Peter Hook has definitively dismissed reuniting with his ex-bandmates from New Order and Joy Division at the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony this November, citing sustained conflict and a protracted legal battle that he says resulted in substantial losses. The septuagenarian bass player, who founded both legendary British acts, made his position crystal clear when asked if he would share 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 principles matter more than the appearance of reuniting. Whilst Hook says he continues to want to attend the ceremony, his refusal to perform alongside his ex-bandmates promises to darken what should be a celebratory moment for two of the UK’s most significant bands.
Ten Years of Quietude and Court Battles
The origins of Hook’s animosity run deep, extending to the aftermath of Ian Curtis’s death in 1980. When the Joy Division frontman took his own life, the remaining members subsequently reunited under the New Order name, with Hook acting as the band’s bassist throughout their most profitable era. However, the dynamic commenced breaking down when Hook departed in 2007, convinced that New Order had exhausted its potential. His exit, he felt, would constitute the definitive end of the group. Instead, his ex-colleagues harboured different intentions.
When Sumner, Morris and Gilbert reconstituted New Order in 2011 without consulting Hook, the bassist felt let down. The decision sparked a lengthy and costly court battle over financial rights and band ownership — a battle that Hook claims consumed six years’ worth of his wages. Though the conflict was eventually settled in 2017, the financial and emotional toll has resulted in enduring damage. Hook hasn’t spoken to Sumner or Gilbert in 15 years, and his communication with Morris has been confined to infrequent exchanges over the last four to five years, offering scant opportunity for healing before November’s ceremony.
- Ian Curtis died by suicide in 1980, leading to Joy Division’s dissolution
- Hook left New Order in 2007, convinced the band had finished
- Remaining members reformed without Hook in 2011, triggering court battles
- Settlement reached in 2017, but personal relationships stay broken
The Induction Nobody Anticipated to Restore
Despite his unwillingness to share the stage with his ex-band members, Hook has stated he will be present at the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame induction in November. However, his attendance will prove a mixed experience, marked more by acknowledgement 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 estranged colleagues. “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 significant impact on post-punk and electronic music.
The admission, 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 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 painful and enduring rifts.
Hook’s Terms for Rapprochement
When asked about the prospect of reconciliation, Hook offered a scenario so laden with sarcasm it was impossible to miss his true feelings. He envisioned Bernard Sumner coming to him with an expression of regret: “Hey Hooky, sorry about that eight-year legal battle that set you back six years’ wages. I’m really sorry about it. We should maybe have just had a conversation about it.” The musician’s flat tone when describing this hypothetical encounter made clear that such an apology stays firmly in the domain of fantasy. Without real recognition of the damage caused and the financial toll extracted, Hook appears reluctant to entertain thoughts of reconciliation.
Yet Hook hasn’t entirely closed the door on the prospect of eventual reconciliation, acknowledging that people is unpredictable and feelings can shift unexpectedly. “So you can’t say for certain, dear. Life is full of surprises. I’m sure that could be a lovely one,” he said with typical wryness. The bassist made a compelling parallel, suggesting that even those we believe we could never forgive might surprise us with a gesture of sincere remorse. However, the responsibility, he made clear, rests squarely on his former colleagues to take the initial decisive action toward reconciliation—something that appears improbable before the November ceremony.
Conflicting Statements from Either Party
Whilst Peter Hook has been direct and explicit about his rejection of involvement in any comeback, his ex-band members have adopted a notably different public position. Bernard Sumner, Stephen Morris and Gillian Gilbert have largely remained silent on the matter, neither confirming nor denying their plans for the November induction ceremony. This disparity in communication has created substantial uncertainty about how the event will develop, with Hook’s defiant stance presenting a marked contrast with the subdued tone originating from the three other band members. The missing coordinated statement from New Order suggests either a calculated strategy of restraint or a underlying disagreement about how to address the matter publicly.
The split in their statements to the media reflects the widening gulf that has developed between the parties since their 2007 separation and ensuing legal disputes. Hook’s preparedness to talk frankly about his concerns stands in stark contrast to what appears to be a preference from his former colleagues to let the matter rest. Whether this quiet reflects an bid to protect reputation, sidestep more confrontation, or simply move forward without revisiting previous disagreements is uncertain. What is evident is that the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame admission will take place against a setting of irreconcilably different accounts about what took place 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 Case and Fading Hope
The spectre of Oasis looms large over talk surrounding possible rock reunions, yet Hook’s circumstances differ significantly from Liam and Noel Gallagher’s recent reconciliation. Whilst the Gallagher brothers eventually found their way back to a functional partnership after almost thirty years of bitterness, Hook seems considerably reluctant toward such a settlement. The Oasis reunion proved that even the most fractious band relationships were capable of healing, notably when monetary rewards and public opinion coincided. However, Hook’s principled stance suggests that monetary considerations and nostalgia by themselves cannot bridge the rift created by what he regards as a fundamental betrayal in the 2011 reformation.
Hook’s conditional language—implying reconciliation might occur solely should Sumner provided a heartfelt apology—hints at a faint chance, though his sarcastic delivery suggests he holds little genuine expectation of such an overture. The bass player has devoted considerable time working through the emotional and financial fallout from the court battle, and that accumulated grievance appears to have calcified into something more resistant to the sort of commercial pressures that could otherwise force a reunion. Unlike Oasis, where both parties eventually acknowledged their shared legacy and reciprocal advantage, Hook appears resolved to protect his integrity more than anything, even if it entails sacrificing a potentially triumphant moment at one of rock music’s most prestigious ceremonies.
- Hook emphasises morality over commercial opportunity in his refusal to reunite
- The 2017 legal settlement resolved monetary issues but not psychological hurt
- Genuine reconciliation would demand remarkable admission from Sumner