the previous digest

[dana hartwell deer <deerdana@dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu>]

> This is incredible.  When a song like "Cache Cache" becomes revered and held
> up a sample of brilliant songwriting I just scratch my head.

I guess it's like Pete's attractiveness, it works for you or not. "Cache Cache"
works more (at least to me) as a poem than a song, but I think the music helps
to bring out the lyrics. The music per se isn't that wonderful, granted.

> Sorry about that subject, but you people got on my nervs! As I've already
> said, PLEASE do not compare bands. That's simply disgusting!

Right on, bro! One big thing that really drives me away from alt.music.who
is how they'll take these things and run with them forever. In fact, one
problem with alt.music.who is they get in this very argument for weeks on
end over and over without focusing on more Who-specific material. The Who
vs. Zepplin debate is a drug. It seems like an interesting little topic to
conjecture on, but soon it grows into a heated obsession. People forget about
things like the upcoming Who tours and what beer Pete drinks and talk
endlessly about Who/Zepplin comparisons. But once you realize it's gotten old,
it's too late. You can't stop. You have to have more and more Who vs. Zepplin
until it feeds on you and ruins you. This habit must shaken! Don't listen to
the Who vs. Zepplin pushers!

> The depth and honesty of Pete's emotional and spiritual expression in his
> music is probably what attracts most women.  Most women are in seek of the
> elusive emotional/spiritual connection with a man, not a superficial, sexual
> attraction to physical appearance as most men seem to be.  The beauty that
> Pete creates with his music is far superior to any physical manifestation of
> beauty.

 The more I look back on it, the more I realize that my "Petelust?" post was
uncalled for and very rude and arrogant. As a straight guy who doesn't
understand why any guys at all are attractive, I shouldn't have made that
post. Really, I was just very amused by all of this Pete competition, and
was just sort of thinking, "Pete Townshend? Really? Golly. I must be ignorant."
And I am. I can't say that all the response hasn't been interesting and
informative, though.

> 	I just got out of the hospital, so this may be the cyclobenzaprine 
> talking, but for cryin' out loud! If someone asks me why, why do have a 
> thing for this Townshend character? I tell them three things: 1) he'd be 
> interesting to talk to, 2) he's a genius 3) I want to lick his nose. 
> No further pontification required. 

He does indeed have a big nose, but it's not what you've got, it's how you
use it. Or so I've been told. 

>         I am rather toughy about the Who and other bands. I think it's just
> that I am sick and tired of all the people who recognize the Stones, the
> Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, and Led Zep, but say,"Who?" whenever I say,"THE WHO".

The Who really don't get enough credit. The funny thing is, though they don't
have the popular recognition of their attainments they deserve, they have a
remarkably loyal following among people who actually play music seriously
themselves. Which speaks a lot for the merit of The Who. Plus, in terms of
the way music history remembers its children, it's not the popular ones that
get remembered, it's the ones who all the greats who follow point to as their
inspiration. Give it a few hundred years, you'll see.

> P.S.It's true though, Page and Hendrix are better lead guitarists,but Pete's the
> LOUDEST!!!!!!

And "lead" ain't all there is to it. Much of the rhythm guitar Pete plays is
dang near impossible, suffice to say no one else in the world has built nearly
the technical skills in those areas as much as Pete. But Pete's lead guitar
stands up to those guitar giants, in my opinion, at least when Pete hits 
fusion with his axe. For instance, I recently got the full (not the cheesy
PBS version) TYMR&B video. The beauty and brilliance of his meoldy lines in
"Music Must Change" and "Love, Reign O'er Me" is astonishing!

> Subject: Re: Tommy Live and Studio

Tommy live is awesome. But the studio version has those very satistfying
full, rich, layered guitar sounds and is great album to sink into the
groove of the music and let your mind float away on. One way to look at
it is that the album is the music, and the live performance is the
expression of that music.

- -Hart Deer
(deerdana@dekalb.dc.peachnet.edu)