Talk:Lloyd Cole and the Commotions

Rattlesnakes
A lot of info seems to be focusing on their debut, Rattlesnakes, or even the merit of its technical production. Suggest to move it to its own article, given that an album that makes NME top 100 surely must be noteworthy enough?

Merge
There's a lot of overlap between this and Lloyd Cole and nothing that would not be appropriate for that page. If more ought to be said about the other Commotions that is unrelated to Lloyd Cole, they can be given pages of their own. Nareek 11:31, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I counted the overlap to approx. 4 lines out of 25 lines in the biography section. If I did my math correctly, Lloyd Cole have been a solo artist for 16 years and singer of the Commotions for 5. Besides, the other member of the Commotions have had noteworthy careers as well (one of them is a columnist of the Guardian (quality broadsheet in the UK) and had at least three well-received books behind him). Obviously he's nowhere near any of the Beatles, yet it would be somewhat similar to bundling Paul McCartney's page with the one for the band he belonged to 20 years ago.

I would tend to agree with the case for leaving the entries separate. Certainly distinct enough and containing enough current and future content to warrant unique but linked entries.


 * The problem with having two separate entries is that the Commotions period is arguably the most important part of Lloyd Cole's career--and it's given decidedly short shrift in Cole's article, because there's another article where that material is supposed to be dealt with.


 * I think the non-UK based reader would claim the opposite. In the UK, Cole is remembered for some hits during the 80s on Top of the Pops and barely noticed for what he has done since, while in the US and continental Europe, the average listener won't always know he was even in a band called the Commotions. Arguably, he is known as a NY-based singer-songwriter to the rest of the world while the celebrity circuit in the UK is extremely UK-centric in that sense. I doubt it is given a short shrift -- how much can be said about a wholesome rockband of bookworms who lurked around somewhere between UK top 40 and top 100, not to mention during a brief period of 3.5 years?


 * I would refer editors to the article for Elvis Costello, where the "and the Attractions" period of his career is dealt with without a separate article. (The individual Attractions all have pages, which can be done for the Commotions as well if they are notable.)  Likewise, Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers is a redirect to Tom Petty.  I would also point to PJ Harvey--which is, as the article notes, both the name of a musician and the name of the trio that she first played with, though no one felt the need to create a PJ Harvey (band) article. Nareek 18:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I think the most accurate comparison would be the Icelandic singer Björk/Sugarcubes. She was the main creative force of the band and now she has been solo several times longer than she was with the group. Cole has, like Björk, changed genres and fanbase since then (which Tom Petty never really did, who merely changed backing musicians). Another artist from that period, Paul Weller, as well as Cole has been the frontman of two groups (The Jam/The Style Council, and The Commotions/The Negatives respectively), and I doubt the sense in merging The Jam (who existed same number of years as the Commotions) into the Paul Weller page. The only thing that could be argued FOR a merger however, is that Cole named his first band after himself. Likewise, Elvis Costello/Attractions could be dealt with in separate articles, and Attraction period could be given a brief summary in Costello article. The only valid acid test is probably proportions in creative output and/or number of years as a group vs solo.


 * Just for the record, I am a non-UK based reader.


 * The Sugarcubes were not Björk's back-up band--Einar was as much or even more a part of the band's persona. Nor were the Jam Paul Weller's back-up band.  I think my examples are more to the point.


 * I think a better acid test is: Would it make sense to have an article for the back-up band alone? I can see that for The Crickets, but The Commotions? I don't see it.


 * Say, would you mind signing your posts? I'm not sure how many people I'm arguing with here. Nareek 21:57, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Definitely no merge. To pick (or repeat) a few examples at random: you wouldn't merge the Paul McCartney entry with The Beatles', the Bob Mould entry with Husker Du's, the Mick Jones with The Clash's etc. The fact that he is most famous for his recordings w/ the Commotions (as all of the above are for their recordings with their first major band), doesn't mean that he is non-notable outside of them. He clearly is. As LC & TC are a sufficiently notable band off their own bat. Unlike The Fall, which is just 'Mark E Smith and whoever he's in a room with'(I haven't checked if their entries are merged), TC were a distinct band with an identifiable membership, who broke up at an identifiable point in time. When this issue is resolved (is anything ever resolved on W/p?), could someone remove the distracting 'proposed merge' box from the top of the article? Thanks.203.3.176.10 06:14, 25 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I give up. I am completely and utterly baffled by people who think Lloyd Cole and the Commotions is more like Paul McCartney and The Beatles than it is like Elvis Costello and the Attractions.  Nareek 11:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Neil Clark
The page linked to Neil Clark (guitar) directs the reader to the writer Neil Clark born 1966 which makes no reference to his playing in the Commotions (or any other band). I am not sure if it is the same person or not - this needs to be clarified. PatrickHadfield 16:33, 26 Oct 2006


 * They are very decidedly not the same person, I have created a human disambiguaqrion page, as well as a disambiguation on the article's themselves, to get over this problem. Patrick, I have slightly modified your comment's formatting. Philip Cross 21:11, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Recording of 2004 concerts
Surely "registration" is Franglais? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.102.66.236 (talk) 15:16, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

'encyclopedic guitar savvy' - what a load of bollocks!
I almost shit myself right there when I saw the words 'encyclopedic guitar savvy.'

What does that mean exactly? The words sure sound nice, but do they mean anything at all? Are you suggesting the guy has some kind of 'encyclopedic' knowledge of the guitar? And how does that work, exactly? Is he a Mr. Memory figure? A mentalist who can recall facts and figures about the guitar? And 'savvy' - how does one have 'savvy' when playing a musical instrument? How, indeed, does one not have 'savvy' when playing an instrument? Are you, as I suspect, indulging in complete bollocks talk?

To have encyclopedic knowledge of it you would have to, presumably, have covered the entire history of the guitar from its Spanish four-string origins to the present day, or perhaps further back to its origins in the Middle East. Perhaps the guy should be a lecturer rather than the rather average performer that he actually is. He should quit the band and tour the lecture circuit. He might have a career there. I'd pay to watch him explain how, for example, a luthier chooses between Indian Rosewood for the fingerboard or treated maple.

Or perhaps you are suggesting the guy knows nothing about guitars, but instead has a great deal of knowledge about guitar playing? Is that what 'encyclopedic' means? Sorry. His stuff is pretty simple, and frankly pretty predictable. While I can't stand people like Steve Vai, I think it's fair to say he has an encyclopedic knowledge of chords and guitar technique. There's nothing that would suggest the guy from the Commotions has, in any way sense or form, a special knowledge of the guitar compaired to Vai or Satriani. His chord changes, and indeed the chords, do not strike me as being either 'savvy' or 'encyclopedic' compared to his peers. In fact, those words seem quite absurd in this context. What he is is a good guitar player who can put together a good pop song. And that is where it ends.

Don't get me wrong, I like the band and the guy is a good guitarist. But one thing I can't stand is sloppy writing. This is an encyclopedia, not a student vanity essay about your favorite band. And yes, I actually play guitar, and synths, and write music, so I do have a little knowledge of the subject. I can tell you don't.

Dpolwarth (talk) 16:57, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I've just removed that line and a load of other fancruft from this article (some of it was appalling) so it should read a little better now. 88.104.30.71 (talk) 22:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC)