Re: Sea and Sand

[mleaman@sccoast.net (Mark Leaman)]

>   Yeh, I think there is an unfortunate and weird generation gap going on
>between '60's Who fans and '70's Who fans. The Who I remember played small
>clubs and were right in my face. And they were hungry, moody and easily
>provoked. And they were Great! The Who in the 70's had it made. Huge
>stadiums, 5 trucks of equipment and, probably, an in-house accountant.
>Still the best band in the World, but something had changed.
>  "Tommy" was the masterpiece of the old Who. "Who's Next" and
>"Quadrephenia" always seemed to me to be the product of  suddenly wealthy
>superstars trying hard to improve on perfection. I don't know. It's just a
>thought...


Dennis:

Does 1969 count in as a `60s Who fan? If so, then I barely made it.
Just an aside; ELP in 1974 had nine tractor-trailers of equipment. The Who
had only 5?
I must disagree with you a bit here. I think that TOMMY was the beginning of
the "new" Who...the more adult, serious Who. Tackling subjects like murder,
homosexuality, abuse, being physically disadvantaged, spirituality (which
had been touched on slightly in Rael, but oh so slightly), and so on. A far
cry from deodorant commercials or masterbation or going to see your baby on
a Magic Bus.
I did not have the chance to see them live until `75, it's true. And if
you're talking about JUST the live shows, then I cannot speak to that.
But I don't think there's a gap between `60s and `70s fans (especially if
`69 counts as `70s). The Who grew...and no band can be what they were, once
they make it big.


                   Cheers                   ML

"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity."  L. Long