The original festival goers were a bunch of very middle class hippies from London. The travellers didn't become involved with Glastonbury until the 80's & yes, they did give the festival it's life & soul until a section of them threw the goodwill of Eavis back in his face & help start a small riot in 1990 that nearly killed the festival off.

The problem with saying 'the festival is middle class now' is ignoring the facts that:

A/ More people in the UK are by definition middle class than in any time in recent history.

B/ Glastonbury has always been middle class.

The problem is that since the fence went up we've had an increase of culture tourists attending who don't want to interact, but come to have their 'Glastonbury moments' pre-packed & laid out for them. Basically there's been an increase in wankers.

This is a huge year for the festival; it's not sold out, there's huge controversy over Jay Z & the weather could decide whether the festival has to scale back it's growth in future years as another year like last year could have a further knock-on effect on next years ticket sales.

It won't ever return to the old days, but it might just trim the tourists out & it would be a better festival for it.

Some interesting points here. I've been to the festival with a friend almost every year it's been on since 1992, and to be honest I think there's still a lot to like about it.

The weather's bad more often than not, but it's still like a magical village that just arises out of nowhere. I love the ambience of the festival, and think the non-music acts contribute to this (circus field, alternative futures), and I think things really come alive at night. The line up is (usually!!) pretty strong, and it's an incredible chance to catch up with / discover a wide range of bands at once and not just mainstreamers you could catch anytime on the telly. 

I don't generally agree with the nostalgia for the pre-fence days. The fence around 1992 wasn't very effective, and whilst some of the fence-jumpers were very likeable student-on-a-budget sorts, there was also a hard core who came to with no money and seemed to spend a lot of time robbing tents and starting fights. Some of the music press seem to have idealised the 'good old days' of the festival by suggesting that an element of violence spices up a festival and makes it somehow more 'edgy' or 'real', and I couldn't disagree more. No I don't go to the festival to get beaten up or have my stuff nicked or listen to morons who can't hold there drink having a scrap and upsetting other festival-goers. That's not radical or free, it's just stupid and ugly, and historically that sort of thing did happen more as a result of mass fence-jumps and consequent overcrowding.

The main things I think need changing at present are: slightly lower gate price (I can afford it but a lot of younger festival-goers can't), and the numbers need to be capped at around 120,000 - otherwise the site gets too overcrowded and when it rains the festival turns into a series of dense queues moving slowly across slippy metal roadways / quagmires trying to get from one stage to another.

They could also maybe cut the number of novelty acts / child entertainers. Yes, we all liked Rolf Harris, the nation's favourite uncle, but Shakin Stevens??? Gilbert O Sullivan ???   Garlic Bread??? - come on, guys, stop taking the piss - this is Glastonbury, not Butlins.

I think the Jay-Zee thing has been exaggerated, and regret the debate about whether disliking rap or R 'n' B makes someone a racist or not. I'll take a look at him out of curiosity and decide for myself: it's a perfectly valid genre of music, if not one I  usually like much personally, but he may turn out to have something special so let's see. I am a bit curious that in such an eclectic festival he's been billed as a headliner on the main stage when there are about 16 other stages he could have had.

For those of you who've never been to the festival in good weather, I have to say it's a whole different experience. Main difference is you can sit or lie on the grass, and don't spend all day standing up. The difference between a wet Glastonbury and a dry one is very similar to the difference between wintre and summer: in good weather everything just becomes a lot easier and less messy.

Anyway, have a good one

Dave

Dave F wrote: I don't generally agree with the nostalgia for the pre-fence days. The fence around 1992 wasn't very effective, and whilst some of the fence-jumpers were very likeable student-on-a-budget sorts, there was also a hard core who came to with no money and seemed to spend a lot of time robbing tents and starting fights.

There was but the festival also had it's mix of weird & wonderful folks who are now excluded.

Dave F wrote: Some of the music press seem to have idealised the 'good old days' of the festival by suggesting that an element of violence spices up a festival and makes it somehow more 'edgy' or 'real', and I couldn't disagree more. No I don't go to the festival to get beaten up or have my stuff nicked or listen to morons who can't hold there drink having a scrap and upsetting other festival-goers. That's not radical or free, it's just stupid and ugly, and historically that sort of thing did happen more as a result of mass fence-jumps and consequent overcrowding.

I'm supprised the reaction is like it is tbh.

I love hip hop but not a fan of Jay Z. i am just supprised that people just move to somewhere else instead if they dont like it.

Thats what i'm going to do.