Peter Hook has categorically ruled out reuniting with his ex-bandmates from New Order and Joy Division at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony in November, citing years of acrimony and a lengthy court dispute that he says cost him dearly. The septuagenarian bass player, who established both iconic British bands, made his views unmistakably evident when asked if he would share the stage with Bernard Sumner, Stephen Morris and Gillian Gilbert for the honour. “No. No. Not after what they did to me and my family, no,” Hook told Rolling Stone, adding that principles matter more than the optics of a reunion. Whilst Hook says he continues to want to attend the ceremony, his decision not to perform alongside his former colleagues promises to darken what should be a celebratory moment for two of the UK’s most significant bands.
A Decade of Silence and Legal Turmoil
The origins of Hook’s resentment stretch far, extending to the period following of Ian Curtis’s passing in 1980. When the Joy Division frontman took his own life, the surviving band members eventually regrouped under the New Order moniker, with Hook acting as the group’s bass player throughout their most profitable period. However, the partnership began to fracture when Hook exited in 2007, thinking then that New Order was spent. His departure, he believed, would mark the final conclusion of the band. Instead, his ex-colleagues harboured different intentions.
When Sumner, Morris and Gilbert revived New Order in 2011 without consulting Hook, the bassist felt betrayed. The action set off a protracted and expensive court battle over royalties and the band’s name — a dispute that Hook claims took up six years of his wages. Though the dispute was finally concluded in 2017, the emotional and financial impact has left scars that remain unhealed. Hook remains estranged from Sumner or Gilbert in 15 years, and his communication with Morris has been restricted to sporadic communication over the last four to five years, offering scant opportunity for healing before November’s ceremony.
- Ian Curtis took his own life in 1980, leading to Joy Division’s breakup
- Hook departed from New Order in 2007, convinced the band had finished
- The surviving members reformed without Hook in 2011, sparking court battles
- Agreement achieved in 2017, but personal relationships remain fractured
The Initiation Nobody Anticipated to Mend
Despite his unwillingness to share the stage with his former bandmates, Hook has stated he will be present at the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame ceremony in November. However, his attendance will prove a bittersweet affair, marked primarily by recognition of Joy Division and New Order’s historical significance than by any sense of genuine connection. The bassist has been emphatic that his presence is driven by factors entirely separate from his estranged colleagues. “For many, many reasons … not one other member of the band is a reason,” he stated bluntly, underscoring just how fractured the group has become despite their monumental influence on post-punk and electronic genres.
The admission, whilst a deserved honour to two bands that fundamentally reshaped British music, has become something of an uncomfortable situation for all involved. What might ordinarily serve as an chance for contemplation and reconciliation has instead become a stark reminder of unresolved grievances and the limits of nostalgia. Hook’s refusal to perform has already cast a shadow over the proceedings, transforming what should be a triumphant celebration into a public acknowledgement of internal discord. The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, typically a venue for uplifting occasions and unexpected reunions, will instead bear witness to one of rock music’s most anguished and persistent rifts.
Hook’s Terms for Rapprochement
When pressed on the prospect of reconciliation, Hook presented a situation so full of sarcasm it was impossible to miss his genuine sentiment. He envisioned Bernard Sumner coming to him with an apology: “Hey Hooky, sorry about that eight-year court case that cost you six years’ wages. I’m really sorry about it. We should maybe have just had a chat about it.” The bassist’s deadpan delivery when describing this hypothetical encounter made evident that such an apology remains squarely within the domain of fantasy. Without genuine acknowledgement of the damage caused and the monetary cost imposed, Hook seems reluctant to consider the prospect of reuniting.
Yet Hook hasn’t completely closed the door on the possibility of eventual reconciliation, acknowledging that people is unpredictable and feelings can change unexpectedly. “So you never know, dear. Life is brimming with surprises. I’m sure that could be a wonderful one,” he said with typical wryness. The bassist made a compelling parallel, suggesting that even those we believe we could not pardon might surprise us with a act of genuine contrition. However, the responsibility, he made clear, rests squarely on his former colleagues to take the first meaningful step toward rapprochement—something that seems unlikely before the November ceremony.
Contrasting Perspectives from Each Side
Whilst Peter Hook has been direct and explicit about his rejection of involvement in any reunion, his ex-band members have maintained a distinctly contrasting public stance. Bernard Sumner, Stephen Morris and Gillian Gilbert have predominantly refrained from comment on the issue, without confirming or denying their plans for the November induction ceremony. This asymmetry in communication has resulted in significant ambiguity about how the occasion will unfold, with Hook’s defiant stance presenting a marked contrast with the comparative silence originating from the remaining three members. The lack of a unified response from New Order suggests either a intentional approach of restraint or a fundamental disagreement about how to manage the matter publicly.
The divergence in their public messaging reflects the broader chasm that has emerged between the parties since their 2007 separation and following legal complications. Hook’s preparedness to talk frankly about his concerns stands in sharp opposition to what appears to be a inclination among his ex-bandmates to allow the situation to settle. Whether this quietness indicates an bid to protect reputation, prevent additional disputes, or simply move forward without dwelling on past disputes stays uncertain. What is evident is that the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame admission will take place against a backdrop of essentially conflicting stories about what occurred and what should happen next.
| Party | Public Position |
|---|---|
| Peter Hook | Definitively refusing to perform or reunite with bandmates; openly discussing the legal battle and emotional toll; leaving reconciliation only possible if former members apologise sincerely |
| Bernard Sumner, Stephen Morris and Gillian Gilbert | Largely silent on reunion plans; no public statements confirming or denying participation in the ceremony; maintaining apparent restraint regarding past disputes |
| Rock & Roll Hall of Fame | Proceeding with induction of both Joy Division and New Order despite internal tensions; providing venue for honouring both acts regardless of personal conflicts between members |
The Oasis Precedent and Diminishing Prospects
The specter of Oasis looms large over talk surrounding possible rock reunions, yet Hook’s position diverges notably from Liam and Noel Gallagher’s recent reconciliation. Whilst the Gallagher brothers finally returned to a functional partnership after nearly three decades of bitterness, Hook appears far less inclined toward such an outcome. The Oasis reunion demonstrated that even the most fractious band relationships could be repaired, notably when economic incentives and audience sentiment converged. However, Hook’s ethical position implies that financial gain and nostalgia on their own cannot span the divide created by what he regards as a fundamental betrayal at the time of the 2011 reformation.
Hook’s qualified remarks—implying a reunion could happen only if Sumner provided a heartfelt apology—hints at a glimmer of possibility, though his sarcastic delivery suggests he harbours minimal real hope of such an gesture. The bass player has spent years working through the emotional and financial fallout from the court battle, and that built-up resentment seems to have hardened into something more resistant to the sort of commercial pressures that could otherwise force a reunion. Unlike Oasis, where each side eventually acknowledged their common heritage and reciprocal advantage, Hook appears resolved to safeguard his principles above all else, even if it means forgoing a potentially triumphant moment at one of rock music’s most prestigious ceremonies.
- Hook emphasises ethical principles ahead of financial gain in his refusal to reunite
- The 2017 legal settlement resolved financial matters but not psychological hurt
- Genuine reconciliation would require unprecedented acknowledgement from Sumner