Paul Weller's Refusal To Reform The Jam

Discussing a Jam, surely one of the most loved Brit bands of all time, reforming, Paul Weller said this: ""I take my hat off to people like the Stones but it's not for me. I couldn't do that. Jagger is brilliant and long may he rock. I couldn't make my career out of old songs, it would do my head in. We haven't had 30 years of us continuing making lousy records, which is the case for some bands. No way would it happen. You can't recapture those things, and also why should you? It would be absurd – three 50-year-old geezers jumping around the stage."

I don't see this at all. For one thing, Weller jumps around as a solo act, what's the difference between doing that as a solo act and doing it with Rick and Bruce, I mean, except setting his old buddies up for life? For another, he plays his old Jam songs all the time, how would it hurt him to do it again? 

Really, does Paul think of the Clash had reformed for a gig (before Strummer died) it would have been nothing more than an a nostalgia trip? The Clash, like the Jam, have a deep lustrous catalog that could survive and thrive on a revisit. These are Wellers greatest songs, and I write that as a man with no problems with his solo career. Indeed, my admiration is boundless.

But it is pure hubris to ignore your greatest achievements because you don't wanna be an oldies act. Nobody is saying give up on his current music to tour for three months as the Jam. He is a prolific songwriter, write some new songs, I hear no great difference between his solo work and and the Jam (solo not Style Council).

In the end, he maybe doesn't like the his fellow band mates and doesn't need the money so fuck it it, right? So why not just say that?