Lost Magic

[Grey Sadler]

Thank you for the info and perspective, UTW.

+1
Very well stated, UTW.

[MaryCalifornia]

[QUOTE=UndertheWire;261095]In a 1975 interview with Cameron Crowe, Bernie "admits to twice leaving and rejoining the Eagles".

Now this is interesting. I've always wondered if Randy misplayed it by thinking that if he quit, they would welcome him right back. If it is true that Bernie quit and then came back (especially if he did this more than one time), this could be a dynamic that Randy was expecting to apply to him as well. Do we think Randy left thinking he could come back at any time, or do we think that when he left, he was done with the Eagles forever? Based on his overtures to the band, I'm thinking the former.

[Freypower]

Given that bands generally have one bass player I don't see how that could have worked unless Randy expected them to ditch Tim so he could return.

[MaryCalifornia]

Agree. Some borderers have suggested that Randy and Timmy could have shared the stage, or something could have been done like what they're doing with Bernie now. That discussion is in another thread somewhere on here. I sure as heck don't like the thought of ditching Timothy! When I suggested that that's what Randy must have been thinking, and that he was MAYBE dismissive of Timothy's role by asking to join them in some shows, I was shot down.

[UndertheWire]

Interesting idea that Randy might have been thinking he'd be able to return after a cool-off period. With hindsight, they might have been better off taking a breaking, making solo albums and then getting back together to put out a new album in 1979.

ETA: Once they'd brought in Timothy, I don't see how they could have brought back Randy. Timothy seems to have done everything they've asked of him with none of the hassle.

[randysgirl]

[quote=MaryCalifornia;261103]

In a 1975 interview with Cameron Crowe, Bernie "admits to twice leaving and rejoining the Eagles".

Now this is interesting. I've always wondered if Randy misplayed it by thinking that if he quit, they would welcome him right back. If it is true that Bernie quit and then came back (especially if he did this more than one time), this could be a dynamic that Randy was expecting to apply to him as well. Do we think Randy left thinking he could come back at any time, or do we think that when he left, he was done with the Eagles forever? Based on his overtures to the band, I'm thinking the former.

I have read a lot about Randy from various sources and all I have seen is that he is a nice, shy fellow. I think when he quit, it was mostly due to the tensions in the group as described in the HOTE and I think he needed to get away at that particular time. He probably gave no thought to coming back one way or another. Much later in 1994, he seems to have expressed some interest in returning on a limited basis for HFO, much like Bernie is doing now. The dust had settled by then and emotions had cooled.

I do not think he was trying to get Tim ditched. It seems Tim and Randy have a mutual respect for each other as musicians. Tim showed himself to be a class act when he gave a nod to Randy at the R&R Hall of Fame induction. Randy later put his hand on Tim's shoulder and thanked him as you could see it on camera. I have read somewhere on this site that Tim will not sing TITTL out of respect for Randy's "territory" I think Glenn called it. Randy and Tim both seem to be classy guys.

[chaim]

If The Long Run is going to be criticised for not containing enough good songs, as has been the case in this thread, then I don't know what it has to do with the loss of Randy. He wrote one song on Hotel California, and from what I've read about the Eagles, he wasn't exactly guiding the process when material was selected and written by others.

Personally I prefer Randy to Timothy. But I don't think the quality of the material (hit material anyway) has that much to do with him being or not being there.

[Ive always been a dreamer]

This has turned into an interesting discussion. I would have to say that I don't really look at things in terms of lost magic either. I'm one that appreciates the entire Eagles catalog and each band members' contributions very much. I personally don't think they lost anything no matter which band members were in the band or what type of music they recorded.

[luna65]

It's not an uncommon opinion, though, when discussing a band which counts numerous lineups and decades on its' side. I see it all the time in the Pink Floyd and Yes discussion forums I belong to/moderate. Some people are partial to certain eras and some people like every era, every lineup. Some people want artists/bands to return to their previous sound because that's what they liked best. I see it as a function of history and nostalgia beyond considerations of how deeply invested a person might be in a particular fandom. Granted, I love the glory days but I was glad that - for whatever reason - they decided to come back and at least make us happy to be fans again, and openly acknowledges that the history is one which deserves to be lauded. Many bands can't even get to that point because when choosing how and why and whom to tell the tale just leads to further contention.

[Freypower]

My beloved Dire Straits is a good example of a band which has never reformed in any way. This might make a new Sake of the Song thread. Should bands reform or not? If so with whom?