I think they were well out of debt by the end of 82. Combat Rock sold massively worldwide but especially in the States.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:35pmLet's not forget how much debt the band were into Sony/CBS for. This must've been a factor when you consider them not taking that break you mention.YoungParisians wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:21pmI think youve got something there.matedog wrote: ↑08 Apr 2021, 4:56pmThis is when we really need Rattie.
Based on my memory, there were always tensions, but things got better when Bernie first got the boot in 78 and they remained charged and unified during their first US tours through London Calling. After their successes, Joe seemed to feel some sense of complacency which prompted the Bernie return ultimatum. The residencies and huge publicity victory of Bonds probably kept Bernie in good favor with Mick in 81. Things seemed to go south with Rat Patrol-Combat Rock as Mick lost that creative battle. The massive success of Combat Rock probably placated Mick a bit after that though, but perhaps that turned the tide of acrimony from Mick to Joe/Bernie at Mick.
It's a shame that the end of 82 thru 83 wasn't spent as deliberate downtime instead of the dysfunctional lost year that resulted in the break-up.
Maybe Joe and Mick could have each released solo efforts: Joe's to placate the angst surrounding his punk integrity that was so center-point to Clash II? Mick's to experiment even further with electro, soundtrack work or producing? Paul = more acting roles? Topper truly finding his way thru rehab to rejoin the band? All this easily posited in retrospect, of course.
Or maybe if Peter Jenner's company was still managing, tensions could have been addressed? A good manager would recognize the need for a break. A self interested manager would keep them together to make money. And a megalomaniac manager would try to write, perform and produce the follow up album
When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
- Heston
- God of Thunder...and Rock 'n Roll
- Posts: 38356
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
- Location: North of Watford Junction
Re: When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
There's a tiny, tiny hopeful part of me that says you guys are running a Kaufmanesque long con on the board
-
Guest1
Re: When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
It’s interesting to consider alternate histories; if Sandinista was never sold as a single LP but rather the price of the full three pieces of vinyl, and thusly the band never goes into debt, perhaps Bernie never returns? Perhaps the Clash don’t break up until the early 90s.Heston wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:43pmI think they were well out of debt by the end of 82. Combat Rock sold massively worldwide but especially in the States.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:35pmLet's not forget how much debt the band were into Sony/CBS for. This must've been a factor when you consider them not taking that break you mention.YoungParisians wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:21pmI think youve got something there.matedog wrote: ↑08 Apr 2021, 4:56pmThis is when we really need Rattie.
Based on my memory, there were always tensions, but things got better when Bernie first got the boot in 78 and they remained charged and unified during their first US tours through London Calling. After their successes, Joe seemed to feel some sense of complacency which prompted the Bernie return ultimatum. The residencies and huge publicity victory of Bonds probably kept Bernie in good favor with Mick in 81. Things seemed to go south with Rat Patrol-Combat Rock as Mick lost that creative battle. The massive success of Combat Rock probably placated Mick a bit after that though, but perhaps that turned the tide of acrimony from Mick to Joe/Bernie at Mick.
It's a shame that the end of 82 thru 83 wasn't spent as deliberate downtime instead of the dysfunctional lost year that resulted in the break-up.
Maybe Joe and Mick could have each released solo efforts: Joe's to placate the angst surrounding his punk integrity that was so center-point to Clash II? Mick's to experiment even further with electro, soundtrack work or producing? Paul = more acting roles? Topper truly finding his way thru rehab to rejoin the band? All this easily posited in retrospect, of course.
Or maybe if Peter Jenner's company was still managing, tensions could have been addressed? A good manager would recognize the need for a break. A self interested manager would keep them together to make money. And a megalomaniac manager would try to write, perform and produce the follow up album
- Marky Dread
- Messiah of the Milk Bar
- Posts: 58888
- Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am
Re: When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
I'm thinking less of the money and more their contractual obligation. Didn't they sign some shitty deal where they owed so many records to the label?Heston wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:43pmI think they were well out of debt by the end of 82. Combat Rock sold massively worldwide but especially in the States.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:35pmLet's not forget how much debt the band were into Sony/CBS for. This must've been a factor when you consider them not taking that break you mention.YoungParisians wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:21pmI think youve got something there.matedog wrote: ↑08 Apr 2021, 4:56pmThis is when we really need Rattie.
Based on my memory, there were always tensions, but things got better when Bernie first got the boot in 78 and they remained charged and unified during their first US tours through London Calling. After their successes, Joe seemed to feel some sense of complacency which prompted the Bernie return ultimatum. The residencies and huge publicity victory of Bonds probably kept Bernie in good favor with Mick in 81. Things seemed to go south with Rat Patrol-Combat Rock as Mick lost that creative battle. The massive success of Combat Rock probably placated Mick a bit after that though, but perhaps that turned the tide of acrimony from Mick to Joe/Bernie at Mick.
It's a shame that the end of 82 thru 83 wasn't spent as deliberate downtime instead of the dysfunctional lost year that resulted in the break-up.
Maybe Joe and Mick could have each released solo efforts: Joe's to placate the angst surrounding his punk integrity that was so center-point to Clash II? Mick's to experiment even further with electro, soundtrack work or producing? Paul = more acting roles? Topper truly finding his way thru rehab to rejoin the band? All this easily posited in retrospect, of course.
Or maybe if Peter Jenner's company was still managing, tensions could have been addressed? A good manager would recognize the need for a break. A self interested manager would keep them together to make money. And a megalomaniac manager would try to write, perform and produce the follow up album
Forces have been looting
My humanity
Curfews have been curbing
The end of liberty
We're the flowers in the dustbin...
No fuchsias for you.
"Without the common people you're nothing"
Nos Sumus Una Familia
- Heston
- God of Thunder...and Rock 'n Roll
- Posts: 38356
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
- Location: North of Watford Junction
Re: When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
I honestly think that was just an excuse to cover up for Sandinista after the event. I don't believe any band and its attendant lawyers don't know how many albums they owe to a record company.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 2:19pmI'm thinking less of the money and more their contractual obligation. Didn't they sign some shitty deal where they owed so many records to the label?Heston wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:43pmI think they were well out of debt by the end of 82. Combat Rock sold massively worldwide but especially in the States.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:35pmLet's not forget how much debt the band were into Sony/CBS for. This must've been a factor when you consider them not taking that break you mention.YoungParisians wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:21pmI think youve got something there.matedog wrote: ↑08 Apr 2021, 4:56pmThis is when we really need Rattie.
Based on my memory, there were always tensions, but things got better when Bernie first got the boot in 78 and they remained charged and unified during their first US tours through London Calling. After their successes, Joe seemed to feel some sense of complacency which prompted the Bernie return ultimatum. The residencies and huge publicity victory of Bonds probably kept Bernie in good favor with Mick in 81. Things seemed to go south with Rat Patrol-Combat Rock as Mick lost that creative battle. The massive success of Combat Rock probably placated Mick a bit after that though, but perhaps that turned the tide of acrimony from Mick to Joe/Bernie at Mick.
It's a shame that the end of 82 thru 83 wasn't spent as deliberate downtime instead of the dysfunctional lost year that resulted in the break-up.
Maybe Joe and Mick could have each released solo efforts: Joe's to placate the angst surrounding his punk integrity that was so center-point to Clash II? Mick's to experiment even further with electro, soundtrack work or producing? Paul = more acting roles? Topper truly finding his way thru rehab to rejoin the band? All this easily posited in retrospect, of course.
Or maybe if Peter Jenner's company was still managing, tensions could have been addressed? A good manager would recognize the need for a break. A self interested manager would keep them together to make money. And a megalomaniac manager would try to write, perform and produce the follow up album
There's a tiny, tiny hopeful part of me that says you guys are running a Kaufmanesque long con on the board
- Marky Dread
- Messiah of the Milk Bar
- Posts: 58888
- Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am
Re: When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
You're probably correct mate. That said there was a lot of naivety surrounding the signings of punk groups at the time. I remember reading that Matlock said he was the only member of the Pistols who actually bothered to read the contract with E.M.I.Heston wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 2:24pmI honestly think that was just an excuse to cover up for Sandinista after the event. I don't believe any band and its attendant lawyers don't know how many albums they owe to a record company.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 2:19pmI'm thinking less of the money and more their contractual obligation. Didn't they sign some shitty deal where they owed so many records to the label?Heston wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:43pmI think they were well out of debt by the end of 82. Combat Rock sold massively worldwide but especially in the States.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:35pmLet's not forget how much debt the band were into Sony/CBS for. This must've been a factor when you consider them not taking that break you mention.YoungParisians wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:21pm
I think youve got something there.
It's a shame that the end of 82 thru 83 wasn't spent as deliberate downtime instead of the dysfunctional lost year that resulted in the break-up.
Maybe Joe and Mick could have each released solo efforts: Joe's to placate the angst surrounding his punk integrity that was so center-point to Clash II? Mick's to experiment even further with electro, soundtrack work or producing? Paul = more acting roles? Topper truly finding his way thru rehab to rejoin the band? All this easily posited in retrospect, of course.
Or maybe if Peter Jenner's company was still managing, tensions could have been addressed? A good manager would recognize the need for a break. A self interested manager would keep them together to make money. And a megalomaniac manager would try to write, perform and produce the follow up album
Forces have been looting
My humanity
Curfews have been curbing
The end of liberty
We're the flowers in the dustbin...
No fuchsias for you.
"Without the common people you're nothing"
Nos Sumus Una Familia
- Heston
- God of Thunder...and Rock 'n Roll
- Posts: 38356
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
- Location: North of Watford Junction
Re: When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
I think the Clash were a lot more savvy than they let on. Keeping their own publishing was a masterstroke and the reason they are all pretty well off in their old age.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 2:31pmYou're probably correct mate. That said there was a lot of naivety surrounding the signings of punk groups at the time. I remember reading that Matlock said he was the only member of the Pistols who actually bothered to read the contract with E.M.I.Heston wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 2:24pmI honestly think that was just an excuse to cover up for Sandinista after the event. I don't believe any band and its attendant lawyers don't know how many albums they owe to a record company.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 2:19pmI'm thinking less of the money and more their contractual obligation. Didn't they sign some shitty deal where they owed so many records to the label?Heston wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:43pmI think they were well out of debt by the end of 82. Combat Rock sold massively worldwide but especially in the States.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:35pm
Let's not forget how much debt the band were into Sony/CBS for. This must've been a factor when you consider them not taking that break you mention.
There's a tiny, tiny hopeful part of me that says you guys are running a Kaufmanesque long con on the board
- Marky Dread
- Messiah of the Milk Bar
- Posts: 58888
- Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am
Re: When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
Well yeah sure. Mind you the Pistols ain't exactly paupers for just two albums as such.Heston wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 2:34pmI think the Clash were a lot more savvy than they let on. Keeping their own publishing was a masterstroke and the reason they are all pretty well off in their old age.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 2:31pmYou're probably correct mate. That said there was a lot of naivety surrounding the signings of punk groups at the time. I remember reading that Matlock said he was the only member of the Pistols who actually bothered to read the contract with E.M.I.Heston wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 2:24pmI honestly think that was just an excuse to cover up for Sandinista after the event. I don't believe any band and its attendant lawyers don't know how many albums they owe to a record company.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 2:19pmI'm thinking less of the money and more their contractual obligation. Didn't they sign some shitty deal where they owed so many records to the label?
Forces have been looting
My humanity
Curfews have been curbing
The end of liberty
We're the flowers in the dustbin...
No fuchsias for you.
"Without the common people you're nothing"
Nos Sumus Una Familia
- Toppers Boppers
- Long Time Jerk
- Posts: 824
- Joined: 18 Nov 2009, 5:52am
- Location: Gates Of The West (country)
Re: When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
They were busy in the US Autumn 82, touring Combat Rock, the Who stadium shows & SNL appearance finishing up with the Jamaican festival in November. Maybe other promotion duties too, resulting in Combat Rock going top ten January 83 stateside.
- Heston
- God of Thunder...and Rock 'n Roll
- Posts: 38356
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
- Location: North of Watford Junction
Re: When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
Yeah so basically less than ten gigs between October 82 and late August 83.Toppers Boppers wrote: ↑22 Apr 2021, 7:28amThey were busy in the US Autumn 82, touring Combat Rock, the Who stadium shows & SNL appearance finishing up with the Jamaican festival in November. Maybe other promotion duties too, resulting in Combat Rock going top ten January 83 stateside.
There's a tiny, tiny hopeful part of me that says you guys are running a Kaufmanesque long con on the board
- WestwayKid
- Unknown Immortal
- Posts: 6704
- Joined: 20 Sep 2017, 8:22am
- Location: Mill-e-wah-que
Re: When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
Agreed. That story always had more than a whiff of myth about it.Heston wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 2:24pmI honestly think that was just an excuse to cover up for Sandinista after the event. I don't believe any band and its attendant lawyers don't know how many albums they owe to a record company.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 2:19pmI'm thinking less of the money and more their contractual obligation. Didn't they sign some shitty deal where they owed so many records to the label?Heston wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:43pmI think they were well out of debt by the end of 82. Combat Rock sold massively worldwide but especially in the States.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:35pmLet's not forget how much debt the band were into Sony/CBS for. This must've been a factor when you consider them not taking that break you mention.YoungParisians wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:21pm
I think youve got something there.
It's a shame that the end of 82 thru 83 wasn't spent as deliberate downtime instead of the dysfunctional lost year that resulted in the break-up.
Maybe Joe and Mick could have each released solo efforts: Joe's to placate the angst surrounding his punk integrity that was so center-point to Clash II? Mick's to experiment even further with electro, soundtrack work or producing? Paul = more acting roles? Topper truly finding his way thru rehab to rejoin the band? All this easily posited in retrospect, of course.
Or maybe if Peter Jenner's company was still managing, tensions could have been addressed? A good manager would recognize the need for a break. A self interested manager would keep them together to make money. And a megalomaniac manager would try to write, perform and produce the follow up album
"They don't think it be like it is, but it do." - Oscar Gamble
- Marky Dread
- Messiah of the Milk Bar
- Posts: 58888
- Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am
Re: When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
The Clash....myth....never.WestwayKid wrote: ↑22 Apr 2021, 8:21amAgreed. That story always had more than a whiff of myth about it.Heston wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 2:24pmI honestly think that was just an excuse to cover up for Sandinista after the event. I don't believe any band and its attendant lawyers don't know how many albums they owe to a record company.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 2:19pmI'm thinking less of the money and more their contractual obligation. Didn't they sign some shitty deal where they owed so many records to the label?Heston wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:43pmI think they were well out of debt by the end of 82. Combat Rock sold massively worldwide but especially in the States.Marky Dread wrote: ↑20 Apr 2021, 1:35pm
Let's not forget how much debt the band were into Sony/CBS for. This must've been a factor when you consider them not taking that break you mention.
Forces have been looting
My humanity
Curfews have been curbing
The end of liberty
We're the flowers in the dustbin...
No fuchsias for you.
"Without the common people you're nothing"
Nos Sumus Una Familia
-
Guest1
Re: When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
Yeah they were at their commercial peak definitely if not their prime creatively. Combat Rock is bizzare in the sense that it’s arguably way more inaccessible than Sandanista on some songs yet had enough radio fodder to carry it over on into the mainstream. I feel like if a promotional video of TIE was shot for MTV as planned that album would have sold bucketloads as well. The namesake of the Clash piggybacking off the success of Combat Rock combined with a song tailor made for 80s radio with synths and anthemic group chorus. Idk might have given the Clash MKII some bizzare second wind. Tons of records that were absolute shite but sold massive units due to one great song. A lot of Combat Rock bandwagoners probably wouldn’t have even realized Mick was out of the band.
- Toppers Boppers
- Long Time Jerk
- Posts: 824
- Joined: 18 Nov 2009, 5:52am
- Location: Gates Of The West (country)
Re: When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
They played at least 15 gigs Oct - Nov 82, their biggest shows too so lot's of pressure. Recorded 'House of the Ju-Ju Queen' single in Dec to finish out the year. So, autumn 82 looks busy to me but fair point with Jan-April 83 when CR was riding high in the US charts - were they just movie making and in the studio experimenting back in London?Heston wrote: ↑22 Apr 2021, 7:50amYeah so basically less than ten gigs between October 82 and late August 83.Toppers Boppers wrote: ↑22 Apr 2021, 7:28amThey were busy in the US Autumn 82, touring Combat Rock, the Who stadium shows & SNL appearance finishing up with the Jamaican festival in November. Maybe other promotion duties too, resulting in Combat Rock going top ten January 83 stateside.
Re: When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
YoungParisians did a bang up job with this timeline of 1983:Toppers Boppers wrote: ↑22 Apr 2021, 10:10amThey played at least 15 gigs Oct - Nov 82, their biggest shows too so lot's of pressure. Recorded 'House of the Ju-Ju Queen' single in Dec to finish out the year. So, autumn 82 looks busy to me but fair point with Jan-April 83 when CR was riding high in the US charts - were they just movie making and in the studio experimenting back in London?Heston wrote: ↑22 Apr 2021, 7:50amYeah so basically less than ten gigs between October 82 and late August 83.Toppers Boppers wrote: ↑22 Apr 2021, 7:28amThey were busy in the US Autumn 82, touring Combat Rock, the Who stadium shows & SNL appearance finishing up with the Jamaican festival in November. Maybe other promotion duties too, resulting in Combat Rock going top ten January 83 stateside.
https://clashcity.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=13143
The studio sessionography gives some insight too: https://clashcity.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=12475
Look, you have to establish context for these things. And I maintain that unless you appreciate the Fall of Constantinople, the Great Fire of London, and Mickey Mantle's fatalist alcoholism, live Freddy makes no sense. If you want to half-ass it, fine, go call Simon Schama to do the appendix.
- Heston
- God of Thunder...and Rock 'n Roll
- Posts: 38356
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
- Location: North of Watford Junction
Re: When did tensions begin to flare up between Mick and Joe?
Yeah, I meant from the end of October, which I count as autumn. So basically between their gig at LA Coliseum on 29th October and Mick's sacking at the end of August 83 they played 8 confirmed gigs in ten months, 7 of them in May. That's hardly a back breaking schedule and may as well represent a break to me. Yeah they were messing about with home movies and fun side projects but I still say it basically constituted nearly a year off. This is why I never buy the notion that they needed a break.Toppers Boppers wrote: ↑22 Apr 2021, 10:10amThey played at least 15 gigs Oct - Nov 82, their biggest shows too so lot's of pressure. Recorded 'House of the Ju-Ju Queen' single in Dec to finish out the year. So, autumn 82 looks busy to me but fair point with Jan-April 83 when CR was riding high in the US charts - were they just movie making and in the studio experimenting back in London?Heston wrote: ↑22 Apr 2021, 7:50amYeah so basically less than ten gigs between October 82 and late August 83.Toppers Boppers wrote: ↑22 Apr 2021, 7:28amThey were busy in the US Autumn 82, touring Combat Rock, the Who stadium shows & SNL appearance finishing up with the Jamaican festival in November. Maybe other promotion duties too, resulting in Combat Rock going top ten January 83 stateside.
There's a tiny, tiny hopeful part of me that says you guys are running a Kaufmanesque long con on the board