Who or not Who



Sroundtable at aol.com Sroundtable at aol.com
Mon Feb 6 21:56:09 CST 2006


 
In a message dated 2/5/2006 7:53:28 A.M. Central Standard Time,  
thewho-request at igtc.com writes:

NO!

I do NOT have to accept what they deign to give us. Look  over much of Pete 
Townshend's written output--one of his major themes is  that people should 
NOT 
accept what they're given. Should Bobby in  LIFEHOUSE have accepted a world 
without music? Should Jimmy just accept  that his life has no meaning? What 
about 
the residents in White City? Are  they just to take what they're given? 
Should 
Ray High just sit back and  accept that he's a has-been?

Pete and Roger can do what they do. And I  can comment on that output and 
that's just the way it goes.  



I didn't say accept without questioning or criticizing.  I meant  accept that 
this is The Who we get.  Neither Keith or John are coming back,  so this is 
what we get.  Accept it.  Criticize Pino as bassist, slam  the setlists, 
comment on the individual performances, review the new album with  skepticism.  
THAT'S all valid.  But to say they aren't The Who is an  exercise in futility and 
it's getting very tiresome to hear this same trite  comment.  Pete and Roger 
say it is still The Who, then it IS, in whatever  direction they want to take 
it.  I did NOT mean that we have to like what  they give us, but we should 
accept that they are The Who and go forward from  that point.
 
Mc



More information about the TheWho mailing list