Mediocrity and Pete...Pete...I can't say it!



O'Neal, Kevin W. Kevin.ONeal at vtmednet.org
Thu Apr 22 09:16:11 CDT 2004


>From: Alan McKendree <amck at thenetdr.com>
>Subject: Re: FCC indecency crackdown affecting The Who
>
>As Pete-ophiles (hey! anyone ever use 
>that one before?!?) know,

Oh man!  I laughed my ass off when I read that.
But hey!  That's not funny!

>From: Marcus Surrealius <bushchoked at yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: Mediocrity and what's lucky
>
>> At best it sounds like something Townshend
>> would toss aside when it comes time to pick a dozen
>> songs for a proper album.
>
>So, you see, I do see it and so do others.

To use your quote, but this time it's really true....
"That's just one person.  One person."

>The point is: when The Who start doing things other
>more common bands are doing, that's sliding into
>mediocrity. 

Come on (where have I read that before).  Even Roger has admitted that bands their age aren't exactly sitting in the drivers seat.
You don't think Geffin wanted this?
A small price to pay for a large label that will run with their new album full force.

>And, just so you know, even The Kinks
>haven't done this.

As Scott wrote, they haven't done much.

>So you mean Ringo and Paul should tour as The Beatles?
>I mean, the songwriter and singer and drummer are the
>same.

And, don't forget the bassist.
Ringo wasn't a key part of their sound.
And, the best of The Beatles are from the team of John and Paul.
It's not a fair comparison.
The dichotomy is different.

I'm not comfortable taking up this argument.
It *is* different, but I too wish they would tour under another name other than The Who.
I dunno.
It's just not such a big deal to me that it would prevent me from seeing Pete and Roger and Zak perform Who songs.
And, that's what they are.  They are "Who" songs.

>In your opinion. A back-to-back comparison of LAL to a
>2000 show say it all for me. And that's WITH John.

Looking in my catalog for a time machine.
And you say you're not stuck in the past???
Come along and live life in the moment.
It's new.
It's different.
It's obviously very worth seeing and hearing.

Or, just say fuck it and not listen.
"Put in your ear plugs, Put on your eye shades", ....ahem.....I leave it right there.

>But at one time, WMD was also called an opinion.

I don't think there was ever an argument that Iraq had WMD.
Hell, we gave them to 'em!
But, we also had Iraq contained.
Back to The Who!

>..and
>the evidence is just as strong for the mediocrity.

Your 'living in the past' opinion.

>> A Senior moment??  ;-)
>
>A Sunday Morning after partying till 3 AM Saturday
>night moment.

Those can be brutal mornings, unless you're hanging with a good friend named Bob.

Kevin in VT


Confidentiality Notice:
This message, and any attachments, may contain information that is confidential, privileged, and/or protected from disclosure under state and federal laws that deal with the privacy and security of medical information. If you received this message in error or through inappropriate means, please reply to this message to notify the Sender that the message was received by you in error, and then permanently delete this message from all storage media, without forwarding or retaining a copy.




More information about the TheWho mailing list