For and Against: the pros and cons of the Oasis reunion argued
As soon as Oasis split up in 2009, the rumour mill of a reunion has never stopped running. Now that the murmuring has finally come to fruition, the potentialities have instantly been put under the microscope. It’s the best of times, it’s the worst of times, it’s the fun the world needs right now, it’s a damning indictment of modern music. Like it or loath it, everyone has an opinion on it—and there are even diverse opinions about the fact that everyone has an opinion on it.
In 15 frantic years, Oasis sold bucketloads of records, caused the rapid onset baldness of several tour managers, and just about achieved the rarefied feat of defining an era. Whether you were onboard the bandwagon or wishing it would leave town, you couldn’t fucking ignore them — that much was true when they landed a helicopter at Knebworth, and it’s still true now.
It is not without irony that nearly the exact same interim of time that they have been apart has been as vital a part of the band as their period together. Alongside the huge hits that represent a moment in time, Oasis are also now known for classics such as Liam being described as “a man with a fork in a world of soup” and his rather more simplified but equally cutting response of calling Noel a “potato” and a U2 fan.
Alas, all of that is seemingly behind them now, and the next chapter in their storied lore is about to unfold. It’s hard to know what to make of it, as evidenced by the fact that both Jack and I, in the debate below, could claim to be merely playing the devil’s advocate. In the right light, the announced shows seem like a vital revival that will provide the ‘I was there’ moments of 2025. In the wrong light, they seem troublesome for all sorts of reasons. We’re delving into both sides below.
Jack: in praise of the great reunion
It says something of the massive cultural impact that two brothers from Manchester can have that, for almost 15 years, a section of the world’s population has been begging for them to simply have a conversation and, as one cocky frontman said to another, “Stop marding”. But, during the 1990s, Oasis and the dynamic sibling duo of Noel and Liam Gallagher weren’t just the biggest band in Britain; they were a conquering royal family of unabashed and unadulterated musical swagger. Now, with hints that the feud may finally be over and Oasis are ready to reunite, they seem set to reascend to their love seat of a throne.
While some music purists might view the reunion as a poor reflection of the state of rock and roll, why shouldn’t a band as iconic and beloved as Oasis be given the chance to roll into stadium shows and deliver what their fans have been dreaming of since their 2009 split? After all, no one seems to mind The Rolling Stones completing their 1000th show of the year, wheeling out their bandmates for a geriatric rendition of ‘Satisfaction’. So why is Oasis subjected to such public criticism? If other legendary acts can keep the spirit alive, surely Oasis deserves the same opportunity to reconnect with their audience.
The usual reason seems to be their immense popularity and the hoards of unwelcomed fans they gathered along the way. Selling millions of albums is always likely to draw yourself a huge, tribal crowd and with Oasis known for their football-adjacent lad culture, the rough does often start to overwhelm the smooth when it comes to a wholesome evening involving the Mancunians. But to ignore the group’s appeal is, at best, to miss their connection to their fans and, at worst, to deny a cultural facet of Britain’s working class.
In small towns and big cities up and down the country, previously perceived menacing members of the public are reduced to choir boys splashing in puddles of spilt beer as ‘Don’t Look Back in Anger’ billows out across any airwave they happen to be near. Lad culture may have been born in the ’90s, but it is still ever-present today, rearing its head in some of the most awful ways but also operating as a touchpoint for an increasingly isolated sub-section of society.
But it goes beyond that. Britain, by and large, has been battered since Oasis split up. Unless you happen to be sitting on a large trust fund, a succession of Tory governments have ensured the cost of living (and enjoyment of it) is so high that a win at the bookies is the only way you can enjoy a night out guilt-free. Now, with a brief window of optimism arising after the general election, there is a sense of hope that has been encapsulated with the suspected return of two of Britain’s beloved sons to their rightful place.
Let’s be honest, we’ve all found ourselves arm-in-arm with a stranger belting out ‘Champagne Supernova’ with a cheeky cigarette in one hand and a half-spilled beverage in the other. It’s the kind of unstoppable fun that this country has needed for over a decade. And, though we might not rank Oasis as our favourite band, worried that we’re lumped in with a group of poorly-haircutted ultras, the truth is they are the closest thing we’ve had to national heroes in 30 years.
Oasis were never the band for over-thinkers, they were the group to get the party started, to let off some steam and sing your heart out to. If there’s one thing we need to do right now it is come together, have a sing-song and enjoy the party.
Tom: in prosecution of the cash-in
Yes, it’ll be fun, or at least it would’ve been fun. But at this stage, it’s the ‘fun’ Secret Santa order that arrives in mid-January, long after the party it was intended for. So, now all you’re left with is a damning dent in your bank account that reminds you of what could’ve been. And it’s a dent that you could also do without—a dent that could’ve been spent on other forms of fun like – taking the moral high ground – supporting the crippled grassroots of culture rather than a big payday for a pair of brats.
While there might still be arm-in-arm singalongs when the catchy choruses of Oasis arrive at wedding parties, you’d have to be fairly glossy-eyed about the whole ordeal to imagine that things will unfurl in a similarly wholesome fashion at the massive gigs that lay ahead. Maybe the shows will be an orgiastic celebration of the simpler times of the 1990s. But in reality, it is just as easy to picture a flat £160 gig that sees you sardined into Wembley just to have a pint of piss hurled over you while fair-weather fans there to ‘take part in the big occasion’ talk through the whole set-list, and a few troublemakers start fighting to ‘Supersonic’.
Of course, this is speculative, but the very fact that this will be what many people fear from the shows is indicative of the fact that Oasis may well have just dated to a state of redundancy in the modern world. Simply put, it just doesn’t seem particularly 2025 to have a 52-year-old Liam Gallagher swagger out onto the stage like he’s still king of the world to sing 30-year-old songs about being on the dole.
Energy and atmosphere were always an integral part of Oasis, the feuding and carnage playing into their appeal. For the brothers to put that aside, play the hits, and top-up the pension fund is a prospect that denies all that was best about them in the first place. Even picturing them on stage, hugging before a polished rendition of ‘Champagne Supernova’ is mildly nauseating.
The beauty of Oasis is that they always stood outside the norm. They were ardently indifferent vagabonds who didn’t follow the rules; the comeback – even at its best – renders them simply yet another bloody reunion band. In fact, it is almost as though the best we can hope for is an on-stage fall-out, some fitting dysfunction to tie in with their ‘fun’ legacy. And it is easy to see why a young star who has just sweated over their new album might read that and feel a deep sense of injustice, tantamount to ‘what has that got to do with art’.
In short, it seems that the best we can hope for is ‘it might be really fun’, but that’s about it for the jury to mull over from the defence when it comes to the prosecution, there are more reasons than you can shake a stick at to not only support the case that the ‘fun’ may never arise, but also to question that even if it does, at what cost?
