Solo animated dreams...

Jim M NakedI at
Thu Mar 31 07:25:38 CST 2005

----- Original Message ----- From: "O'Neal, Kevin W."

> Yeah, but Jim, you could say that for just about all solo artists.  It's
> always a tug-of-war (do what I want, vs. what the record companies think
> "they" want).
> Those with true success have both.

I don't know about that.  I think you've got two kinds of artists; 
Sales-driven and art-driven.  And, while each artist has some degree of 
both, I think that for many you can say one thing was much more important 
than the other.  Some guys I'd classify as sales-driven are Sting, Phil 
Collins (obviously), McCartney and Clapton.  These guys have never done any 
solo work that you wouldn't call mainstream commercial.  Then there's 
art-driven guys like David Byrne or Mark Knopfler.  I concede that *some* of 
Pete's work has been pretty commercial, but not that much, as I listed 
before.  Overall, Pete deserves to be in the art-driven category because of 
his several projects that were blatantly anti-commercial.  So, I look at him 
as one of the more commercially successful art-driven guys.  By the way, 
there are several totally commercial artists from major bands who've had a 
lot less solo success than Pete.  I'm thinking Jagger and Plant.  I wouldn't 
accuse either of their solo work as being art-driven!

> Pete doesn't.
> And, I'm sure Pete wants it.

Sure he has both.  As far as I can tell, he's only had one "flop" - 
Psychoderelict.  All of his other commercial projects sold pretty well, 
didn't they.  Unless he actually expected Iron Man to sell?  I suppose he 
may have, but c'mon, let's be real, Pete!

> He also wants to be "feared in his <my> neighborhood."
> Ya think he still wants that?  ;-)

Careful what you ask for, right?

> Sunny skies and big mountains here!  (?)

Waiting for the horizontal rain coming Saturday.

Jim M 

More information about the TheWho mailing list