Peter Hook has definitively dismissed reuniting with his ex-bandmates from New Order and Joy Division at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony in November, citing prolonged discord and a protracted legal battle that he says resulted in substantial losses. The 70-year-old bassist, who established both iconic British bands, made his stance abundantly plain when asked if he would share the stage with Bernard Sumner, Stephen Morris and Gillian Gilbert for the honour. “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 unwillingness to play alongside his former colleagues promises to diminish what should be a celebratory moment for two of the UK’s most significant bands.
Ten Years of Quiet and Judicial Struggle
The origins of Hook’s antagonism run deep, stretching back to the wake of Ian Curtis’s passing in 1980. When the Joy Division vocalist died by suicide, the surviving band members eventually regrouped under the New Order name, with Hook functioning as the band’s bass player throughout their most profitable period. However, the partnership began to fracture when Hook left in 2007, thinking then that New Order had run its course. His leaving, he felt, would constitute the definitive end of the outfit. Instead, his onetime partners possessed alternative ideas.
When Sumner, Morris and Gilbert reconstituted New Order in 2011 without consulting Hook, the bassist felt let down. The decision sparked a long-running and costly legal conflict over financial rights and band ownership — a dispute that Hook claims consumed the equivalent of six years of his wages. Though the conflict was finally concluded in 2017, the emotional and financial impact has resulted in enduring damage. Hook hasn’t spoken to Sumner or Gilbert in 15 years, and his contact with Morris has been confined to infrequent exchanges over the past four or five years, making reconciliation unlikely before November’s ceremony.
- Ian Curtis died by suicide in 1980, leading to Joy Division’s breakup
- Hook departed from New Order in 2007, believing the band had finished
- Remaining members reformed without Hook in 2011, sparking court battles
- Settlement reached in 2017, but interpersonal bonds stay broken
The Onboarding No One Anticipated 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 primarily by recognition of the historical importance of Joy Division and New Order than by any sense of familial warmth. The bassist has been emphatic that his attendance is motivated by factors entirely separate from his distant band members. “For numerous 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 music.
The induction, whilst a deserved honour to two bands that fundamentally reshaped British music, has become something of an awkward affair 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 Requirements for Resolution
When asked about the possibility of reuniting, Hook offered a situation so full of sarcasm it was clear his genuine sentiment. He imagined Bernard Sumner approaching 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 musician’s flat tone when outlining this imagined meeting made clear that such an apology remains squarely within the realm of fantasy. Without real recognition of the damage caused and the monetary cost imposed, Hook appears unwilling to entertain thoughts of reconciliation.
Yet Hook hasn’t completely closed the door on the prospect of future peace, recognising that people is unpredictable and feelings can change unexpectedly. “So you never know, dear. Life is full of surprises. I’m sure that could be a wonderful one,” he said with characteristic wryness. The bassist made a compelling parallel, proposing that even those we believe we could not pardon might surprise us with a gesture of genuine contrition. However, the onus, he made clear, rests firmly on his former colleagues to take the first meaningful step toward rapprochement—something that appears improbable before the November ceremony.
Conflicting Statements from Either Party
Whilst Peter Hook has been direct and explicit about his refusal to participate in any comeback, his former bandmates have presented a distinctly contrasting public position. Bernard Sumner, Stephen Morris and Gillian Gilbert have mostly stayed quiet on the subject, avoiding confirmation or denial of their intentions for the induction ceremony in November. This disparity in communication has resulted in significant ambiguity about how the occasion will develop, with Hook’s uncompromising stand standing in stark contrast to the relative quiet originating from the three other band members. The missing coordinated statement from New Order indicates either a intentional approach of restraint or a underlying disagreement about how to manage the matter publicly.
The split in their public messaging demonstrates the significant divide that has emerged between the parties since their 2007 split and following legal complications. Hook’s readiness to discuss openly about his grievances stands in sharp opposition to what appears to be a preference from his former colleagues to allow the situation to settle. Whether this quietness indicates an attempt to preserve dignity, sidestep more confrontation, or merely progress ahead without revisiting previous disagreements 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 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 hangs over talk surrounding potential rock reunions, yet Hook’s circumstances differ significantly from Liam and Noel Gallagher’s latest reunion. Whilst the Gallagher brothers eventually found their way back to a working relationship after close to thirty years of bitterness, Hook appears far less inclined toward such a settlement. The Oasis reunion demonstrated that even the most strained band relationships could be mended, notably when monetary rewards and audience sentiment aligned. However, Hook’s principled stand suggests that money and nostalgia by themselves cannot bridge the divide created by what he views as a fundamental betrayal during the 2011 reformation.
Hook’s conditional language—suggesting a reunion could happen only if Sumner offered a heartfelt apology—hints at a glimmer of possibility, though his sarcastic delivery suggests he harbours minimal real hope of such an overture. The bass player has devoted considerable time processing the emotional and financial fallout from the legal dispute, and that built-up resentment seems to have hardened into something less susceptible to the sort of commercial pressures that could otherwise force a reunion. Unlike Oasis, where both parties eventually acknowledged their shared legacy and mutual benefit, Hook seems determined to protect his integrity above all else, even if it means forgoing a potentially triumphant moment at one of rock music’s most prestigious ceremonies.
- Hook stresses ethical principles ahead of financial gain in his refusal to reunite
- The 2017 financial settlement settled monetary issues but not emotional damage
- Authentic reconciliation would necessitate extraordinary recognition from Sumner