TAKE THAT – "Sure"

This was the lead single from the album? Sounds more like a third or fourth. It is a bit laboured isn’t it. I quite liked the “holding squeezing touching teasing” part but that was about all. I agree that Gary’s voice was far from ideal for the song, but I’m not sure that Mark or Robbie would have been any better.

In boy band terms East 17 were the only serious competition at this stage weren’t they? Second division act Bad Boys Inc had scored their only top 10 hit earlier in the year, while the likes of 911 and Backstreet Boys were still a little way off. There was however, a new entry at number 7 in the second week of Sure’s reign – ‘Cigarettes and Alcohol’ the biggest hit to date for Oasis.

Compare and contrast the sleeve for this single with the sleeve for their last #1. Change is coming. Robbie’s got a skinhead with a slash in it, versus his longer, more overtly “boyband” haircut. Howard has finally been allowed to grow some dreadlocks and a beard. Jason and Mark look less styled than before too. Only Gary is clinging to the old certainties.

Sure is, I reckon, boring. And if invisibility is death in pop, being boring is going to take you down a similar road in the long run (even the Pet Shop Boys wore gigantic conical hats). If it’s a grab for R&B credibility, it’s a bad one. This is the last of their #1s to try for an overtly American feel, at least to my ear (doubtless I will be disabused of this notion when the spoiler bunnies break out of their respective hutches). At this point, as an age 13 boy, TT were still boring with Sure not helping matters. Soon though, their personalities will start to poke out beyond the photos and they became more interesting as a result. Change is coming and, for Howard, Jason, Mark, Robbie and, even to an extent, Gary, it is to be embraced.

It has that insistent ‘noise’ that “Jump Around” House of Pain has, only more politer. A bit like Pat Boone’s version of “Tutti Frutti”…

OK, I thought of something to say about this one:

One of the remarkable trends of the pre-rock singles chart was the manner in which polite British crooners were fashioned to sound as American as possible, manfully (or womanfully) trying to emulate the effortless sophistication of their counterparts on a ration coupon budget with the intent of sounding “international,” even though the States were never likely to embrace a Dickie Valentine or a Michael Holliday when Frank and Bing were still active and hale.

Some commentators have taken as an indication of coming full circle the equivalent tendency over the last decade or so – effectively kickstarted by Simon Cowell – of current British groups and performers to endeavour to appeal to an assumed international market, and in doing so jettison every facet of them which made them British, and appealing, and therefore different. We need not spend much time turning our eyes away from such calamities as the second Mis-teeq album, or that Mutya Buena solo album where the sparkiest Sugababe was apparently harpooned at bayonet point to do caterwauling Whitney/Marah-style pseudo-soul Mogadon in order to make it in the eyes of a market which in all practical terms no longer exists.

Although “Sure” seems to have been an earnest attempt by Take That to appeal to the post-New Jack Swing demographic – Gary Barlow co-produced with the Brothers In Rhythm team, and the song bears a rare Barlow/Owen/Williams co-writing credit – it simply doesn’t work. The group’s natural charm and modest determination to be themselves are eroded against bland hotel lobbies of Al Jarreau chord changes, and Barlow’s voice simply isn’t built to curve with the indentures and turnarounds of 1994 R&B patterns; references in the lyric to “positive reactions” and “compatible” sound awkward in both construction and delivery. In contrast, something like East 17’s “Deep,” though in most ways patently absurd, actually does work in terms of Walthamstow roughage roughing it up with a track which very wisely kicks back to preserve both pop and would-be hip hop tendencies; it succeeds precisely because it isn’t in your face. But “Sure” sounded like a shoehorned Take That and unsurprisingly became not only their lowest-selling chart-topper but also the lowest-selling number one of 1994; it’s another one about which I had to remind myself, and I don’t think I missed very much in the forgetting.

#1 – a quintet of Irish boys were very close to making their debut and joining the boyband fray in October 1994, and would go on to top the chart six times.

This is certainly one of the That’s less memorable number ones. It’s unconvincing musically.

I remember this coming out, and must have heard it, but it rings no bells, none at all.

At least the Brothers In Rhythm production means it genuinely swings (unlike many of Gaz Baz’s previous wellington-booted efforts), and the bv’s are a sweet enough hook. But that’s it. 4 is as much as it could hope for.

Over the weekend we were listening to Now Dance 92, and a Twenty 4 Seven track came on whose hook was similarly slight – we were waiting for a chorus that never came, and realised how strongly Max Martin and Xenomania changed the structure of songwriting a few years later. “Sure so sure” would barely count as a bridge on one of their songs let alone a chorus.

#11: Or altered it back to how Bjorn and Benny and Chinnichap had dunnit. Not sure whether anything Stargate or XMania did was an advance as such – other than technologically, in terms of production, etc. – but that’s a question for another Popular time.

Rather advert-jingly this one (you can sure-so-sure with Shell maybe?) and not too impressive. Actually the more often Take That appear on Popular the more convinced I am not only that Gary Barlows reputations rests largely on one particular song (which we’ll be coming to in a short while), but also that their present status as the nations best-loved band has been retconned to some degree.
As I recall it, for all the adualation they were receiving in 1994 plenty of people just found them a bore.

What does “retconned” mean?

Re 13: Yes, true enough (Xeno definitely looked back to the RAK set-up, with Brian Higgins as Mickie Most). I was thinking specifically of ‘dance pop’, or post-house pop.

It’ll be a while before we get there though, so I’ll button up.

#9 Yes, of course! I tend to think of them as ‘late nineties’

#12 They did score a US Top 10 hit in 1995, the timing of their split not to the liking of their US record company, as it was something of a breakthrough there.

Clearly the worst of Take That’s number ones, and a particularly grating instance of their trademark weirdly shrill backing vocals. Amazed it got 4. Not even Lulu bursting in 2/3 of the way through could have saved this one.

It was mainly because they came over well in non_performance TV appearances (mostly thanks to Rob),

Well, at the time I quite liked this. To these ears it felt like a progression and undoubtedly was intended as such, TT showing their rivals that they could ‘do’ sexy too. Does rather pale in comparison to Deep or East 17’s contemporaneous Steam now though doesn’t it?

Is there a less sexual word than “social”? Yeah, loads! As a socialist who likes being social I happen to think there’s an inherent sexiness to it meself..

Pop music’s Socialist-in-Chief who promotes dodgy characters like Michelle-Shocked and Frank Turner. Wish Bill would choose his musical pals more carefully.

Sex Pistols were a boy band [/whiskered old challops]

Mark Owen’s appearance (and win) on an early Celebrity Big Brother also key here, I think. He came across as chilled and likeable.

I think there was always an overtone of them being more-than-a-teen-phenomenon. The way I recall it, Lulu got them cachet with an older demographic, Pray was the start of Barlow-as-serious-artist, a theme which I revile; and Robbie turning into a different kind of teenager gave the others an unearned aura of maturity.

I also recall their having Mercury nominations and Ivor Novello awards pressed onto them, which I can’t really begrudge – such things are just puff anyway. I do recall Tony Parsons sneering at their nomination during some feature, specifically Jason saying that people had told him that being around them was like being around the Beatles – I mean it’s obvious why that’s silly, but it’s also obvious why it’s not, so the sneer left me with goodwill towards them, and ill-will towards Parsons.

Anyway, Sure’s better than I’d feared from reading the comments – at least the backing track is. As for Gary’s vocal, ‘dancer in wellington boots’ is about right. Like sewing wearing boxing gloves, or settling down into a concrete pillow. Alan Partridge singing it wouldn’t be massively dissimilar.

From memory (with big not-paying-attention caveats!):

Robbie – cheeky
Mark – sweet
Jason – slacker (the presence of this as a boyband archetype dates the band delightfully!)
Gary – leader/artistic (it’s very hard indeed to scrape away now-Barlow to get at then-Barlow, he seems always to have been himself)
Howard – kind of generic normal himbo type?? Marcello’s right, he’s tough to place if you were outside the fandom

Was it Seaweed doing Go Your Own Way? I can piece together my Fleetwood Mac adoration through half-remembered baby steps throughout the nineties, and that’s one of them.

Robbie – Josh That
Mark – Gosh That
Gary – Tosh That
Jason – Bosh That
Howard – Quosh™ That

Howard was harder to pin down until a bunny came along and lifted him out of obscurity. More on that later I guess.

No. 3 watch for 15 October 1994.. don’t worry, I’m not turking any No. 2 watch’s jaaaahb [sic].. Bon Jovi, “Always.”

Astonishing they’ve never had a UK number 1 – not even stable of ropey ’80s bars Livin’ On A Prayer! – considering, like TT, their (eventual) ubiquity with ladies of a certain age and years of survival despite almost never being a critics’ choice. But, also like TT, every now and then people come along and say, “Yeah, I always actually liked that kinda music, honest..”

There may not be a record I despised in 1994 more than ‘Always’ but half of this is due to the video and the two long-haired chumps vying for the girl’s affections. Give me Alicia Silverstone and Aerosmith then and for a bit.

It’s “I’m not taking anyone’s job” in the South Park Colorado hick dialect.

I’d link to an amusing clip, but it would sound too much like a terrifying bunny coming up very, very soon which makes Sure look like Love Will Tear Us Apart

#48 HA! Well, this should mean good news for Corona – Rhythm of the Night.

If it can cure Tom’s flu, it can cure anything.