wtf? i don't know how you reached this conclusion,
most of their songs are about social and political relations
and power plays... it's more influenced by (post) structuralism than marxism...

isnt gang of four considered punk? indie section? or am i wrong

i more meant they were nowhere near as marxist as usually reported.
whenever i read an article about them they always call them "marxist band" or "marxist agitators" or whatever

yeah, a lot of people give them flack for signing with WB,
but gang of four were never revolutionaries. if anything
they were satirists, and understood that if you want to make
money or have your message heard you can't just wallow
in the underground preaching to the choir.

exactly!!!

Yeah this should really be in the punk section.

Anyway, just came to say that, based on this new reissue, I went and gave it a listen (they put up a Spotify playlist) and after about an hour I started to get exhausted. Too much atonal jangly guitar. I don't understand why the Pitchfork article asks why they didn't become super popular, based on what? This is not exactly commercial music (I guess neither were the Sex pistols but they were big?).

Anyway, I get their influence (and yes, after some years I too hear them now in some Franz Ferdinand songs), but I prefer the bands they inspired rather than their own music.

Also, I still haven't listened to their post 82 output but seeing as how their original and most critically acclaimed run didn't leave me wanting more, don't think I will.

^2000s hipster bandwagoners don't deserve good music.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCQtCj39TN0

yeah wtf how can you not be knocked off your feet by this

The guitars are pretty scary.

I love RTJ, but this track doesn't have much replay value and the sample comes off as an overly self-conscious move for reach. It's like a case study in what people hate about them lol