HummingPolice&I'm One with a new material tour

["O'Neal, Kevin W." <Kevin.ONeal@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>From: Sroundtable@xxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: Happy Jack/Hummer commercial
>
>I guess Pete isn't involved in the current SUV debate,

Shame Pete feels it's ok to just give his songs to any product.
I wonder if there even exists a line that can be crossed.

>or else he supports consumer's rights to own them by licensing Happy Jack to Hummer.

You mean like a property owners right to clear-cut their property?
We are all just caretakers of our planet.  There is no such thing as unlimited rights.

>From: TigerPurr1@xxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: Getting Into (or sick of) The Who
>
>Just curious as to why you think the Police would have had such a lofty 
>position if they had stuck around.

After Synchronicity (1983-4) there really wasn't another band out there that could compete with The Police.  They were on top.  The only thing missing was *longevity* "on top".

>They were good, but in the late 70's/early 80's 
>they had tough competition from the Clash,

Tough competition from the Clash?  Not even.  The Clash wasn't even close to the popularity of The Police.  The Clash was much more genre specific, while The Police crossed those lines.

>Mellencamp,

Please.  And, yuck.

>Tom Petty,

Good, but not as popular as The Police 

>Prince,

The Police were not pop mainstream like Madonna or Prince.
That's what made them sooo good.
Prince?  Um, ok.
 
>Springsteen,

No comment. 

>Talking Heads,

Too genre specific to garner wide popularity. 

>U2,

Yes, U2 would have given them a run for their money.  But, U2 was in it's infancy when Sting stung The Police and killed them.

>Whether any of them made it isn't my point, 
>just that the Police did have the competition and why you think the Police 
>was far above the others.

Based on what I've written above, I obviously disagree with that statement.

>Debbie
>Tiger  

Grrrrrrrrr.    ;-)

>From: Joe Lewinski <lewinski@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: Sick of Who, Johnny, Lifehouse, Hershey , Backing tracks, TKAA, Mainstream Pete, 
>Quad Fall,  I'm One
>
>I only attended the Camden show in 2002, but felt like I was at Hershey, and
>Mansfield II because of the encore series.

Got to wonder what became of the DVD intentions for Mansfield II?
I've got my own 'Magical' theory.

>TKAA:
>I am really looking forward to the TKAA DVD.

I just ordered mine.

>It's definitely a Who Fall.

Eh.

>Mainstream Pete:
>Most women I know don't consider Pete as a sex symbol
>like Sting, or Eric Clapton, and I believe this is a big part of his 
>failure to make
>solid progress in this market segment.   IMHO, he's better than both combined.

Agreed on both parts.
I also attribute his lack of success to the vast departure of his solo material from his guitar slashing, smashing, violent persona of The Who.
It's such a Jeckle and Hyde thing.
I just wonder if people buy expecting one thing, and then find another.

>Quad Autumn:
>
>Kevin:    I read your post that you look forward to playing Quad while driving
>through the Fall and letting the melancholy bath over you.   I enjoy this too.
>It used to be unsettling, but now I actually enjoy opportunity for reflection.

It really is quite a powerful piece.  One that does give opportunity for serious reflection.  It's one of the best ways for me to 'get in tune'.

>I'm One:
>it
>was a special moment, and I knew that I was helping Betty through a tough
>time with some help from Townshend.

You're a good man Joe.  But, we've always known that.
It's a tough thing to be there at the 'end' for someone.  Emotionally draining.  A bit frightening.

On another "I'm One" theme,...my boy recently turned 1 year old.  
I put a picture of him up on my office door with a sign that read "I'm One!"
No one here (at work) gets the double meaning.
<sigh>

>From: Joe Lewinski <lewinski@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: Did Someone say Who Tour? Read till the end 
>
>Scott wrote:
 >>  Actually, they need to just stop altogether.
>
>Scott:  You can't really mean this, can you?    You
>would deny friends the opportunity to get together
>and play music and have fun?   Come on...

I'm of the same frame of mind.
Another tour of no new material, in my book, is pointless.
But, I will miss the pre-show gatherings.

>From: "Schrade, Scott" <sschrade@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: Did Someone say Who Tour? Read till the end
>
>I mean, if they're somehow able to scrape together a new album, then OK.

Yeah, I'd be excited to see that.

>But I'm not sure if I'm really jonesing for them to take
>to the road next summer to do yet another tour, playing the same old songs.
>(Conversely, if they did tour I'd probably buy tickets for multiple shows!)

I'm afraid it's at the point that it would be fodder for industry jokers.
The critics would rip them apart.

>It's all starting to feel diluted, like
>the '89 tour.

Yealp.

>From: Ken in MD <seahawkman2001@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: <I'm One>
>
>but if
>they don't garner some of this psychic momentum and
>lay it down on a record a great opportunity will have
>been missed.

Really?
Funny.  I was just thinking the other day that the opportunity had already been missed.
I think the momentum is now gone.
If there *is* any sort of momentum, it's not even *close* to what it was right after the CFNYC.
*That* was momentum.
John's death really derailed things.
Pete's legal troubles, IMO, killed what was left.

Now, if TKAA DVD really sells, and The Who does go into the studio and comes out with a rocking album full of fresh sounds and thought provoking and reflective material, it (momentum) could indeed take off again.
But no John.
No John.
No John.
That's a tough one to get over.
No John.

>From: Joe Lewinski <lewinski@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [none]
>I showed them the Camden boot I have on DVD
>thanks to this friend I have in New England ;-),

Awww, despite some of the "shit" I post, we're still friends.
That's nice.
;-)

>I said, "...see that guy with his fist in the
>air, that's Scott Schrade.  He went to 3 shows in a row."

I looked!  I couldn't see!
It does show a bunch of footage from our sections though.
What a tease!

>I am looking forward to Pete's autobiography too.

I'm not holding my breath.

>From: "Schrade, Scott" <sschrade@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Joe L.'s Post With the Way-Too-Long Subject Line
>
>You forgot to mention Cake.  ;-/

You said you liked them when I played a CD for you on our travels!

>But Pete's solo
>output (apart from EMPTY GLASS) seems to have rubbed the public the wrong 
>way.

No, no rubbing the public the wrong way with Empty Glass.
I believe that despite the great songs on that album, the homosexual debate that ensued after EG, contributed to Pete's solo demise.
Our ignorant country wasn't ready for that sort of honesty.

>I mean, *I* like his voice, but I don't 
>think he has a strong enough voice to be a hugely successful solo artist.

Really?
Hmmm.  I've always thought it was great.  I've never thought it was a detriment.

>I have a nagging suspicion that Pete's autobiography is gonna take as long 
>to materialize as Daltrey's Moon bio pic.  

Yealp.

Kevin in VT