Re: The Who Mailing List Digest V9 #306

[John Hughes <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

David, re

> > It appears that many of the hardcores on this list feel the band's 
> > legacy was tarnished by the '89 tour. That's your personal opinion 
> > and I respect it. I just don't believe it to be the same for the 
> > masses and the rock media. I think other incidents such as 
> > (Woodstock, Tommy, Quad, Cincinatti and playing on after John's 
> > death) will have a far greater impact on the Who's legacy than
> > the '89 tour.

Well said. For every one who calls the 89 tour "The Who on Ice" there
were hundreds if not thousands who thought it was great.

As far as I am concerned, simply looking at a boot of the show I went
to, they played 6 songs I'd never heard them play before, 1 song I
hadn't heard them play since 1968, and played with verve and vigour
another 23 songs - that's 10 songs more than they played on this tour
just finished in total.

For God's sake, the tour was billed as the 25th Anniversary tour, and
"die hard" fans knew that there was going to be a lot more than just
Pete, Roger and John on stage, so it's almost hypocrisy to go and then
say it wasn't what they wanted.

What I think most "diehard" Who fans who complain about that tour are
really complaining about is Pete not playing electric guitar. And for
them to say it that act of self protection by Pete somehow tarnishes a
legacy is plain dumb - IMO.

The rest of the 10,000 or more who saw each show, as you say, didn't
care, were entertained, enjoyed themselves, and probably were the bulk
of the 10,000 or more who saw the Who on each night of the 96 and 97
Quad tours, and each night of the 2000 and 2002 tours.

For the record, having seen the Who regularly between 1968 and 1973, I
enjoyed every show I've seen since august 1979 with the one exception of
the last half hour of a show in 1981 when Pete was obviously suffering
from the effects of his heroin addiction. 

Cheers,

John