Why should you despair?

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

>
Why Should I Care?

I have to comment on this. I feel I need to talk to Pete, really, and while
I could EMail I doubt if he'd get it before the tour ends and he needs to
hear this NOW. I don't know if it will get to him; I tend to doubt it as we
are the setlist tapers, it seems. But who knows if there's a lurker who
might get a message through or someone on the tour monitoring. And if not,
well there are thoughts here that it won't hurt to share...well, maybe I
will send it to him anyway. Who knows?

>
There was not a trace of any benign and unconditional spiritual energy.

Pete:

It might be you didn't get the energy on stage. But that doesn't mean it
wasn't there. Your music, even interpreted by The Who, is as moving and
spiritual as music gets. Like U2's stuff before Rattle And Hum, it's an
undercurrent that eventually sweeps the listener away without conscious
knowledge. It's subtle yet persuasive.
A fan since Tommy, I have been to four Who shows over the years: 1975, 1989,
1996 & 1997. Atlanta will be my fifth. I have never felt the desire to
follow the band, just experience the magic from time to time. And magic
there is at every show. Raleigh 1989 had a moment at the beginning of Behind
Blue Eyes, as the audience sang along quietly. For a moment, I felt I was on
LSD. Immediately I knew that 45,000 minds were all in the same place, if
only for a moment. And what is more spiritual than that?
Benign? Certainly. Unconditional? You inspired it, so I suppose not. Are you
feeling guilty for inspiring us? We're not ALL beerguzzling Led Zeppelin
fans out for a Who night to prove Zep was the better, you know. Some of us,
at least, have been moved by your music. All of us in some way, I'd say.
Please don't judge us by our worst and loudest representatives. We don't
like them either.

>
your job before you come and see us (except for all those Trust-Fund misfits
who follow us around the world in a kind of trance, trying to find a
Grateful Dead family vibe, that of course doesn't apply to The Who.

I agree with you to some extent, but I also realize those who follow are
dazzled by the light. In a world of mediocrity, a live Who show is pretty
damned extraordinary.

>
can we truly respond to the simple gift of well-wishers showing up? Do they
expect a funeral or a baby-shower?)

They expect you to move them. We, I guess. We expect you to enjoy yourself
and if you aren't, then don't feel you have to do this for us. It's great
when you do, but you don't have to.

>
'home-cooked' meals. If the most glamorous woman in the world presented
herself to me for sex and romance I would be unable to demonstrate even the
slightest enthusiasm (this is not a challenge, I have one lover and want no
other).

No road romance.

>
but something that needs to be LIVED? There is no fan or critic who can give
an answer, unless Rock is not Rock but ART.

Rock is Art, to varying degrees. Yours approaches high Art (Quad made it,
I'd say. Lifehouse).
Again, just because there's Loverboy and Lynyrd Skynyrd doesn't mean all
Rock music is shit.

>
Condition Number One: Some expert Who fans taped a proposed song list on the
room door of each of us at our last hotel. Several things go through our
minds at such times. So, you know precisely what rooms we are in? Can we
have no secrets? Will you not allow us even the pretence of privacy?

Once again, I ask you not to judge us by our least admirable members. I have
had many opportunities to meet you over the years, but passed because I do
value your privacy. Most of us feel as you do about this. The fact that
there are people trying so hard that they annoy or frighten you bothers us
perhaps more than it does you, because it means we are misjudged as a
result. The innocent paying for the crimes.

>
 In any case do you really think that because you ask nicely in envelopes
and not by e-mail we will respond to your requests? Do you think I should
care what you want to hear us play? Why should I care?

Perhaps you shouldn't. I don't care what you play. I have my preferences, of
course, but will accept what you offer.

>
 Explain to me. I really need to know.

You already know.

>
Hey, you can't explain, can you? That was my genius, recognising that
frailty in 'you' when I was just a kid. My genius today is seeing that you
want to have some influence over us, however tiny, to obviate your apparent
powerlessness.

See? You knew. Most of us have rather mundane lives and the idea that you
could find one of us as special as we find you via your music is rather
intoxicating. Also there are those who "keep score" by various methods, like
collecting or contacts or attending record numbers of shows.

>
But powerlessness is good

This is true. If we felt powerful we probably wouldn't find you as
interesting. Are we not interesting in our powerlessness? We're all sparks,
after all...

>
what is going on. Why? You have become more than fans. You are critics,
through the miracle of e-mail!

Who taught us to be critics, Pete? You called the Beatles music "crap" in an
interview (I'd agree in the case you were speaking of) pretty early on. You
have always been vocal when it comes to music.
You set a fucking high standard for Rock music. Hell, you turned Rock N Roll
into Rock yourself! It's understandable that we find most other
bands/artists wanting.

>
I accept that; if I do I can then advance my argument that what I do is art.

There you are. You have to accept your music and words are Art.

>
 I have no control over it. I am powerless to affect its course.

This is not true. You have total control. If you wanted to tour MY
Generation and the material previous to it, the shows would go on.
Smokestack Lightning, anyone?

>
Art is like life, it rolls by unhindered.

Art is controlled by the artist.

>
How can anyone in their right mind describe previous Who tours as 'bloated',
or 'self-indulgent' when they were in fact natural acts of artistic
attrition and compromise?

One "Pete Townshend" fact remains when others could be argued: you are your
own worst critic/enemy (same thing, really). You were the one who spoke of
Tommy live being a cabaret in 1970. The Who on ice is another term. Bloated,
perhaps, for those who prefer your way of adapting the music to three
instruments with no overdubs in a live setting (my preference). I didn't
find either tour so, although it worked better for Quad IMHO. "Self
indulgent." Nah. It's not like you took Pearl Jam and went on a Who cover
band tour, like your friend Jimmy Page. THAT is self indulgent. And a joke,
IMHO.
You do what you want. We'll either like it, or not. That is not your
problem. It's ours.

>
Why is this tour so utterly cool (apart from the odd out-of-date fashion
accessory or misplaced wrinkle) and all those that have gone before such
mistakes?

It's seen so because The Who is the greatest stripped down band in the
world. To quote Obi-Wan Kenobi: it is your destiny.

>
If The Who had been trotting out this kind of show for the past 18 years
since we quit making records, who would be taking a blind bit of notice
today?

If you were doing an oldies show, no. If it was new material, it would
depend on the material. Your performance is the only constant.
Damn, as I write this Pinball Wizard just came on the radio. Wonder what
that means.

>
Not a single journalist feels that this mechanism is worth a serious or
uncynical mention. Maybe nobody knows

WE know, and have known for months. And we appreciate it, even if the
mainstream media do not. We wish you weren't so negative about The Who and
could find joy in it, but then you wouldn't be you, right? And we'd rather
you were the person you are. No matter how much shit we get from others
about it.

>
But THIS is hard. It is not hard to be on stage and play that guitar thing,
but to be away from home and family and friends, the familiar things. To
return to a place of hotel-room isolation I promised myself a million times
I would never revisit once I had enough money to stay home.

Of one thing I can assure you: if you want to change your mode of touring,
we do not mind one bit. Small tours, single appearances...whatever makes YOU
comfortable. We will accept it.

>
 Worst of all is to create great moments of art, in performance, and watch
them disappear immediately into the ether, into legend. today that 'ether'
is of course the thin air of free download and rip- bootleg.

This statement is the one which made me feel I must contact you (something
I've avoided for years), and as if I am an equal although I hardly feel like
one: these moments do NOT disappear. For instance I remember in detail how
you opened the 1975 show, my first Who live experience. It was magical and
unmatched by any other band I've seen, and that's not a few. It becomes a
treasured memory and later an EMail legend. Changed my life, it did. Sad as
you might find that.

I hope you get this ASAP, because I fear when you're in this frame of mind
you will beat yourself up more. And it's needless, completely needless.
Don't feel obligated to us, PLEASE! Offer what you can, and don't worry
about the critics either. One of the great things about your writing is your
cynical humor...so apply it here, Okay? So you see the same faces in the
front rows...you would be amused to observe how they scramble to get these
tickets so you will see them! Think of that instead of what they expect from
you. Give them what you want and watch how they jump up and down in glee.
Maybe that will bring a smile to that lonely hotel room.
See you in Atlanta (but not in the front rows). Sorry for being so
long-winded.


"It's hard to be Governor, or First Lady in my case."
        George W Bush, boy genius, Presidential candidate 2000


        Cheers                 ML