Adam Ant brands Live Aid a “mistake” and a “waste of time”. and the end of ‘rock n roll’

Adam Ant, a firm favourite here at Louder Than War not just for his music but his last of punks outspokeness has taken a dig at Live Aid branding the global fundraising concerts a "mistake" and a "waste of time".

[caption id="attachment_9063" align="alignright" width="140" caption="Adam Ant speaks out against live aid"]Adam Ant speaks out against live aid[/caption]

Adam himself appeared on the bill at the London leg of the worldwide co-ordinated shows in 1985, but was restricted to one song by organizer Bob Geldof, this has made him feel aggrieved but he also has other points to make about the concert, which whilst raising plenty of money for a genuine good cause was also the point at which music started to dress in pastel shades and become uber mainstream.

Now he's taken aim at the former Boomtown Rats frontman over the event - held to aid famine victims in Africa - and blamed him for "the end of rock 'n' roll" and the success of U2.

Asked to comment on a famous photograph of himself and Geldof together prior to Live Aid, Ant tells Uncut magazine, "That was when I was asked by Sir Bob to promote this concert. They had no idea they could sell it out. Then in Bob's book he said, 'Adam was over the hill so I let him have one number.' One thing I'd like to do (in the photo) is kick him up the a**e.

"Doing that show was the biggest f**king mistake in the world. Knighthoods were made, Bono got it made, and it was a waste of f**king time. It was the end of rock 'n' roll, now hippies run the world, like f**king (British festival) Glastonbury... I hate hippies."

Is Adam right?
Was Live Aid a genuine charity gig or were a lot of the bands reviving careers?
were anarchist band and friends of Crass, Chumbawumba correct with their 'pictures of starving children sell records' album cover?

comments please!

11 thoughts on “Adam Ant brands Live Aid a “mistake” and a “waste of time”. and the end of ‘rock n roll’

  1. The idea for live aid was right at the time, the execution and legacy are all that was wrong about it.

  2. Simon K

    Well said Mr Ant… This was the start of the Simon Cowell generation .Most of the bands at Live Aid did it to boost their careers… I’m pleased to say i never watched any of the Live Aids .

  3. Neil

    Yeah right, like the end of rock and roll is more important than the death of a starving child? So what if it gave a boost to the flagging careers of a few pompous, egotistical, over the hill ‘rock stars’. After all, the public didn’t have to go to their gigs or buy their recods/cd’s, they chose too. Rather like they’ve chosen to go and see you o0n your latest tour Adam.

    • Marcelo

      Well said.

  4. Paul Morea

    It was 26 years ago and did not particularly contribute to the Normalisation of rock’n'roll.

  5. Phil Newall

    It\’s such an emotive issue – something had to be done, and I would suggest that its inception, and its organisers aims were entirely genuine; Geldof and co passionately believed that they could raise money, buy food and therefore save lives.

    However I also believe that certain managers, and performers knew that hidden under this obvious good cause would be an opportunity to raise the profile of their act, and in turn further their career – and I believe it is this aspect that Adam is referring to.

    The saddest aspect of all this is that many of the people saved from starvation have since died – from starvation. Supplying grain and rice did not, and will not stop people from starving; it\’s a short term stop gap – the Governments in many of the effected nations are corrupt, and its these institutions that we should deal with if we have any real desire to break the cycle of famine and starvation.

    Bob Geldof couldn\’t deal with these foreign powers, however he did feel compelled enough to do something, and even if all it did was raise the world\’s awareness to a terrible situation then I believe he did the right thing – he wasn\’t in a position to prevent unscrupulous managers and the like from to quote another \’holiday in other peoples misery\’

  6. Robin Brunskill

    If what I read is correct about the famine (and it may not be, since it was courtesy of a British newspaper) it was a famine created on purpose by the government, sold to the “gullible West” as a guilt trip, money was raised and this money went straight back to the pockets of those who created the famine in the first place, with some of the to the starving so as to get a good “gratitude” camera shot.

    And Ive just been reading Andy Kershaw’s excellent book “No off Switch” where Bob Geldof is mentioned in a way that backs up Adam Ant’s evaluation of him.

  7. No one

    Music’s been shite since the mid 80s, maybe he has a point.

  8. Marcelo

    Qué aparato, mamina…

  9. Late to this one, but couldn’t agree more. Who was it that said ‘Live Aid – a bunch of cocaine fuelled arseholes going “hey – we’re saving the world man”‘? OH yeah, it was me, that’s who.

    What is really sickening is the personal profit / career kick-start this gave the likes of Geldof. I’m not saying he did it for personal gain, but he was already a fucking has-been at that point and no one could argue that he has done __very__ well on the exposure coming off the back of live/band aid.

  10. alan jones

    Poverty and aids will never be eradicated in Africa as long as we turn a blind eye.
    There is no financial gain for the west.Mugabe has killed more than Saddam.
    The Catholic church has killed even more people by sending missionaries to”educate”
    the people and teaching the ridiculous theory that contraception is ungodly,therefore spreading aids and
    increasing the population that cannot support themselves.
    Please reply to me as I would love to rant with someone.

Have your say...

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *