SZA

[NorthernSoul52]

Like to think I was the only man at SZA supping John Smith's, but I suspect not.

 

Between a three-and-four-star affair for me, but with full props to a band that massively improved her sound live and gave it the heft it required. Went in expecting little, especially given that lacklustre crowd beyond the initial gantries, and those early problems - echo-mic feedback, relatively unengaged connection past the immediate periphery, the sparse sound of crickets and departing campers - left me braced for a rough one. But glad I stuck it out and was gradually won over; when she's got the moment to give a good vocal, she certainly did, and some of the songs - F2F was the highlight - worked a treat.

 

Crowd size does not correlate to quality, of course, but will say that her and Burna Boy probably came out in the bottom two of headliners/subs in both categories. Was surprised how impressive the LCD Soundsystem crowd looked to be from my point in the throng.

[Wooderson]

4 hours ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

She's got it all*

 

 

*Except for big hits

 

Seemed she went right to the raggedy edge timewise. Bout to get hooked.

[MEGATRONICMEATWAGON]

1 hour ago, DeanoL said:

 

I think I see where you are coming from and I'd ask if you hang around many other internet forums? Because I can see how in isolation that post could be seen as fairly innocent and "not too bad" but I'd urge you to go look at some YouTube videos or Reddit threads about Star Wars or Marvel and I'm sure many other things, and you'll see that same message and attitude come out over and over again. How the "woke agenda" is ruining all our favourite things by having film and TV series with female leads and some LGBT characters. It's honestly instantly recognisable the second you see the word "woke". It's indicative that someone has gone down a rabbit hole and just things all of society and media is being ruined by women and gay people having representation.

 

I think we've all at some point been where you are, and seen a single comment that doesn't seem too bad and thought "well, maybe we should try talking to them and changing their minds?" - and indeed we may well have tried. But trust me, you won't get anywhere. And such "discussions" swiftly degenerate into absolutely awful exchanges. I can absolutely see why the mods would want to just cut that off before it starts. Like I say, look around elsewhere, you'll see plenty of evidence for that. That person was not open to having their viewpoint challenged at all. 

 

I'm normally all for debate and convincing people and winning the argument, but that was unwinnable.

 

I know you're saying that with good intentions, and without trying to toot my own horn or come across as patronising, I'd consider myself well versed in this area and have a keen interest in debating. I'm not active on any other sites, but I do host debating seminars at university every term which go into argumentation pyramids and  things like that, so I'm quite familiar with hearing different opinions on a regular basis. I've heard absolutely all sorts, on both sides of the spectrum, from shock tactics, to baseless "facts", as well as insults and barbed comments.

 

Perhaps that's why I'm quite open to anything to be said. For a start, I'm a huge advocate of free speech and giving people the ability to make mistakes in order to get to the truth. 

 

For me, you can't just cancel debates because you don't like a certain turn of phrase or wording. Open dialogue and exchanges are a fundamental, even if it's not very well expressed sometimes.

 

That's not a support of what was said either, but for the recognition that, like I said, to get to the truth, people are human and will make mistakes in wording or beliefs, and that it's fair game to challenge and ask for clarification, rather than just shutting something down.

[giantkatestacks]

1 hour ago, FakeEmpire said:

I often avoid the Pyramid because it gets far too busy for me. Really appreciated the space at SZA's set and it just seemed to be full of nicer people. Chilled vibe, everyone into it, not full of talkers or coked up idiots. Enjoyed it a lot.

This was the learning for me as well. We sat on the hill then wandered down for the majority, moved around, had space to dance. I quite like the concept of the Sunday headliner being the legend and then afterwards you get more interesting stuff. I know that wasnt intentional and it led to problems in the rest of the site but it was a lovely chilled Pyramid experience.

[DeanoL]

8 minutes ago, MEGATRONICMEATWAGON said:

 

I know you're saying that with good intentions, and without trying to toot my own horn or come across as patronising, I'd consider myself well versed in this area and have a keen interest in debating. I'm not active on any other sites, but I do host debating seminars at university every term which go into argumentation pyramids and  things like that, so I'm quite familiar with hearing different opinions on a regular basis. I've heard absolutely all sorts, on both sides of the spectrum, from shock tactics, to baseless "facts", as well as insults and barbed comments.

But in those situations you have two things you don't have here:

1) structure, so everyone can get heard, and people can be held responsible for what they say and

2) good faith - the very point of attending a debate is to have a conversation and try and change minds

 

An internet forum is not that. People are not necessarily operating in good faith. "Trolling" is absolutely a thing, and while often stuff gets classified as "trolling" which isn't, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Not everyone is here for a debate. Some people are just here to spew horrible things, wind people up and then laugh. Some are just here to express anger at some perceived slight by the booking policy.

 

I get where you are coming from. There are some people on this site I've had massive arguments with, and disagreed with hugely, but they always argued in good faith and we'd all admit when we were wrong.

 

I mean to put it another way, using your debating seminars as an example, imagine if say you were hosting a debate on who should be the next PM. And one speaker just stood up and started chanting "Sunak out. Sunak out. Sunak out" over and over, trying to get the audience to join in. Presumably you would shut that down? Because that person isn't there to debate. They're just acting as a disrupter.

 

What happened with that post was the online equivalent of that.

[DeanoL]

1 hour ago, CaledonianGonzo said:

 

That comment was more in regards to the oft-touted 100 plus other stages.  Missing a third of the festival because you don't fancy what's on the Pyramid is cutting your nose off to spite your face.

Fair enough. I guess I can relate a bit more because my general approach has been to go see bands I like, and if there isn't anything, go watch Theatre/Circus/Comedy.

And the interesting thing is Circus now shuts at 6pm Sunday, so does The Glebe and Poetry&Words. Pavement/Gateway/Sensation/Walkabout acts only run until 6pm most days anyway. Astrolabe shuts at 8pm Sunday. 

 

There's quite a lot of the festival that shuts by Sunday evening. Obviously there's also plenty of other stuff still on but honestly don't blame people for wanting to leave a bit early - especially as for some, driving home Midnight-5am wouldn't be safe, so it means another night in the tent, but 7pm-midnight would be and gets them home effectively a day early. Saves a day's annual leave too for people who have work on Monday. 

[MEGATRONICMEATWAGON]

32 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

But in those situations you have two things you don't have here:

1) structure, so everyone can get heard, and people can be held responsible for what they say and

2) good faith - the very point of attending a debate is to have a conversation and try and change minds

 

An internet forum is not that. People are not necessarily operating in good faith. "Trolling" is absolutely a thing, and while often stuff gets classified as "trolling" which isn't, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Not everyone is here for a debate. Some people are just here to spew horrible things, wind people up and then laugh. Some are just here to express anger at some perceived slight by the booking policy.

 

I get where you are coming from. There are some people on this site I've had massive arguments with, and disagreed with hugely, but they always argued in good faith and we'd all admit when we were wrong.

 

I mean to put it another way, using your debating seminars as an example, imagine if say you were hosting a debate on who should be the next PM. And one speaker just stood up and started chanting "Sunak out. Sunak out. Sunak out" over and over, trying to get the audience to join in. Presumably you would shut that down? Because that person isn't there to debate. They're just acting as a disrupter.

 

What happened with that post was the online equivalent of that.

 

I would disagree that there's no structure here. That's actually why I prefer this place than the breakaway place, because I feel like to detail and actually curate a carefully worded response is easier on here. The other place is just quick one or two word responses, in jokes constantly, and emoji-overkill.

 

As for good faith, I think everyone operates in an open and honest manner 99.99% of the time. Not always, and it spills into personal attacks, which is totally unnecessary and is usually a sign that you've won the discussion if that's all the other has to offer. 

 

Because of the structure on efests I think everyone has the right to prove what they're saying as being true and try to persuade people. Also you don't have to engage if you don't want to. There's been times I've thought someone was wrong but I've just been too tired or thought it's not worth getting involved.

 

Trolling is such an interesting subject in itself. Sometimes, I see it as a reason not to engage with views you don't like, but I see trolling on here literally everyday concerning how good/bad an act is, jokes made at the expense of musicians, politicans, celebrities, or even just ribbing each other a bit, with the sole purpose of making fun of those people. 

 

I mean, you're right, if someone just stood up and yelled something, whatever it was, I would ask them to expand on it, rather than just yelling something because of that's not good for a discussion, but I don't know if that's what's happened here.

 

I mean, the person could have changed the sentence with poison to something more PC like, "I don't think it's constructive for Emily Eavis to base booking decisions on gender and it's damaging for society as whole" and then this would've all been likely avoided.

 

And I said that before as well, the word poison is quite a heavy word and invokes quite colourful imagery, but maybe that was the shock intention. Certainly, I've seen many others lament that there's too many white people at Glastonbury and I think that's also quite provocative as it bases choice of acts on some kind of colour chart, but unfortunately people are allowed to say that kind of thing as well.

 

Note: I'm really not trying to get drawn into an argument on the "poison" of woke culture or diversity and anti-white comments on eFests 😬

 

[HappyInAField]

Vibe in here getting a bit spiky.. seems like a simple situation

 

She was bumped up into a slot that wasn't fair or sensible. Did a decent job, could have acknowledged the fest//crowd more but it happens.

 

To nick a phrase from dear Roy Walker: for Glastonbury, SZA is very good but not (quite) right

[DeanoL]

12 minutes ago, MEGATRONICMEATWAGON said:

Trolling is such an interesting subject in itself. Sometimes, I see it as a reason not to engage with views you don't like, but I see trolling on here literally everyday concerning how good/bad an act is, jokes made at the expense of musicians, politicans, celebrities, or even just ribbing each other a bit, with the sole purpose of making fun of those people. 

 

See I wouldn't even define most of that as trolling. I see trolling as posting just to start an argument with the intent of just upsetting people, or starting a big, aggressive row which puts people off visiting the forum. And there are still people with axes to grind that purposefully register and post stuff here for just that effect.

 

I mean watch as much of this video as you can stand: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0_5aVvM6Do and look through the comments and see how confident you'd feel engaging with this group. (And to be clear, The Acolyte is the second most successful Star Wars show of all time)

[clarkete]

3 hours ago, DeanoL said:

 

I don't see where you are seeing this massive amount of negativity? People are saying SZA as Pyramid headliner didn't work. I don't really see that as arguable, given the tiny crowd. People are discussing why that happened, and the vast majority of people don't think it's because SZA is sh*t. Most of us want her to have had a bigger crowd. So it's a question of why that didn't happen? It's not coming from a negative place.

 

Most of the 3 or 4 pages before I posted were not the subjects you've referred to, simply to-ing and fro-ing from negative perspective (which I have zero desire to reignite) to responses (including several from other regs such as yourself). 

 

Those original posts weren't merely discussing stage positioning, hence my comment. 

 

[VicAtreides]

Just watched SZA’s set back on iplayer. I left after 45 mins, despite being a fan of hers since around 2017, to go and watch The National and I don’t regret that at all.
 

For me it’s the sound issues with the mic that plague the first half of the set that put me off and watching on tv it’s not much different.

 

She definitely sounds better later on in the set but there is a lack of engagement from her which I know doesn’t usually go down well at Glasto so maybe that’s contributed to the poor reaction.
 

That said, the people the front look like they’re having the time of their lives on the BBC and the set really comes to life with songs like F2F and Nobody Gets Me - I just felt those moments were few and far between, and then the mic situation was just bizarre. She’s basically unintelligible for the first half of her set which is a massive shame. Does anyone know what this issue is? I’ve heard all sorts from feedback to auto tune but I’m non the wiser except that it sounds muffled to me.

[CaledonianGonzo]

It's terrible on Drew Barrymore. Like one of the bugs on her stage set flew into her mouth and she's trying to chew her way around it.

[MEGATRONICMEATWAGON]

1 hour ago, DeanoL said:

See I wouldn't even define most of that as trolling. I see trolling as posting just to start an argument with the intent of just upsetting people, or starting a big, aggressive row which puts people off visiting the forum. And there are still people with axes to grind that purposefully register and post stuff here for just that effect.

 

Sure, there is that form of trolling. I'm not a fan of starting off a discussion with some hyperbolic phrase either for that very reason - if you go too hard at the beginning, it'll likely put people off from engaging with you. I've learnt that myself from my younger years when I'd say something shocking for the sake of seeing a friend's reaction, for example. But then I realised people get turned off by such bombastic approaches and I decided to change my approach. Perhaps, I just got older and mellower 😅

 

For me, there is nuance to trolling. It could be something as simple as sarcasm. How many times have we seen people on the boards sarcastically mention Coldplay or the Foos as being boring, but using an analogy or joke or a meme? That's also going to cause offense, at least to their fans, but it does also start discussion, which is fine for me. I mean, Frankie Boyle and Jimmy Carr are experts at scything comments - they fully intend to troll people, but they're massively successful for it. Then perhaps a discussion comes out of it with viewers or people at home, and I find that healthy.

 

But it's not used solely on one side. For that video about Disney for example, 100% there is an opposite video trolling the other side. But should those videos or thoughts be cancelled or banned or deplatformed? I don't think so, personally. 

Edited Thursday at 03:13 PM by MEGATRONICMEATWAGON

[The Orgazoid]

Who says the Pyramid has to be full every night for it to be a success? Last year they had their Mega TV moment with Elton, this year they had their Mega TV moment, complete with blackpool illuminations wth Coldplay. It doesn't have to be like that every night, and it very rarely is. I'm not sure how GnR could be classed in any way as a better booking, other than if you just happen to prefer the music.

 

[incident]

1 hour ago, The Orgazoid said:

Who says the Pyramid has to be full every night for it to be a success?

 

Nobody has said that.

 

But it does need to be at more than 10% of capacity. Obviously.

[fullfathom5]

It doesn't need to be rammed to the rafters every night, but it needs to utilise the field... otherwise there are too many people elsewhere.

[giantkatestacks]

13 minutes ago, fullfathom5 said:

It doesn't need to be rammed to the rafters every night, but it needs to utilise the field... otherwise there are too many people elsewhere.

Isnt the point that this year so many people had gone home after Shania that it didnt matter it wasnt utilised?

[fullfathom5]

2 minutes ago, giantkatestacks said:

Isnt the point that this year so many people had gone home after Shania that it didnt matter it wasnt utilised?

Quite possibly, yeah.

[clarkete]

1 hour ago, giantkatestacks said:

Isnt the point that this year so many people had gone home after Shania that it didnt matter it wasnt utilised?

 

You could already see folks who had left the CV fields the previous night, indeed noticed a few doing the wistful look back at the top of the hill.