F***ing Legends, Mate: The Stone Roses At Heaton Park
Joe Kennedy
, July 3rd, 2012 06:47
Tens of thousands of you traipsed through the drizzle to Heaton Park for The Stone Roses reunion this past weekend. Joe Kennedy explains why this was more significant than a mere nostalgia exercise

The epithet 'legendary' has suffered severe abuse over the last ten years or so. It once had an end-of-pier charm, its native irony raising the curtain on magicians, crooners and ventriloquists half-forgotten even by those who know about such things: Sgt. Pepper's was, in one respect, an extended riff on this melancholy knowingness. Lately, though, the term has been co-opted by Hollyoaks-haircutted students and stag-partiers polluting bars with laddish blather about alcohol consumption and sexual point-scoring. Because of this, the bands who soundtrack such feats of postmodern male heroism - hello, The Enemy; Kasabian, you fucking legends - have also been afforded the description.
For those within a couple of birthdays of my own 31 years, The Stone Roses are 'legendary' in a more etymologically precise way. People now hitting their fourth decade approached gig-going age somewhere between the Roses' comeback tour of late 1995 and their notorious meltdown at Reading in 1996, with the result that the band came to be a cipher for all of the transformative experiences we'd missed by the skin of our teeth. We'd been too young for rave, just, and the possibilities embraced during that period - not only the apparent combinatory infinity of sample-based music, but the obliterative bliss of My Bloody Valentine and Sonic Youth - were to us no more than ideas encountered in the back-issues of Select handed down by older siblings. Despite the miniscule chronological gap between the early 90s and Britpop's reestablishment of deference to received ideas, it was as if we were uncovering traces of some archaic belief system of which the Roses were avatars.
At Heaton Park, where the Roses are playing the second of three homecoming shows, the audience is split between those for whom the band symbolise this missed encounter with sublimity and people old enough to plausibly have attended the chaotic, era-defining gig at Spike Island in May 1990. Initial impressions suggest that there's been a conscious effort to replicate some of the anarchy of that day. However, the disorganisation has been pasted onto another, financial imperative: here in stereotypically drizzly north Manchester, you queue for an hour to get a drink only to find that a small bottle of Fosters costs four pounds. Elsewhere, there's acres of mud, worsened by the large numbers who've decided not to wait for the toilets and are instead pissing on any available upright surface. It's as if the planners have cultivated a degree of low-level misbehaviour to cater to the nostalgia of those who were there first time around and the fantasies of those who weren't.
Somehow, this mirrors one of the Roses' most intriguing and troubling contradictions. They juggled styles, influences and ideas to create a blend - musical, lyrical and aesthetic - which implied emancipation and limitlessness, but also played right into the hands of more conservative, commodifying forces. Melodic guitar-pop, funk, Northern Soul, krautrock, the bass-heavy post-punk of Joy Division and PiL, Hendrix and dub were distilled into the sound; exuberant polysexuality, Situationist politics and geographically-detailed lyricism - hymns to the belt of chemical and salt-mining towns strung between Manchester and Merseyside - composed the poetic identity. This turned into a kind of radicalised regionalism, a take on northern England that maintained the pride and self-belief but jettisoned the pigeon-fancying fatalism and dodgy gender assumptions of kitchen-sink realism. However, what ensued was so multifaceted that it was hard to conceive of it in its totality, meaning that aspects of it could be appropriated for purposes far removed from the original context.
This perhaps explains the discontinuity between the Roses and their alleged offspring. Bands who try to conjure their spirit by siphoning off one or two components of the brew miss the point, but these simplifications often appeal to the marketing men desperate to capture and marketise the 'authentic' voice of Britain beyond London and the South-East. Liam Gallagher - here tonight fronting the less-than-inspiring Beady Eye - took Ian Brown's perceived 'arrogance' and ran with it, but the similarity between Oasis and Brown's band doesn't extend much beyond attitude and a vaguely overlapping melodic intelligence. Kasabian seem at times to register the surrealist impulses of 'Elephant Stone' or 'Sugar Spun Sister', but are only clumsily imaginative when they seek to emulate them.
In the thick of the crowd, you wonder which aspect of the band's identity drew many of tonight's punters. If you've seen the opening of The Warriors, you'll remember how it opens with a rally of all New York's gangs. Heaton Park isn't dissimilar, only the implausibly-costumed streetfighters have been replaced by members of every casual firm north of Northampton. Everywhere you look, there's a CP Company zip-up or a Stone Island patch or a face half-recognised from some slightly forbidding pub visited on an away trip to Grimsby, Blackpool or Paisley. It occurs to me that many in the press assume a kind of retrogressive appreciation of the Roses happens amongst this - considerable - section of their fanbase, and that it works by mapping them with the same qualities as Oasis: there's an assumption that it's that 'arrogance', that 'swagger', those 'legendary' traits of Brown that impress.
But then the band come on and, as anticipated, go straight into 'I Wanna Be Adored', and it's finally proven to me in the most empirical way possible that the Roses have nothing whatsoever in common with 'Don't Look Back in Anger' or 'Club Foot', and that their appeal does indeed ride on something noble. From where I'm standing, they sound very tight, but the guitar line with which John Squire dresses Mani and Reni's unmistakable opening groove still testifies to an experience of vulnerability none of the group's imitators could ever confess to either lyrically or musically. The mood in the crowd changes: where there'd been a bit of needle prior to the beginning of the set, there's now a connectedness which exceeds the boozy hugging this kind of crowd have a reputation for.
I'm still ambivalent, though. The sound is too low and, by the time we're six or seven songs in the performance has been marked thoroughly by unevenness. It seems that there's too much reciprocation between the band and the crowd, which means that any let-up by the audience in terms of showering the band with appreciation is sensed and translated into the music. The Roses aren't, for all of their latter-day live competence - Brown's singing is nowhere near as off as has been reported - types to plough on undeterred in the face of any psychological instability: several songs at the beginning of the set are executed with technical proficiency, but also without the kind of energy one would expect an event like this to inspire. In the crowd, levels of belief waver correspondingly.
Against the run of everything I forecast about this evening, it turns out to be 'Ten Storey Love Song' which brings equilibrium. On record, it's the track which bears most resemblance to the lumbering lad-rock which attempts to claim lineage from the Roses, but here it's performed with a brightness and precision which suggests nothing less than the respect and gratitude of the band for their fans. Rain slants across the stage, lathering the distant Pennines in mist, but the mutuality on which the performance depends is suddenly guaranteed. After that, 'Standing Here' and (inevitably) 'Fool's Gold' are excellent, and the second half of the show largely follows suit.
It's easy to be cynical about this reformation. My Twitter feed keeps returning disparaging remarks about the tragedy of middle-aged middle-managers attempting to relive Spike Island, the dreadfulness of Brown's vocals, the inevitability of further intra-band discord and the general cultural irrelevance of the whole affair. I find it hard to tell how many of these thoughts are propelled by genuine dislike and how many are simply expressions of anxiety about being seen to profess sympathies for a group damned by association with any number of provincial indie discos and service station compilations. They're also the bearers of an earnestness which makes some uncomfortable. I understand, and perhaps even share, certain reservations. But for those who felt cheated by having been born two or three years too late, that singularly unlucky generation who got Coldplay and Starsailor instead of a Roses or a Pistols or a Stones or even a Franz bloody Ferdinand, this offers a form of closure. The ending, 'Elizabeth My Dear' seguing into 'I Am The Resurrection', is as predictable as can be but arguably all the better for being so: as legends go, it's a bit like meeting Robin Hood only to find that he actually does suck the jewels from the rings on his victim's hands.
There's no encore. Instead, there's a firework display soundtracked by 'Redemption Song'. It's pretty dark, but it's still possible to look around and see this has been widely perceived as a vindication of the band's decision to reform and play these dates. Eventually, the crowd are funnelled out in increments, emerging to find that a shortage of shuttle buses and trams means most will have to walk the three or four miles back to Manchester city centre. At another show, in another city, I can imagine this provoking splutterings of discontent, but there's a tacit understanding here that it's the ability to produce or articulate a genuine experience of communality, one that's far more successful than 'Live Forever' or 'Rock and Roll Star' in its blending of the universal and the particular, that makes the Stone Roses. It takes almost an hour to get halfway, but as thousands traipse south through Cheetham Hill I realise that this is a genuinely public moment of the kind Britain needs at the moment and that those of us born in the early eighties were mostly robbed of thanks to calendarial misfortune. Ultimately, in that case, it's all been worth it.
Jul 3, 2012 11:51am
Ian D jones whilst I agree with your chicken in a basket sentiments I think
perhaps you have picked the wrong example in A-Ha , who transcended
their teen fandom to accumulate a body of mature body of adult
work , much of which was critically acclaimed , and retired on high with an arena
tour and nights at the RAH ..somehow as much as I love the first roses album I
cannot imagine them progressing much further than the mooted next album , if said songs
exist why weren't they played ? Why on earth predictably start with I Wanna Be Adored
just like every other gig they did in the past ? Why not try something different such as Breaking
Into Heaven as an opener ? Thankful I spent my 60 quid this summer
on 3 1/2 hours of Bruce and a gig that like previous tours that took
in requests and veered off the chosen set list ,
Jul 3, 2012 11:51am
Ian D jones whilst I agree with your chicken in a basket sentiments I think
perhaps you have picked the wrong example in A-Ha , who transcended
their teen fandom to accumulate a body of mature body of adult
work , much of which was critically acclaimed , and retired on high with an arena
tour and nights at the RAH ..somehow as much as I love the first roses album I
cannot imagine them progressing much further than the mooted next album , if said songs
exist why weren't they played ? Why on earth predictably start with I Wanna Be Adored
just like every other gig they did in the past ? Why not try something different such as Breaking
Into Heaven as an opener ? Thankful I spent my 60 quid this summer
on 3 1/2 hours of Bruce and a gig that like previous tours that took
in requests and veered off the chosen set list ,
Jul 3, 2012 12:06pm
Friday 29th of June 2012 - will live with all of us that were there forever! To be there and feel the love from likeminded people was truly amazing. It will never be forgotton!
To all the people that were pissing against the wall - come on, out of order! Hahaha, you know what I'm talking about! XXXXXXXXX
Jul 3, 2012 12:50pm
Ian D jones whilst I agree with your chicken in a basket sentiments, I would like to point out that the Stone Roses seems like a chicken in a basket at the moment but is actually more like a slug in a basket observed by those who have never actually viewed a slug, let alone a chicken. please pass the ruddy remote control.
Jul 3, 2012 1:19pm
Great review. As someone who was, not cynical, but wholly apathetic about the reunion, I'd just add that it wasn't for the reasons speculated about above. It was because I don't think they were ever that great a band in the first place ('Fools Gold' aside) despite their good attitude at their peak. There are plenty of us out here.
Jul 3, 2012 3:41pm
I really don't understand how statements like "(the Roses testify to a) vulnerability none of the group's imitators could ever confess to either lyrically or musically" apply to Oasis.
I don't know if it's caused by the dissonance between their image and the content, or if their more loutish (or just mainstream) fans poison them in the eyes of intellectual indie fans, but Noel's lyrics are generally incredibly vulnerable and sensitive. Same with Liam.
The Roses lyrics, if you don't know the allusions, are a load of gibberish.
I wish I could have been at the gig, it looked like fun. I hope they come to North America! There's too much questioning of motives, and the assumption that if money is the primary motivator then it's not authentic and can't be good. Here's the thing: every tour is motivated by money. And musicians, if they can't make money, generally quit. A tour can be done for the money and still be good (ie. Pavement 2010).
Jul 3, 2012 7:09pm
In reply to Ssslip:
Are These people for real. It was amazing. If you looked around and saw everybody's faces you wouldn't be saying it was shit. Top gig. Top night. I think people with these crazy comments need to get out more. Site one on
Jul 4, 2012 12:57am
The Stone Roses were never musically counter-cultural. They rode the idea that the public would want to hear guitars again after the synth pop of the late 80s and lucked out. They never intended to be anything other than mainstream and their lyrics were rarely if ever exceptional. They had a few nice tunes on their debut (Made of Stone I always liked the most) and that was about it. They mixed guitars and rave in a bric-a-brac way and white kids used it was a gateway to dance music.That's white kids who weren't already listening to Capital FM or buying SAW records. The may well be legendary but I doubt if that legend will survive the nostalgic generation who were part of the experience because their talents were really in demographics more than anything else. As this rave generation dies off, so will the legend of this band's 'legendary' music. And as for Oasis, they're like a poor version of this band from the start, weren't they; a faded blueprint. The idea that anyone young will look to them in another 10, 20 or 30 years as a creative force is almost unthinkable.They'll just be seen as a rocked out George Formby or Herman's Hermits. A period of diminishing returns, the kidz'll say. A time when guitar rock showed it had less and less to say creatively other than to commodify itself.
So, was it 'top' was it? Was you 'on one'? I don't care. Fuck off.
Jul 4, 2012 10:32am
In reply to Sir David Nasdaq:
One - no, I wasn't 'on one'. Two - the precise point of this piece was talk about how the band were, for those who hit their mid teens in the mid-90s *in the middle of nowhere with virtually no access to any interesting alternative music', 'legendary' in the proper sense of the word, ie as something that overshadowed our own cultural experience without ever really being verifiable.
Personally, I hear very little in any of the Roses' music that's directly connected to rave in as much as they didn't engage in any meaningful way with synths, drum machines, or sampling. What makes them interesting - I think - is that they synthesised earlier forms of dance music not only with guitar pop but with post-punk (the guitar on a lot of the early stuff reminds me of what Keith Levene was doing on the first PiL record) and krautrock. They then used this as a vehicle for lyrics which put a whole new spin on regionalism. I'd call them countercultural. Fuck it, they *were* countercultural within the social and political context of the late eighties. Surely the fact that they acted as a gateway for white kids (like me) into other forms of music is a good thing. Put it this way, there wasn't a lot of pirate radio in North Yorkshire circa 1995, so how else were we supposed to get to these things?
Jul 4, 2012 10:38am
In reply to Ssslip:
Interesting comments, although I don't really agree. I don't actually think Oasis' lyrics are bad - at least not on the first record; things go downhill fast after that - but I don't get any real sense of vulnerability from them. 'Supersonic' and 'Columbia' describe something with stunning accuracy, but it isn't vulnerability. More importantly, I don't really get what you mean by saying that the Roses' lyrics are 'gibberish' if you don't 'get the allusions'. Surely there's a frame of reference for understanding any form of poetry - I mean, Pavement only begin to make any sense at all if you're reading the same books as them and have some grounding in American popular culture. I'd argue that 'Going Down', 'Mersey Paradise' and 'Elephant Stone' are as good lyrically as most of what the poetically-vaunted Smiths had to offer...
Jul 4, 2012 1:53pm
In reply to Joe K:
I don't think all of the Roses words are gibberish, some of them are quite good. But I before I read explanations for the revolutionary sentiments, I thought people who said they were partly a political band were crazy.
I don't know that I've read the same books as Pavement, but a lot of their words make sense to me, probably because I apply my own meaning or story to them.
"Columbia" and "Supersonic" aren't the best examples of vulnerability in Oasis. How about Slide Away, Acquiesce, Rocking Chair, Talk Tonight, Don't Go Away, Gas Panic...sure, they're not all vulnerable, there's a lot of cockiness, arrogance, and gobbledygook in there as well. But I think that Noel's sensitivity has been ignored because his image and interviews are so sarcastic and abrasive.
Jul 5, 2012 3:48pm
i went on saturday - one of, if not the best, atmospheres at a gig i've ever experienced.
the roses were incredibly important for so many people - their two albums coincided with pivotal moments in my personal life, and these songs will always have a personal resonance, but to celebrate this music with the band in a field full of people who were, in the words of a mate of mine 'giving you back the same thing you were feeling, everywhere you looked' , well that's something that i'll never forget, whatever the naysayers suggest.
it was incredible.
if you weren't there, and you want to slag off the people who were, or our motives, then that's fine, but seriously, you're missing the point.
communal celebration is all too rare in our lives, and ok, this could have been better organised (cheaper lager, more toilets, better transport) but, you know, that's an argument for another day.
what we need to do is recognise that for maybe three generations of music fans, the roses mean a hell of a lot, and heaton park over three days was one hell of a way for the band to cement their place in music folklore, and for the fans to have their love of this music, these words, these four flawed individuals, justified.
thanks to the band, and thanks to everyone who went, for making it special.
didn't we have a lovely time...?
Jul 5, 2012 4:41pm
While I do love the Roses, being an American, it's always funny how those in the UK will go absolutely bonkers over something in the moment, then be aghast at themselves about 10 yrs later that they were so bonkers over it. Another 10 yrs on, theyhen reassess and think level-headedly that whatever it was they went ape over at first, then were sick with themselves about later on, was both not as amazing as they initially thought and not as awful as they wanted to think later on. This is what it seems the senitiment over the Roses is and where the sentiment over Oasis is in the middle of. In the late 90s/early 00s, when Radiohead had OK Computer and Kid A, I can just imagine was thought of a bunch of baggy, paisley Northerners from a decade before - gah, how could you have been so short-sighted to fall in love with that!? Certainly young, immature stupidity. Now we are a few years on from the decade removed from Oasis's heyday and they are continually used as a reference as a retrospective cultural low-point - again, one of those, I can't believe I went boozing down the pub in my trainers and track jacket with my long Liam hair and drukenly bellowed how I'd "live forever" arm in arm with a bunch of nonces acting the same. Maybe in another 5 yrs you'll reassess....
Jul 8, 2012 7:49pm
I was old enough to have the misfortune of hearing these manc cunts the first time around,they were over hyped shite then and then are over hyped mythologised shite now
A cunt band with a cunt sheep following
Stone Roses fans are a bunch of thick pricks
Jul 19, 2012 12:21pm
In reply to slane:
I was old enough to have the misfortune of hearing these manc cunts the first time around,they were over hyped shite then and then are over hyped mythologised shite now
A cunt band with a cunt sheep following
Stone Roses fans are a bunch of thick pricks
and further to that, I want to state how criminally underated Jesus Jones were and how absolutely pissed off I am that Bon Jovi never get near the best album ever awards. The crap these bastards like isnt fit to wipe the shit from my shoe, whatever happened to the decent bands from the early 90s like from the BRIT awards and ''now thats what I call music 23''
Jul 19, 2012 12:29pm
In reply to slane:
some bastard is posing as me, probably some fucking Roses lovin cunt, well arnt you clever
and yer wrong about Jesus Jones, its George Michaels ' Listen Without Prejudice ' you cunt
















Goldblade
The National
Vår
The Memory Band
The Focus Group
Neon Neon
Jul 3, 2012 11:03am
I was there on Saturday too, and this is almost exactly how I feel. Good review.
Reply to this Admin