Peter Hook has definitively dismissed reuniting with his former New Order and Joy Division bandmates at the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony in November, citing years of acrimony and a lengthy court dispute that he says caused him significant harm. The septuagenarian bass player, who established both iconic British bands, made his views unmistakably evident when asked if he would take the stage with Bernard Sumner, Stephen Morris and Gillian Gilbert for the recognition. “No. No. Not following what they did to me and my family, no,” Hook told Rolling Stone, adding that values are important more than the appearance of reuniting. Whilst Hook says he remains keen 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 Britain’s most impactful musical groups.
A Decade of Quietude and Court Battles
The roots of Hook’s antagonism stretch far, stretching back to the wake of Ian Curtis’s passing in 1980. When the Joy Division vocalist took his own life, the surviving band members later reformed under the New Order banner, with Hook functioning as the group’s bassist throughout their most lucrative era. However, the partnership started to deteriorate when Hook exited in 2007, convinced that New Order was spent. His leaving, he thought, would signal the definitive end of the outfit. Instead, his ex-colleagues possessed alternative ideas.
When Sumner, Morris and Gilbert reconstituted New Order in 2011 without seeking input from Hook, the bassist experienced betrayal. The action sparked a long-running and costly legal dispute over the band’s name and royalties — a battle that Hook claims cost him six years’ worth of his wages. Though the dispute was ultimately resolved in 2017, the psychological and monetary cost has created lasting wounds. Hook hasn’t spoken to Sumner or Gilbert in 15 years, and his communication with Morris has been confined to infrequent exchanges over the past four or five years, leaving little room for reconciliation before November’s ceremony.
- Ian Curtis died by suicide in 1980, resulting in Joy Division’s dissolution
- Hook departed from New Order in 2007, convinced the band had finished
- Remaining members reformed without Hook in 2011, triggering legal disputes
- Agreement achieved in 2017, but personal relationships remain fractured
The Introduction No One Expected to Heal
Despite his refusal to participate the stage with his ex-band members, Hook has confirmed he will attend the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame induction in November. However, his attendance will prove a bittersweet affair, marked more by acknowledgement of the historical importance of Joy Division and New Order than by any sense of genuine connection. The bassist has been emphatic that his attendance is motivated by factors entirely separate from his distant band members. “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 significant impact on post-punk and electronic music.
The induction, whilst a deserved honour to two bands that profoundly transformed British music, has become something of an uncomfortable situation for all involved. What might ordinarily serve as an opportunity for reflection and reconciliation has instead become a sobering testament of unresolved grievances and the limits of nostalgia. Hook’s decision not to participate 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 feel-good moments and unexpected reunions, will instead bear witness to one of rock music’s most anguished and persistent rifts.
Hook’s Terms for Resolution
When pressed on the possibility of reuniting, Hook presented a scenario so laden with 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 of earnings. I’m really sorry about it. We should maybe have just had a chat about it.” The bassist’s flat tone when outlining this hypothetical encounter made clear that such an apology stays squarely within the realm of fantasy. Without real recognition of the harm done and the monetary cost imposed, Hook seems unwilling to entertain thoughts of reuniting.
Yet Hook hasn’t completely closed the door on the prospect of future peace, acknowledging that people is unpredictable and emotions can change unexpectedly. “So you can’t say for certain, dear. Life is brimming with surprises. I’m sure that could be a lovely one,” he said with characteristic wryness. The bassist made a relatable parallel, suggesting that even those we believe we could not pardon might surprise us with a gesture of sincere remorse. However, the responsibility, he made clear, rests firmly on his former colleagues to take the first meaningful step toward rapprochement—something that seems unlikely before the autumn ceremony.
Contrasting Perspectives from Both Sides
Whilst Peter Hook has been clear and unequivocal about his refusal to participate in any reunion event, his former bandmates have adopted a distinctly contrasting public position. Bernard Sumner, Stephen Morris and Gillian Gilbert have mostly stayed quiet 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 event will develop, with Hook’s defiant stance standing in stark contrast to the relative quiet coming from the other three members. The absence of a coordinated response from New Order indicates either a calculated strategy of restraint or a deep-seated disagreement about how to address the situation publicly.
The split in their public messaging demonstrates the widening gulf that has opened between the parties since their 2007 separation and following legal complications. Hook’s willingness to speak candidly about his grievances stands in sharp opposition to what appears to be a tendency from his past associates to allow the situation to settle. Whether this quiet reflects an bid to protect reputation, sidestep more confrontation, or simply move forward without rehashing old grievances remains unclear. What is certain is that the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame admission will take place against a setting of essentially conflicting stories about what took place and what needs to come 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 shadow of Oasis looms large over talk surrounding potential rock reunions, yet Hook’s situation differs markedly from Liam and Noel Gallagher’s recent rapprochement. Whilst the Gallagher brothers ultimately reconciled to a collaborative arrangement after almost thirty years of hostility, Hook looks far less willing toward such a resolution. The Oasis comeback showed that even the most strained band relationships could be repaired, notably when monetary rewards and public sentiment converged. However, Hook’s ethical position implies that monetary considerations and nostalgia on their own cannot span the chasm created by what he considers to be a fundamental betrayal during the 2011 reformation.
Hook’s qualified remarks—implying reconciliation might occur solely should Sumner provided a genuine expression of remorse—points to a faint chance, though his sardonic tone suggests he harbours minimal real hope of such an gesture. The bassist has devoted considerable time 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 type of financial incentives that could otherwise force a reunion. Unlike Oasis, where both parties eventually acknowledged their common heritage and mutual benefit, Hook appears resolved to safeguard his principles above all else, even if it means forgoing a potentially triumphant moment at one of the most esteemed events in rock music.
- Hook emphasises morality over commercial opportunity in his decision not to reunite
- The 2017 court agreement addressed monetary issues but not psychological hurt
- True reconciliation would necessitate remarkable admission from Sumner