Topic: Chart Music Podcast 2 (Man Sound) - ITS PIPOU TIME!

[dr beat]

Thinking about years they haven't covered, I think they've pretty much done all the 70s, although not sure if they've covered 1972.

Also not covered yet as far as I'm aware: 1988, 1990, 1992, 1993, 1997 to 1999, and anything after 2000 (but would understand if they might not find any mileage in the 20th century TOTPs).

1988 might be a decent-ish year to look at, although that was my prime TOTP time so might be a little biased, but I recall plenty of decent dancey stuff even before that year's summer - Coldcut, Bomb the Bass etc.

[daf]

Thinking about years they haven't covered, I think they've pretty much done all the 70s, although not sure if they've covered 1972.

There aren't that many to choose from -

22 June 1972 : Presenter: Ed Stewart
16 November 1972 : Presenter: Jimmy Savile   
28 December 1972 : Presenters: Noel Edmonds & Tony Blackburn

Unfortunately, all three are problematic - as Glitter features in the two non-Savile editions!

[dr beat]

Oof yes, I can see why now!

[Nice Relaxing Poo]

I think they should let bygones be bygones and give old Jimmy a chance.

[dr beat]

They have had to deal with Glitter before, and I think they did a good job.  Ed Stewart though...

[Brundle-Fly]

I think they can more than deal with Savile sensitively and forensically, although I think that might be the longest podcast ever, let alone CMP.

[Rizla]

I'm sure they could, but I applaud them for choosing to steer clear of those episodes wholesale. It's one thing joking around DLT's workplace bullying and handsiness, quite another when it's one of the most evil sick abusive monsters this country has ever produced, a Giles De Rais wannabe nightmare who basically groomed a nation. Far far too traumatic a subject for a funny podcast. If they run out of episodes of TOTP there's always the Tube, or a Live Aid special, or Saturday Swapshop etc etc.

[Satchmo Distel]

I don't think they've done a proper T Rex or Roxy Music analysis, partly because of the 1972 problem.

What's missing with The Smiths is Simon Price's perspective, although I appreciate the jokes Taylor throws in at Morrissey's expense.

[Camp Tramp]

I don't believe that Wham have been covered yet. At least according to Al when I asked him on Twitter.

[DrGreggles]

Erasure?

[dr beat]

No she deleted herself![1]

1.

sorry

[justin_bennett]

The Cure? Not yet I don't think.

Just finished the latest - up there with the best yet (I say that every time), but a particularly good Easter Egg at the end.

Long may it continue...

[badaids]

They have to cover Savile at some point. 1. He was a key part it totp for most of its existence. 2. There is so much of interest to cover there And we know they would treat it with the incisiveness and intellect that it deserves.. 3. Why the fuck not - if nonces, pervs and cunts are out of bounds then they have already broken that rule on half a dozen or so presenters and performers.

And as for the Smiths - I also remember Stubbs claiming that he didn’t like them because there is no blackness in their music - which is a big dollop off wrong from him. And Taylor describing Mike Joyce as a groovless clod hopping oaf of a drummer which is unnecessarily harsh but also true.

And as for Bowie - there is Taylor’s typically acidic but honest put down of Ashes to Ashes; that it’s his best song but the video - man reacting to a paparazzi like he’s been shit and a Pierrot walking down a beach is Bad Art.

Erasure and The Cure were the two band that I’m hoping they’ll cover soon.

And I love Neil but please if he is reading this - please stop qualifying every statement  with ‘in a sense’, or ‘in a very real way,.

[Rizla]

Why the fuck not - if nonces, pervs and cunts are out of bounds then they have already broken that rule on half a dozen or so presenters and performers.

The closest they've come to discussing an actual wrong 'un, (Glitter aside and I don't think they went into much detail did they?) was Tam Paton and J King, and they made the point that as much of a cunt as both men undoubtedly were, they drew much more fire due to their sexuality than say Jimmy Page or any other sexual exploiter of minors, esp given the difference in age of consent laws. But to reiterate, Savile wasn't *just* a nonce, he was a serial, systematic exploiter, a hugely sinister and violent figure, picking the most vulnerable victims imaginable, not to mention a fucking necrophile. There is no comparison between his crimes and the others. No-one else even comes close.

[dr beat]

There's a relatively lengthy discussion about Glitter in one of the earliest episodes, where Simon talks about DJing his stuff.

[Rizla]

There's a relatively lengthy discussion about Glitter in one of the earliest episodes, where Simon talks about DJing his stuff.

The other thing is, it's up for discussion whether or not we can distinguish the man from the artist, and Glitter made some undeniably excellent records. Johnathan King, not so much. But Jimmy Savile? Happily erase that cunt from history entirely, except as a cautionary tale. He contributed nothing of worth.

[badaids]

The closest they've come to discussing an actual wrong 'un, (Glitter aside and I don't think they went into much detail did they?) was Tam Paton and J King, and they made the point that as much of a cunt as both men undoubtedly were, they drew much more fire due to their sexuality than say Jimmy Page or any other sexual exploiter of minors, esp given the difference in age of consent laws. But to reiterate, Savile wasn't *just* a nonce, he was a serial, systematic exploiter, a hugely sinister and violent figure, picking the most vulnerable victims imaginable, not to mention a fucking necrophile. There is no comparison between his crimes and the others. No-one else even comes close.

I quite agree.  But let's talk about the cunt.

There's a recent episode where Neil basically sails very close to accusing Cliff Richard of being another Savile, and in some detail.

But I'm fascinated by Savile as I grew up in Walton on Thames in the 1980s just a street away from the Walton Hop, and can remember my Dad warning me everytime that Savile or King appeared on TV never to play anywhere near there.  It was common knowledge that it was nonce central over there.

[Rizla]

Yet another thing to bear in mind, which I'd guess is why they want to steer clear of discussing JS - all of the other nonces mentioned faced justice in their lifetimes, whilst he went to the grave having never answered to a single one of his terrible crimes. His many many victims were denied closure. Discussing him be seen as insensitive to said victims, as well as raking over ashes that have been raked enough. Consign the evil cunt to history's dustbin, I say.

[Ballad of Ballard Berkley]

Yet another thing to bear in mind, which I'd guess is why they want to steer clear of discussing JS - all of the other nonces mentioned faced justice in their lifetimes, whilst he went to the grave having never answered to a single one of his terrible crimes. His many many victims were denied closure. Discussing him be seen as insensitive to said victims, as well as raking over ashes that have been raked enough. Consign the evil cunt to history's dustbin, I say.

I agree with this. Imagine the juddering gear-shift required to go from a lengthy, sombre discussion about one of Britain's worst serial sex offenders to a funny segment on, I dunno, Chicory Tip. It wouldn't work, it'd be like those painful moments in That's Life! where Esther would end that week's deadly serious item by handing over to Doc Cox for a bit of light relief. But a million times more insensitive.

[Seedsy]

Yeah, but the gang are intelligent, thoughtful and skillful wordsmiths. They wouldn't do it in a way which is insensitive. And Al is there to completely draw a line under such a subject like Saville and move on. I personally think Saville has to be discussed.

Sorry if this has already been asked, The most obvious wow factor totp moment that hasn't been done is bowie and star man. I take it that was a Saville episode?

[badaids]

Yeah, but the gang are intelligent, thoughtful and skillful wordsmiths. They wouldn't do it in a way which is insensitive. And Al is there to completely draw a line under such a subject like Saville and move on. I personally think Saville has to be discussed.

Sorry if this has already been asked, The most obvious wow factor totp moment that hasn't been done is bowie and star man. I take it that was a Saville episode?

This is my standpoint totally.  Nostalgia is such a big part of the podcast, and Savile such a big part of TOTP that Savile can't be avoided. They have to discuss this at some point and they are totally equipped to do it in the right way, as for every other topic they will have much to say that has never been said before too. I don't see how it is insensitive to the victims to do that. 

As for how it is handled next to other lighthearted elements, it can be easily treated by Al; for instance saying that this is the episode in which they well do it (they've 50 episodes under the belt), they've always known that they will have to address it at some point and this will be it, after that never speak of it again. 

I do understand the argument that he should be ignored, but in any case Savile is already consigned to the dustbin of history - nothing they say or do can change that. 

[daf]

Sorry if this has already been asked, The most obvious wow factor totp moment that hasn't been done is bowie and star man. I take it that was a Saville episode?

Sort of - It was shown twice in 1972 -

6 July 1972 : Presenter: Tony Blackburn
20 July 1972 : Presenter: Noel Edmonds (repeat performance)

Though both shows have been wiped, that performance survived - thanks to it's inclusion in the 27 December 1973 "10 Years of Pop" edition - which WAS presented by Jimmy Savile.

[grainger]

A highlight of the last episode was the incredulity in his voice with "They released Shakespeare's Sister as a single. What do you think you're doing? Do you think this is going to be number one? - No!"

(I like Ask too. Shakespeare's Sister is utter dogshit though.)

I can't comment on the number-1-worthiness of the two songs, but Shakespeare's Sister is miles better than Ask.

[Pearly-Dewdrops Drops]

Listening to an episode of this for the first time (February 1985). Enjoying it despite the thermonuclear bad takes of slagging off The Smiths for 30 minutes shortly after glowing praise for The Colourfield (!?)

[DrGreggles]

It's almost as if Morrissey is a massive cunt and Terry Hall isn't!

[Pearly-Dewdrops Drops]

It's almost as if Morrissey is a massive cunt and Terry Hall isn't!

Doesn't really change the respective merits of the music in question.

(And one of them just took a dig at Billy Bragg!)

[Ballad of Ballard Berkley]

And that Colourfield record is so much better than How Soon is Now?

[Pearly-Dewdrops Drops]

And that Colourfield record is so much better than How Soon is Now?

Hey I said I was still enjoying the show regardless, no need to double down on this truly ludicrous take.

[non capisco]

Doesn't really change the respective merits of the music in question.

Taylor acknowledged that he thought How Soon Is Now is one of their best songs. Neil quite rightly went all in with fists and feet on their racist cunt of a frontman. I think Morrissey proving beyond all doubt that he's an out and out bigot has pretty much poisoned the well when it comes to evaluating The Smiths. I think How Soon Is Now is a sonic marvel, love that tremolo and weird mewling guitar line. Unfortunately it has that poxy twat having a moan all over the top of it.

[Seedsy]

I love how Neil is just fucking straight down the hard-line, if you like morrissey you are a racist cunt. If you like oasis you are a union flag waving brexiter.
He has lived a life in the UK I could never imagine living.
It does take over his critical analysis of the actual music in hand.
Saying that, I do genuinely believe he hates indie white rock music on its musical merits.
I think I'm just a bit touchy as I like alot of that music and i
like to think I'm not a big racist apologist