smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Craig Leve" <CraigL@ori.org> |
| Subject | Re: Big Star - In Space |
| Date | Wed, 28 Sep 2005 09:48:04 -0700 |
[Part 1 text/plain us-ascii (2.2 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
Mike,
I haven't heard the new one myself (except one track the Jon Auer one
that sounds like Chris Bell). Typically I think less of the branding
issue you raise - that is, bands can really slip around stylistically if
that's their perogative - and if I'm a fan, I'll likely follow. I mean
if one followed this logic, I guess you'd end up carping about the
various incarnations of the Byrds for departing from the brand, or
bemoan anything after the first few Beatles albums for the betrayal of
the brand sound. Maybe these aren't perfect examples but I guess it's
all in what you think defines the 'brand'.
Still, without really knowing (or maybe feeling I can't get worked up
about this issue much) - it seems a bit odd to decide after 30 years to
resurrect a band moniker with one of the band's architects long dead and
then create an album that seems less about that band's legacy and more
about what you (Alex Chilton) like to be doing these days. No offense to
Chilton's artistic decisions, but why not just make it a Chilton album
if that's what you're gonna do? It's Chilton's moniker to work with, I
suppose but I think he owes Chris Bell's memory more than sullying the
Big Star legacy if he's not interested in pursuing that sound any more.
And he's seemed perfectly comfortable with distancing himself from Big
Star as productive unit in the last 20+ years, so what was the appeal in
this project for Chilton? I don't expect logic, but just trying to make
a little...pop star sense of this.
Or maybe Stringfellow/Auer couldn't be to Chilton what Sahanaja is to
Wilson?
Best,
Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: audities-owner@smoe.org [mailto:audities-owner@smoe.org] On Behalf
Of Michael Bennett
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 7:36 AM
To: audities@smoe.org
Subject: Re: Big Star - In Space
Both make valid points. But I do think that fans have
a right to carp a bit if a record branded Big Star
strays from what made Big Star Big Star. I don't
think it's an indictment of Big Star fans to have that expectation. If
you're going to call it Big Star, then you accept the brand name
benefits and must accept the backlash consequences.
Just my opinion...
Mike Bennett
NP: The 88 - Over and Over
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.