Noel Gallagher doesn’t think Harry Styles is a genuine songwriter
The Blur vs. Oasis battle is reignited—and this time it's over who has the worst take on pop stars
Aux News Noel Gallagher
Earlier this year, Damon Albarn made the (factually false) claim that Taylor Swift doesn’t write her own songs. At the time, we joked that Blur and Oasis had left their face-off behind, with Albarn now starting a new era of beefing with pop stars. But turns out, a Gallagher has entered the ring, and this time Blur and Oasis are battling it out again over who has the worst take on mainstream pop artists.
In an interview with Daily Star (via Yahoo!), Noel Gallagher ranted about The X Factor being meaningless in the grand scheme of the music industry, saying, “The X Factor is a TV show, it’s got nothing to do with music, it’s got nothing to do with music whatsoever, and anything that has come from that, that’s got nothing to do with music.”
But what could’ve been left as a critique of The X Factor turned into another inaccurate take on a major musician: Harry Styles. The singer, who got his start on The X Factor when Simon Cowell had the individual auditioning performers join forces to create One Direction, is the most successful artist to have a career kickstarted by the reality competition.
Though Styles has proved that he has more to offer than being a former boybander, Gallagher isn’t convinced. “You’re not telling me Harry Styles is currently in a room somewhere writing a song,” he says. “With any joy, he’ll be surrounded by a lot of girls.”
He adds, “I can assure you he’s not got an acoustic guitar out trying to write a middle eight for something.”
Gallagher seems to have conveniently forgotten that Styles has songwriting credits on everything he’s made post-One Direction (mostly sharing songwriting duties with frequent collaborators Kid Harpoon and Tyler Johnson), and has full control over his music. Styles also has multiple songwriting credits from his time with One Direction.
It’s not the first time the former Oasis member has criticized Styles, either. As reported by NME, Gallagher previously went on Absolute Radio and said his cat “could’ve written in about 10 minutes” Styles’ hit song, “Sign Of The Times.”
Things got bad enough for Albarn that he had to issue an apology to Taylor Swift after she called him out on his erroneous take and thousands of her fans attacked him on Twitter. Though Styles has yet to call out Gallagher for his words, he’s going to have to log off from Twitter for the day. You do not want to mess with Styles’ stans.
133 Comments
The singer, who got his start on The X Factor when Simon Cowell had the individual auditioning performers join forces to create One Direction, is the most successful artist to have a career kickstarted by the reality competition.Not a knock on Styles and “success” is a pretty vague metric, but I think Carrie Underwood is ahead of him by a significant margin still.Edit: Whoops. I read “the” as “a.” Underwood was not on X-Factor, of course. My bad.
Lol Country music will never have worldwide appeal. Pop music will.
Okay, but Carrie Underwood has still sold more albums than Harry Styles. As a solo artist at least. He has her beaten if you count all of One Direction’s sales.
I judge my musicians by leg quality. Underwood in a landslide.
I dunno, Styles is put together pretty well.
The two of them should make a baby.
Not to diminish the achievements of Carrie Underwood, but I don’t think her name is a household name outside of America.Harry Styles is a global phenomenon, these days leading the charts in 50+ countries.He not just has writing credits on every single song he has released as a solo artist so far because his managament lobbyed for it. Behind the album documentaries exist which actually showing him while writing and playing the first versions a few of his songs. And in general, he is a hard working musician, singer, songwriter, actor, soon to be producer and director too. Very talanted and charismatic and grate stage performer.If none of these convoncing enough, just go and check what the biggest names of the music world have to say about him: Mick Jagger, Paul McCartney, Stevie Nicks, Mick Fleetwood, Joni Mitchell and so on. Harry is on his way to be as legendary as them.
Not to diminish the achievements of Carrie Underwood, but I don’t think her name is a household name outside of America.Oh I’m sure. But artists are judged on their album sales. That’s the easiest and least biased way to measure success. Thank you for the essay on Harry Styles though. I’m glad you enjoy his music and persona. I’m neutral on him and will likely remain that way as his style of music is not one that appeals to me. For the record, the same can be said of Carrie Underwood. I couldn’t name a song by either of them.
Country music has been popular all over the world for many decades.
Seriously, from a U.K. perspective, I know Google is my friend but… who?
She’s a Country singer. Pretty blonde lady. Got her start on American Idol. Sings the Sunday Night (American) Football theme song. None of those things will help you I’m sure, but she’s very rich and has sold a lot of albums. Mostly in the US of course.
And to expand on my joke, has the best legs the the game (and uses this to full advantage). She’d break Styles in half.
Carrie Underwood will be 40 next year. She’s “ahead of him” by a little under 11 years…
I agree. He will likely pass her in the future given his current trajectory.
Carrie Underwood sold about 26 million units off 8 albums in 17 years. Styles has, so far, sold about 15 million units off 2 albums in 5 years. We’ll how he does longevity wise, but he seems to be on his way to catching up fast (btw 12 out of those 26M for Carrie were on her first record, Some Hearts, released in 2005).
Though Styles has yet to call out Gallagher for his words, he’s going to have to log off from Twitter for the day. You do not want to mess with Styles’ stans. Noel Gallagher could give a shit less what Harry stans have to say, period. This is a guy who openly heckled his own brother from the audience during a performance of the band he helped form in a room full of Oasis fans. He has as many fucks to give as he has intelligent thoughts in his head, which is leaning towards the negatives at the moment.
You’re mixing up Noel and Liam.
You white, then you Ben Affleck.
Ok ,maybe I’m old , but can you translate this into English ?What has Ben Affleck got to do with two Marconian brothers?
Do you mean Mancunian?Or are they distantly related to Guglielmo Marconi?
Because nobody ever does that…Whichever it is, being insulted by a Gallagher is a rite of passage that Styles should embrace.“My last single has more than a billion streams.”“Is that a lot?”“I think so. Plus I got called out by Noel Gallagher for being useless.”“Holy shit!”
I’m sure there’s a subtle difference I’m missing. Eyebrows maybe?
..There’s a Significant difference for you to switch that up. Noel and Oasis were performing on MTV Unplugged in 96, LIAM was heckling him. And if you Consider Liam at the time didn’t write the songs, switching up Noel and Liam changes your projection to straight up false. If anything Noel was the person to feel bad for. Not saying they don’t look the same cus I thought that was a good joke, just correcting.
Noel: Short lead guitarist, short face, bad teethLiam: Taller frontman, long face, better teeth
BOTH: Lots o’ cocaine
If something dumb was said by a Gallagher brother, it could well be either of them.If something at least gesturing towards intelligent was said by a Gallagher brother, it was definitely said by Noel.That’s the key difference. That, and the fact Noel looks like Parker from Thunderbirds.
Multiple people on a pop culture website starred that comment, smh.
Oasis is dad rock at this point. The kids just don’t know.
Oasis were dad rock from the very start.
This place is dead now.
In total fairness, mixing up which Gallagher brother did something obnoxiously prickish to the other Gallagher brother in a way which firmly cemented how little they give a shit about each other or anyone else’s opinion is like mixing up two almost-but-not-quite identical ants on an anthill.
They’re both pricks, but they’re different flavors of prick. I can’t imagine Noel sitting in the stands and mocking Liam singing songs he wrote. Not his m.o. He’s more into making snarky comments in the press like the ones presented above.
That’s exactly what I was thinking. The only person who gives less of a shit than a Gallagher is Morrisey- because when you don’t care that you come off as a racist douche as opposed to just a run-of-the-mill bad-take douche you’ve reached peak ambivalence. Honestly, fuck Morrisey.
“I can assure you he’s not got an acoustic guitar out trying to write a middle eight for something.” I am curious how much time he does spend doing this when not in rooms full of girls. Genuinely curious question, not trying to knock the guy
i mean he writes music for a living. not just for himself. so probably quite often
Noel Gallagher may be correct that Harry Styles isn’t sitting behind an acoustic guitar figuring out the middle 8, but that’s just because Noel Gallagher’s songwriting references are at least 60 years old.
Boy, I wonder what’s going to stand the test of time, Don’t look back in anger or One Direction
30 years behind Blur even.
True. Pop songs don’t have bridges anymore!
Sorry, but having a songwriting credit on a pop song doesn’t actually make you a songwriter. When you start to get a bit of pull, your management starts lobbying for songwriting credit as part of your contract, to ensure you have an income stream. Often the contributions the stars actually make in material terms are negligible. I’m not saying Noel is right (though he well could be), but I am saying the evidence you’re citing to disprove him is weak.
Also he’s right about “Sign of the Times”, which is, like.. one pretty decent bar of melody repeated eighty hundred times, kept afloat by pretty production.
Agreed. One of the things I always look for when it comes to pop albums and song credits is if the artist has any songs where they are the sole credited writer. If they have even a couple of songs across their albums that are credited to just them, I tend to lean towards the idea that they are active in the songwriting.With someone like Harry Styles, who does not have any solo songwriting credits and hired professional songwriters like Tyler Johnson and Kid Harpoon to work on his albums, I am suspicious as to whether his songwriting co-credits are just vanity credits.
“One of the things I always look for when it comes to pop albums and song credits is if the artist has any songs where they are the sole credited writer.”
Not entirely credible as an approach. Actually, not even remotely credible as an approach. It’s like saying “one of the things I always look for in a fish is feathers…”
Lennon/McCartney.
Bernie Taupin & Elton John.
U2.
That was off the top of my head, spanning several decades. You’re looking for sole writing credits when that isn’t how most mainstream music is created these days.
I think he writes a lot of the lyrics but I’m not sure about the music.
Kid Harpoon and Tyler Johnson are not “hired professionals” they’re his friends and have been since he was 17 years old. Jeff Bhasker talked about Harry coming up with the entire structure of the song Sign Of The Times in 20 minutes on the piano. Most artists nowadays don’t get sole writing credits because there’s a conscious effort to reward composers of the arrangements of the instruments the artist isn’t proficient in. Old single credit songs were usually undercredited and unfair.
“Quick, Harry – what’s a word that rhymes with ‘plunge’?”“Um, ‘clunge’?”“We’ll go with ‘lunge’, but good enough. Here’s your songwriting credit.”
“Uh, splunge?”
THAT’S THE STUPIDEST IDEA I’VE EVER HEARD! GET OUT!
[RUNS AWAY CRYING]
And he’s also quite different from Taylor Swift, who has several acclaimed albums worth of solo credits and very recognizable lyrical and melodical sensibilities that always come through even when collaborating.I can’t say the same about Harry Styles. He’s got some good tunes, competently assembled and I don’t doubt he had a hand in a lot of them too. But he does not strike me as a capital S Songwriter with unique ideas to express. He’s a performer, first and foremost. A pop star. And probably quite good at it. But not a writer.
I don’t think Noel is being QUITE as much of a prick as he’s being made out to be in the article. I’m not saying he’s not one at all, but not as much.
By Gallagher standards, “With any joy, he’ll be surrounded by a lot of girls” is incredible magnanimity.
It’s tough to not make certain assumptions when hearing from a Gallagher, fairly or no.
You can check songwriting credits for Styles’ entire discography on Global Music Rights’ website, which is his PRO. Since Styles was the only person of his songwriting team to be signed to GMR when he wrote his first two albums (since then, Thomas Hull/Kid Harpoon has also joined the roster but the rights don’t revert to the new PRO once you switch) and since publishing rights go through a separate entity (in Styles’ case it’s called HSA Publishing, because he owns his masters and has his own record label and publishing company), the % of control you see on GMR’s catalogue is the % breakdown attributed to Harry Styles by the team that put together the songs. In Sign Of The Times, for instance, Styles’ PRO controls 50% represents 50% of the rights, despite the song having 5 other songwriters. This means the other 5 songwriters share the remaining 50%. GMR represents 42.5% of the song Styles wrote for Bleachers alongside Jack Antonoff and Ilsey Juber (for the soundtrack of the movie ‘Love, Simon’). In this breakdown, if you check BMI/ASCAP’s website, you realize that Styles’ PRO represents a majority % of ALL his discography. Hence, Styles was the main writer on ALL his discography.
Exhibit 1: Blue Ivy Carter got a writing credit for one line in a song. She won a Grammy for it. She didn’t write any song.
This doesn’t really merit a defense, though… Noel doesn’t have any more insight into Harry Styles’ songwriting than anyone commenting on this post. He’s speculating/insulting (to get attention) and folks are speculating to back him up (because they like some 25 year old Oasis songs and want clicks and cred for being anti-pop).
Also, he should pick a lane: Is Harry Styles a hack or is he a fraud? If Noel’s cat could have written Harry Styles’ first single, then Harry Styles probably could have as well…
I think the suggestion is that hackiness is inauthentic in the same way that posturing is inauthentic. I don’t think there’s a need to pick a lane a) because they’re not mutually exclusive but b) it’s fairly clear from context that Noel Gallagher said that stuff to have a go at Harry Styles and his ilk, not to form some perfectly cogent thesis statement.I don’t really buy this “he’s doing it to get attention” angle: Noel Gallagher is just a rockist. Thats a generational thing and I fully understand that the rockism v poptimism divide is long obsolete these days, and that people are happier with more sophisticated positioning around popular music than this old debate about authenticity really allowed. But the idea thaf Gallagher is contriving to get attention here is a little far fetched. He’s just sufficiently old and rich that he’s happy to rest on his laurels, play to the gallery, and lob the same grenades he always did, likely knowing full well they’re less provocative than they used to be.I’m not a fan of his either, for what it’s worth. If you’re under the impression I’m jumping to his defence you’re wrong, and if you’re under the impression that I’m doing it out of loyal fandom you’re also wrong.
You’re not explaining anything to me that I don’t understand; I’m closer, in chronological age, to Noel Gallagher than I am to Harry Styles. I’m just capable of understanding lazy/hacky arguments regardless of where they come from. That said, I can see why you don’t want to pick a lane. The same person – you – typed the following quotes:“[I]t’s fairly clear from context that Noel Gallagher said that stuff to have a go at Harry Styles and his ilk”
“I don’t really buy this ‘he’s doing it to get attention’ angle”
“[H]e’s happy to rest on his laurels, play to the gallery, and lob the same grenades he always did, likely knowing full well they’re less provocative than they used to be”He’s not “having a go at” Esperanza Spalding. He’s not “having a go at” The Roots. He’s not “having a go at” Doja Cat. None of them make rock music, and all of them are more collaborative than Noel Gallagher. So why Harry Styles? He’s pandering to fellow ‘rockists’ for attention by “having a go at” someone with significantly more name recognition. If there’s a reason, other than to get attention, please offer it. I’m here. But look at what you wrote: The reasons you offered are all variations on “to get attention.” The grenades he used to lob were provocative… He’s lobbing them now because Harry Styles is popular and has new music out and in the pipeline. He’s playing to the gallery now because Harry Styles is a high profile artist with name recognition, and someone held in high esteem by younger audiences.
Bottom line: It’s 2022. Arguments about sole writing credits and authenticity haven’t been timely since… the 90s? Trying to make them timely now is lazy. It’s hacky. And you can dress it up any way you like, but there’s no particularly valid reason to do it other than attention seeking. It doesn’t matter how Harry Styles writes his songs, and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with co-writing. It happens ALL THE TIME in various genres, including rock. Noel Gallagher wouldn’t have a career without mimicking successful co-writers.
Wait, so the only time you’ve ever said anything provocative, or to have a go at someone, is for attention? Not for amusement? Not for the sake of ingratiating yourself with the person you’re speaking to? Not for five minutes of shits and giggles? The only reason you can conceive, for person saying silly things about another, is for attention? Is that true?Ever get into heavy metal? A good amount of the signalling that is done there is about how metal is real, metal is true, metal’s not going anywhere, yadda yadda yadda: it’s basically an assurance to the audience that, listen: this stuff may not be on the radio or in the top 40 anymore, but you’re still valid and we’ll still take care of you and you’ll still have your musical interests met. The audience expects this kind of stuff even though they know it’s a meaningless platitude, it’s just part of the performance relationship. Could Mr Gallagher not also be doing what he feels is expected of him by his fans? Not so much seeking attention as rewarding the attention already afforded him by the party faithful? You use the word pandering but I don’t think that’s helpful because there’s nobody who isn’t pandering: indeed that’s one of the core problems that renders rockism/poptimism a false dichotomy.Ever been interviewed by someone with an agenda? Or watched an interview conducted by someone with an agenda? You’d be hard pressed to find an interview with The Mission or the Sisters Of Mercy from around 1987-1995 that didn’t mention the other band, with a view to getting a few antagonistic soundbites. And it’s not because the bands were champing at the bit to talk about each other, but when one music journalist knows that you’ve said provocative or antagonistic things in your last nine interviews, they might be inclined to pull on that thread themselves, not because they’re hoping for some new and paradigm shifting revelation, but to make good, on-brand copy. And you, as the band, might give them what they’re angling for because they’ve been nice enough throughout the interview that you want to gratify them. Could Noel Gallagher not similarly be pulling out the old favourites in response to a journalist asking about “the state of popular music” or whatever? In much the same way that he (presumably) still closes out concerts with a Wonderwall encore?
Look I could go on, but you asked for other reasons and there’s a couple to consider. I did have this big part wherein I cherry picked discrete sentences of yours to highlight inconsistencies in your argument the way you did, but much like rockism vs poptimism arguments, it’s not been a compelling use of communication technology for decades so I opted out. That said I admire your dedication to such obsolete arguments. In this regard you have something in common with Noel Gallagher so thank you for restoring my belief that common ground is possible. Have a great day!
Except there’s a literal documentary where you can see Styles physically write his songs (with an acoustic guitar and all). He has talked extensively about his songwriting process, and a ton of incredibly talented and lauded songwriters have praised him (John Legend, Ryan Tedder, Johnny McDaid, Savan Kotecha). He has also written for other artists such as Ariana Grande, Michael Buble, Kodaline, Augustana, Gavin DeGraw. And he actually is quite critically acclaimed. Perhaps Noel Gallagher is just… wrong. As usual.
Look dude, I quite explicitly left the possibility open that Gallagher was wrong, but if you think that Styles’ entire representations isn’t wholly curated by a team of people, I dunno what to tell you. There’s loads of documentaries where popstars are shown in authentic-looking situations that are totally vetted.I dunno man, I don’t really care and I don’t really understand why everyone feels compelled to make this a binary choice where you have to declare your allegiance to the loutish prick or the twinkly dork, but your “evidence” is no stronger than that which is cited by the article. If you need to believe in Harry Styles’ authenticity, please don’t let me stop you, but c’mon, “I saw it in a documentary made by his record label” is hardly compelling.
Unless his 40-ish MILF is down with it, Harry doesn’t have a room full of girls at his disposal.
its a talent he can pull statements out of his ass without removing his head
I enjoy Noel Gallagher, especially when he’s wrong. He’s never not entertaining.
*(Except when he’s releasing new music).
Burn.
And he’s DEAD WRONG here! It’s funnier than Albarn’s take, mostly because it’s less freighted…
Noel is an ass. He also wrote some brilliant songs. Taking shots at a boy bander should be beneath him.
I’ll ride with you, in my BMWSail with me, in my yellow submarineI like that song. I dunno about the brilliance of it.
He was asked about the X-Factor. And made a short comment about the kid.
Old white guy shouts. Next.
*Old white guy who wrote some truly great music
You know…if old white guys bother you soooooo much, you could have just gone to the next article. Such a weird comment.
At first, I thought the picture of Noel Gallagher was actually of Neil Flynn. That makes for an entirely different and vastly more interesting article.
I mean he’s not wrong.
He was right about a few things here. He knows that talking about more famous people will get him clicks… And he knows that he’s got a devoted following of people who stopped caring about music in the 90s and/or forgot that his career is based off plagiarizing the sole writing credits of some guy named Lennon McCartney.
Has anybody said “Get off my lawn” yet? That’ll be funny.
I think in the UK it’s called a “pitch.”
That’s right, and remember neither Styles nor Gallagher practice their songs, they “training” them.
I think in the UK it’s called a “pitch.”
Another win for Oasis, then. Noel has five of these takes before breakfast. Also, it’s not like Swifties are gonna descend upon him. And even if they did, he’d welcome it.
Part of me would enjoy a Gallagher/Swift face off but a lot of me is afraid of all the nuclear sized destruction that would be left in its wake.One has to wonder to if even Noel and Liam are afraid of taking her on. Nothing good happens when that happens
Nobody won this. Styles could give af and Gallagher is a crabby old shit who wants attention.
Harry brings joy to millions of people, and does it with kindness. The other guy is tedious.
These band members really need to shut the fuck up. Worry about your own music, not what others are doing.
Nah. Being annoying in the press has been their 2nd job for decades.
Noel Gallagher has a new album release to publicise his latest round of interviews, as the old joke goes.
Is that you Harry? Jesus H. Harry Styles is a multi-millionaire, who wouldn’t give you the time of day. He can take a knock or two.
This is precious.
This is such a silly criticism coming from a guy who was once so shameless about plagiarizing his heros.
Which part of this opening riff from Cigarettes and Alcohol did he slave over alone in a room with an acoustic guitar? The part that copies T Rex or the other part that copies T Rex?
and? Why not?
Why not what?
The joint worst/most blatant was stealing Stevie Wonder’s Uptight chorus for Step Out. (Still think he’s right about Styles though).
Apparently they weren’t even aware of that until right before the release of Morning Glory, which is why it was taken off pre-release. And he did write the middle eight for Cigarettes and Alcohol.
That’s probably why he mentions only the middle eight…
That’s worse/more blatant than Don’t Look Back in Anger straight lifting from Imagine?
The opening to DLBIA is a deliberate homage, which is why it only lasts four bars and is then never heard of again in the song, so I would say yes. Step Out was, quite stupidly, intended to pass as a new NG composition which then had to be hastily retracted from their album, and the name ‘Wonder’ added to all future references of the song.
I guess with Oasis it’s hard to decipher what’s homage and what’s…not.Cigarettes and Alcohol is a fun song with a great groove but like the OC points out, good lord.
I remember the great Viz describing each song in the Oasis catalogue as “Any Kinks song mixed with Rebel Rebel”, which I liked.I know that Oasis has the rep of ripping off The Beatles wholesale but to me they’ve always sounded more like T.Rex and Slade. But, you know, less good.
Oh, right, because getting your entire career softballed to you via a reality show is real creativity and talent.
That’s a false binary that has nothing to do with my comment.
I just don’t think Noel is in a position to talk shit about anyone’s songwriting process.
Soooo…because he stole a riff for one song….how many?!?!…his opinion about song writing is unacceptable?
Guys. You’re both terrible. Settle down.
Harry’s new song came on the radio yesterday and the lyrics made me laugh they were so low effort and stupid.
I can’t imagine a scenario where Noel Gallagher would ever apologize even if he was wrong. Given that he’s essentially right (getting co-writing credit is almost meaningless these days) Styles fans should probably just shrug and say, neither was Sinatra, doesn’t mean he wasn’t great.
Noel Gallagher shat on the adorable Aurora’s beautiful cover of Half The World Away, and survived.
I think he will be fine after the onslaught of the Stylesies, or whatever they’re called.
I’m not generally one to side with either Gallagher about anything, let alone Noel these days (somehow my least liked brother has flipped this decade) but nothing said here necessarily refutes what he actually said, or his implicit point about how pop songs are written.
Gallagher seems to have conveniently forgotten that Styles has songwriting credits on everything he’s made post-One Direction (mostly sharing songwriting duties with frequent collaborators Kid Harpoon and Tyler Johnson), and has full control over his music. Styles also has multiple songwriting credits from his time with One Direction. I don’t know much about Harry Styles nor anything about if/how he writes so if he is in fact composing the music and writing the lyrics of his songs himself somewhere in a room then great but a songwriting credit for a pop song these days can mean a lot of things, including virtually nothing other than being present or having the name on the album.
Here’s the funny thing, though: You don’t have any more or less insight into Harry Styles’ songwriting chops than the author does. You don’t have any more or less insight into Harry Styles’ songwriting chops than Noel Gallagher does… Be as cynical as you want about how meaningful songwriting credits are, but the minute someone starts saying that someone they don’t know didn’t do something they don’t know anything about, we’ve got problems. And “collaborates with other songwriters” isn’t exactly a bad thing. Or a new thing. Paul McCartney and John Lennon weren’t wracking up sole writing credits for the first decade or so of their careers, but they sure did play a major role in getting Oasis paid…
the fact that he doesn’t have any solo songwriting credits says it all about his interest in songwriting. Noel’s a total jerk but he’s kinda right. Styles doesn’t need to be Bob Dylan to do his job.
Harry Styles isn’t trying to be Bob Dylan.
If Noel’s whole point is “Harry Styles isn’t Bob Dylan” then he could have saved his vocal chords and not made such an obvious, self-evident, sophist point. Harry Styles ISN’T Bob Dylan. But that’s the problem: Not saying anything never got a Gallagher brother attention, so that wasn’t an option… And his actual point was “I know I’ll get attention by talking shit about a famous pop star with an active, successful career, and I LOVE attention!” He didn’t have an actual point.
And for the record, neither do you: Sole songwriting credits only express interest in writing songs ALONE. If you get off on that, enjoy yourself. Plenty of successful songwriters have done this weird thing called collaboration. If a lack of sole songwriting credits was an issue, Noel Gallagher would’ve have made a small fortune repackaging Lennon/McCartney originals as his prodigious gift for songwriting…
I never said I did but I’m not the one publishing articles about the topic. There’s nothing funny about that. My gripe is that this criticism of Gallagher’s comment did nothing to dispute it the way, say, actually investigating and writing about how Harry does write or his role in production would’ve. Gallagher’s entire point was that Styles’ songs credits are not evidence that he writes songs—where you agree or not, the author just presented what Gallagher took issue with as evidence that he is wrong. Having “full control over” one’s music means nothing. And, no one said anything about sole songwriting credits per se—we know how Lennon/McCartney, Jagger/Richards, John/Taupin, King/Goffin, et al. wrote songs because we know how they wrote songs so this analogy is pointless.
No one said anything about sole writing credits? Really? Let me offer you a quote:
“I don’t know much about Harry Styles nor anything about if/how he writes so if he is in fact composing the music and writing the lyrics of his songs himself somewhere in a room then great but a songwriting credit for a pop song these days can mean a lot of things, including virtually nothing other than being present or having the name on the album.”You wrote that.
You admit that you don’t know anything about how Harry Styles writes, but you’re comfortable making sweeping generalizations on all the things that writing credits don’t necessarily mean. That’s fine… but it’s pointless! It’s a way to buttress someone else’s uninformed perspective.
How much investigation did Noel Gallagher do before he offered this lukewarm take on someone else’s abilities? I ask because you having opinions without knowing the truth is one small thing. And the author offering defenses without knowing the truth is another small thing. But none of this conversation is happening at all if Noel Gallagher isn’t casting doubt on the work of another artist that he doesn’t know, whose process he hasn’t seen. Why would a famous person talk about another famous person’s work product without knowing their work process?
That’s my point: Everyone has a right to an opinion. Everyone has a right to speculate. Everyone has a right to be cynical. But publicly casting wholly uninformed doubt on the work of a peer just to get attention is lame when Damon Albarn does it, and it’s lame when Noel Gallagher does it. Clout chasing is lame when anyone does it. And that’s what this is.
Ugh. That was in direct reference to the picture Gallagher was painting. I didn’t say that was the only definition of songwriting. I was making sweeping, verifiable, generalizations about what contemporary pop song writing credits can mean. Anyway, again, my gripe is with the writer for attempting to refute something without sufficiently refuting it for this reader. Yours seems to be with Gallagher. Have at it. Ciao.
Noel is clearly a dick. But even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and this would seem to be one of those times.
He was right that talking shit about someone more popular than him would get him a lot of attention… NAILED IT!
It’s about time an old geezer took a few shots at The X Factor and Pop Idol etc.What an absolute fud.
there is nothing wrong with Gallagher that a four-man shit-kicking in a tube station couldn’t cure
Yeah, but who appreciates THE SPR3 more? Oasis or Blur? My gut says Blur.
Noel continues his effort to stay relevant despite it being 14 years since Oasis had an album.
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmkay.Here’s where I’m gonna go ahead and suggest: shut the fuck up. This is an adult version of “my dad can beat up your dad.” It’s little boys being little boys, insisting their commitment to the art is bigger than someone else’s. It isn’t about credit. It’s about superiority. And Noel Gallagher has a superiority complex, that is generally couched in humor.But not here. He’s just being a dickbag here.
So brave. Rushing to the defense of a multi-millionaire, pretty-boy popstar. Gallagher is 100% correct. Why defend this corporate-made popstar when he won’t mean anything in a few years?
I like the band PUP.
In which the AV Club defends the songwriting integrity of the fucking shitbag who sang “watermelon sugar high” 76 thousand times in a row and called it a song.Did I accidentally click on Tiger Beat? The new AV Club is aimed at tweens? Fuck off.
It was a lot more fun when the media used to bash pop stars. Where did all this “We must defend pop stars at all costs” shit come from?
When we realized the bullying of pop stars is shitty and stupid?
Levels. I’m not advocating for the bullying of anyone, but I also don’t think pop stars are sacred cows who are above having their music criticized or being poked fun at either.
their fanbases provide way more clicks than the snobs do, same reason AVClub spends more time on them than the sorts of musicians they used to write about in the early years.
Given that modern songwriting is almost uniformly terrible, I don’t think it matters one way or t’other whether Harry Styles is responsible for any of it. Plenty of great stars in music were not songwriters, nor did they need to be. Tom Jones. Shirley Bassey. And that’s just the Welsh ones. It’s not the measure of a musician.
Oh cmon. Being able to write songs and play instruments surely earns you musician points among folks like… musicians.
It’s obvious that the real issue here is that Liam is secretly writing songs for Harry Styles and Noel is jealous. It also explains why Harry’s songs are generally terrible.
Complaining about a performer using outside songwriters is, if nothing else, a very weird take from a guy who writes songs for other performers.