Re: Irvine review from the Orange County Weekly

["Brian Cady" <cadyb@home.com>]

I have been reading all the reviews I've been sending to the list and so far
I think they've broken down into two categories:

1) Reviewers who go to see The Who just as a rock & roll band and rate them
on how well they play and how exciting the show is.  These reviewers, in
almost every instance, love the new tour and think the band is doing a great
job.  The only quibbles I've heard is that Roger's voice isn't quite up to
it.

2) Reviewers who go with a lot of "ought's" and "should's" about The Who.
All of these reviewers once loved The Who (including the one in the Orange
County Weekly) but they don't like the present Who because they violate
what, in their opinion, The Who ought to be doing; such as, "The Who are too
old to tour," "they should have broken up when Keith died," "they shouldn't
have  toured without new material," "they should play more obscure stuff,"
"they shouldn't sell their songs to commercials," "they shouldn't charge so
much for tickets," etc.  These reviewers have already decided on the quality
of the show before they even see it based on their preconceptions.  The only
problem with that is that their opinions are worthless to anyone who doesn't
share their "ethical standards" but only want to know if the shows are good
rock & roll or not.

        -Brian in Atlanta
         The Who This Month!
        http://members.home.net/cadyb/who.htm