Confusions

[thewho rocks <leb905@yahoo.com>]

>exaggerations about how many times The Who have comeback and how many
orchestras have accompanied us. On this latter orchestral point I think
they have confused Roger's and my solo work for The Who - now is that a
mere technicality?

This is an interesting point of confusion.  DOES The Who exist as a
separate entity from it's component parts?  

There's been some clear indication that Pete can never escape The Who,
as he is so often identified as the only member who counts--meaning his
body of work as a guitarist, composer and songwriter are what makes the
band successful, and that Daltrey, Entwistle and Moon would be easily
interchangable for say, the Deep End Band.  

Roger rather took people by surprise with the DST tour, but from all
indications, he slid into somewhat the same position as Pete.  With
competent musicians behind him and a recognizable style, somehow he
became indistinguishable from The Who--whether Pete was present or not.

We've yet to see John take on this role, but some of his music is as
easily identifiable with The Who as Pete's, and there are songs where
his bass is more important than the lead guitar.  You'd suspect that
with the right backup he could pull off the same trick.  (Anybody want
to hear "Heaven and Hell" orchestrated?--sounds good to me.)

Is it true that all three of the principals have had separate solo
careers, but as soon as they drift ever-so-slightly toward Who-related
projects, they can somehow BECOME the band within critical perceptions?
 In retrospect, it was pretty hopeless to expect the Quad tour to be
seen as anything less than The Who out on the road again.  ;)   


LB    

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free!
http://photos.yahoo.com/