Re: The Women of Pete

[JB2TheWho@aol.com]

Dave -

In response to you comments (a small sample of which are cited - BELOW), I
have two simple thoughts -

1. You are clearly extremely WELL-INFORMED and I would be very much surprised
if anyone could take issue with your recollection of facts and, indeed, the
usefulness and interersting nature of those facts as you have shared them!

2. Having said that, I would (with all due respect) disagree with you to a
certain degree but only with regard to the subjective "spin", or conclusion
you have drawn from certain aspects of those facts.

Of course, as with anything "subjective" in nature, an interpretation or an
opinion is just that -- one is not necessarily anymore valid than another --

Personally, one of the most personally confounding things I have ever come
across, in all of pop culture, really, is (what I see - again, JUST MY "TAKE"
on it, nothing more) the astounding degree to which a number of very
intelligent and otherwise very clever people have trouble, similar to that
which you articulated (see below), with regard to Pete's reaction to events
at Cincinatti.

To my way of seeing it, and my reaction has remained solidly unchanged over
the passage of time, the reaction PETE had to the whole thing was one of the
most profound, sincere and astonishing such reactions I have ever come across
from any sort of artist or celebrity to a public event of some contraversy!

SO why do I feel this way, or just WHAT is it I am referring to?

Well, when you think about it, there were probably more than a dozen possible
ways in which Pete could have reacted to Cincinatti, any one of which would
have struck the perfect "A & R Man's" ideal of just how a rock star,
desireous of perserving his future in rock and roll, as just the ticket. And
as I reflect upon it, I can just see MICK JAGGER or David BOWIE or, to scoop
really deeply into the gutter, Michael Jackson --- being in Pete's posiition
and mouthing perfectly just that sort of reaction, precisely of the sort you
found lacking in your assessment of the whole thing.

The reason for this, I believe, is no coincedence at all. And it is no
surprise thsat the "proper" and "acceptable" reaction", as an ideal, remains
remarkably similar even across cultural/social/racial/sexual/age group
boundaries.The reason for this remarkable synchronicity <g> is simple -
Anyone with half a brain (and ALSO half a conscience) would know a
potentially career-ending disaster when they see one and go running into the
corporate arms of the A & R men with all possible haste, having the articular
of "the proper response" as not only the foremost, but indeed, THE ONLY thing
whatsoever on their minds at the time.

So I look at PETE's reaction. And, indeed, at first "take", I reacted in a
manner not unlike your own. Sort of saying to myself - "hey, this is bloody
cold" or something to that effect. But I also know what a painfully sincere
and utterly dedicated artist TOWNSHEND really is, and it starts to dawn on me
that the ONLY "sincere", ergo heartfelt, reaction someone like PETE could
possibly have to something like Cincy is exactly the reaction he displayed.

In other words, at a time of potentially career-ended crisis, I can't think
of ANY rock star, other than perhaps Bob Dylan and of course, Pete, who would
have had the intregity and the compassion to totally eschew the dozen of
"proper" and formulated responses, and instead do what Pete did (in other
words, take the lives of those fans which were lost too seriously, affort
them too much respect, to sit back and mouth off the sort of concocted
response which, alas, we are ALL conditioned to expect in such times.

I will hasten to grant you that Roger did come down with a serious/serious/
serious case of "FOOT IN MOUTH" diesease at the time, which didn't help
matters at all! But them Rog has NEVCER pretended to be especially articulate
or even "deep" (and that very quality is exactly what makes Roger Daltrey so
totally "for real" as well).

Pete is a a gifted, almost sublime, master of words and communication, and
there can be no doubt that he was/is more than capable of knowing what to say
to "get off the hook", and to even appreciate the benefit to his career of
saying it.

Instead we get, from this very, very, very DEEP and SINCERE man the ackward
cadence of pure thoughts with an absolute refusal to just "write-off" those
lost lives by dismissing them with some formula response. Real thought is, of
course, by defination, utterly naked, stumbling, uncertain, which is why our
pop idols so rarely, IF EVER, let any of us come even close to hearing their
REAL feelings.

PETE is nothing is not subtle, and the more I thought about it, the more I
began to not just understand, but to openly ADMIRE Pete's reaction to Cincy.
(In my own humble opinion, of course), by refusing to "play it safe" by
putting some some great bloody "act", laced with sorrow and contrition (and
the pressure to due so much have been utterly CRUSHING, especially after
ROGER's rather appalling public gaffe), and instead really respecting the
lost lives and aspirations of those dead kids by refusing to mouth the usual
Corporate bulls#@t but reacting from the heart (and mind), Pete was utterly
devastating in his sincerity and profoundity.

Of course it looked bloody ackward, as well as though he had become thicker,
rather than smarter, over the passage of ten years of so of celebrity (which
you alluded to in your comments). And I'm sure that Pete Townshend knew this
at the time, or very shortly thereafter. That all just makes it even more
remarkable that he continued to speak from the heart, which was, perhaps, the
finest and most moving thing he could of possibly done for those kids.

They risked, and ultimately LOST their lives, and PETE in turn was
unyieldingly willing to risk and, perhaps, even lose his fame and celebrity
(and let's not forget MONEY - I know MICK and most of the others would NEVER
forget thier MONEY in such a crisis), and I don't see that there's anything
much greater than a fella can "do for his mates" (or fans)!!

Well, it's just an opinion.....

Regards,

JB2TheWHO!

In a message dated 97-07-23 09:17:29 EDT, daelliott@lucent.com (Dave Elliott)
writes:

<< of that work.  Sally Simpson was a great view of the complex relationships
 between famous people and obsessed fans, all wrapped up in a neat little
 story.
 
 I'm not intending to dredge up old arguments, but I find it interesting that
 the 24 year old Pete Towshend can witness such an event, and write an (IMO)
 incredibly insightful account/commentary of the whole scene (obsessed young
 fan, disapproving parent, attempt at a brush with stardom meeting an
 inevitable end).  In contrast, ten years later, the events at Cincinnati
 end up in a song about Pete (as pointed out by Alan here and by others to
 me in email) from the context of how he was affected.  Perhaps it was
 because he didn't actually witness the Cincinnati tragedy, or perhaps 10
 more years of rock and roll had changed his perspective, or perhaps it was
 just because during the period from 75 to 82 he wrote mostly about himself.
>>