Track-by-Track: From Please to Nonetheless

[Gabby]

My enduring memory of when Absolutely Fabulous was released was how many people I knew who were NOT fans of PSB were actually quite happy with it and openly sang it. It was the lowest common denominator that appealed to the non-PSB masses.

Imagine (almost?) any other PSB song as a person with an "I'm with stupid" t-shirt on with the arrow pointing firmly in Ab Fab's direction.

All that said, I do have a soft spot for it and never mind when it comes on, but we all know PSB can do so, SO much better.

[markus]

Tracks 84 and 85: Euroboy and Some Speculation

Chronology: Very, Further Listening, Tracks 13 and 14

As the thread owner, I'm going to take a liberty now and combine these two tracks - mainly because they were on the same single release and because they are, basically, two backing tracks in search of a song.

I consider both Relentless omissions. One is muscular and driving, the other mysterious and sinister. I found both very slight at the time - again, the lack of an actual song being the limiting factor for me, though Some Speculation is at least intriguing. They feel like leftovers, which they likely were. But they're quality leftovers. Together, they are satisfyingly seedy.

Drico.

This music is right up my alley — two techno masterpieces that end Alternative on a high note. Everything before feels like a warm-up for this moment, when we finally hear real emotion from the polished poster boys on their early album covers.

[NotInvisible]

No. I’m talking about a classic cry-wolf move — using homophobia as a convenient excuse when nothing like that actually happened.

Can you link to an interview where Neil cries wolf, or are you making it up again?

[NotInvisible]

I consider both Relentless omissions. One is muscular and driving, the other mysterious and sinister. I found both very slight at the time - again, the lack of an actual song being the limiting factor for me, though Some Speculation is at least intriguing. They feel like leftovers, which they likely were. But they're quality leftovers. Together, they are satisfyingly seedy.

These are great tracks, but I understand why they were left off Relentless. That album is so sonically of a piece, and neither of these feel like seamless fits. So if they were intended for Relentless, I get why they were shifted to b-sides. Between Relentless, these two tracks, Absolutely Fabulous, A Different Point of View and Young Offender, Neil and Chris were definitely in an electronic dance music zone as never before, or since.

[leesmapman]

While I think Yesterday When I Was Mad was the strangest single choice and I'm not a fan of Jam & Spoon, but the single packages were pretty strong with the Can You Forgive Her? swing version and the two aforementioned b-side tracks. I love these. Best of the Very b-sides imho. Which were already very strong.

[TwizzleUK]

Tracks 84 and 85: Euroboy and Some Speculation

Chronology: Very, Further Listening, Tracks 13 and 14

As the thread owner, I'm going to take a liberty now and combine these two tracks - mainly because they were on the same single release and because they are, basically, two backing tracks in search of a song.

I don't see why we should talk about these together as they were on the same release - we didn't do that with 'Paninaro' and 'Jack The Lad', or 'One Of The Crowd' and 'Your Funny Uncle'. I disagree that they are both "backing tracks in search of a song" and like them both. They even played 'Some Speculation' live during the 'Somewhere' residency, so obviously saw it as more than that.

Also, athough people have talked around it, haven't we missed an official announcement in this thread for 'Absolutely Fabulous'?

[markus]

No. I’m talking about a classic cry-wolf move — using homophobia as a convenient excuse when nothing like that actually happened.

Can you link to an interview where Neil cries wolf, or are you making it up again?

Since it bothers you, you give me a link where he, or someone else does not.

[markus]

Track 83: Absolutely Fabulous

Chronology: Very, Further Listening, Track 12

We're kind of there already, so without further ado...

The Rubicon of PSB releases. Once they crossed this, quality control no longer mattered and they could do what they liked. That's obviously liberating and is arguably the reason they're still around today but it also spelt the end of the perfection of the early years.

Here's an interview in which Neil announces what they're doing next: https://youtu.be/wIRfFYZdCVY?si=mtd5tNtKPcnchNkC

Yes, our next single is a comedy record with Jennifer Saunders and Joanna Lumley, all perfectly normal for the group who brought you Being Boring.

So why did they release it? Hubris? Neil's love for name-dropping his friends from the Groucho? Chris's grief (and lackadaisical attitude to promotion right through Bilingual)?

In an alternative universe in which they split up during the Nightlife tour, this is the death knell. If you release this and Disco 2, then don't be surprised when your gigs are half-empty.

In some ways, I wish they had done that. The original version of the Pet Shop Boys was far cooler and appealing in its otherness. This version was too clubbable, going round Chris Evans's house to record crappy b-sides and releasing self-indulgent cover versions with their artist friend.

The highly successful version of the Pet Shop Boys that exists now, touring its greatest hits in perpetuity is a product of Absolutely Fabulous. The thigh-slapping, the rehearsed anecdotes, the omnipresent David Walliams. It's the bloody Pet Shop Boys, sweetie.

What a great post!

My five cents: I loved the show. Like the song itself, the best lines from the cast stayed in my head for years. But musically, the synth line is just a weaker version of Domino Dancing. By Pet Shop Boys standards, it’s an average song. Maybe they were saturating the market and thought calling themselves Absolutely Fabulous would mean it didn't count, no harm done...

[NotInvisible]

Since it bothers you, you give me a link where he, or someone else does not.

Not how the burden of proof works, chief.

But if you want interviews where he doesn't say that, you can take your pick from every interview ever.

[Drico One]

This thread is becoming weirdly testy...

[Drico One]

Here's an interview in which Neil announces what they're doing next...

I vaguely recall this. What's striking is how much of that feature was more concerned with the "ride" and certainly the video rather than the song itself. Liberation, as a single, was, basically, a triumph of packaging over content (did they even remix the 7"?). "So what are you doing next....?"

I'm not sure even Neil is fully bought into the wisdom of Absolutely fabulous by the end of that clip.

The highly successful version of the Pet Shop Boys that exists now, touring its greatest hits in perpetuity is a product of Absolutely Fabulous. The thigh-slapping, the rehearsed anecdotes, the omnipresent David Walliams. It's the bloody Pet Shop Boys, sweetie.

I would say the Pet Shop Boys of today is a product, almost exclusively, of their first eight years. In fact, almost right up to the time of the clip you posted above. The singles from West End girls to Go West. Let's face it, that's Dreamworld. Everything that has come since has been almost irrelevant to their pop cultural impact, but it sustained them and us - and I'm very glad of it. By the time of that clip, they'd been around as long as the Beatles and Abba had been in their entire careers. They were done. Had they had bigger egos, they might well have split or given up, but it's endearing that they stayed true to what they were: songwriters and pop artists - and even more so that they stayed true to each other. There, no was no break up, no creative differences, no solo album...no reunion.

I'll forgive the thigh-slapping and eccentic hangers-on for the sustained excellence that brightened the decades since, even if they were never the perfect pop duo again. They couldn't be.

Drico.

[markus]

Since it bothers you, you give me a link where he, or someone else does not.

Not how the burden of proof works, chief.

But if you want interviews where he doesn't say that, you can take your pick from every interview ever.

If you're accusing me of spreading disinformation, maybe you should stop paying attention to me? For your own well-being.

[NotInvisible]

If you're accusing me of spreading desinformation, maybe you should stop paying attention to me?

Surely if someone is spreading disinformation, they should be called out for it? There aren't any interviews where Neil frets about a homophobic backlash to Domino Dancing. Our own GeoWayne post rationalizes it in A Life in Pop, which is perhaps what you're misremembering.

[markus]

If you're accusing me of spreading desinformation, maybe you should stop paying attention to me?

Surely if someone is spreading disinformation, they should be called out for it? There aren't any interviews where Neil frets about a homophobic backlash to Domino Dancing. Our own GeoWayne post rationalizes it in A Life in Pop, which is perhaps what you're misremembering.

If you continue have some sort of hangup about it, I see it as your job to solve the problem.

[NotInvisible]

If you continue have some sort of hangup about it, I see it as your job to solve the problem.

So if I were to mention the article in which you admit to being a pedophile, you wouldn't expect me to prove it with a link but instead accept that it's your job to solve the problem? Another hot take from the master, I guess.