Peter Hook has firmly rejected reuniting with his ex-bandmates from New Order and Joy Division at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony in November, citing sustained conflict and a lengthy court dispute that he says cost him dearly. The 70-year-old bassist, who established both iconic British bands, made his position crystal clear when asked if he would perform together 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 principles matter more than the look of getting back together. Whilst Hook says he is still eager to attend the ceremony, his unwillingness to play alongside his former colleagues 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, rooted in the period following of Ian Curtis’s passing in 1980. When the Joy Division lead singer ended his life, the remaining members later reformed under the New Order banner, with Hook serving as the group’s bass player throughout their most lucrative period. However, the dynamic started to deteriorate when Hook left in 2007, convinced that New Order had run its course. His leaving, he thought, would constitute the definitive end of the group. Instead, his ex-colleagues had other plans.
When Sumner, Morris and Gilbert revived New Order in 2011 without seeking input from Hook, the bassist felt let down. The decision set off a protracted and expensive court battle over royalties and the band’s name — a dispute that Hook maintains cost him six years’ worth of his wages. Though the dispute was eventually settled in 2017, the emotional and financial impact has created lasting wounds. Hook remains estranged from Sumner or Gilbert in 15 years, and his contact 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, resulting in Joy Division’s dissolution
- Hook departed from New Order in 2007, believing the band had run its course
- Remaining members reformed without Hook in 2011, triggering court battles
- Agreement achieved in 2017, but personal relationships stay broken
The Introduction Nobody Anticipated to Mend
Despite his refusal to participate 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 presence will be a bittersweet affair, marked more by acknowledgement of Joy Division and New Order’s historical significance 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 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 admission, 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 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 painful and enduring rifts.
Hook’s Terms for Rapprochement
When asked about the possibility of reuniting, Hook presented a situation so full of sarcasm it was clear his true feelings. He envisioned Bernard Sumner coming to him with an expression of regret: “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 musician’s deadpan delivery when describing this imagined meeting made clear that such an apology remains firmly in the realm of fantasy. Without real recognition of the damage caused and the financial toll imposed, Hook appears reluctant to entertain thoughts of reuniting.
Yet Hook hasn’t completely closed the door on the possibility of future peace, recognising that human nature is unpredictable and feelings can change unexpectedly. “So you never know, dear. Life is full of surprises. I’m sure that could be a lovely one,” he said with typical wryness. The bassist drew a relatable parallel, suggesting that even those we believe we could never forgive might surprise us with a act of genuine contrition. However, the onus, he made clear, rests squarely on his ex-bandmates to take the first meaningful step toward rapprochement—something that appears improbable before the autumn ceremony.
Opposing Views from Both Sides
Whilst Peter Hook has been forthright and unambiguous about his refusal to participate in any reunion event, his previous musical partners have presented a markedly separate public position. Bernard Sumner, Stephen Morris and Gillian Gilbert have predominantly refrained from comment on the issue, without confirming or denying their intentions for the November induction ceremony. This imbalance in messaging has created substantial uncertainty about how the occasion will take shape, with Hook’s uncompromising stand presenting a marked contrast with the subdued tone coming from the three other band members. The absence of a coordinated response from New Order suggests either a deliberate strategy of restraint or a fundamental disagreement about how to address the circumstances publicly.
The distinction in their statements to the media demonstrates the significant divide that has emerged between the parties since their 2007 separation and following legal complications. Hook’s willingness to speak candidly about his grievances stands in stark contrast to what appears to be a preference from his former colleagues to allow the situation to settle. Whether this quiet reflects an effort to maintain respect, sidestep more confrontation, or just proceed without revisiting previous disagreements stays uncertain. What is clear is that the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame induction will occur against a setting of irreconcilably different accounts 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 Diminishing Prospects
The spectre of Oasis hangs over discussions of prospective rock comebacks, yet Hook’s circumstances differ significantly from Liam and Noel Gallagher’s recent rapprochement. Whilst the Gallagher brothers ultimately reconciled to a collaborative arrangement after nearly three decades of hostility, Hook appears far less inclined toward such a resolution. The Oasis reunion proved that even the most strained band relationships were capable of healing, notably when financial incentives and public opinion converged. However, Hook’s principled stance suggests that monetary considerations and nostalgia on their own cannot span the divide created by what he views as a essential betrayal at the time of the 2011 reformation.
Hook’s qualified remarks—suggesting reconciliation might occur solely should Sumner offered a genuine expression of remorse—points to a glimmer of possibility, though his sarcastic delivery suggests he holds little genuine expectation of such an overture. The bassist has devoted considerable time processing the psychological and monetary consequences from the court battle, and that accumulated grievance appears to have calcified into something less susceptible to the sort of commercial pressures that might otherwise compel a reconciliation. Unlike Oasis, where each side ultimately recognised their common heritage and reciprocal advantage, Hook appears resolved to protect his integrity more than anything, 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 legal settlement addressed financial matters but not psychological hurt
- Authentic reconciliation would demand remarkable admission from Sumner