Re: Empty Glass

["Jim M" <petenotped@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- From: "Schrade, Scott"

> But this inevitably leads to the unpleasant theory that Pete completely
> fucked up The Who & sealed its fate when he signed his solo deal & tried
> to juggle both.  Daltrey was right (again!) to be upset when he saw Pete's
> better songs going on Pete's solo albums rather than Who albums.  Pete
> nourished The Who in the beginning & Pete eventually starved The Who at
> the end.  <sniff>
...
> This is all starting to seem like an "Imaginary Tale" from a comic book!
> WORLD'S FINEST:  "What If.....Batman Married Lois Lane!!!"

Don't you think that's fun?  It is imaginary, but I do think it supports
what you said about Pete starving The Who.  There was plenty of good "Who"
material available at the time.  More than in the mid '70s.  By Numbers has
always been my least favorite Who album, and I love Pete's soft solo stuff.
It just didn't work with The Who for me.  Who Are You works much better for
me musically, but a lot of the songs are about Pete's creative process and
the future of rock (Guitar And Pen, Music Must Change, Sister Disco).  Those
songs really stick out to me as Daltrey singing Pete's ideas.  The best Who
songs make you feel like Roger's breathing life into Pete's words, but not
those.

So, yes, Pete starved The Who of material by putting more creativity into
his solo career than the group.  I never really thought of it like that,
because I saw it more as his writing changing in a way that didn't really
suit the band.  But your analysis shows that they really could have put out
one hell of an album in 1980, if they had been able to keep focussed on The
Who.  But, hey, with everything that had gone on, and how long they had been
doing the same thing, we're lucky they survived at all, so I'm not
complaining.

Jim M