[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The Who by Numbers



In a message dated 04/05/2002 5:55:07 AM Central Standard Time, 
TheWho-Digest-Owner@igtc.com writes:


> Of course, Townshend was battling a 
> severe alcohol addiction at the time, while Keith Moon was busy driving 
> Rolls 
> Royces into garden ponds, but those facts alone can't excuse the numbing 
> mediocrity of tracks like "Squeeze Box" and "Slip Kid." By Numbers would 
> have 
> been a weak record by most bands' standards, but the fact that the mighty 
> Quadrophenia was released barely two years before makes it seem even worse."
> 
> Weak by most bands standards??? Maybe it just needs some drum machines to 
> make it "better."
> 
> - --Mike
> 

Slip Kid mind-numbing?  What's wrong with this guy?  Squeeze Box is simply a 
fun song with a country sort of sound not meant to be anything more (despite 
the obvious sexual innuendo).  See, this is what I think gets Pete so 
infuriated with the music world sometimes.  He blows everyone away with 
Tommy, WN, and Quad- then when the Who makes a conventional album with just 
good songs and no revolutionary theme or musical innovation- he gets slammed 
by critics.  I actually prefer Squeeze Box to YBYB.  In any event, there is 
nothing wrong with putting a fun, mindless song on an album now and then.  Do 
we need to be intellectually challenged on EVERY song?  What does the 
reviewer think of mindless pop numbers like "I wanna hold your Hand" or "she 
loves you," or "Can't buy me love," or "hard day's night"???????  I'm not 
criticizing these songs, but they are no more meaningful or thought provoking 
than the other million songs about guys who love girls.  I don't hear people 
ripping the beatles for these?  

mc