Re: Who Comeback? No.

[Legalize Adulthood! <legalize@xmission.com>]

In article <199411020659.AA27339@IndyNet.indy.net>,
    Kyle Ewing <kewing@indy.net>  writes:
> One of my favorite WHO quotes is Pete saying "The Who is a bloody wild 
> animal and it has to be fed chunks of raw meat and Southern Comfort.  It 
> can't feed on anything less."  Also, "There is no supression within the 
> group.  You are what you are and nobody cares.  We say what we want when 
> we want. . .  If we wre not like this it would destroy our stage 
> performance.  We play how we feel."  Both are from the liner notes in _The 
> WHO-Thirty Years of Maximum R&B Live_.

I agree with these sentiments, and yet...

> It would be rediculous for a 40 something year old to write something
> like "I hope I die before I get old" and mean it.

Write perhaps, but perform, I don't think so.  One of the things I've
always said myself was that "there's no point in growing up if you
can't be a kid anymore", and I think that I truly "hope I die before I
get old" in that sense.  I don't want to be a boring old fart, EVER.
I think youngness is a state of mind and not a marking of the years.

> To carry on as The Who would be a serious mistake to me, kind of like the 
> Eagles tour or the Robert Plant/Jimmy Page "Led Zep" thing.  THE WHO died 
> with Keith Moon.

Hmm... although i don't want to see the aging rocker reunion type crap
either, you have to admit that some acts are able to continue without
becoming parodies of themselves.  The Stones still manage to rock the
crowd, as they recently did in Salt Lake City where I live (they
hadn't been here since 1966!!).  I guess this is why I am disappointed
with the "Join Together" performance... its too much like listening to
Who Muzak.

However, I have to disagree with the idea that The Who's energy and
style died with Keith Moon.  As I said in a previous post, Kenney can
and has kicked ass with the best of them, and the music definately
rocked, just in a different way from the way Keith would've rocked.
But I think there would be even LESS respect for KJ's drumming had he
attempted to immitate Moon instead of find his own style that fit within
the emotional juggernaut that rears its ugly maw when The Who are in
their prime performing condition.

The fact that Pete can still rock and perform without becoming a
parody of himself is readily apparent by looking at the Pete Townshend
Live video where he performs Psychoderelict.  What I think holds Pete
back from performing at his best is when he feels that its just a 60s
rehash retrospective like it must be within the context of a Who
concert.  In his solo performances, he picks and plays "Who Classics"
because he just plain wants to; its not expected of him.  I think Pete,
and the rest of the band, have always cared deeply about the fans and
never wanted to disappoint them.  They know that if The Who played a
gig they couldn't leave out "My Generation" or "Magic Bus" because too 
many fans (and critics) would be so disappointed, so they plod through
it even though they may be bored to tears with it and hate it by now.
(Didn't John say in 30 yrs how much he hated Magic Bus because it was
15 minutes of B, B, B, B, B, or something to that effect?)

> I would love to see Townshend, Daltrey, and Entwisitle 
> work together in the future, perhaps writing as the people they ARE, not 
> what they were.

Agreed!

> Daltrey's "Rebel" from UNDER A RAGING MOON is a perfect 
> example of the type of thing I would like to see from the New Who.

Hmm... with the exception of McVicar, I always ignored Daltrey's solo
stuff as I didn't listen to The Who for his voice, but for Townshend's
songwriting sung by Roger.

> Some background info. on me:  I'm 25 years old, loved THE WHO since I was 
> 15, and feel like I've outgrown what they've done so far.  I stopped 
> relating to most of Quadrophenia after I entered college, and now enjoy The 
> WHO's later material and Townshend's solo material more than anything.

Some background info on me: I'm 29 years old (almost 30!), loved The
Who since I was 15 8-), and am surprised at how every once in a while
I get back into my "who phase" and listen almost exclusively to The
Who for several months.  In all that time, I have yet to tire of the
music, and I'm really at a loss to explain why!  Most things that I
get repeatedly exposed to I get tired of.

Perhaps its because I still find new ways to relate to the music (after
all, when Townshend was 30 he was writing/recording Who By Numbers) and
still find new things I like about the music, even after having
listened to it for 15 years.  I still love The Who in the way I still
love Bugs Bunny: they're both enjoyable when you're a kid and when
you're an "adult", but for different reasons.

That's how I know when I've hit on real quality entertainment: it lasts
through repeated viewings and takes on different meanings as we go
through life because it has value on more than one level.  Why is it
that my legs are thrust involuntarily into motion when I watch The Kids
Are Alright for the 50th time?  Its certainly not because I'm a
testosterone-laden teenager.
						-- Rich
--
http://www.xmission.com/~legalize	Legalize Adulthood in Utah!
legalize@xmission.com