In an interview with 'new' members of Kiss, they do claim that 99.99% of their fans are aware of the history of the band, that Thayer and Singer weren't the original guitarist and drummer: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/ne...k-out-20140531
In an interview with 'new' members of Kiss, they do claim that 99.99% of their fans are aware of the history of the band, that Thayer and Singer weren't the original guitarist and drummer: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/ne...k-out-20140531
The band doesn't try to lie that T & S are the original guys (Stanley often mentions Tommy's name in concerts), but occasionally even the media seems to be confused because of the makeup. What the Kiss guys say in interviews can't be trusted, because they always say whatever supports their current thing. That doesn't mean the 99,99% isn't true. I just find it a bit worrying that they sign their names over the other guys' pictures for young fans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Annoying Twit
But why I mention Kiss in this context is that I go to that forum a lot and a slightly similar lineup "issue" can be found there. But I have no fear that Deacon will be signing over his dad's photo. :rofl:
I have thought about the "replacing" Glenn thing for some time. If I can relate this to something a bit more understandable, I'd relate it like this.
Your spouse dies. Can you "replace" your spouse. In one sense. If you remarry, you have a new spouse. They are legally your spouse, they do all the things that spouses do. Does that mean you replace "Mary"? No. You can never do that. You have shared experiences and memories and videos and pictures with her that you'll never have with "Susie". Does that mean that people who have only known you for a few years might assume that you and Susie have been married for years? yes. But people who've known you for a long time, understand.
We can't begrudge someone remarrying after the death of a spouse anymore than we can a group carrying on after a member dies. Do you have to like it? No. Do you have to accept it? No. but it's the way things are. There are a lot of people who don't like or accept someone's new spouse. That doesn't mean it was wrong for them to remarry, or that they are doing something that shouldn't be done.
If you look at Don's initial comments after Glenn's passing, I think you see something that you'd see in a grieving widow/widower. Immediately after a spouse dies, if someone said, "hey are you going to get married again?" You're response would most likely be a resounding "no" or maybe an "are you crazy".....but as time passes you miss companionship. You miss the things you enjoyed most about a marriage....and you might decide that's what you'd like to do.
A great point, but I don't think it's exactly the same. The ex-wife is out of the picture, but the music by the old lineups plays still on the radio every day - even when the band doesn't exist anymore. IMO it's not unreasonable to hope that it will never be forgotten who did the records that will always be heard. I'm not saying it will be forgotten, but at the moment I fear that it could be possible. I realize I could be dead wrong, so I won't keep saying this over and over again.
They could play together without using the name "Eagles," BillBailey, if they wanted to "remarry."
But they insist on using the name so they can make more cash.
Thus, your analogy doesn't really work for me.
I think that's a good analogy, Bill. I agree that no one can ever replace Glenn, and in my mind, the new Eagles aren't really the "true" Eagles. Still, they do make it work. The new harmonies are a little different, but they sound great.Quote:
Originally Posted by BillBailey1976
Using the Eagles name is just Economics 101. Just because they want to make it a profitable venture doesn't mean it's a money grab. They employ a lot of people, and this way, they can play less shows and spend more time with their families and doing other things they want to do -- something which I'm sure is important to them at this time in their lives.
I've probably said this before, but I found it ironic (and possibly a little amusing) that Glenn's family, former band mates and at least some of his friends are enjoying this new tour/tribute to Glenn and even find it healing, yet some of his die-hard fans are dead-set against. I know, I know, to each his own...
I don't think this will happen. This band was defined by its 70s lineup, especially the HC one. In the grand scheme of things, once these few distasteful years are over, it's this lineup that will be forgotten.Quote:
Originally Posted by chaim
I mean, look at the short shrift anything post 70s gets in Eagles discussions now in programs and magazines with pieces about the band. Do you expect that to change?
I suppose if anyone remembers that Vince Gill and Deacon sort-of joined the band in its latter days, it's true they might get confused and attribute some of Glenn's LROOE work to Vince Gill. That is an appalling thought I had not considered, and one more reason to loathe this venture.
However, that is not the same as Glenn being forgotten. I think you need not worry about that.
This too shall pass.
According to Wikipedia the phrase "to each his own" means "every person is entitled to his or her personal preferences and tastes". Merriam-webster says it's "used to say that other people are free to like different things". I wish people wouldn't use the phrase to say in a condescending way "what a stupid opinion you have".
Soda, you're probably right. Perhaps The Orchestra is one of the reasons for my "fear". They have one member who was in ELO in the 70's (and one who helped with the orchestral arrangements, but wasn't in the band), but today many people think they see ELO when they see the band. They have no idea there was a person named Jeff Lynne who wrote, sang and produced all the songs. Often it even says "Electric Light Orchestra" in their ads.
I meant the phrase "to each own" in the way I have highlighted in your post. If I inferred that anyone's opinion(s) were stupid, I apologize. I certainly didn't mean to infer that. In fact, it was a reminder to myself that everyone is different and has their own opinions and tastes. (Thankfully, or the world would be pretty boring!)Quote:
Originally Posted by chaim
Do I agree with those opinions? No. Do I understand them? No. (Which is why I think I have trouble stopping myself from posting about them.) Do I respect them? Yes, definitely.
I am very sad and angry about something else in my life right now, so I apologize if some of that seeped into my above post.
Ok, no problem. I think it was the "I know, I know" part I reacted to. I have no issues with you - certainly not because you don't understand some of my opinions or "concerns". I hope that whatever is wrong in your life at the moment will be alright.Quote:
Originally Posted by maryc2130