Peter Hook has categorically ruled out reuniting with his former New Order and Joy Division bandmates at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony this November, citing prolonged discord and a protracted legal battle that he says cost him dearly. The 70-year-old bassist, who established both iconic British bands, made his stance abundantly plain when asked if he would perform together 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 optics of a reunion. Whilst Hook says he continues to want to attend the ceremony, his unwillingness to play alongside his ex-bandmates promises to darken what should be a celebratory moment for two of Britain’s most impactful musical groups.
Ten Years of Silence and Legal Turmoil
The origins of Hook’s animosity run deep, rooted in the aftermath of Ian Curtis’s passing in 1980. When the Joy Division vocalist died by suicide, the other members later reformed under the New Order banner, with Hook acting as the group’s bassist throughout their most lucrative years. However, the partnership began to fracture when Hook exited in 2007, believing at the time that New Order had run its course. His exit, he believed, would constitute the final conclusion 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 betrayed. The action set off a long-running and costly legal dispute over royalties and the band’s name — a battle that Hook asserts cost him six years’ worth of his wages. Though the dispute was finally concluded in 2017, the emotional and financial impact has left scars that remain unhealed. Hook hasn’t spoken to Sumner or Gilbert in 15 years, and his contact with Morris has been limited to occasional contact over the past four or five years, leaving little room for reconciliation before November’s ceremony.
- Ian Curtis took his own life in 1980, leading to Joy Division’s breakup
- Hook left New Order in 2007, believing the band had finished
- The surviving members reunited without Hook in 2011, sparking legal disputes
- Agreement achieved in 2017, but personal relationships stay broken
The Introduction Nobody Expected to Heal
Despite his unwillingness to share the stage with his ex-band members, Hook has confirmed he will attend the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame ceremony in November. However, his attendance will prove a bittersweet affair, marked more by acknowledgement of Joy Division and New Order’s historical significance than by any sense of familial warmth. The bassist has been emphatic that his attendance is motivated by reasons completely distinct from his estranged colleagues. “For many, many reasons … not one other member of the band is a reason,” he stated bluntly, highlighting precisely how divided 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 awkward affair 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 decision not to participate has already cast a shadow over the proceedings, transforming what should be a victorious occasion 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 Requirements for Rapprochement
When pressed on the prospect of reconciliation, Hook presented a situation so laden with sarcasm it was clear his genuine sentiment. He imagined 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 conversation about it.” The bassist’s flat tone when outlining this imagined meeting made clear that such an apology stays firmly in the realm of fantasy. Without real recognition of the harm done and the monetary cost imposed, Hook appears reluctant to entertain thoughts of reuniting.
Yet Hook hasn’t completely closed the door on the prospect of future peace, acknowledging that human nature is unpredictable and emotions 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 characteristic wryness. The bassist drew a relatable parallel, suggesting that even those we believe we could never forgive might surprise us with a gesture 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 appears improbable before the autumn ceremony.
Contrasting Perspectives from Either Party
Whilst Peter Hook has been forthright and unambiguous about his rejection of involvement in any reunion event, his former bandmates have maintained a markedly separate public stance. Bernard Sumner, Stephen Morris and Gillian Gilbert have largely remained silent on the issue, avoiding confirmation or denial of their intentions for the November induction ceremony. This imbalance in messaging has resulted in significant ambiguity about how the occasion will develop, with Hook’s defiant stance contrasting sharply against the subdued tone coming from the three other band members. The absence of a coordinated response from New Order suggests either a intentional approach of restraint or a deep-seated disagreement about how to address the circumstances publicly.
The split in their public communications reflects the broader chasm that has opened between the parties since their split in 2007 and following legal complications. Hook’s willingness to speak candidly about his complaints stands in marked contrast to what appears to be a preference from his former colleagues to let the matter rest. Whether this quietness indicates an effort to maintain respect, sidestep more confrontation, or just proceed without revisiting previous disagreements stays uncertain. What is certain is that the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame admission will take place against a context of fundamentally incompatible narratives about what happened 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 Fading Hope
The specter of Oasis hangs over discussions of 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 functional partnership after almost thirty years of acrimony, Hook appears far less inclined toward such a resolution. The Oasis reunion demonstrated that even the most contentious band relationships could be mended, especially when financial incentives and audience sentiment coincided. However, Hook’s principled stand indicates that financial gain and nostalgia by themselves cannot bridge the rift created by what he regards as a essential betrayal at the time of the 2011 reformation.
Hook’s qualified remarks—implying a reunion could happen only if Sumner provided a heartfelt apology—points to a glimmer of possibility, though his sarcastic delivery indicates he harbours minimal real hope of such an overture. The bass player has devoted considerable time processing the psychological and monetary consequences from the legal dispute, and that built-up resentment appears to have calcified into something less susceptible to the sort of commercial pressures that could otherwise force a reconciliation. Unlike Oasis, where each side ultimately recognised their common heritage and reciprocal advantage, Hook appears resolved to safeguard his principles above all else, even if it entails sacrificing a potentially triumphant moment at one of the most esteemed events in rock music.
- Hook stresses ethical principles ahead of financial gain in his refusal to reunite
- The 2017 legal settlement addressed financial matters but not psychological hurt
- Authentic reconciliation would necessitate unprecedented acknowledgement from Sumner