Horse's Neck

[Jacksonjim@aol.com]

WFang said on Nov. 12:

.I think Pete should do what he does best: write and perform >MUSIC..

Fang is dead on.  This book is Pete's attempt to become his conception of the
serious artist.  He's still trying with his move toward grand theatre.
 Pete's collection of short stories reads like a prose writer's first,
amateurish works. Very unrevised (like a lot of recent Stephen King...no, I
don't want to get us off on that track).  If Pete weren't Pete, I doubt this
collection would have been published.  But I think Pete found writing the
book very cathartic (I believe it coincided with his psychoanalysis).  You
know, in Freudian terms, the horse is a symbol or representation of the
penis....


Jim

Also, Fang is right about Marsh's book being rushed and unfinished. I get the
feeling that he felt compelled (from Pete? from his editor?) to take the Who
story up to the then-present. I doubt he actually wanted to since his
feelings about post-Moon Who are fairly negative