interesting point..... I guess I'm from the "artists have to eat, and they own intellectual property that they can license in order to make money to live" school of thought... do you feel the same way about authors who sign agreements for their books to be turned into movies (that may end up being kind of Hollywood-schlocky) ? I'm really not trying to be a bear on this, but I'm always interested in what is at the heart of criticisms like this... I guess another question for you is AFTER Pete signed over the rights for Tommy to the Broadway producers and was finally able to see what their interpretation looked like, do you think he should have walked away from the contract if in fact he thought that it wasn't, what, rock'n'roll enough? just truly curious.... ________________________________ From: "lowtunes@aol.com" To: audities@smoe.org Sent: Fri, February 12, 2010 10:37:18 AM Subject: Re: Loud criticism of The Who? My thoughts: It's not that the Who didn't live up to "...hope I die before I get old." It's that they DID live up to their album entitled "The Who Sell Out". Whether it was the Broadway-ization of Tommy (anyone who saw it knows what I mean) or selling soft drinks or E-Trade on TV, Pete seemed not only to sell out quietly, but with relish. That's what eats at me, a long time fan, the most. Tony