RECENT POSTS
The previous ten posts on the Blog
Archives
- U2 And Who? World Exclusive Info On The Other Glasto 2010 Headliners
- RIP Jedward, 2009 - 2009
- U2 To Headline Glastonbury 5 Reasons It's A Good Idea
- The Best Ever Songs Rejected From Albums
- The NME Chart Top 40 Revealed - November 23, 2009
- Superstars Of The Small Screen - The 10 Best TV Heroes Of The Noughties
- A Decade In Music Did The Internet Save The Industry, Or Kill It?
- 10 Tracks You Have To Hear This Week - Shy Child, The Golden Filter, The Pains Of Being Pure At Heart
- Albums Of The Decade - Who Did We Overlook?
- Bill Bailey Answers YOUR Questions
- Four Days In Rio De Janeiro With Gogol Bordello
- The NME Chart Top 40 Revealed - 16th November 2009
- More...
CATEGORIES
Filter Blog posts by...
Categories
- All
- In The Office (902)
SEARCH
Use the form below to search the blog archives...
Posted on 23/04/09 at 03:42:21 pm
The news section in the current issue of NME features the somewhat startling news that Lee Mavers, enigmatic frontman of The La's, wants Babyshambles - including Pete Doherty - to be his backing band on a proposed second album by the legendary group.
This is an appalling idea. Speaking as a huge fan of their eponymous 1990 debut, I'd rather the legend remained intact. Recording a new album now is unlikely to do anything other than sully the band's reputation - maybe even more than their 2005 comeback tour did.
Those dates, which included performances at Glastonbury and V Festivals, were an uninspired, shoddy mess, featuring virtually the same setlist as when I saw them back in 1991, in the same bloody order. It was like time had stopped.
But even then at least Mavers had John Power on bass and backing vocals, the former Cast man being his lieutenant in the late 80s/early 90s, when The La¹s were a fully functional group, enchanting us with amazing singles like 'Timeless Melody', 'Feelin'' and, of course, the immortal 'There She Goes'.
If what Babyshambles drummer Adam Ficek tells us is true, we'd have an extremely ordinary, uninspiring group providing a plodding backdrop to songs by a man whose time has surely come and gone. Indeed, it's precisely because Mavers refuses to release a second album that he is such a cult figure.
And what about live performances? OK, so Mavers appeared as a guest on selected dates on Pete's recent solo tour, but Doherty is a notoriously unreliable live performer. Coupled with Mavers' general lack of enthusiasm for appearing before an audience, and we could have a total disaster on our hands.
Lee, don¹t do it. 'There She Goes' will keep the wolf from the door. Let sleeping dogs lie. Please.
Permalink
defstereo [Visitor] //April 23 2009 at 17:39
cant see what the problem is? The first album will always be there, youre saying the guy should never release another album because you like the first one so much? That album is one of my favourites and i want to hear more of Lee Mavers songs, whoever the backing band is!I'd rather hear great songs played roughly than a polished turd any day!
Adrian [Visitor] //April 23 2009 at 17:39
Amen.
Andy Bevan [Visitor] //April 23 2009 at 17:46
What bollocks.
As if Lee would listen to the press's opinion before releasing his new(ish) songs anyway
richard yates [Visitor] //April 23 2009 at 18:22
if it comes out and it's not to your taste then that's unfortunate but you'll still have the debut to listen to. that won't change. rock journos are too concerned with things like reputation and legacy. it's all music. stop worrying about what the career retrospective piece will look like. lee's a songwriter, who for whatever reason feels inspired to work with a group of musicians. who are we to deny him that? just cos you love the first album doesn't give you a right to tell him what to do.
Larry [Visitor] //April 23 2009 at 18:52
Well I'd let rancid shite like Hard-Fi be his backing back as long as we get to hear finished versions of songs like Was It Something I Said, Human Race etc. You can't really say his best work is behind him, since he has been writing and tinkering with these songs even before the first album came out (The Kitchen Tapes). There is no doubt that the quality is there, it's just a case of Lee finally being able to get it right.
Rhys [Visitor] //April 23 2009 at 19:40
In what way are babyshambles an extremely ordinary and uninspiring band?, All you have to do is look at tracks like F*** Forever, and French Dog Blues to see there brilliance.
George [Visitor] //April 23 2009 at 20:38
We wonder why current music is dull uninspiring, don't take risks = sounding like Coldplay.
Farouk Bulsara [Visitor] //April 23 2009 at 22:41
If the guy is any good then his new record will be good no matter what shitty group is backing him. i suspect it wont tho cos hes just another basically talentless acoustic guitar stumming bore and there she goes is a total pile of reheated dog shit. still at least its not cast eh ? whatever thankyou
julian [Visitor] //April 23 2009 at 22:46
what this guy said is utter bollox, he dont want a new album but complain about hearing the first record again in 2005??? whats about people who never heard those songs live before this guy gets paid for writing that!
Alan Woodhouse [Visitor] //April 24 2009 at 00:56
dont listen to me as i am an idiot and no nothing about music.
Garry Boy [Visitor] //April 24 2009 at 01:12
If Lee Mavers makes another album I think it may actually save the world. He is untouchable!
Gavin [Visitor] //April 24 2009 at 05:00
In my opinion, that article sums up everything that is wrong with the NME. It is all about trying to be "cool" to a bunch of "hip Indie kids" and nothing about music.
We all know there is no way in a million years that Lee Mavers will release a second La's album with Babyshambles. But if a perfectionist like him was satisfied with a finished album and wanted to release it, then I would trust his faith in whoever was playing drums, guitar and bass, and I would love to hear new Mavers compositions released to his satisfaction.
The whole "don't release a second album because it will spoil my fantasy of The La's mythical status if it isn't as good as the first one" is absolutely childish, pathetic and ridiculous.
jim [Visitor] //April 24 2009 at 07:52
shut up, let the man sing
Dan102 [Visitor] //April 24 2009 at 08:06
I think this is great news! Lee Mavers hasn't released a new album since 1990 for a reason, and that is because he didn't feel that it was right! Now he has found a band that he actually feels may be right for the songs he wants to do!! Fantastic............... I hope it turns out for the best for all involved! Especially as I am a huge fan of Babyshambles and really, really enjoy The La's too! Basically, it's his music - so let the bloke have some fun!!
IamtheSea [Visitor] //April 24 2009 at 09:55
Lee can do whatever he wants and still die a legend. Anyone who enjoys real music will know the The La's are a band time cannot affect. Recording with Pete will probably mean more people actually pay the La's Debut the attention it deserves. Might not help either of the front men with that certain problem they share though.
Neptune Wogan [Visitor] //April 24 2009 at 14:06
good call.
he should do a Lee Mavers album, not a La's album.
Person [Visitor] //April 24 2009 at 14:27
Why would he want to do it with the Babyshambles? Their name says it all, can't see why he can't just release a solo album if he wants to use them instead of tarnishing The La's name.
Nigel B [Visitor] //April 24 2009 at 15:22
LA's best band ever and I lived through the hype 1st time.
Bottom line is J.Powers has to be involved or it's like Beatles without McCartney.
Sophie [Visitor] //April 24 2009 at 17:04
I sort of agree...
Although it is clear Pete Doherty is deeply deeply influenced by this band - The La's debut LP was perfect, the melodies were tight -the production was a beautiful hazy stupor - but it worked.
When Babyshambles attempt to do this, the stupor ascends into a heommarage.
The La's record is pristine. If this ends up being terrible - it will be a big fat anomolie all over their perfect track record.
how does alan woodhouse have a job [Visitor] //April 24 2009 at 18:20
so you want him never to make music ever again in case its shit? surely if hes half decent this wont be shit like you seem to think
black trees [Visitor] //April 24 2009 at 19:22
I totally agree with Richard Yates here. Too many journalists care about "legacy" and all that non-sense rather than music. You can't write off music that hasn't been recorded yet. Let Lee Mavers do his thing and when it has been released, you can decide for yourself.
Gareth K Jones [Visitor] //April 25 2009 at 00:25
Apparently, from the rumours of years ago, Lee Mavers has wrote 'the best song ever,' in his hiatus. I for one could not care who he is with - as long as we get a chance to hear such songs. The first album demands respect, I would say, any follow up deserves the same.
David [Visitor] //April 25 2009 at 01:25
Lee Mavers is a legend, if he wants to make music then regardless of what he's done in the past, let him do it. I don't think it's a "hip indie kid" exclusive view the whole "don't release a second album and ruin the myth" as it's a philosophy with loads of bands. The La's album will always be timeless and also unappreciated by the blind masses who only know There She Goes. That's their loss.
The Burning Sounds [Visitor] //April 25 2009 at 10:13
Sounds like a great idea! Them lot would come up with some great melodies for sure...
Danny [Visitor] //April 25 2009 at 17:11
I'm all for some new Lee material, but its not The La's without John Power. The Babyshambles idea would be OK-without Doherty- can't stand him now- if Lee was gonna release something under his name and not The La's.
Sam [Visitor] //April 25 2009 at 18:56
I think it's a great idea, just as long as it is not under the name of The La's and it is clear that this is a separate project
Joe Spex [Visitor] //April 25 2009 at 21:09
Alan Woodhouse is a cunt.
This journalists a numpty [Visitor] //April 25 2009 at 23:19
My goodness, do you actually make a living writing this rubbish and then can look at yourself in the mirror every morning, a) mavers is a genius and is likely to write a genius album, b) you obviously haven't been to see doherty play recently cos i doubt you look to support your overblown vacuous statements with any real evidence and c) baby shambles are a fantastic band writing some of the most interesting backings around, so go take your coldplay and elbow lp's and whatever dross you consider to be extroadinary lock yourself in a little room and don't come out till there's a call for piss soaked self congratualatory reviews, by the way don't hold your breath that isn't likely to be soon.
Zuluhotel [Visitor] //April 26 2009 at 03:17
I wonder what Noel Gallagher thinks about all this...
FF [Visitor] //April 26 2009 at 16:34
Then what do you want him to do?
Not write another album in the rest of his life just because he could "ruin" his reputation, cmon dont be stupid its his job to play music and he can do it with whomever and whenever he wants and if you dont like it it doesnt mean its not good maybe its not your taste but to tell him to dont record the album is as if you tell paul mccartney he shouldnt play solo because he could ruin his reputation of the beatles.
KennyG78 [Visitor] //April 26 2009 at 20:20
Lee Mavers, the man who is more obsessed with the notes, chords and sounds of his songs than any man in all of christendom, is going to team up with Babyshambles, the loosest worst band of all time?
Naaaaaa
Nick Carlisle [Visitor] //April 26 2009 at 21:54
Does Alan Woodhouse really believe what he's put his name to there? If he does I'm not surprised for every good journo at nme there's 10 clowns.
WhatAnIdiot [Visitor] //May 28 2009 at 16:22
my god, how stupid is this argument. This is an example of everything that is wrong about the music press.
sushi [Visitor] //May 28 2009 at 17:01
lee can do whatever he likes musicwise: as long as hes happy, im happy. why wouldnt he record with babyshambles? they are a great band, so whatever it takes for him to feel the vibe again is fine by me.
PaulIOM [Visitor] //May 28 2009 at 18:58
The world waited 19 years for Indiana Jones 4, and look what happened there. It's why The Stone Roses have never reformed, because Ian Brown knows their time has past.
I became a fan of The La's when their debut was re-released in 2001, and then was fortunate enough to see Mavers/Power play at the Manchester Ritz in 2005. The reunion show I saw was fantastic, and didn't sour their legend one bit for me.
I've heard snippits of 'new' Mavers songs on youtube (the Crescent and Kitchen tapes) and have mixed opinions on them. But the guy can do whatever he wants. And if all he ends up doing is re-hashing the same old songs, so be it.
Are you content we'll never hear any new material by Syd Barrett, Kurt Cobain, John Lennon? If Nirvana reformed in Pete Doherty's kitchen, OF COURSE it would be awful. But life's for living, warts an' all.
Liam [Visitor] //May 28 2009 at 19:52
couldn't agree more.... 1st album is a classic, leave it at that! and if ya have to do a 2nd record, dont do it with a bunch of junkie wasters
TheMusicLover [Visitor] //May 28 2009 at 21:01
Why oh why would Mavers choose to collaborate with O'Connell? Please Lee, as a La's fan who saw you many times during your existence and loved you utterly - DON"T DO IT. If you want to record anything do it with some good people and release it under your own name on vinyl only, no interviews, no shows, just a record.
Dale Hogan [Visitor] //May 28 2009 at 22:38
I don't mind Lee Mavers recording a new album; i just wish that he'd find a backing band of greater musical superiority. I mean... Babyshambles? Yes Pete Doherty can write good songs, but as a guitarist he's terrible.
I'm sure John Power would play bass on the album too, seeing as he took part in the reunion gigs.
So yeah, in short, i don't mind a new album of Mavers songs, but fuck calling it a La's album.
Pumpenink [Visitor] //May 29 2009 at 10:14
Totally agree with Neptune. Keeping The La's title is a bit of a con for us real fans. I've no doubt he'll come out with a stunning piece but should've re-invented himself as solo or new name as the other La's have flown the nest.
milfcat [Visitor] //May 29 2009 at 11:08
I agree, Babyshambles are shit
This post has 2 feedbacks awaiting moderation...
Leave a comment:
<< Previous post: Britpop 'Where Are They Now?' Special - Share Your Knowledge
Next post: La Roux Vs Little Boots First-Listen Face-Off! >>
