If and only if i wonder what you would think

[JennyB]

If Paul wants to hire some young guns and go about doing some Tribute to The Clash show I'd consider seeing 'em if they came to Denver (I mean, I've seen The Nuns of Brixton multiple times) but absolutely not under the banner of "The Clash" at all.

I bet Nuns of Brixton was much better than our local Clash tribute band, Guns of Bridgeton (a very boring STL suburb).

Also, hard pass.

[Low Down Low]

I was chatting to Heston on another thread and this scenario came to my mind and was really interested what the forum thought

No right or wrong answer to this

If Paul reformed the clash today on his own and employed 3 very competent singers and musicians that were all unknown how do you think you would take that news?
Do you think you would feel excited and think its better than nothing or think i am right up for this.

I am really interested what an opinion would be.

Lets forget about the stranglers (maybe another day on another thread :) ) but I am pretty sure this is all about how attached and how close you are to the band. I asked this question specifically here as I wanted an expert ideas and opinions and you cant get better than this website over the topic of the clash and that’s compared to any band website I would say.

I have no doubt at all and make no mistake that if Paul had carried the clash on himself and had competent song writers for a new album and used those Havana 3am gigs to fill up the track listings with the very best and popular clash songs he would have become successful or at least created longevity for his band. Thank god he didn’t is all I can say and you can tip your hat and salute him for that. I know he did GOB live but he had every right to do that he wrote and sung it.


All the band know of the importance and total respect for the clash legacy, the clash songs, the clash fans and the other band members. If you bring in other elements into the band you change what that band represents and in to something different and you dilute that amazing legacy and history by adding inferior work.
The guys today would know if they reformed with out obviously Joe it would be worth millions to them all, but they don’t, not just in respect for Joe but for respect to the whole clash legacy. I am sure if they didn’t have that respect the reformation would have happened by now.

I asked the forum as I know the people here would care about the clash music and how it would be represented and its something that clash fans have not experienced so I was interested in the opinions

In these current times there is a vast amount of people that would go to clash gigs think of themselves as fans that wouldn’t even be able to tell you the name of the drummer. They may even get the names of Joe and Mick mixed up because they have seen Mick sing SISOSIG
What I am saying they love those songs and even if they would be aware that Joe is no longer the lead singer their attitude would be meh so what they did a fantastic version of Rock the casbah.

For me the clash music goes well beyond being just music and something that another singer could replace their legacy is a masterpiece of the highest order. With all the original members the songs can lift the hairs on the back of my neck and make me well up with emotion.

So the importance of people being that close is the same as this analogy. A great photogragher can take a masterpiece painting take a HD photo of it blow it up. Clean the blemishes and faults and make that picture look better than ever. Gold frame it with glass and put it on the wall of an art museum. He might then claim it to be better or at least as good as the original and someone like me wouldn’t care if it’s the real thing or not and enjoy it for the painting that it isn’t. But an expert Art collector would be horrified to see people enjoy it and claim it be as good.

At the end of the day the clash were always the real deal and there music should be left that way as well. What is really great is what they said - is what they did with no bull shit

The reason that this is mentioned is because it’s a very real possibility that it could have happened so many bands have and are doing this just as Inder mentioned its why its an interesting topic because we are all so lucky it didn’t happen that way for the clash. The great money spinner that this creates is the motivation for other bands don’t believe otherwise so its really a great feeling to see the clash camp stand separate from all that.

My thoughts on my own question is this. I could accept Mick and Joe as the banner of the clash and Joe on his own at a stretch but a definate no for Mick , Paul or topper on their own.


What Joe did with his solo projects regarding the clash songs was fine and respectful with integrity intact imo.
That’s just my opinion and I know shit compared to you Marky and the majority of this site.

But thank you to everyone for replying and especially to all the humour that made me laugh.

Hugh, when you say there was a "real possibility" this could have happened, i know you mean in a general sense and that is fine, but we all know in the specific case of the Clash here, there was only ever a remote chance of some form of Clash reunion while Joe was still alive and none whatsoever once he was gone. I don't know who would hate it more between Mick and Paul, my money on Paul by a whisker, but I'm pretty sure they could have had all the money on the planet chucked at them and they'd still have said massive no way and no thanks. Still a worthwhile discussion though and I just think it further underscores what you say about them being the real deal.

Yes bad wording on my behalf. But ill try and explain what i was trying to say. A "Real Possibility" in respect that in these current times all the bands are at it and more importantly the listening audiences are so accepting of it as well. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to start thinking that egos and money could take over.
What Icarisone said about the uniqueness of the singing voices of mick and Joe echoed my thoughts exactly but yeah i am with you completely and have total respect for them all for doing the right thing.

No worries mate, i wasn't taking issue with you at all. I think another part of it is both Mick and Paul had other outlets apart from performing, Mick with his long standing love of production and Paul with his painting, so i think that also pushed them further away from any idea of getting the group back together in any shape or form. They'd moved so far past it. Of them all, i think Joe was the one born to perform, he needed it like he needed oxygen, that be my take on it anyway!

[Heston]

Don't forget that the word "utter" was highlighted in bold on the CtC album cover.

[Dr. Medulla]

Don't forget that the word "utter" was highlighted in bold on the CtC album cover.

Utter, of course, is the Sanskrit word for “contractual obligation album.”

[Marky Dread]

Don't forget that the word "utter" was highlighted in bold on the CtC album cover.

That sleeve certainly had me looking at it in utter astonishment and amazement. Then when I heard Dictator there was plenty of utterances. Had I just gone mad was I a complete nutter.

[NoMoreHugh]

I was chatting to Heston on another thread and this scenario came to my mind and was really interested what the forum thought

No right or wrong answer to this

If Paul reformed the clash today on his own and employed 3 very competent singers and musicians that were all unknown how do you think you would take that news?
Do you think you would feel excited and think its better than nothing or think i am right up for this.

I am really interested what an opinion would be.

The thing is Hugh you are talking about putting a band back together when that band hasn't been around for 37 years.

The Stranglers on the other hand have continued and evolved with new members. With Baz Warne being a Strangler longer than Hugh Cornwell being part of the live set-up since 2001. The recent Stranglers album is excellent. So for me I'm more than happy if new members come in and are making great new music in the tradition of the original group.

With The Clash if Cut the Crap had been a solid rock n roll record then things would be viewed much differently. But it wasn't it was a failed attempt at being modern. You can argue about Bernie's input and drum machines, sequencers and so on. But If I had been in The Clash at that point and I'm really talking about Joe here then I would have said fuck off Bernie I'm not putting that out under The Clash name.

Lets forget about the stranglers (maybe another day on another thread :) ) but I am pretty sure this is all about how attached and how close you are to the band. I asked this question specifically here as I wanted an expert ideas and opinions and you cant get better than this website over the topic of the clash and that’s compared to any band website I would say.

I have no doubt at all and make no mistake that if Paul had carried the clash on himself and had competent song writers for a new album and used those Havana 3am gigs to fill up the track listings with the very best and popular clash songs he would have become successful or at least created longevity for his band. Thank god he didn’t is all I can say and you can tip your hat and salute him for that. I know he did GOB live but he had every right to do that he wrote and sung it.


All the band know of the importance and total respect for the clash legacy, the clash songs, the clash fans and the other band members. If you bring in other elements into the band you change what that band represents and in to something different and you dilute that amazing legacy and history by adding inferior work.
The guys today would know if they reformed with out obviously Joe it would be worth millions to them all, but they don’t, not just in respect for Joe but for respect to the whole clash legacy. I am sure if they didn’t have that respect the reformation would have happened by now.

I asked the forum as I know the people here would care about the clash music and how it would be represented and its something that clash fans have not experienced so I was interested in the opinions

In these current times there is a vast amount of people that would go to clash gigs think of themselves as fans that wouldn’t even be able to tell you the name of the drummer. They may even get the names of Joe and Mick mixed up because they have seen Mick sing SISOSIG
What I am saying they love those songs and even if they would be aware that Joe is no longer the lead singer their attitude would be meh so what they did a fantastic version of Rock the casbah.

For me the clash music goes well beyond being just music and something that another singer could replace their legacy is a masterpiece of the highest order. With all the original members the songs can lift the hairs on the back of my neck and make me well up with emotion.

So the importance of people being that close is the same as this analogy. A great photogragher can take a masterpiece painting take a HD photo of it blow it up. Clean the blemishes and faults and make that picture look better than ever. Gold frame it with glass and put it on the wall of an art museum. He might then claim it to be better or at least as good as the original and someone like me wouldn’t care if it’s the real thing or not and enjoy it for the painting that it isn’t. But an expert Art collector would be horrified to see people enjoy it and claim it be as good.

At the end of the day the clash were always the real deal and there music should be left that way as well. What is really great is what they said - is what they did with no bull shit

The reason that this is mentioned is because it’s a very real possibility that it could have happened so many bands have and are doing this just as Inder mentioned its why its an interesting topic because we are all so lucky it didn’t happen that way for the clash. The great money spinner that this creates is the motivation for other bands don’t believe otherwise so its really a great feeling to see the clash camp stand separate from all that.

My thoughts on my own question is this. I could accept Mick and Joe as the banner of the clash and Joe on his own at a stretch but a definate no for Mick , Paul or topper on their own.


What Joe did with his solo projects regarding the clash songs was fine and respectful with integrity intact imo.
That’s just my opinion and I know shit compared to you Marky and the majority of this site.

But thank you to everyone for replying and especially to all the humour that made me laugh.

I won't argue with any of your views on this subject as it's personal to how you feel.

But I will say that unlike many other bands where members left (Hugh as example) or died (Pete Shelley). Mick Jones was fired and had he not been kicked out of his own band I could see The Clash continuing in the same way as The Who. They were definitely heading in the direction of bands like U2.

Without Mick they just didn't have the same spark that made The Clash so great. It's no put down on the new members as they were big shoes to fill. Not necessarily musically as such because lots of musicians are very good/competent at playing stuff but as an arranger Mick was on another level. Which is proven when you listen to CtC that despite the rubbish production and Bernie's input some tracks were decent. However Mick would made those songs great.

As to one existing band member carrying on with "The Clash" in name with three new members starting today then no that would be stupid.

But if CtC had been better produced then there is no reason to see why The Clash couldn't of continued producing further records.

Part of me hates Joe and Paul for dumping Mick but the same could be said for Topper. Maybe Topper could've cleaned up and the band taken a break.

But on the other hand we got a great new band in Big Audio Dynamite and The Clash didn't turn into The Who.

Sorry for some reason i missed this
Youre always welcome to argue or put forward opinions to me mate anytime i wouldn't take it personally or be offended (that's not to say its an open opportunity for everyone to go open season on me ) But if you think i am wrong regarding the stranglers (which i am not :) ) and i have got anything wrong regarding the stranglers (which i haven't :) ) then by all means let me know. Even though i don't agree with you at all its interesting to see your side and your opinions.
The clash subject however i am a numpty i just know what i have experienced as a youngster

I took the Stranglers topic away from the other thread as i wanted to genuinely see this scenario as a clash point of view and i have to say i was really satisfied to get the responses that i thought was right.
But as we have always known you and I are totally unmoveable in our opinions regarding the Stranglers and we both know neither of us would budge an inch and i would be disappointed if we both did.

Regarding your comment i totally agree It did seem rather harsh to sack Mick for being so damn brilliant but as you say we was treated with great BAD discography and a clash that has a faultless history of music. Also i don't know about anyone else but at the time i never realised just how important Mick was until he was gone and showed everyone what he was capable of with out the clash.

I feel so fortunate to remember the band at there best with no blemishes (ish)and something i appreciate . Yeah the clash turning in to the Who would be too much of a cringe for me!!!

[Marky Dread]

I was chatting to Heston on another thread and this scenario came to my mind and was really interested what the forum thought

No right or wrong answer to this

If Paul reformed the clash today on his own and employed 3 very competent singers and musicians that were all unknown how do you think you would take that news?
Do you think you would feel excited and think its better than nothing or think i am right up for this.

I am really interested what an opinion would be.

The thing is Hugh you are talking about putting a band back together when that band hasn't been around for 37 years.

The Stranglers on the other hand have continued and evolved with new members. With Baz Warne being a Strangler longer than Hugh Cornwell being part of the live set-up since 2001. The recent Stranglers album is excellent. So for me I'm more than happy if new members come in and are making great new music in the tradition of the original group.

With The Clash if Cut the Crap had been a solid rock n roll record then things would be viewed much differently. But it wasn't it was a failed attempt at being modern. You can argue about Bernie's input and drum machines, sequencers and so on. But If I had been in The Clash at that point and I'm really talking about Joe here then I would have said fuck off Bernie I'm not putting that out under The Clash name.

Lets forget about the stranglers (maybe another day on another thread :) ) but I am pretty sure this is all about how attached and how close you are to the band. I asked this question specifically here as I wanted an expert ideas and opinions and you cant get better than this website over the topic of the clash and that’s compared to any band website I would say.

I have no doubt at all and make no mistake that if Paul had carried the clash on himself and had competent song writers for a new album and used those Havana 3am gigs to fill up the track listings with the very best and popular clash songs he would have become successful or at least created longevity for his band. Thank god he didn’t is all I can say and you can tip your hat and salute him for that. I know he did GOB live but he had every right to do that he wrote and sung it.


All the band know of the importance and total respect for the clash legacy, the clash songs, the clash fans and the other band members. If you bring in other elements into the band you change what that band represents and in to something different and you dilute that amazing legacy and history by adding inferior work.
The guys today would know if they reformed with out obviously Joe it would be worth millions to them all, but they don’t, not just in respect for Joe but for respect to the whole clash legacy. I am sure if they didn’t have that respect the reformation would have happened by now.

I asked the forum as I know the people here would care about the clash music and how it would be represented and its something that clash fans have not experienced so I was interested in the opinions

In these current times there is a vast amount of people that would go to clash gigs think of themselves as fans that wouldn’t even be able to tell you the name of the drummer. They may even get the names of Joe and Mick mixed up because they have seen Mick sing SISOSIG
What I am saying they love those songs and even if they would be aware that Joe is no longer the lead singer their attitude would be meh so what they did a fantastic version of Rock the casbah.

For me the clash music goes well beyond being just music and something that another singer could replace their legacy is a masterpiece of the highest order. With all the original members the songs can lift the hairs on the back of my neck and make me well up with emotion.

So the importance of people being that close is the same as this analogy. A great photogragher can take a masterpiece painting take a HD photo of it blow it up. Clean the blemishes and faults and make that picture look better than ever. Gold frame it with glass and put it on the wall of an art museum. He might then claim it to be better or at least as good as the original and someone like me wouldn’t care if it’s the real thing or not and enjoy it for the painting that it isn’t. But an expert Art collector would be horrified to see people enjoy it and claim it be as good.

At the end of the day the clash were always the real deal and there music should be left that way as well. What is really great is what they said - is what they did with no bull shit

The reason that this is mentioned is because it’s a very real possibility that it could have happened so many bands have and are doing this just as Inder mentioned its why its an interesting topic because we are all so lucky it didn’t happen that way for the clash. The great money spinner that this creates is the motivation for other bands don’t believe otherwise so its really a great feeling to see the clash camp stand separate from all that.

My thoughts on my own question is this. I could accept Mick and Joe as the banner of the clash and Joe on his own at a stretch but a definate no for Mick , Paul or topper on their own.


What Joe did with his solo projects regarding the clash songs was fine and respectful with integrity intact imo.
That’s just my opinion and I know shit compared to you Marky and the majority of this site.

But thank you to everyone for replying and especially to all the humour that made me laugh.

I won't argue with any of your views on this subject as it's personal to how you feel.

But I will say that unlike many other bands where members left (Hugh as example) or died (Pete Shelley). Mick Jones was fired and had he not been kicked out of his own band I could see The Clash continuing in the same way as The Who. They were definitely heading in the direction of bands like U2.

Without Mick they just didn't have the same spark that made The Clash so great. It's no put down on the new members as they were big shoes to fill. Not necessarily musically as such because lots of musicians are very good/competent at playing stuff but as an arranger Mick was on another level. Which is proven when you listen to CtC that despite the rubbish production and Bernie's input some tracks were decent. However Mick would made those songs great.

As to one existing band member carrying on with "The Clash" in name with three new members starting today then no that would be stupid.

But if CtC had been better produced then there is no reason to see why The Clash couldn't of continued producing further records.

Part of me hates Joe and Paul for dumping Mick but the same could be said for Topper. Maybe Topper could've cleaned up and the band taken a break.

But on the other hand we got a great new band in Big Audio Dynamite and The Clash didn't turn into The Who.

Sorry for some reason i missed this
Youre always welcome to argue or put forward opinions to me mate anytime i wouldn't take it personally or be offended (that's not to say its an open opportunity for everyone to go open season on me ) But if you think i am wrong regarding the stranglers (which i am not :) ) and i have got anything wrong regarding the stranglers (which i haven't :) ) then by all means let me know. Even though i don't agree with you at all its interesting to see your side and your opinions.
The clash subject however i am a numpty i just know what i have experienced as a youngster

I took the Stranglers topic away from the other thread as i wanted to genuinely see this scenario as a clash point of view and i have to say i was really satisfied to get the responses that i thought was right.
But as we have always known you and I are totally unmoveable in our opinions regarding the Stranglers and we both know neither of us would budge an inch and i would be disappointed if we both did.

You took The Stranglers out of the equation. I thought the reason you were posing the question regards a version of The Clash reforming was because you dislike the idea of The Stranglers continuing with just one original member and were asking how Clash fans would feel if the same had happened to The Clash. Maybe I was reading too much into your first post.

I like all versions of The Stranglers obviously the Hugh years are best but the current Baz version are a solid group. Play those songs really great way better than Hugh plays them these days and I've been to shows by both. And the newer stuff has been an excellent continuation of the band. It's sad that Jet had to retire and even sadder that we lost Dave to this fucking awful covid crap. I liked Hugh's album "Monster" but it's not in the same league as the recent Stranglers albums for me.

Hugh seems really bitter in interviews saying stuff like why do they carry on? Well you chose to leave Hugh and there were 4 Stranglers not 1.

Of course none of this will change your mind and why should it. It's all down to choice. So no you're not wrong but then nor am I.

Peace, love & eternal men in black.

[laxman]

Get the lead singer of Glasvegas in (dead ringer for Strummer) or James Dean Bradfield or Heston or Robbie Williams (or even better Heston and Robbie Williams) and I'm in.

[Marky Dread]

Get the lead singer of Glasvegas in (dead ringer for Strummer) or James Dean Bradfield or Heston or Robbie Williams (or even better Heston and Robbie Williams) and I'm in.

You really hate The Clash don't you.

[Heston]

Get the lead singer of Glasvegas in (dead ringer for Strummer) or James Dean Bradfield or Heston or Robbie Williams (or even better Heston and Robbie Williams) and I'm in.

Strummer is irreplaceable.

[matedog]

Does Heston do Joe’s parts or Mick’s with this Robbie Williams combo?

[Marky Dread]

Does Heston do Joe’s parts or Mick’s with this Robbie Williams combo?

Heston's on drums.

[Dr. Medulla]

Does Heston do Joe’s parts or Mick’s with this Robbie Williams combo?

Heston is Vince all over.

[weller259]

The Clash were/are so vital to my musical life, they hold a very important and necessary spot in my musical world and as such, I am glad there is no "reuniting" (as such could be done without Joe) or anything. If Mick suddenly decided he wanted to do something of that nature, I would certainly give it some deep thought, not sure if Paul doing it would elicit the same response from me, hell i'm still not sure how many or what records/songs he actually did play on, to me its Mick who would/could change my opinion on any "reforming". Big Audio Dynamite was and still is very important to me musically too and while some may really like the current-day Who and the fact that after all these years they are still out there doing their thing, I am glad that the Clash didn't do it. Cut The Crap was a valiant effort but ultimately it failed horribly and I am content to let that be the post-Mick legacy of the Clash. Having been fortunate to see them at Bonds (which seems like a lifetime ago now) in their prime and experienced the excitement and electricity of their live performances, while more of a great thing is always desired, anything now that wasn't of that time (to me anyways) would just feel like a giant let-down. Personally I would have no problem with Paul or Mick or even Topper doing a tribute type thing but without at the very least Mick being involved I would not consider attending. Celebrating their music and legacy with the records and recordings of live shows is good enough for me.

Edits were made to clean up bad grammar and to clarify some thoughts. I need a proofreader and an editor, lol.

[Marky Dread]

The Clash were/are so vital to my musical life, they hold a very important and necessary spot in my musical world and as such, I am glad there is no "reuniting" (as such could be done without Joe) or anything. If Mick suddenly decided he wanted to do something of that nature, I would certainly give it some deep thought, not sure if Paul doing it would elicit the same response from me, hell i'm still not sure how many or what records/songs he actually did play on, to me its Mick who would/could change my opinion on any "reforming". Big Audio Dynamite was and still is very important to me musically too and while some may really like the current-day Who and the fact that after all these years they are still out there doing their thing, I am glad that the Clash didn't do it. Cut The Crap was a valiant effort but ultimately it failed horribly and I am content to let that be the post-Mick legacy of the Clash. Having been fortunate to see them at Bonds (which seems like a lifetime ago now) in their prime and experienced the excitement and electricity of their live performances, while more of a great thing is always desired, anything now that wasn't of that time (to me anyways) would just feel like a giant let-down. Personally I would have no problem with Paul or Mick or even Topper doing a tribute type thing but without at the very least Mick being involved I would not consider attending. Celebrating their music and legacy with the records and recordings of live shows is good enough for me.

Edits were made to clean up bad grammar and to clarify some thoughts. I need a proofreader and an editor, lol.

While The Clash has to remain where it is the idea of Mick, Paul and Topper working together on a totally different project would still thrill me.