A good ol' fashioned debate! Or three?

["Mark R. Leaman" <mleaman@sccoast.net>]

> There are several symbols for domestic violence within TOMMY, so I don't 
> think the details are terribly important, just the violence and the 
> resulting alienation.

Keets:

Of course, the details aren't important because basically it doesn't matter
how Tommy "got there," he had to be seperate from society in order to
become Pete's vehicle for social commentary.
But you raise a point...violence in the story. OK, I agree with you...but
apart from the killing of the lover (or father if you're talking about the
movie version), which is the reason for Tom's withdrawl, there is none
before he becomes deaf dumb and blind. Or am I missing a disc?
There's plenty of violence afterwards, from Ernie's rape to Kevin's
beating, and let's not forget the followers at the end...who, depending on
how you read it, either kill Tommy or make him physically deaf dumb and
blind (my own belief).
Please show me anything you've found pre-withdrawl that leads you to see it
as violence which relates to the withdrawl (or not; what the Hell). I feel
like I'm missing something, and I've been listening to TOMMY for 30 years.

> To date, DALTREY is still the best solo album Roger has released

My vote would go to McVICAR.

> would say "I'm a fan of The Who" when what they mean is "I know lots of
> people who like The Who, so I pretend to to fit in." like people do with
The
> Beatles.

Emmy:

I think I could live with that.
Seriously, I don't think that would happen for the very same reason it
never did: The Beatles are, for the most part, no challenge to enjoy. A
good bit of their music is happy Pop Rock, easy to hum or sing along to.
Most people can understand the messages (as such) right away. It doesn't
take a lot of effort to appreciate them.
Townshend's songs, from SO onward at least, have levels and more meaning
than even he seemed to be aware of. For that matter, even My Generation and
AAA were more than they appeared on the surface. I could even cite some of
the songs he never released, like Melancolia and You Came Back. Who else
was writing about reincarnation in 1966??? Melancolia illustrates a deep
understanding of the feelings you have when left by someone you deeply
love...as opposed to The Beatles' songs on the subject, like Baby's In
Black or For No One (their best on this subject IMHO). They seem to me to
be no more than a statement about it, and they don't touch me the way
Pete's song do.
The point is that Pete is an intellectual, and even though I believe at
times he did his damnest to keep it at bay so he could write some hit
songs, it comes through. And I would never say that Lennon/McCartney
weren't better music-writers (for the most part; Townshend definitely had
his moments), and along with that I'd have to say Dylan is the greatest of
the lyric-writers...but at the same time, I'd declare that Peter Townshend
was the best at both together, and the ONLY songwriters I think even came
close (so far) are Andy Partridge of XTC and Ray Davies (however,
inconsistantly).
IMHO, of course.

> Then people would stop appreciating masterpieces like Tommy and
Quadrophinia.

I don't know that they do as it is. It doesn't seem like it.

> It's still a good idea, tho.

Donkey-shine.

> tears people up.  Remember Carol O'Connor's public statements re his 
> son's death and his suit against the drug dealer?  O'Connor says if you 
> love 'em, go for it.

Keets:

But that's blaming the wrong thing. To paraphrase: "Drugs don't kill
people; people kill people." Any other idea is ridiculous. Many, MANY
people have been successful drug-users for decades, contributing to society
and having happy and useful lives. They are unable to publically admit
this, given the current anti-intellectual climate (the same one which
allows the GOP to entrap and railroad the President), but it is still a
fact. Keep in mind that only the failures make the news, and that's a very
small percentage.
O'Connor was a good actor on AITF, but as a social commentator he shows a
basic lack of understanding. I'd love to ask him why an alcoholic (which
means constantly drunk) can hold a job in this country, but if someone
smokes a single joint within 60 days (and not on the job but in their
private life) he/she can be fired on the spot. And no one seems to think
there's anything wrong with this.
No WONDER there are so many Beatles fans!!!