Glastonbury license refused

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

http://www.nme.com/news/103764.htm

quite a farce really, check out the comments from the some of Pilton villagers at the end...the one about it 'being offensive to M*sl*ms' is staggering

― stevem (blueski), Saturday, 14 December 2002 15:45 (twenty-two years ago)

The Glastonbury Festival "would be the target for a terrorist attack"?!? Now they're just being insane. The only reason I could imagine it being offensive to Muslims would be over the fact that you can hear Western popular music promoting sex and drugs there, and some of the people attending might not be wearing many clothes. In which case, you might as well have banned just about any regular pop or rock concert in the country ever.

― Chriddof (Chriddof), Saturday, 14 December 2002 17:53 (twenty-two years ago)

i think the Pilton resident in question may have just been clutching at straws just to enforce the view that the festival should be stopped...I dunno though, I'm half relieved when things like this happen as it may give people a chance to re-evaluate what its about vs what it used to be about. its true that there were noticeably less people there this year and this is almost certainly down to the hype surrounding the Supermegadeluxefence 3000, but it still had its moments. are we just to give up on the concept of anti-corporate (obv. it hasnt really been like that for many years), independent (until the Mean Fiddler stepped in) music-based festivals in the Uk (and anywhere) now?

― stevem (blueski), Saturday, 14 December 2002 17:59 (twenty-two years ago)

I have the whiff of a conspiracy theory here. The beginnings of the Glastonbury Festival were also very much the beginnings of the movement to challenge the landed gentry in the countryside, like the Enclosure Acts in reverse. Now the process that was in its infancy in 1971 is heading for the endgame, one can imagine that the old guard would want to retaliate in a very symbolic way. There would still be a certain sort of person in that area (it's a Tory constituency even today, despite having previously been considered more likely to go Lib Dem than many areas that *have* gone from blue to yellow) who would regard the non-licensing of the festival as a "victory" akin to the continuation of foxhunting.

Not that I care, really, but ... it has its resonance.

― robin "semi-urban fox" carmody (robin carmody), Monday, 16 December 2002 04:49 (twenty-two years ago)

It'll go ahead anyway, there'll be an appeal, terms and conditions will be met, the police won't object, and REM, Radiohead and the Rolling Stones will all headline the most alliterative festival bill ever.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 16 December 2002 12:02 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh GOOOOD we do not want to see loads of teenybopping drug snorting mud wrestling mosh freaks on one field! (Yes, I am joking.)

― nathalie (nathalie), Monday, 16 December 2002 12:15 (twenty-two years ago)

yeh, storm in a teacup perhaps...but i'm not sure if the festival can recover from the increased affiliation with Mean Fiddler, the crackdown on gatecrashers vs the influx of freeloading mediawhore hangers-on (due to increased media coverage on the web etc.) and the continued mellowing of Eavis and his musical tastes (Rod Stewart, R.E.M, Rolling Stones etc.)

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 16 December 2002 13:18 (twenty-two years ago)

Speaking from someone who has actually witnessed a scally pulling a knife on someone at Glastonbury, I can safely say the festival was MUCH MUCH BETTER without the gatecrashers.

There were no crushes down the right hand side of the stage after the headliners had finished as well, which was a relief.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 16 December 2002 17:33 (twenty-two years ago)

Speaking as someone who has actually witnessed a scally pulling a knife on someone at Glastonbury, I can safely say the festival was MUCH MUCH BETTER without the gatecrashers.

There were no crushes down the right hand side of the stage after the headliners had finished as well, which was a relief.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 16 December 2002 17:34 (twenty-two years ago)

You can say that again!

― Chewshabadoo (Chewshabadoo), Monday, 16 December 2002 17:49 (twenty-two years ago)

speaking as someone who, in 2000
saw violence, theft and my sister and her friend
getting their mobiles robbed/felt up at the same time
(in broad day light as coldplay were playing) we were
thrilled by the no-scally policy
working so well this year.

― piscesboy, Monday, 16 December 2002 18:05 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh GOOOOD we do not want to see loads of teenybopping drug snorting mud wrestling mosh freaks on one field! (No, I am not joking.)

― , Monday, 16 December 2002 18:09 (twenty-two years ago)

I dunno, it's only greatly corporate if you allow it to feel that way, good fun is good fun.

― Ronan (Ronan), Monday, 16 December 2002 23:05 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.