RE: Quad vs. Lifehouse and are they really painted clowns?

["L. Bird" <pkeets@hotmail.com>]

>	[O'Neal, Kevin W.]  Quad was the same way for a long time.  Like I said 
>above, I don't feel like there was an understanding of Quad until the movie 
>came out.

I thought the play was clear enough--it just required a little too much 
attention span.  The basic flow of ideas in the previous incarnations was 
fine, too.  Pete just has a little problem with plot, like he says, but it's 
not really necessary for understanding the ideas.


>	[O'Neal, Kevin W.]  Wow.  I find the concept and storyline to be 
>incredibly interesting.  It's visionary, and cuts to the very soul of 
>music, religion, social unrest, and everyone's desire to find nirvana.  
>It's about what rock and roll *means*, how it affects us all, and what it's 
>potentials can be (if you believe).  Unfortunately the play doesn't do the 
>concept justice.

All of it's in there, but I agree that it could have been more elegantly 
written.


> > , & CHRONICLES isn't the cohesive representation it was meant to
> > be.
> >
>	[O'Neal, Kevin W.]  Was it meant to be a cohesive representation, or just 
>finally, a collection of all the tracks/demos/works that *make up* 
>Lifehouse.  If it was to be cohesive, it *did* fail.  But, I believe it's
>just a collection.

Me, too.  Seems like a review of the process to date.


>	[O'Neal, Kevin W.]  OK, let me be the one to tell you ;-).  I used to not, 
>but now (for the last 5 or 6 years) when I hear a Lifehouse song, I *do* 
>place it into the context of Lifehouse.  For the *not*-so-casual Who fan, 
>the concept (or existence for that matter) is well known.  For the casual 
>Who fan, the concept (to a lesser extent) and existence of Lifehouse is now 
>being known.  I see the unavailing (even though it's not 
>complete......BRING ON THE ROCK OPERA!!) as the bridge to the past.  The 
>long lost tapes.  If Pete would put out a coherent Rock Opera, and then a 
>movie on top of that, the world would go "Aaahhhhhh, so this is what it was
>all about.

In order to understand Lifehouse, I do think folks have to make a 
distinction between the sixties Lifehouse, the seventies Lifehouse and 
Lifehouse 2000.  The ideas and philosophies differ enough to make them 
separate works, and the concept really DOES get confusing when you try to 
squash all three together.  Pete has gotten more cynical and disillusioned 
as he's gotten older, and even if the plotlines remain similar, the 
philosophies don't match up well at all.  It's like the continuing saga of 
Lifehouse in three volumes.

I wouldn't be adverse to hearing a rock opera, or musical theater, or 
whatever, for each avatar of the thing.  All done by The Who, of course.  
That's a lot of tours, but hey, we all enjoy those, don't we?  :)


keets
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com