What we need is to look to more new music, instead of clinging on to the "rear guard" of the music industry. All in all, 2009 has been a fantastic end to to the musical decade, with both Kasabian and Arctic Monkeys producing their best albums, and, in turn, two of the best albums this decade. As far as reunions go, I think Blur have got it right, they have reformed, played a few festivals, two fantastic gigs at Hyde Park and now they are going their separate ways again. Their legacy remains unspoiled by a tepid attempt at another album.
Don't get me wrong, if you want to go on popularity, one band has managed to reform and be successful. Take That. Okay, they are no indie-kid's first choice on the iPod, but they are now arguably more successful that they were in the nineties.
Jarvis Cocker has denied reports Pulp will reform. Good. Far too many bands have reformed, eyes fixed on big money deals available, then produced poor records. Spandau Ballet are one of the 'latest' bands to do so. Releasing an album consisting of their "greatest hits" re-recorded and a few new songs. All they need to do now is name it "Rip-Off" and watch the money come rolling in. Because thats what it boils down to. All manner of 70s and 80s bands have reformed (some more than once!) for the cold, hard cash and that does not bode well for the future.
If all of these old bands are getting the press, then where do they new bands stand? The old bands were once new bands, and the reason they were 'successful' was because they got the attention they deserved and they were new and exciting, different. So, by reforming you are losing that one thing that made you in the first place, originality. Hypocrits.
New bands, who are as exciting now as these old bands were are going to get nowhere without the support they are lacking. If they don't get enough support, they will just fade away and Radio One will just become a constant playlist of reworked 80s tracks, intertwined with anecdotes from Chris Moyles. And who wants that? *Shudders*