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 lengthy court dispute that he says resulted in substantial losses. The septuagenarian bass player, who founded both legendary British acts, made his views unmistakably evident when asked if he would take 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 ethics count more than the optics of a reunion. Whilst Hook says he remains keen to attend the ceremony, his decision not to perform alongside his ex-bandmates promises to darken what should be a triumphant occasion for two of the UK’s most significant bands.
A Decade of Silence and Legal Turmoil
The origins of Hook’s resentment are profound, rooted in the period following of Ian Curtis’s death in 1980. When the Joy Division frontman ended his life, the other members eventually regrouped under the New Order name, with Hook serving as the band’s bass player throughout their most lucrative period. However, the relationship started to deteriorate when Hook exited in 2007, convinced that New Order had run its course. His departure, he believed, would mark the definitive end of the group. Instead, his ex-colleagues had other plans.
When Sumner, Morris and Gilbert reconstituted New Order in 2011 without informing Hook, the bassist felt betrayed. The decision sparked a lengthy and costly legal conflict over royalties and the band’s name — a battle that Hook asserts cost him the equivalent of six years of his wages. Though the dispute was ultimately resolved in 2017, the psychological and monetary cost has left scars that remain unhealed. Hook has not communicated with Sumner or Gilbert in 15 years, and his interactions with Morris has been limited to occasional contact over the past four or five years, offering scant opportunity for healing before November’s ceremony.
- Ian Curtis died by suicide in 1980, leading to Joy Division’s breakup
- Hook left New Order in 2007, convinced the band had run its course
- Remaining members reunited without Hook in 2011, triggering legal disputes
- Settlement reached in 2017, but interpersonal bonds remain fractured
The Onboarding Nobody 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 presence will be a mixed experience, marked primarily by recognition of the historical importance of Joy Division and New Order than by any sense of genuine connection. The bass player has been clear that his attendance is motivated by reasons completely distinct from his distant band members. “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 monumental influence 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 uncomfortable situation for all involved. What might ordinarily serve as an chance for contemplation 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 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 Terms for Resolution
When pressed on the prospect of reconciliation, 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 of earnings. I’m really sorry about it. We should maybe have just had a chat about it.” The bassist’s flat tone when describing this imagined meeting made clear that such an apology stays squarely within the realm of fantasy. Without genuine acknowledgement of the harm done and the monetary cost extracted, Hook appears unwilling to consider the prospect of reuniting.
Yet Hook hasn’t completely closed the door on the possibility of future peace, recognising that people is unpredictable and feelings can change unexpectedly. “So you can’t say for certain, dear. Life is full of surprises. I’m sure that could be a wonderful one,” he said with typical wryness. The bassist made 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 reconciliation—something that seems unlikely before the autumn ceremony.
Conflicting Statements from Each Side
Whilst Peter Hook has been direct and explicit about his rejection of involvement in any reunion event, his ex-band members have presented a markedly separate public stance. Bernard Sumner, Stephen Morris and Gillian Gilbert have predominantly refrained from comment on the matter, neither confirming nor denying their intentions for the November induction ceremony. This imbalance in messaging has created substantial uncertainty about how the event will unfold, with Hook’s uncompromising stand contrasting sharply against the subdued tone emanating from the other three members. The missing coordinated statement from New Order suggests either a deliberate strategy of restraint or a underlying disagreement about how to manage the circumstances publicly.
The distinction in their public communications reflects the broader chasm that has emerged between the parties since their split in 2007 and subsequent legal entanglement. Hook’s willingness to speak candidly about his complaints stands in sharp opposition to what appears to be a tendency from his past associates to let the matter rest. Whether this quiet reflects an attempt to preserve dignity, prevent additional disputes, or merely progress ahead without rehashing old grievances is uncertain. What is evident is that the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame admission will take place against a backdrop 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 Case and Diminishing Prospects
The shadow of Oasis looms large over discussions of possible rock reunions, yet Hook’s circumstances differ significantly from Liam and Noel Gallagher’s latest reunion. Whilst the Gallagher brothers ultimately reconciled to a functional partnership after close to thirty years of acrimony, Hook looks far less willing toward such an outcome. The Oasis comeback showed that even the most contentious band relationships could be mended, particularly when economic incentives and public sentiment coincided. However, Hook’s principled stand indicates that monetary considerations and nostalgia alone cannot bridge the chasm created by what he views as a core betrayal during the 2011 reformation.
Hook’s conditional language—implying a reunion could happen only if Sumner offered a genuine expression of remorse—points to a glimmer of possibility, though his sardonic tone indicates he holds little genuine expectation of such an overture. The bass player has spent years working through the emotional and financial fallout from the court battle, and that accumulated grievance seems to have hardened into something less susceptible to the sort of commercial pressures that could otherwise force a reunion. Unlike Oasis, where each side ultimately recognised their common heritage and mutual benefit, Hook seems determined to safeguard his principles more than anything, even if it entails sacrificing a possibly glorious occasion at one of rock music’s most prestigious ceremonies.
- Hook stresses ethical principles ahead of financial gain in his refusal to reunite
- The 2017 court agreement settled financial matters but not emotional wounds
- Genuine reconciliation would necessitate remarkable admission from Sumner