horns and charged "The Edge", his simulated live making and leather trousers. And the obligatory headliner mention of Leylines. All the work of a clown. But a very professional clown.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moos Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well done maxxi, balance of the elements restored.

> End of universe averted, stars can stop falling

> from the sky now.



*sniffs air in suspicion*... you sure that's not a line from a CP song?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well, let's think. The ones with 30,000 people

> singing along in unison from start to end are

> probably the good ones.


"Popular" is not the same as "good".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know the same goes for 'unpopular', right?


Poor Jeremy. Was it the sight of all those fresh-faced youngsters with their whole lives ahead of them, singing away, arm in arm. It is disheartening, I know. But at least you can feel secure in the knowledge that popular is not the the same as good. The fools!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yeah, plenty of bad 'unpopular' music too. I just fail to understand what people see in Coldplay.


In particular, I don't know why these "fresh-faced youngsters with their whole lives ahead of them" would be interested in such an insipid dirge.


Perhaps the dead Tory guy had been subjected to both the U2 and Coldplay sets, and lost all will to carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zane Lowe - he's been around for years on the VH1/MTV2 channels and more recently at BBC


The sort of guy who would sneer at you if you asked for the wrong album in a Manchester record shop, it's fair to say


Speaking of U2, whatever your view it was great to see Larry being so brutally honest in that interview. I've always liked him. He didn't go so far as to say "meh" but that was the vibe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was weird to see 'roving reports' from such areas as the Stone Circle and green fields - and only ever seeing about six people sitting there.


But I'm prepared to admit that the long term future of the festival won't be secured by ageing hippies beating pieces of bronze whilst people who've forgotten where their tent is look-on, waiting for the acid to wear off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Well worth signing up to become a "supporter" as they send their updates and often shed light on things the council and their supporters would rather didn't get too much attention! https://www.onedulwich.uk/get-involved
    • Spot on...and they rant against "anonymous" groups like One Dulwich and then post missives from "anonymous" lobby groups like Clean Air Dulwich without any sense of hypocrisy or irony...
    • The original council proposals for the area around the Dulwich cross roads were made well before Covid - and were rejected then by locals. The council used the Covid legislation to push through the LTNs when opposition was not allowed. LTNs, as experiments were some good (reduced traffic in areas which did not push traffic elsewhere and which did meet the needs of residents - typically in places very well served by public transport and where the topology (absence e.g. of hills) allowed wide use of cycling and walking - not as it happens a good description of the Dulwich (inc ED, WD and ND) areas.)  Dulwich never met Southwark's own description of ideal LTN areas, but did happen to match Southwark Councillor ambitions dating way back. One Dulwich has been clear, I believe that it is anti this LTN but not, necessarily all LTNs per se. But as it is One Dulwich is has not stated views about LTNs in general. In the main those prepared to make a view known, in Dulwich, have not supported the Council's LTN ambitions locally - whilst some, living in the LTN area, have gained personal benefit. But it would appear not even a majority of those living in the LTN area have supported the LTN. And certainly not those living immediately outside the area where traffic has worsened. As a resident of Underhill, a remaining access route to the South Circular, I can confirm that I am suffering increased traffic and blockages in rush hours whilst living some way away from the LTN. All this - 'I want to name the guilty parties' -' is One Dulwich a secret fascists cabal whose only interest is being anti-Labour?' conspiracy theorising is frankly irrelevant - whoever they are they seem to represent feelings of a majority of actual residents either in the LTNs, or in parts of Dulwich impacted by the LTNs. And I'm beginning to find these 'Answer me this...' tirades frankly irritating.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...