York Battle of the Bands photo from 1990s - can you spot anyone?
WHERE are they now?
That's the question we are wondering as we look at this photo from 1997 outside York Barbican centre.
The Press photo shows contestants in the Inter-Schools' Battle of the Bands contest.
It was the second year the competition had been staged at the prestigious venue.
From 1996 onwards, scores of talented young musicians took to the stage to show off their musical skills.
Winners won fantastic prizes including studio time and gigs across the city.
Recognise anyone here? Did any of these bands or musicians make it big. Get in touch via the Send Now tab at the end of this article.
Battle of the Bands contestants outside York Barbican in 1997 for the inter-schools contest. York Press photo
Recommended reading:Popular York band announce new album and gig in the city
Solving the mystery of why these rock legends were busking in York in 1980s
If you love delving into York's past and seeing photos and reading stories from yesteryear then make sure you check The Press every day for its regular nostalgia stories. And don't miss our eight-page nostalgia supplement every Wednesday in the paper.
We also have more than 3,000 members in our online nostalgia group on Facebook, Why We Love York - Memories. It is free to join and you will find us at www.facebook.com/groups/yorknostalgia/.
It would be great to see your old photos of York - and they don't have to be from centuries ago. We all love seeing old photos from our recent past, and some of our more popular stories with readers date from the 70s, 80s and 90s.
Send us your Battle of the Bands memories
And don't forget, if this photo brings back memories of York's Battle of the Bands please get in touch via the Send Now tab below...
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
Gay influencer couple Probably This broke up. The response is alarming at best.
Are we, as a society, OK when relationships ending on any sort of stage sends ripples across tens of thousands of people eager to engage in an algorithmic bloodletting? If you've spent any amount of time on the internet, you've probably heard this one before: Internet couple attracts an audience. Internet couple breaks up. Former internet couple's followers try to figure out who gets custody in the split. There's several somethings to be said about living your relationships Extremely Online in an attention economy, and they mostly boil down to this: Influencers are not your #RelationshipGoals. We were reminded of that again recently. On Aug. 16, influencers Probably This – a couple comprising Matt Armato (bald) and Beau Ciolino (not bald) – published a now-deleted video announcing they broke up after 12 years. I found their Instagram account in the depths of my 2020 pandemic doomscrolling and clicked the follow button for their design, renovation and decoration of a charming New Orleans home. Five years later, they've called it quits, but cited an enduring mutual respect and care for each other as they move on. (Armato got the Probably This TikTok account and Ciolino got the Instagram.) From one bald gay to another (though, I promise, not exclusively because of that), I empathize with Armato, whose clear discomfort was the impetus for the audience to scathingly pick Ciolino apart. Accusations of cheating, assumptions about open relationships and critiques of their differing demeanors (Ciolino seemed bubbly in a nervous way; Armato appeared quietly devastated) filled the comment sections of the now-deleted video. The discourse is discoursing, which prompted Armato to post a story highlight to his Instagram page. 'I know the video has sparked a lot of reactions,' Armato writes. 'Please know that there are no teams here. I see your compassion and I appreciate it, but if your support for me looks like tearing him down I don't want it.' People break up. The internet has changed what that looks like. People break up. Everyone does that. But the internet has changed our relationship with how relationships conclude, and it leaves us all spinning through the vacuum where there should be space, peace and processing. Because Armato and Ciolino made a living, at least on some level, by putting their relationship online and commodifying their personal lives, they felt they owed it to their audiences to explain their separation. I'm not part of their relationship, and I don't pretend to be an expert on either one of them. I've followed their content casually at best. But like Facebook rolling out legacy pages for dead users, we're still in the nascent stages of an internet that continues to redefine itself and the relationships around us. As a result, we're not thinking about what happens when a relationship publicly implodes, and our mileage in the aftermath may vary. In this case, we've gone from tablescapes to tribunals. I live for the mess. But we're not entitled to any of it. Admittedly, I live for it. I also desperately need us all to collectively march out our front doors and touch the nearest patch of grass. Perhaps it's that when gay audiences see gay people in relationships, they receive outsize attention and parasocial projections both on the relationship as a concept and also the individuals within them because of the representation the community sees from them – especially considering the historic lack of representation we've felt in spaces that were not ours to create. But, gay people set conveniently aside, the thematic thread in any kind of online relationship is that we're buying what they're selling in an economy predicated on attention. That comes with the highs and, for the more patient among us, the perceived ultimate low: the breakup that unfolds just as much online as the relationship did. Everyone loves a messy fight – at least, at my messiest, I'd water the sidewalk if it meant I could be nosy about an argument down the street – so social media is an ideal front porch to eavesdrop in real time as people and relationships unravel. Still, our parasocial relationships with these couples threaten to (and often do) shift our role as passive observers into active participants. We're not just watching and liking. We're commenting and taking sides in a void of context. Our currency becomes zingy reads and memetic reaction images and backhanded messages of support for one person or the other. That can't be healthy for any of us. Not for an audience that misunderstands our place in a relationship that has invited us in as casual observers. Not for a couple or content creator navigating a difficult space that sees their comment section revolting against the absence of a relationship that doesn't exist anymore. And not for the people somewhere in between, navigating a spew of videos by and about couples who aren't together anymore. What do influencers actually owe you? It's easy to wave this off as a piece of non-reality – it's not real and can't hurt us – but as our younger generations continue to experience higher levels of isolation, the internet grows as a bastion of community and connections, and thus the real-world impacts become more undeniable. The internet is real and it can hurt you. Perhaps there's some schadenfreude there in getting to see the walls crumble down and reality peek through. Real relationships and real people are deeply complicated, take a metric ton of work and you are not promised your idea of success. Seeing that stripped away thrills us because it's a reminder that the influencers who dupe us into buying their display of perfection are not all they pretend to be. It's fine to admire what you aspire for. It's good, even, to identify and appreciate that you have representation. But also accept that you are only getting the version of the story influencers choose for you. This is an attention economy, and they benefit from obfuscating the truth. It should not stop us from pursuing our own and living our lives defined by our own rules. The reality is that we never should've been idolizing relationships like Probably This – or the people who actually live them – to begin with. Otherwise, we're living in a digital panopticon of our own making. Did that former influencer couple ever really owe anyone the truth? And are we, as a society, OK when relationships ending on any sort of stage sends ripples across tens of thousands of people eager to engage in an algorithmic bloodletting? Probably not. Drew Atkins is an opinion digital producer for USA TODAY and the USA TODAY Network. Reach him at aatkins@
USA Today
3 hours ago
- USA Today
Steelers welcome legendary band Linkin Park to practice
The Pittsburgh Steelers had some special guests at practice on Tuesday — none other than the legendary band Linkin Park. One of the greatest rock bands of their generation, Linkin Park had a front-row seat to intense action at practice — with Pittsburgh Post-Gazette's Brian Batko reporting that Aaron Rodgers played a role in their attendance. Linkin Park's Mike Shinoda, Brad Delson, Joe Hahn, David Farrell, Colin Brittain, Alex Feder, and Emily Armstrong — the new co-vocalist following the late-great Chester Bennington's passing in 2017 — had a show later that night at the Pittsburgh Penguins' PPG Paints Arena, part of their From Zero World Tour. Their next stop is Nashville, Tennessee, at the Bridgestone Arena on August 21, but the Steelers won't forget the surprise appearance of the iconic Linkin Park. The Pittsburgh Steelers will need to shake off the starstruck nerves in a hurry, as they travel to take on the Carolina Panthers in their preseason finale on Thursday, August 21, at 7:00 PM EST — which you can learn more about here. For up-to-date Steelers coverage, follow us on X @TheSteelersWire and give our Facebook page a like.
Miami Herald
3 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Mr. Darcy isn't fiction's hottest man, says ‘Moderation' author Elaine Castillo
Elaine Castillo made the Financial Times' "30 of the Planet's Most Exciting Young People," and her debut novel, "America Is Not the Heart," was named a best book of 2018 by NPR, Lit Hub, Kirkus Reviews and more outlets. Her new book is "Moderation." Here, she takes the Book Pages Q&A. Q. Please tell readers about your new book. I keep saying "Moderation" is a novel about two people who are wrong about the genre the story of their lives is being told in: one thinks he's in a corporate espionage revenge thriller about the collusion between the tech industry and the rise of the far right, the other thinks she's in a gritty immigrant drama about content moderators and racialized labor in the post-2008 economic climate-and actually, they're both in a Jane Austen-style romance. The novel's main character is a content moderator, essentially one of the frontline workers of the Internet: she filters through the most harrowing extremes of violent content, every day, so that civilians like us don't have to see that content in our Facebook feeds and Instagram grids. Then, one day, she's offered a mysterious and lucrative position as an elite moderator, for a cutting-edge virtual reality landscape… and the rest of the book unfolds from there. Ultimately, it's a novel about labor, harm, and love as a practice of world-building, love as maybe the most sci-fi fantasy idea of all. Q. Is there a book or books you always recommend to other readers? Recently I've been recommended "War and Peace"-I know, I know, but if it makes you feel any better, I just finished the copy my dad and I bought when I was in high school, so take your time-but Tolstoy's takedown of Napoleon and the whole Hegelian Great Man theory, his excoriating view of the dictatorial temperament, his capacious interest in the fullness and meaning of the world-I'll paraphrase what Clifton Fadiman says in his beautiful intro to the Maude translation, which is that Tolstoy knows much, but it's his love for what he knows that makes his knowledge live for us. And something else in this novel that I hold to as well: that the battlefield, the politics, the history, the "war" of "War and Peace" is not separate from the salons, the ballrooms, the romances, the friendships, the domestic squabbles, the "peace" of "War and Peace." A lesser writer would see genre hierarchies between these two sides-would be afraid of spending so much time on Helene Kuragina's salons-but Tolstoy knows this binary is silly and false, and makes for a smaller mind, a poorer vision, an untrue world. Q. What are you reading now? Currently in the middle of reading Karen Hao's "Empire of AI" and loving it. Q. How do you decide what to read next? I think it's completely instinctual: in fact, I think while writers are often asked what they read before writing their latest novel (what their influences were going into it, that kind of thing) I think it would be better to ask writers what they read right after turning in their manuscript. Because for most of us, it's the practice of writing itself that shows us what we were trying to do, the ideas we were circling around-we find out in the writing. It's the books we're instinctively drawn to afterwards that are often revelatory, because usually we're subconsciously being drawn to things that might illuminate what we've just done, the world we've just come out of making. And I think that's especially true if you, like me, are the kind of person who chooses a book seemingly completely different from the book they've just written. With my first novel, about a bisexual Communist exile living in the Bay Area, the first book I read after turning in the manuscript was George Eliot's "The Mill on the Floss," which I thought would be totally different from the world I'd just written: rural England, siblings, class and coming of age in the 1800s, complete 180, right? Well, it turns out "The Mill on the Floss" is a Filipino family drama, as far as I was concerned. And I wouldn't have known that if I hadn't been mysteriously drawn to that book! So listening to your subconscious attractions is invaluable, as a reader. Q. What's something – a fact, a bit of dialogue or something else – that has stayed with you from a recent reading? The death of a particular horse in Émile Zola's "Germinal," which I re-read for the first time in 20 years. I originally read it in French at university, and sobbed then. This time I read it in English-because there are certain scenes that are omitted in some English translations, which I find politically telling, and was curious to know if this one would translate those scenes (it did)-and thought that scene wouldn't hit me as hard. But I found myself sobbing all over again. It's one of my most beloved books, and yet I also think of it as a great cautionary failure: a book that's also about the failure to integrate personal repair with collective repair, a book that's also about how the failure to make our interpersonal relationships less fascist will prevent us from making a world that's less fascist, a book that's about what happens when love has no place in one's revolutionary hopes. Reading "War and Peace" and "Germinal" side by side is illuminating in this regard. Q. Do you have a favorite book or books? Either of the two mentioned above ("War and Peace," "Germinal"), but a new favorite has been "Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers." I got into Tolkien for the first time last year, and completely fell in love with the universe, with his essays (have been recommending "On Fairy Stories" to everyone I know), and am beginning a campaign to convince people that Faramir, not Darcy, is the hottest man in English fiction. Q. Which books are you planning to read next? I want to finish "Empire of AI," and then I'm looking forward to reading an early galley of my friend John Freeman's "California Rewritten"; he's such a brilliant, incisive and poetic reader, editor and writer, and truly one of the best Californian dog people I know (as a Californian dog person, this category is of paramount importance to me), and I can't wait to dive into his take on Californian literature. Q. Do you have a favorite character or quote from a book? Right now, it's Faramir in "The Two Towers": "What in truth this Thing is I cannot yet guess; but some heirloom of power and peril it must be. A fell weapon, perchance, devised by the Dark Lord. If it were a thing that gave advantage in battle, I can well believe that Boromir, the proud and fearless, often rash, ever anxious for the victory of Minas Tirith (and his own glory therein) might desire such a thing and be allured by it… But fear no more! I would not take this thing, if it lay by the highway. Not were Minas Tirith falling in ruin and I alone could save her, so, using the weapon of the Dark Lord for her good and my glory. No, I do not wish for such triumphs, Frodo son of Drogo… For myself, I would see the White Tree in flower again in the courts of the kings, and the Silver Crown return, and Minas Tirith in peace; Minas Anor again as of old, full of light, high and fair,"-and this is the part that really gets me!-"beautiful as a queen among other queens: not a mistress of many slaves, nay, not even a kind mistress of willing slaves." I think what gets me is the fact that Faramir sees the liberation of his people, his city, only as a collective, shared liberation; that a liberation that comes at the cost of oppressing someone else is no liberation at all. Wise words for our day. Q. Is there a person who made an impact on your reading life – a teacher, a parent, a librarian or someone else? My father was the person who gave me my first book, and turned me into a reader, and then into a writer. He was the only person I shared this love of reading with-no one else in my early life was a reader-and his loss was the loss of an entire shared world. But I glimpse that world again every time I read. Q. What's a memorable book experience – good or bad – you're willing to share? I am a complete horror scaredy-cat-my friends know I've watched all of Kubrick's films EXCEPT "The Shining," all of Hitchcock EXCEPT "Psycho," et cetera. I've been wanting to watch the film "Audition" for over 20 years and can't bring myself to because I'm too scared. Now full on bloody, gory, violent fight scenes, like in Park Chan-wook films: totally fine with that. But a door creaking before a jumpscare? HARD NO. That said, I read one of the most magnificent-and magnificently terrifying-books recently, Susan Barker's "Old Soul," which is just the most stunning exploration of time, immortality, harm, desire, evil. And while it fully terrified me, it also made me curious to maybe dip a toe back into the horror genre. A thrilling reading experience, which has creaked open (eek) a new door! Q. What's something about your book that no one knows? Maybe how much it owes to the spirit of a film I love, Akira Kurosawa's "Red Beard," on the long afterlife of curing and being cured - what it means, to be a doctor. The book mentions Kurosawa films, including "Red Beard" -though it would be a spoiler to say which Kurosawa film is William's (secret) favorite, but I leave it to Kurosawa fans to guess! Another film I love (and in which I found resonances with "Moderation," despite watching the film only after writing it) is Kenji Mizoguchi's "Sansho the Bailiff"; a wondrous films about what harm, repair, and justice actually look like over the course of a life, and what we do with power once it comes into our hands. Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
