Today I realised that in my post yesterday, I hadn’t spoken about the line-up for this year’s Glastonbury festival. The festival is back after not going ahead last year due to the ground having to be fertilised or whatever it is, even though I believed for ages that it was because of the venues for the London Olympics having to use the many portaloos they have in place! Felt like such a wally when I found out that wasn’t the case.
Anyway, the line-up this year is pretty decent, you’ve got some fantastic acts such as Public Enemy, the xx, Nas, Primal Scream etc etc etc! Obviously, the big focus point is always on the headliners, and this year I found it a tad strange for one of them. Rolling Stones, fair enough, I’m not the biggest fan of their work I’ll admit, but they’ve been going 50 years live and have never played at the festival so it’s only the perfect time in their career for them to take to the pyramid stage. Arctic Monkeys, brilliant band, one of my all time favourites, and they’ve got new material this year so it should be an awesome set. The one that confuses me however is Mumford & Sons. Now I know they’re a very popular band and a very good one at that, but I’m not being funny, they’ve got two albums, one which has only just been released practically, TWO! That’s nothing for a pyramid stage headline act, I’ll be surprised if they play an hour. They probably will, just to prove me wrong, but it’ll be loads of album tracks that most of the crowd won’t know. I worked out today they’ve got 6 songs that the majority of the crowd will know and they are easily guessable. They don’t deserve it, I know they’ve been really successful but the proof is there. The Smashing Pumpkins are also playing and they have put in probably 20+ more year’s work than Mumford have to get where they are, it’s ridiculous. You can tell Michael Eavis is getting old. Sorry about the rant but I do feel strongly about it in a way. I’ll say this though, they are a perfect Glastonbury band for the type of music that they play.