The Who's reputation and No lies

Marcus Surrealius bushchoked at
Sun Jul 11 12:05:03 CDT 2004

> I don't think the band is a laughing stock. 


Ah, but it is. Many, many jokes have been made about

> C'mon, you're going to lump the Drifters in with The

I'm not going to disregard what The Drifters
contributed to music. But more importantly, they are
the epitome of the "Oldies Show & Revue" mentality.

> I mean I see your point, but I just can't let it
pass as a viable statement on Roger and Pete 

It's an example. Plenty of other bands do it too, it's
fairly common. So, the question is: Do you consider
The Who to be common? I don't, or didn't I should say.
Using CD titles like Then And Now, like they were
Slaughter or something, plus going out diminished,
plus the things you cite as all adds up to
something, doesn't it. And it ain't pretty.

> You mean you're still hung up on that?

Well, I'm not "hung up" about anything, really. I am
merely pointing out the things I hear when I mention
The Who. I'd rather the guys don't do things that add
to this, especially as obvious and easily avoided as
the ones we're debating here. You know, consider being
more than just a Rock band, the things Pete talked
about in interviews before the first break-up. He had
the vision then. What happened?
It's OK for some people to rise above the masses.

> And I suppose this is the real issue then. Your
expectations. You're welcome to them. The Who meant
something to you beyond their music. And you hold them
accountable to that standard. That is your right. But
you are doomed to disappointment.

Aren't The Who more than just music to you? Were they
not the standard-bearer for Rock music? Were they not
above and beyond for decades? I suppose I am doomed to
disappointment as they've seemed to drop their
standards and become just another aging average band.
It's sad, really.
Perhaps the difference between us here is how much
regard we have for the band. The Who gave me these
expectations by setting a higher example. I'm not
bothered by having higher standards than, say, a
Journey fan.

> A lot of bands and musicians meant a great many
things to people in the 60's and 70's.

Are you going to lump The Who in with "a lot of
bands?" I think they stand above that. Or...used to,
anyway. Now they're more like Spinal Tap or The

> But for those that survive, the world has moved on.
Only those that died in their prime will always remain
in that state. 

Not really. It doesn't HAVE to be that way. Some
people with standards never compromise them. What
would be wrong with acknowledging the fact that
without John, they no longer have the essence of what
made their music special? Page and Plant were smart
enough to see that (and act accordingly) for instance,
and with a lot less reason. John Kay as well.

> I allow them the right to change their spots without
judgement for the sake of loss I feel when I think of
so much talent that never wrote or performed again. 

They have the right, and I have the right to be
saddened by the lessening of their stature.

>You speak of a lot of bad judgement. Does that mean
you judge the band directly?

I judge their actions directly, in the greater scheme
of things. The Who had the opportunity to stand above
them all, to one day be considered as people now
consider Beethoven or Mozart. But not if they end
their career running around on Oldies Show Revue
tours, like what's left of Sugarloaf and Iron
Butterfly do...pretending they are what they were.

> I was trying to say, watch what you say about the
South. I'm a Southerner.

As am I. Which gives me the perfect right to say it.
I'm in the most progressive area in South Carolina,
and the stereotypes are all here in full force and
much worse out in the hinderlands of the state. Not
only that, but I've traveled the South fairly
extensively...from Virginia to Louisiana. I know of
what I speak.

> And they refuse to let it die or change. I am not
one of those Southerners. Our numbers are growing.

I see these old feelings lurking, waiting to come back
out. America is being herded back toward the 50's
mentality. Racism is OK if you call it "quotas" or
"Affirmative Action," it seems. Or if it's directed at
Arabs or Mexicans. Civilization is back to "them or
us," instead of trying to raise everyone to a higher
level. Understanding a different culture is ridiculed.
We used to be scared by the "Commies" but now it's the
"Terrorists." If you're not a Christian, you're scum.
It's like they're trying to wipe out the 60's, when it
comes down to it. And THAT would by its nature include
the influence of The Who's music.

> Nope.  This is entirely wrong.  The very instant the
polls closed in Florida's eastern time zone the
networks leapt to project for Gore in a frenzy not to 
get scooped.


As usual, you don't know what the Hell you're talking
about. Even the website attempting to debunk Moore's
film had to admit:

"NBC called Florida for Gore at 7:49:40 p.m., Eastern
Time. This was 10 minutes before polls closed in the
Florida panhandle. Thirty seconds later, CBS called
Florida for Gore. And at 7:52 p.m., Fox called Florida
for Gore. Moore never lets the audience know that Fox
was among the networks which made the error of calling
Florida for Gore prematurely. Then at 8:02 p.m., ABC
called Florida for Gore. Only ABC had waited until the
Florida polls were closed."

I told you before: I don't lie. I don't need to. It's
a non-issue pumped up to appear as one. Round One goes
to Moore. The other "exposed lies" on the website are
likewise constructed and accurate.
Now, could it be that Pete Townshend's feeling he was
"bullied" by Moore be as artificial?

"What is life choices about?"
  George "what am reality" Bush

Cheers         ML

Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! 

More information about the TheWho mailing list