A few days ago, I was heading from the opticians to uni when I spotted a record shop not far from the railway station. My train wasn't in a while, so I decided to head over, maybe snoop around for a bit, not expecting to buy anything. The record shop itself was great, with countless rock vinyls from the Who and the Doors, alongside other great rock bands from over fifty years ago.
They also had a punk/new wave section, which I spent some time trawling through. While doing so, I found some more vinyls from bands like Killing Joke and Magazine; I'd argue they're more post-punk than either punk or new wave, but that would be pedantic. Either way, I was checking out the shop's singles collection, when I stumbled across something far more interesting.
I asked the owner whether this looked like an original version, and she said yes. She joked it was far older than I was, and to be fair, she wasn't wrong. This is, after all, Love Will Tear Us Apart, a single issued by Joy Division back in 1980.
Everyone knows Love Will Tear Us Apart. It's one of those songs you might not recognise by title, but which you're bound to have heard over the radio or in a bar at some point. Hell, many football fans even have a chant to the song's melody about Leeds United. It's probably Joy Division's most recognised single, and even if it's debatably not their finest, it's still a terrific song. Catchy yet melancholic, referring to Ian Curtis's marital issues and epilepsy, it's easy to get lost in the music and forget about the lyrics. Indie band the Wombats even wrote a song about this called Let's Dance to Joy Division.
The single was released in June 1980, one month after Curtis's suicide and the band had effectively disbanded. One month later, they would release their second album Closer, an album which delved even further into themes of isolation and depression. Off the back of all this, Love Will Tear Us Apart became a hit - thirteenth in the charts! - though sadly Curtis wasn't around to witness this.
Single ID
I'm pretty certain my single's an original because it's got just one B-side. On the A-side, you have Love Will Tear Us Apart, but the B-side has These Days. I want to argue These Days might be a better song - it's more punkish, with a punchier bassline from Peter Hook - but I can't let myself go that far. However, some versions of the single also include an additional recording of Love Will Tear Us Apart on the back, right after These Days. It's listed as the "Pennine Version" on streaming services, featuring a different vocal take by Curtis. Yet the original doesn't list this version, and my copy doesn't either, so QED.
Another reason why I'm sure this is an original is it's got a Factory Records catalogue number, FAC 23. For the unaware, this was Joy Division's (later New Order's) record label, and they liked releasing all their stuff using an unconventional numbering scheme. In this case, the 3 actually symbolises the fact it was specifically a Joy Division single - FAC 23 came before FAC 22 (which was a single by A Certain Ratio). Factory Records aren't around anymore, let alone 7" singles, so QED again.
By the way, this cataloguing scheme went beyond music. There's a number for their club, the Haçienda (FAC 51); posters; even label owner Tony Wilson's coffin has one (FAC 501). It's a pretty fun rabbit hole to read through
Alright, I don't necessarily want this post to be a brag about me having a cool single. I don't even have a record player right now. However, you can be sure that once I buy one, I'll be playing it as much as I possibly can.
I've mentioned a few times on this blog just how much I love Joy Division, so this feels like a bit of a full circle moment for me. I remember when Love Will Tear Us Apart was the only song I knew by them, before later discovering their album Unknown Pleasures, the one with the pulsar waves on the cover. Obviously from there I got into New Order, who I've spoken about plenty times on this blog, but more importantly, both bands are some of my absolute favourites. I'd be a very different person without them.
Comments
Post a Comment