Re: Who at MSG

[John Hughes <john@pureneasy.fsnet.co.uk>]

>From another list I'm on, some somewhat disparate views of the Who's
performance.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

> > On the other hand, I thought the Who were totally lame and 
> > disappointing, turning in Generic Perfunctory Rock Anthems; I mean, 
> > if I never hear Baba O'Reilly again, it'll be too soon. (Nothing 
> > more exciting than watching them stand around, scratching their 
> > asses, waiting for that programmed synth part to cycle around to the 
> > part where they start playing again.) How cool if they could have 
> > pulled out, say, a 4-song set of Kids are Alright, So Sad About Us, 
> > 5:15 or Drowned, and Love Reign O'r Me, instead of the wind-up
> > stadium fodder. I guess the cops and firemen dug it.  As for me-- 
> > yawn. I appear to be in the minority, but-- yawn.  Maybe I've just 
> > seen them one too many times, and know that these are not the 
> > hilights of their live act. (Unless Won't Get Fooled Again is done 
> > acoustic, which they did on the Q'phenia tour, and which was indeed 
> > cool.)

------------------------------------------------------------------------

> > But that's exactly why I think it rocked. I'm soooo tired of those 
> > songs, and tired of people who think of rock solely as classic rock. 
> > But for one night, one place, those four songs were pretty spot on. 
> > 
> > "Who Are You" is a song of defiance (and never rocked this hard 
> > before). "Blue Eyes" was a little obvious, but touching, especially 
> > on the last verse. "Won't Get Fooled Again" -- well, sure sounds 
> > like an anthem in this context...and for a bunch of guys out there 
> > who lost friends and buddies and partners...well, I can see how it 
> > connected.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

> > Against all odds, and after a lackluster start, the Concert for NYC 
> > turned out to be a pretty decent -- and at times inspiring -- 
> > program last night.
> > 
> > It really seemed to move up to the next level after what I thought 
> > was a pretty blistering set by the Who. (Go figure -- people on a 
> > Who message board are complaining about Roger's vocals, Pete's solos 
> > and the song selection.)  Of course, it's almost become cliche the 
> > role the Who play at these things now.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

> > Besides the musical content of the show, the other thing that struck 
> > me -- strongly -- about the Concert for NYC was the politics of the 
> > event. And I mean that on several different levels.
> > 
> > First, let's look at the music hierarchy. If there was any doubt 
> > that Paul McCartney is the most powerful and influential living 
> > musician, it was dispelled last night. (Embarrassingly,
> > entertainment Weekly doesn't even mention him in their annual 
> > "power" issue this week.) Who else could command the last slot of 
> > the evening?  Who else could keep Michael Jackson off the
> > set?  Who else could make the Who, the Stones and Elton John all 
> > accept roles as warm-up acts?
> > 
> > Speaking of the Who, as riveting as their performance was, one gets 
> > a true sense of their relative weight in the industry -- there was 
> > still three hours to go when they started their set! 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Something there for all of us to chew on, I think.

Having watched most of the concert in its UK truncated version - at
least 45 minutes were cut out from what I've been told was the whole US
broadcast - I believe that The Who played an excellent set - for the
circumstances.

That's not to say they could have played a better set, but I think other
comments I've not included about the new material McCartney played would
be mirrored by non Who fans complaining about songs they've never heard
of.

I thought the overall feel of the concert was well intentioned, though a
touch less of the political speechmaking (Hilary Clinton and Patakis in
particular) and a lot less of embarrassingly awful "comedians": that guy
in the red jumper, the guy in the opera suit, Jim Carrey, in particular
could have gracefully made an excuse or two not to be there. IMO of
course.

The films were excellent. I missed Bebe Neuwirth in Woody's vignette,
must go back to that! They showed in particular that it is not a good
idea to let actors out without a script to comfort them. 

And I too wondered where Bruce Springsteen was. It seemed to me that he
would have been the perfect act for the night, genuinely relevant to the
people the event was celebrating, but I thought he was most conspicuous
by his absence.

The concert had its mawkish moments, as did Live Aid and the concert for
Freddie Mercury, but it had its genuinely moving moments too. The family
with Meg Ryan in particular, and the young boy later on; wasn't he on
stage at the finale? 

Cheers,

John