PatonthebackLifehouseTourNoJohn *ISABEL*

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

>From: Joe Lewinski <lewinski@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: HummingPolice&I'm One with a new material tour 
>
>I really don't want the pats on the back.

I understand.
I'm not too good at taking compliments either.
Haven't had much practice lately.  ;-)  

>From: Sroundtable@xxxxxxx
>Subject: 2000 Lifehouse Tour?
>
>> Lifehouse '99-00
>
>This is the first time I have heard the 2000 Tour referred to as the Lifehouse Tour.

It was never officially called this.
"Lifehouse Tour" was first coined by Billy...aka "Magic".
But, considering the songs, and the proximity to both LH Elements and Chronicles....

>I believe I saw T-shirts in 2002 which had the Kids are Alright Tour 2000.

Must have been bootlegs.

>For us Who fanatics, John's absence hurts badly, but let's be honest, the general public doesn't >care much.

I don't believe that for a moment.  And, I'm being honest.

>Most people don't know his name,

I'm continually surprised by the amount of people who know John.  Granted, they may not all know his name as "John Entwistle", but they know him.
I've heard things like "that amazing bassist, what's his name ...Entamin?", and stuff like that.
But, my point is that there is indeed a keen understanding by people who know just a thing or two about music, that the bassist of The Who was the ultimate.
It's also my assertion that anyone who goes to a Who concert (given the lack of publicity) has a more than average appreciation for The Who, and thus John's work.
Hell, the reactions alone to the video footage in Tour 2002 prove that.
So, he *will* indeed be missed, and he *won't* be easily replaced.
Not by a long shot.
People were understanding in 2002.
But, for another tour to have impact, the bassist had better jam.
Pino was alright.
But, Pino didn't jam.
That's not a slam on Pino.  He filled the hole admirably under dire circumstances.  But, he didn't let it go.  
He didn't fill the hole the way Zak is currently filling that unfillable hole.

>Most of the people who go to Who concerts at large arenas are simply fans of the music, but 
>don't know much about the band other than Roger is lead singer and Pete does windmills on 
>guitar.

Yeah, average "fans of music" who "don't know much about the band other than Roger is lead singer and Pete does windmills on guitar" went to completely unpublicized shows and paid an arm and a leg to do it.
Right.

Not.

>John's absence will likely not hurt ticket sales a whole lot.

That depends on what happens prior to a tour.
Will there be an album first?
Will the bassist on that album kick ass?
If not on both counts, then hell *yes* ticket sales will suffer.....big time.

>From: "Jim M" <petenotped@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: Farewell Tours
>
>Scott, Kevin, 
>
>But, isn't there a part of you that doesn't want to see it end on that note?

More than one.

>Wouldn't you rather they did one more go around,

Only with new material and a better fit at bass.

>got people talking about
>how those old geezers can still rock,

I think they proved that already to the world in 2000.
 
>instead of snickering about what Pete
>does on his computer.

I fear a tour will bring all the "snicker-ers" out of the closet, no matter how good they rock or how good new material is.

>After a full tour without John, Pete still believed they would continue.
>The only thing that's happened since then is Pete's arrest and caution.  I
>can't see him letting that be the final chapter of The Who.

I hear ya.
But, I'm not holding my breath.
At this point, I find myself wondering why Pete has been so silent with his fans.
Jack shit to us on his web after his......ahem....apology.
He's definitely withdrawn significantly since January.

>From: SicilianMother@xxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: You can have your Cake, and eat it too.
>
>I am humbled.

By me??!
You're silly.

>From: Ken in MD <seahawkman2001@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: HummingPolice&I'm One with a new material tour 
>
>I was thinking more about the
>momentum that has built up in Pete, to write songs and
>build his relationship with Roger, who clearly is
>ready to go.

Ahhhh.
Yeah, I don't know *what* to think of that.
Ironic. 

>must surely have built up some kind of creative
>energy.

I would (and do) hope that we would hear increasing word about upcoming studio time, and how (or on what) that time will be spent on.
But......we haven't yet, other than Roger saying it will be so.
I just fear this will the the ultimate "it didn't happen".
I hope I'm wrong.

>We'll see. 

*That's* a certainty.

>From: Joe Lewinski <lewinski@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Isabel ringing?
>

She ain't no Avon Lady!

>Mark, if you're still on the list - have you guys been spared?

He's probably just too busy building his internet CD sales empire.
Oh, and marching off to 'get a Dem. in the White House' war.

>From: "Paul M. Moriarty" <pmm@xxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: Isabel ringing?
>
>Cute subject line.
>
>However, it's pretty far off-topic.

Jesus, Paul.
That's pretty tight.
A "community" (your words), remember??
Why not let the community be more than one dimension....within reason....as you have in the past.

I've understood other "stay on topic reprimands", but this one really is sitting sour.
I don't get it.

Kevin in VT