Seeing this today got my hackles up. I mean, seriously?! This is getting petty beyond a joke. I mean, it has been bad enough of late that the rotation of band members has been so …. frequent … that it’s hard to keep a “current band line-up” image current. I can see why for these purposes that more recent images now only feature Laurel and Hardy BUT when images are airbrushed for reuse? That – I’m not on board with. It started with a more recent image of the “band” that had a full ensemble of musicians in it which was then airbrushed to show just the Glesga Twins (or should I now call them the Tao Two?). I’m fine with the idea of them deciding that they are now just a glorified duo with a backing band that they like to pretend is all one big happy family. Great. Go for it. But where it gets murky is when photos that comprised the whole ensemble have been airbrushed to have just Batman and Robin present. That leaves a sour taste in my mouth (IN MA MARRF) – if you get that reference, you’re my kind of person. Lol.
Now, this latest example takes the forking biscuit! It’s history! It’s an historical representation of what the band was. To airbrush out Mick, Derek and Mel is just sssoooo fecking petty! Just stop it!!!
Granted, this may sound INCREDIBLY hypocritical coming from me, the woman who made so much thinly veiled SM “art” that really was just a vehicle to show how stupidly smitten she was with the young and delicious Jim Kerr (yeah, I know) – but I also did that because I was wanting to highlight the lyrics which was/is to be fair his main contribution to this “band.” I’m a fan and I wasn’t trying to literally airbrush people out of the history of Simple Minds. Not like the shit the actual band management are doing now.
If you want to keep pushing the band as just the duo of Little and Large, why not just use images that have been taken of just the both of them together? I’m sure there’s plenty of them. And if there isn’t? Tough! Stop airbrushing the history of Simple Minds, please!! For the love of god. If those two men can continue to fill music venues by playing a back catalogue of material that they did not write themselves, then the least they can do is acknowledge the presence of those who co-wrote that history in photographic images. I mean, geez-o!
Prip rant over.
Both images for comparing and contrasting…
Where’s the top of Charlie’s hair?
Not very well done, the airbrushing or whatever has been done.
So it was always just Jim & Charlie’s band even when I first saw them in ’82.
Oh well that’s me telt then!
Have you seen this Larelle: https://www.thethings.com/breakfast-club-dont-you-music-video-smiple-minds-feud/
Had to look up’ gregarious’. A word I’ve not heard used in years.
A rather polite way of saying Jim’s a bastard. I get that with his drive that maybe they might have been less “successful.” But there is no denying that the agreement to record the la-la-la song was the start of compromising their artistic integrity. And he can denounce that opinion all he likes but given in the recent past (and to me personally) he has said that “a song needs to not just be good, but great” – and at the time and has subsequently called Don’t You “a good song.” Erm, ipso facto! The man contradicts himself so much. Whatever Jim says, does, thinks, believes is (seemingly) always correct and everyone else is wrong. Hey ho.
As for the chunk of Charlie’s hair? It’s been taken off by Mick’s missing chest. 🙈🤷🏻♀️😔
They’ve airbrushed a big chunk of Charlie’s heid out as well ! 😆
I’m sure Jim thinks he disnae need it anyway. 🤣🤣🤣
Holy *crap* that’s *bad*.
It’s not like they couldn’t have cropped the photo so the rest of the band were just background, maybe blurring the headless crotches. But wow. That’s super disingenuous. Like, truly awful.
Wonder if they used Photoshop’s “AI” bull-pucky to do it, too. That “background” on the “new” one is creepy in a weird wrong-lighting sort of way.
Ugh. So petty. And I don’t even care for any of the band (for myself, not judging, but I care that you care and that is important to me), but this is just infuriating on a human artist level.
Like, I’m sure the original photographer has NO idea they did this & wouldn’t be happy that they did (and would have edited it differently I bet). You’re the SM expert, do you know who took the photo?
I actually don’t know off the top of my head, but I’m sure with some digging I could find out. I know the period it was taken – it was a promotional photo around the release of Sparkle in the Rain, so would have been taken either late 1983 or early 1984 (most likely the latter). And I was thinking the same – re: probably would not have got the photographer’s consent. It’s a very SM management thing to do…they assume ownership and rights because they believe that because the band are in the photos that makes the photos the band’s property. Lol. Yeah, sure. Such flagrant disregard.