Solo animated dreams...
NakedI at comcast.net
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.
More information about the TheWho