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

Re: the Man WHO Wrote the SOUNDTRACK of OUR LIVES; thanks keets!



Somehow, I don`t think they`ll prove Pete`s a child molester because there`s
nothing to prove. There are numerous reasons why he most likely isn`t, and
as one of them I`d like tomention because I don`t think it has been yet
mentioned on this list: Pete is a parent himself. A father of three (or
four?). His son is 12. I`m sure he has babyhood and childhood pics of his
own kids. Wonder how he would feel if someone found those pics sexually
attractive - and put in the *right place*, they would be. Oh no, what I`m
saying is actually not one of the reasons. It`s logic. It`s also a proof, if
somebody needs it, that Pete is *normal* (i.e. not a man who finds children
sexually attractive). Somehow, I know Pete is what he says he is. And he
isn`t what he says he isn`t.
----- Original Message -----
From: "L. Bird" <pkeets@hotmail.com>
To: <thewho@igtc.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: the Man WHO Wrote the SOUNDTRACK of OUR LIVES


> >We shouldn`t judge or sentence Pete. Yes he`s lost the way he was dear to
> >so many people.
>
> Maybe not.  I'll accept that Pete had real reasons for wanting to know
what
> was on that website, and I haven't really changed my opinion of him
because
> of it.  And I won't, unless it's absolutely proved beyond a shadow of a
> doubt that he's a child molester.  Somehow I just can't see that
happening.
>
> But be careful, Pete!  From now on, I would guess the authorities will be
> watching for some other mistake!  They tend to harass people they suspect.
>
>
> >ARTIST may be gone or imprisoned or forgotten better still, but if his
art
> >is true art which the art of Pete Townshend and of the Who undoubtfully
is,
> >the ART goes on forever, renewed by new perception and understanding.
> >Someone on this list (I think it was Joe Levinsky) once asked me how
could
> >Pete be separated from his art. Simple as that.
>
> I don't think you can do it.  When you see the art, it's separate from the
> man, but when you look at the man, there's no way to separate him from his
> art.
>
>
> >millions of people all over the world, who of you would want to be said
> >about by thousands of people: "Joe Lewinsky (Scott Schrade, Keets, Jim
> >Sigel, Helen, Johanna, mc...) is in me, a part of my life, a true part of
> >me?"
>
> Everybody I meet becomes a part of me, because they influence me in some
> way.  Also, we tend to be influenced more by someone we admire.  We study
> what they do, and try to emulate what we like.  This shouldn't be a huge
> burden to Pete.  I don't think anyone here is going to try heroin just
> because Pete did.  But they are likely to have a second look at his
> understanding of God and the Universe.  It's an interesting philosophy.
>
>
> >No matter what Pete Townshend has ever done or will do, this doesn`t
> >make you either a better or a worse human being, for it doesn`t really
> >matter if Pete gets higher or falls on his face in the mud, you don`t
> >follow him in either direction *allthough you think you must*.You`re
free,
> >you`re free, you`re your own not Pete`s, he never asked you. He never
said
> >he wanted to be the foundation of your life, it`s main theme, it`s only
> >purpose, the only one who could light yer way...
> >Well... okay I`m stoppin`, but for that one moment, *stand inside his
> >shoes*, and you`ll understand how he must be feeling. Don`t be hard on
him,
> >let him just be Pete Townshend, and if you love him, just love him the
way
> >he is.
>
> That's a good thought.
>
>
> keets
> P.S. Well that`s true that in a sense everybody we meet becomes a part of
us, and we can`t control it; we in our turn become a part of them. Ever
thought of it: the crowd a musician faces when he comes out on stage becomes
a part of him, though he may not know any of the people in person. And it`s
also true that art and artist are forever connected, like creator with
creation and parent with his child. what i was trying to say wasn`t "just go
pretend that pete has nothing to do with all that who stuff...", it rather
was "once something is created (a song, a poem, a novel, a painting, a
whatever even not so artistic, like a sweater, it starts living a life of
its own, separate from the one who`s the original author! )" Many of you
here are people of art, almost everyone`s a musician. I have my art, too. I
know (I do hope I know) what I`m sayin.
Summing it up, we live in a world of duality, and sometimes what is yes here
is no there. A lot of things are this way but few. Duality is a natural
feature of things. No, you can not separate the artist from his art. Yes,
you can. These both statements are true.
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus