Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Yes Mona, I was aware of 1996/1997 interviews where Nick admitted being really pissed off about Neil ending the band, however I don't remember him ever saying stuff like this:

"Neil had a particular way of maintaining his authority. The threat of breaking up the band was always hanging over the band, and delivered by Neil.

and

"It was one of those mind games that, towards the end, just became annoying until he finally, ultimately, pulled the pin."

quote:
*never* trust what you read in the papers.
So you don't think Nick spoke to the news reporter? Or quoted him correctly? I know what you're saying & I'm not always that happy @ newspaper reports, but this one exists because Nick actually went out of his way ot publically embarras Neil Finn 7 years after the split. Or are you saying an actual news item about the band in the biggest newspaper in Australia wasn't worth starting a new topic about?

Also notable was the reporter thinking the band had split up in 1993... Roll Eyes

It looks like I won't be going to see Tarmac Adam tonight.
quote:
this one exists because Nick actually went out of his way ot publically embarras Neil Finn 7 years after the split
I don't get what's so embarrassing about it. IMO, it all makes sense. Neil had to have thought about a solo career long before the breakup, we already know about some of the internal problems within the group (Nick being fired by Neil among them), and it's clear to everyone that Neil was the controlling force behind the band. Taking all that into account, the only thing left is the individual band members' opinions and perceptions about what happened -- I'd say Nick's certainly entitled to his. He may still be sour about the whole breakup, but it didn't stop him from playing with Neil (and Paul) at the Cold Live at the Chapel gig in 2001. In short, I personally think you're making a big deal over a small thing. Smiler
Not that I really mean to take Neil's side here or anything, but how do we know that comments he might have made to Nick about breaking up the band were really a "threat"? When Nick says that Neil "threatened" to end the band, it implies to me that he thought it was something said for spite. Maybe it's just what Neil was really feeling at the time. And maybe when he said those things he really meant them at the time he said them! People say they're going to do a of lot of things when they're stressed out - believe me, I know - a couple of times within the past few weeks I've nearly quit a job that I actually like for the most part. And when I was thinking I might quit, I MEANT it - but of course, then things calm down and you get over it and go on. But sometimes things get to a breaking point, so as for Neil eventually "pulling the pin," well, why was it Neil's responsibility to stay in a situation where he wasn't getting what he wanted anymore? It's not like he was married to Nick and Paul. Yes, maybe they were friends, but the band was likely to end at SOME POINT, as most bands do. I can see why Nick might take this personally, but we don't really know if it was meant that way when it all actually went down.

However, having said all that, I can certainly understand why Nick might might feel this way, and he's certainly entitled to his opinion about it. This sort of situation is fraught with emotional overtones, and while it's one thing for me to comment as a third party observer, I might feel very different about it if I was in Nick's shoes, and might very well feel exactly the same way he does. I don't think Nick should be crucified for making these comments - he's only human, after all, with feelings that can get hurt, just like the rest of us. Smiler
quote:
I can see why Nick might take this personally, but we don't really know if it was meant that way when it all actually went down.

However, having said all that, I can certainly understand why Nick might might feel this way, and he's certainly entitled to his opinion about it. This sort of situation is fraught with emotional overtones, and while it's one thing for me to comment as a third party observer, I might feel very different about it if I was in Nick's shoes, and might very well feel exactly the same way he does. I don't think Nick should be crucified for making these comments - he's only human, after all, with feelings that can get hurt, just like the rest of us.
Yeah, that's what I was trying to say. I wouldn't take this version (or Neil's) as fact -- it's all perception.
Weird as I was just responding to Mo/Maureen on the List that out of Nick and Paul it was Nick who really wanted the band to go on, Paul had long long left, and really Nick was pissed off. It's his right, especially at the time.

Saying all that it's actually been quite awhile since the split and you would expect that most people would move on.
Several things to think about:
1/ Nick has had quite a few occasions to tell Neil what he thinks, and from the times I have been around have never heard him say a thing

2/ When Split Enz broke up, it was Neil Finn who gave Nick Seymour the chance to be in this amazing band, he came to Neil cap in hand, and has benefited incredibly well, in all areas. Financially Neil has been very generous to all of us, from royalties to Nick getting a brand new 4 wheel drive , to owning his own apartment at Prahran and Dublin... each time Neil tours Crowded House sell CDS, and a percentage goes to Nick, and Paul (Mark/Peter/Tim)... they do not have to do a thing.

3/ I was never on every tour, on every tour bus or in every backstage band room, but I have to say during that whole time I never once heard Neil threaten to break up the band as some sort of power play... not saying it didn't happen but I can never ever remember one time..... while I was present and I was around A LOT.

Even when Nick was sacked for those few weeks, there was talk of a replacement, but not of the band splitting. There were times when Neil did feel that a huge weight of the band was on his shoulders, especially around interviews etc, and you know what, it WAS... and maybe he did say this is getting too much BUT I never witnessed him playing mind games etc as quoted...

Was Neil a controling force behind Crowded House, yes and I am so glad he was, in many cases, but I can think of hundreds of examples where Nick and Pauls input was always part of it.... Neil was the leader, I think everyone would agree with that...but Crowded House really was Neil, Nick and Paul...

I'm not sure if the article was taken out of context, etc, but it just feels like a really cheap shot, because Nui (journalist who we have all known for years) couldn't get a Tarmac Adam article printed in the Sun without some sort of
beefed up Crowded House piece for placement......

I don't think Nick should be crucified, but if the reason for doing this is to scrape in some mention of Tarmac Adam's gig tonight in the paper it really is a piss poor. We do have to ask- would Nick be saying the same stuff to a journalist if there wasn't a show that could well be only 1/3 full! Give us the dirt and we'll give you a mention of your show...

I remember the day that Neil decided to break up the band, 5 of us (maybe 6?) were in the room, no threats no big drama just Neil saying
it's time to move on, I want to break up Crowded House. He looked really relieved, and I laughed (weird reaction I know)...but it wasn't a big drama or any threats thrown at people....

Anyway nuff said from my side....Nicks a really good mate love him to death but I felt it was a really cheap shot at some media attention for this other project and really a bit sad.

None of us are saints but I can honestly say that the reason why I put in all these hours of work is simply that, Neil Finn has been an exceptional person, and incredibly kind... you'd think after 23 years I would of noticed one half decent threat !!! *GRIN*. maybe I'm just a bit slow!!

Peter
Interesting to read these perspectives...all I can say is that if Neil was hinting at going in new directions or trying to prepare his band-mates for a break-up, this could come across as a threat rather than a kindness, it all depends where you are sitting. I certainly would not miss a gig on account of it...why not go and see what Nick has to say for himself? It's a great album.
Wuntie
Pretty sure Neil never hinted at going solo, that was just natural. You have to remember that
demo's had been done for some songs (with Peter Jones) as possible tracks for the next Crowded House album.
The plan was release Recurring Dream and tour and record the new CD off the back of that
no talk of any solo stuff etc. It all happened when we were in London VERY quickly, just a decision to finish and yep Neil lit the match! (:
I agree,
I think fans should see Tarmac Adam and maybe have a listen to the CD before you buy it. So far we have had a massive 6 emails regarding the CD, and 5 people hate it to one liking it. (Two if you include Wuntie). Everyone's different, some may love it,.if you are asking me,I think it is so bland, I truly dislike Matt ODonnells voice and the songwriting is horrid. It put's the "S" in HIT.
Nick did ask me what I thought, so I was honest.

I guess the true test is how many copies the public buys and if the people who love it will still be playing it 6 months down the track.

At least LIVE the Seymour/Hester personality's can come out which is always entertaining.

Gryph.
Thanks for the great post Peter.
quote:
Originally posted by gryphon:
When Split Enz broke up, it was Neil Finn who gave Nick Seymour the chance to be in this amazing band, he came to Neil cap in hand, and has benefited incredibly well, in all areas.
Exactly. He lived off the genius of Neil Finn for more than 10 years playing bass lines already written, enjoying the life of a rock star, earning heaps of money... and yet he still wants to make Neil look bad to the general public (and a page 9 article in Australia's highest selling tabloid is appealing to the dumbest demographic - people who's perception of Sir Neil will change for the worse).

quote:
...each time Neil tours Crowded House sell CDS, and a percentage goes to Nick, and Paul (Mark/Peter/Tim)... they do not have to do a thing.
Make that Nick living off Neil for... 18 years? Wink

quote:
Was Neil a controling force behind Crowded House, yes and I am so glad he was, in many cases, but I can think of hundreds of examples where Nick and Pauls input was always part of it.... Neil was the leader, I think everyone would agree with that...but Crowded House really was Neil, Nick and Paul...
Neil (IMO) had every right to be the controlling force behind the "band" - he started up the band, sang lead vocals... and of course wrote the songs - which (IMO) cancells everything else out. I'm not agreeing/disagreeing with what you're saying PG, just incorporating my opinions in & using your post as a base Big Grin .

quote:
I'm not sure if the article was taken out of context, etc, but it just feels like a really cheap shot, because Nui (journalist who we have all known for years) couldn't get a Tarmac Adam article printed in the Sun without some sort of
beefed up Crowded House piece for placement......
Yeah, quite possibly. It just so happens that there was another article in the Herald Sun's Hit Entertainment Liftout that same day (today) about Tarmac Adam:
TARMAC ON THE ROAD: Crowded House fans might like to check out a new band by the name of Tarmac Adam when they play their first gig tonight at 8:30pm at the Corner Hotel, 57 Swan St, Richmond. Tarmac Adam don't necessarily sound like Crowded House, but do feature two former members of the Australasian supergroup, bassist Nick Seymour and drummer Paul Hester. The band will use the gig to launch debut album Hand Held Torch. Tickets are $17.60 + BF from the venue. Phone: (03) 9427 9188.

I actually met Nui Te Koha 2 years ago @ the Herald Sun & he didn't really talk much. He had his own little closed off office & seemed a bit preoccupied with work. Ah well...

No offence to anyone who may be... er... offended. Just my views.
quote:
Originally posted by gryphon:
[qb] Wuntie
I agree,
I think fans should see Tarmac Adam and maybe have a listen to the CD before you buy it. So far we have had a massive 6 emails regarding the CD, and 5 people hate it to one liking it. (Two if you include Wuntie). Everyone's different, some may love it,.if you are asking me,I think it is so bland, I truly dislike Matt ODonnells voice and the songwriting is horrid. It put's the "S" in HIT.
[/qb]
YIKES! I'll admit that it's not for everybody, my sister gave me the CD for my birthday and said something like "sorry, this is sh*te" whilst it played in the background at my birthday dinner. I'd recommend it to fans of Coldplay or Travis...certainly not music to change the world by any stretch but an enjoyable, optimistic little album (in my very humble opinion)...I probably would not have bought it without hearing it first myself.
Hmmm. I'm still not seeing how Nick's comments are a "slam" but I'd like to be able to read the rest of the interview. Just finished saying yesterday that the board was needing a little controversy...
Acutally I'm in doubt about the seriousness of this article. I mean this Nui doesn't even know the right dates about his topic.
I don't know so much about CH than you all do, so maybe I'm not quiet qualified to say something about it.

We all have to remind that these guys are humans and nobody is flawless even Neil Finn. And actually no one of us was backstage and no one can say what really happened.Their surely had some conflicts and fights between them, that happens everytime when people are together especially for so long time.
In my opinion Neil Finn was the leader of CH and he had the right to break the band up. He was the mainspring of CH, but he couldn't have done it in such a way without Nick and Paul. In my opinion they were an inspiration for him, and they involved a whole lot more then we all really know as well.

Well, Neil was in the position to do this things but it's all about the point of view. And do you think he would have wanted to destroy the good vibes with such behavior?

What's kind of strange is the fact that this story appears again after all this years and after a few performances of them together. If Peter is right, and Nick only wants to get some media attention, then it's really sad. I think he's not in need for that poor advertising.

In my opinion a journalist only wanted to get a good headline and mixed up some lines he once heard.
I'm kinda wondering if these comments were just a small part of a much longer interview. That's why I agree with Mona and what some other people have said, don't always believe what you read. Not because I believe Nick's words were twisted around, but it might have been just a tiny blurb taken from the whole interview. Yeah, it's possible Nick is trying to stir up controversy to sell records...or, the interviewer is trying to stir up controversy to sell a few papers. We just don't know.
quote:
Was Neil a controling force behind Crowded House, yes and I am so glad he was, in many cases, but I can think of hundreds of examples where Nick and Pauls input was always part of it.... Neil was the leader, I think everyone would agree with that...but Crowded House really was Neil, Nick and Paul...
Oh, I certainly agree with that. I don't care that the group members didn't contribute equally -- they all contributed in some way.

quote:
Neil (IMO) had every right to be the controlling force behind the "band" - he started up the band, sang lead vocals... and of course wrote the songs - which (IMO) cancells everything else out.
It's easy to have that viewpoint when you aren't the one who feels like you're being controlled. Smiler BTW, I'll never understand the swipe at CH being a band. Performing songs written and sang by Neil Finn doesn't make them any less of a band.

quote:
If Peter is right, and Nick only wants to get some media attention, then it's really sad.
In fairness to Nick, it's a two-way street just like Peter said. I'm sure anyone interviewing Nick about Tarmac Adam is going to inevitably ask about Crowded House. I can't really blame Nick if he still has some bitter feelings about it. He was obviously hurt the most by the breakup, so it's only natural (heh) that he's taking longer to "move on." It's been my experience that the timeline for moving on is an individual thing.

While I'm defending Nick because I don't think he's done anything wrong, I am not trying to put down Neil at all. I love both of them. Well, as much as one can love two guys he doesn't know.
It's always sad when a group breaks up after being together a long time, but Nick really needs to let this thing go already. I think it's nice that he and Paul are back together in a new project, but the CH break-up was over seven years ago. This attitude of Nick's is getting really old, most people are past gving a **** and it can't be healthy for him.

Then again maybe he is over the break-up, and is just slagging off Neil to score some publicity for his new bands album. And no, I don't buy the theory that the writer manipulated Nick's words or just printed parts of the interview. Nick's got a history of slagging off both Neil and Tim off in the press.

Whichever of the above is true, the quotes imply more about Nick's character than Neil's. The more interviews I read like this, the less credability the guy has.

It would be interesting to see how Paul Hester feels about the comments in the article. I always got the impression that Paul stayed good friends with Neil and Tim.
I'm with you, Sandra, I don't know a tremendous amount about the personal relationships within the band members... but I'll agree with Jenn, we have no idea what the conversation was between Nick and the reporter. Nick might have talked at length about Tarmac Adam, and then only made one small remark (probably when prodded) about CH, and the reporter chose to let that part go to the press, instead of anything else (more relevant) that was discussed. JMHO.
Oh dear. Nick. If you want to make a fresh start with a new band, you really shouldn't begin by criticising your previous band. It goes without saying that it severs ties, but it also associates negativity with a new product, ie. Tarmac Adam. If the press ask you about your time in CH, then yes, respond. You are more than entitled to have your say. But respond appropriately. It's no secret that you and Neil had problems - hell, everyone had problems with Neil at one point or another. But discussing them sourly now will only cast a bad light on your new band. And to be honest, if you're with a band that is starting from the ground up, you can't afford to piss anybody off. So if Neil said something unflattering about you when CH broke up, you don't come out seven years later and retaliate. It gives the impression to the press and the public that you really can't let go of grudges, and i'm sure that's not the case.

In saying that, i'd also be careful about who you discuss things with in the media. As evidence shows, they have a sneaky way of getting quotes from people that may have been said off-handedly, and milking it for all that it is worth.

*steps down from the soapbox* I didn't say that as eloquently as I would like, but I haven't had my coffee yet.
Yeah Wuntie this will shake it up...did you slip Nick that $10 just to do that *grin*.

Hmm I don't know -I like Coldplay and Travis even more.....I can understand why some people think Nick has slammed Neil, the amount of industry calls we had about this pretty much all thought that, I know Neil is too sensible (and as my other half Mark said too classy) to bite at this. ..and he's aware how the press can chop things up and go for an angle... Nick seems to of given them what they wanted.

Sandra ,I think Nui knew what he was doing, he penned the Paul 'why I left Crowded House' article........it's the one with Paul at our typewriter and a blank sheet of paper with the caption super-imposed, that was one of Nui's.
So he's been around CH for awhile etc
Actually I was backstage at most shows, and the split stuff wasn't from that area, that i can remember.... I'm not there all the time but if there were power trips like that, and it seemed like Nick was saying it was a continual thing, I would of heard or spotted it, simply because
I'm sure various members would of been in very bad moods or some discussion would of taken place.....I don't know, it was while back now. Nui's interview was done only a week ago so it isn't old or heresay etc...and Nui does record everything....so the quotes would be exact. I get the feeling it would of been a longer interview and The Sun simply took out this bit to beef it up..... I'm sure Nick would of said it (otherwise he'd be suing) but I bet a big chunk of the interview wasn't used...we have to give the old Scrote (Nick)some benefit of the doubt (myself included).

Yep Laver, I agree 100% everyone is different, I just find it very strange that after 5 years of never mentioning this, media, friends and especially to Neil that suddenly it was mentioned again. It's not like this is the first Nick interview since the band split.... that's why I think it's a bit odd. I've probably had some pretty intense talks with Nick over the last few years, (all good), as I said he is a friend, but this Neil stuff has never surfaced, and several times we have talked about CH breaking up...
as a mate it does worry me a bit....

Anyway I've exhausted my comments, from what I gather from NZ it was a shrug and 'silly tosser' so I'm glad that is the case.....

Not much else I can say, but no one stress on this too much....... just one of those 'odd' things.

Peter
My ten cents:

I think things put in print can become very polarised. I've fallen foul of this myself on a number of occasions where the context and emphasis get lost.

Its entirely possible that the interviewer asked a very specific question about the break up and Nick gave an honest answer that, in his angle, Neil would from time to time, when disagreements ensued, mention that he could just break up the band if he wanted to.

Its entirely possible that Nick IS over it, that it doesn't bother him, but he's just telling it like it was. No different to me talking to friends about arguments I had with ex-partners, for example. It doesn't mean I'm not over it, in fact, possibly the opposite: I'm over it and I can talk about it...
quote:
Its entirely possible that Nick IS over it, that it doesn't bother him, but he's just telling it like it was. No different to me talking to friends about arguments I had with ex-partners, for example. It doesn't mean I'm not over it, in fact, possibly the opposite: I'm over it and I can talk about it...
Well said, Paul. Once again, I'd be inclined to say he was "telling it like he perceived it to be." Also, I think you touched on something else -- a lot of this is probably hyperbole. I don't think Nick's saying Neil literally held a possible breakup over his head constantly. As time goes on, a few fights here and there might seem more like "all the time."

Peter, I recognize your unique situation as a friend of Nick and Neil. IMO, it's natural for you to read a little more into the comments. OTOH, I still say everyone else is overreacting. It's not like they showed a picture of Nick eating babies. Roll Eyes
Just my two cents on this, from the angle of someone who deals with the press from a PR side:

I was more off-put by the headline than the actual story. In the story, Nick actually defends his position a little bit by saying the following before digging into Neil:

"Any band that is close will be prone to the internal politics and egos of its players, and we would all somehow manipulate that," Seymour said.

That said, in my experience, the editors of the papers' specific sections write the Headlines and the headline BANDMATE ACCUSES FINN sets the tone for the entire article for what could have been off-handed comments in the middle of an interview.

I'm in the camp of Mona - never trust the press completely. Everyone has their own narratives and they always color an article or headline...the concept of fair and balanced press free of bias is a fairly new myth that can never truly exist...any one person's definition of fair and balanced is biased in of itself, thus nothing can be fair and balanced to everyone.

OK, I'm off my soapbox now and back on topic...
annefrancis

Add Reply

Post
    All times London, UK.

    ©1998-Eternity, Frenz.com. All post content is the copyrighted work of the person who wrote it. Please don't copy, reproduce, or publish anything you see written here without the author's permission.
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×