The Australian Interviews Stevie/Lindsey 2/04
 

[Did she really call him "honey"?]

HEADLINE: Mac without the knives out

BYLINE: Iain Shedden

BODY:
Fleetwood Mac are still as hot -- and almost as argumentative -- as they were in their heyday. Iain Shedden reports

AS befits a luxury hotel, there's a lot of expensive baggage around. It's not the tangible sort, though. It's the emotional baggage that comes from being in one of the richest, most successful, most complicated rock bands in the world: Fleetwood Mac.

Stevie Nicks and Lindsey Buckingham, two of the chief protagonists in a rock soap opera that has flirted with the public imagination for almost 30 years, are holed up in a room at Sydney's InterContinental hotel.

Nicks and Buckingham are 55 and 54 respectively, were once a couple and a recording duo, and for a quarter of a century have been doing their best to paste over the cracks of their personal and occasional professional break-ups.

Even today, sharing a sofa and being fraternally hands-on, there are moments where their troubled past flits before them.

"It's not that we don't still have disagreements and arguments and see everything the same way," Nicks says, "but beyond that we have a deep and caring friendship. If anything happened to Lindsey I'd be devastated -- and vice versa."

Nicks, like some of her colleagues, has done the rock'n'roll lifestyle thing big time. On the surface, her long-term drug abuse in the 1980s (cocaine and later the tranquilliser Klonopin) have left her unscathed. Her voice is still in great shape and the long sweep of straight blonde hair complements a face that could be 10 years younger.

Her memory is another matter, but we'll get to that later.

Fleetwood Mac's first Australian tour in 14 years is part of a global assault that has already taken them across the US and Europe. Given the acrimony that has haunted the band since the album Rumours launched them into the stratosphere in 1977, it is remarkable that they are prepared to be in the same room, never mind on the same stage night after night.

In the beginning, the entwined personalities and careers of the band's personnel were a disaster waiting to happen. The bass player, John McVie, was married to keyboard player Christine McVie. Buckingham-Nicks had their own recording career before joining Fleetwood Mac and they too were a couple. It was bound to end in tears. No one could have predicted that it would also fuel Rumours, one of the most successful albums in rock history.

"Things are better now than they used to be," says Nicks. "In the old days we were angry with each other and didn't like each other. We had to go on stage and play. It was all about dirty looks and not having much fun. That's partly to do with why Lindsey left the band in '83."

"Eighty-seven," interjects Buckingham and, as if on cue, there follows a few minutes of intense discussion between them about just when the guitarist was in the band and when he wasn't.

"But honey, you really left in '83, you only came back to do [the album] Tango in the Night in 1987. You didn't tour."

"No, no, I was in the band until 1987," he insists, and suddenly it's as if only the two of them are in the room. "I was there for the whole thing. I produced the album and then I pulled out for the tour because it was just too crazy."

Nicks gives this a few seconds' thought.

"I thought you pretty much left. Oh, I can't even remember," she concedes.

Buckingham, however, is eager to make his point, recalling how the artistically adventurous Tusk, the relatively unsuccessful follow-up to Rumours, was a turning point in his relationship with the other members. He's still addressing this only to Nicks.

"It was harder for me because after Tusk there was this dictum that came down [from the other members] that we weren't going to move to the left too much anymore. It was hard for me to reconcile the process because that was interesting to me. In some ways I was treading water, but I was never not there. I was there for everything."

Nicks thinks again. "So where was I?"

Then, realising there's a third person in the room, they laugh and acknowledge the therapy session ambience.

The pair are accompanied on this tour by John McVie and drummer Mick Fleetwood, as well as seven other musicians and a touring entourage that totals 86. Not included is songwriter Christine McVie, who quit the band in the late '90s. This leaves Nicks and Buckingham as the chief songwriters, as is reflected on the album Say You Will, which they are on the road to promote. McVie's departure has altered the dynamics of the group and allowed Buckingam's guitar playing to become more prominent, he says. "Fleetwood Mac has survived by being able to be flexible," he says. "One of the reasons I'm having the best time on stage is because I have more room to manoeuvre out there."

The Say You Will tour is about more than just survival, however. The band grossed $91 million in the US last year from ticket sales and the Australian leg is close to sold out -- so any agonising among them can be done on the way to the bank.

Nicks says she would like to concentrate on other things. She has a successful solo career, but would also like to write children's books and to indulge her favourite, non-music activity, painting. Their extracurricular interests -- and the personal demons that inhabit their world -- might not be enough to stop another Fleetwood Mac tour down the track.

"You have a band of people who are sovereign and talented in their own right and who have found ways to stay together," says Buckingham. "We are musicians, songwriters and singers par excellence ... I would like to think. We are a band and in many ways we are better now than we have ever been."

And what about simply getting along with each other?

"We are still shaping what we are to each other," Buckingham says, in the way only a Californian can. "Stevie and I can still push each other's buttons quite easily. That does happen. But we all have other things that we can do. It's all about respecting each other and finding a rhythm.

"What makes it meaningful and makes it have poetry and makes it tender is that we are now in the aftermath of the coda, working out all these things from a more mature and distant perspective ... working on being adults."

"Trying," says Nicks.

"Yes, we're trying," he agrees.

Great interview...but is there more?

No. That was the end of the article. That sentence about "we're trying." That was it. I thought it was a good interview too and I didn't see it online before.

I laughed at the part about when they're arguing as to when he left the group.

Michele

Actualy, La Nicks is mostly correct here. All of the rags at the time indicated FM broke up after Mirage. I mean TITN was five years later and in that time La Nicks released two solo records and did two or three world tours. LB was working on his third record and seemingly had no interest in FM until =, for whatever reason, he deceided to morph his solo record (presumably GOS) into TITN. But, accroding to most of the press and his own opinion later, he did not go willingly and in fact later backed out because the craziness was starting. So, for him to say he was totally committed to FM until he left in 1987 is not that accurate.

And people got all over La Nicks for her "enjoy my celebrity" comment - LB equates himself and his band to a sovereign :rolleyes: If La Nicks had said this, she hardly would be given a free pass and instead would be called all kinds of names :rolleyes:
______________________________________________________

I LOVE that she called him honey. I also think the Australians seem to get the best interviews.

Finally, wouldn't you just love to read Stevie's journals in 1987. Thank goodness she wrote it all down so she can reference it when she finally writes that book.

Actually, she is completely wrong.

I can't think of a single magazine that reported that Fleetwood Mac had broken up in 1983. But besides that, this isn't Stevie's claim. Her claim in the interview is that Lindsey left the band in 1983. That's completely wrong.

Completely irrelevant to Stevie's claim that Lindsey left the band in 1983. (He did not.)

A small point, but recording on Gift Of Screws didn't start until the mid 1990s. The solo work he had already done in 1986 (which he folded into the band album) was not called Gift Of Screws.

His level of commitment to the band is completely irrelevant to what Stevie claimed, which was that he left the band in 1983. This is completely & verifiably wrong.

That isn't what "sovereign" means in the context in which Lindsey used it. He means that the band is independent; it makes its own creative decisions. Whether that's true or not is another issue worth discussing here, but that's all he meant. It's really not an eye-roller. I think you're projecting something onto the quote.

If Lindsey was talking about prisoner abuse and pointed out that the Guantanamo base was in the sovereign territory of Cuba, I think that would make him just as bad as Stevie is too.

Still, however Lindsey meant "sovereign" he was talking about the band as a whole. He didn't say, "enjoy my sovereign talent."

He didn't say he was totally committed to FM from 1982-1987. All he said was that he produced the TITN album (and I'd say he produced it in a totally committed fashion) and, because he did and wrote and sang songs on it with Christine and (sometimes) Stevie, I think his contention that he remained in the band until 1987 is not only reasonable, but beyond dispute.


Michele

Thanks for posting this interview, it was really enjoyable to read. The exchanges between Linds and Stevie are still very potent, even if they were to talk about what kind of potato chips they each liked it would still be a great read. "Lindsey, you stopped liking Pringles in '83"..."No no, I stopped liking them in '87, not '83..."

Yes, it was funny that the interviewer commented that it was like they forgot he was in the room.

Michele

i totally agree...he didnt leave until 87. It wasnt like the band toured after the Mirage tour...there was a lack of music and touring. Even up to Tango In The Night, which he was involved in the recordeding of the album, and made the music videos to it. In my opinion that still "counts" as being part of the band. His "spirit" may have been gone in '83, but...

Stevie has no memories of timeframes. She often claims she toured for The Wild Heart in 1984. The album came out in 1983. The tour was '83 also.

Stevie has said she doesn't remember much about the eighties!

Michele

Despite the South and an incorrect Concerto note - with respect:

Main Entry: 1sov·er·eign
Variant(s): also sov·ran \ˈsä-v(ə-)rən, -vərn also ˈsə-\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English soverain, from Anglo-French soverein, from soverein, adjective
Date: 13th century
1 a: one possessing or held to possess sovereignty b: one that exercises supreme authority within a limited sphere c: an acknowledged leader : arbiter
2: any of various gold coins of the United Kingdom
______________________________

Maybe he meant a coin?

Acually, he said "No, no, I was in the band until 1987" and then she said . . . ." I think if LB'ws solo recods had taken off, he'd have been out of there. La Nicks' quotes support this somewhat :shrug: So, back to my arument that LB needed FM when he relatively failed as a solo artist - at least commercially. To have had her, his ex, succeed so fantastically, must have stuck him in the heart, esp. since his production of her incredible words and bare music made her and FM (no slam on CM intended) . I watch that Mirage video and his perfenctory denial of FM not breaking up rings hollow.

Who knows for sure though :shrug:

Personally, I think denouement :cool:

But, she has it written down :shrug:

Why are people so loathe to believe her, but they (not you per se) take his word as law?

Yes, I've been looking at the old articles and I'd say you're right. But when Tango arrived, the press treated it like a reunion and that's when all the band members started saying that they'd never broken up. Here's an article with Christine, from The Advertiser, June 18, 1987:

HEADLINE: FLEETWOOD MAC ENDS THE FRUSTRATION

BYLINE: DAVID SLY

BODY:
FOR the past two months, Christine McVie has been quizzed by bemused journalists over how Fleetwood Mac came to reunite for the recording of the new Tango In the Night album. She's plainly sick of it. "I really don't know how you people got a hold of that story. We never broke up," she claimed in a near hysterical tone.

Fine. But five years between albums is a ridiculously long time, especially when no Press statement had been issued on the impending future of the band during that period.

"Yes. Okay. I'll grant that five years is a long hiatus, but it didn't seem like such a big deal to each of us. We all went off and did our own projects, finished them and then came back to work on a new Fleetwood Mac album.

"You really can't expect much more from us. Everyone should know by now that we are notoriously slow workers." The world was largely aware that the five band members - Lindsay Buckingham, Stevie Nicks, Mick Fleetwood, McVie and her former husband John McVie - were virtually at each others' throats by the completion of the Mirage concert tour throughout the US in 1982.

McVie admitted that it was not an easy time for the band, as two albums in a row had failed to match the colossal commercial success of the Rumours album and tensions among all parties were mounting.

"We simply decided that we needed a break from each other, though it was never decided that we would split the band," she said.

"We were going through a difficult patch, but I think we all knew that eventually we would come back together and record.

"We had to get over the personal disappointment of Mirage,

which we felt was one of our weaker albums - not because it didn't sell fantastically, but because we made the record for all the wrong reasons.

"After Rumours, we recorded the double album Tusk, which saw us stretch so far out to the left in a completely different direction to Rumours. Therefore, we decided that Mirage should get back to something that the record company, or at least the public, would expect from us.

"It was a compromise . . . lacking in intensity and passion and it therefore paled alongside everything else we had done."

A procession of solo excursions followed, with albums from Nicks, McVie and Buckingham (Nicks's Rock A Little album was the most successful), while Fleetwood forged the experimental rock troupe Zoo and John McVie returned to playing bar room blues.

Christine doubted that any of the solo outings were responsible for reshaping the sound of Fleetwood Mac for the new album.

"If anything, they cleaned the musical frustrations out of our systems so that we can get on with the job ahead," she explained.

"Our feelings towards working with each other in the studio were at a peak again and we agreed that it was time for us to do something constructive as a unit. Yes, we had grown apart as individuals but were still very much a band.

"In many ways it was a comforting feeling getting back with the musicians you had been making music with for the previous 12 years of your life. That mild sense of celebration saw us return to the feeling that we had while recording the Rumours album."

Um, I doubt Stevie was referring to anything she had "written down" when she gave that interview. People aren't "loathe" to believe her, but it's hard to believe her when she contradicts herself every ten minutes and when what she says flies in the face of clear facts.

This is what Stevie said to the Los Angeles Times on June 14, 1987:

So, she has an interview where she gets feisty at the thought that the band had broken up. So, I know that she knew then (if she doesn't know now) that Lindsey hadn't left the band in 1982. What he did in 1982 was cut short the Mirage tour. He didn't leave the band.

As for taking Lindsey's word as law, I just don't see everything as polarized or adversarial as that. I don't think he's a saint and she's a sinner, in any category, but I won't think the reverse either.

I've heard Lindsey say that he only wrote one song for a movie and I know that's not true. He's prone to dementia at time. However, in this interview, your interpretation of Lindsey's "word" is so different from what I think he said, that I wouldn't even know how to take that as law. He talked about the band, being full of unique individuals in their own right, who come together. He didn't say that he had any kind of sovereign power and wasn't even talking about himself. It was a communal commendation he offered.

What I liked about this interview is you don't have to take one person's word over another. No reason to choose your side of the battleground. I mean, they were getting along when the interview was conducted and to me it seemed like a rather funny, domestic little exchange. I liked it's spousal quality, because there was even a loving familiarity to the bickering. And because they were comrades at the time, there was no one upmanship. They were both offering a fair and balanced assessment of the way they mutually push the other's buttons.

So, I really didn't see an opportunity for side-taking at all, until you did.

Michele

I am just stating that I think LB had no interest whatsoever with working with FM after Mirage. So, as I said, I think La Nicks was somewhat correct even though LB did not officially leave until after TITN was finished. I think the interviews at the time he left show that. He talks about reuniting with FM and morphing his solo stuff into TITN and then once he was back, the craziness was too much for him to do the tour. To me, that sounds like he came back to the band even though there had been no official parting of ways. Maybe burned out is a better phrase than left the band, which is why I said "La Nicks is mostly correct here."

As for the article you posted - of course FM is going to say that to sell the record :shrug: I mean they can't very well say "we are so fukcing sick of each other we want to puke, but we want to market this record so we're going to pretend to be happy" can they :cool:

I agree.

But that's not what's at issue. Stevie said Lindsey left the group in 1983. She was wrong about that. No big deal, really -- as Michele & Vivfox said, she sometimes gets her dates & circumstances & other details wrong. She spent an entire tour (a few years back) telling her fans she wrote RHIANNON in 1973, but she spent five years telling radio listeners in interviews that she wrote it in October 1974. You get older & you forget when you did this & that. No big deal. But when she's wrong, she's wrong. Don't dress up her mistaken data with interpretive play & recontextualization. (We used to do this in grad school: historicize & then rehistoricize in the Louis Montrose fashion.)

But that was ALL OF THEM, strand. It wasn't as if the other four were waiting around for him, & in he walks. In fact, what happened is that Christine was the one who got the ball rolling by calling Dashut to produce her song for A FINE MESS, & Dashut in turn suggested bringing in Lindsey while Chris called Mick & John to play too. Those four members of the band were working on the Elvis Presley song in August 1985, & the following month (September 17, to be exact) they all met up backstage at the benefit Stevie was playing with Don Henley & Tom Petty at Universal Amphitheatre to plan a new Fleetwood Mac album.

If Lindsey had said the same thing about Stevie in this period, he'd have been as "correct" as she was -- in other words, incorrect. Nobody in Fleetwood Mac in the 1980s left the band until August 1987. They were all emotionally distant from Fleetwood Mac in those days (that's not what our debate is about): Stevie was doing THE WILD HEART & touring, Lindsey was doing GO INSANE & producing elsewhere, John was at sea much of the time, Chris was doing CHRISTINE MCVIE & touring. Stevie forgot some of those trivial details.

But that is not what you said initially. Stevie was talking about an exit, not about someone being disenchanted with the band. If all you'd said was that Lindsey was unhappy after Mirage, there would have been nothing to counter, because everyone knows too well that he was. He was unhappy after people were disappointed in Tusk -- which is not to say he left the band after Tusk.

The issue you raised in saying Stevie was correct (and you didn't explain yesterday that you only meant you thought she meant "burnt out" and was correct about Lindsey being "burnt out" even though she never said "burnt out") was not whether they were happy. It was weather they were a broken up band after 1982. Not only does TITN prove that they weren't, but so do the band's comments at the time.

I'd posit that if they thought they were broken up, Mick would have replaced Lindsey after Mirage and not waited five years, letting all the tour money they could have reaped in that interim go to waste. As Stevie told the London Times, they lost "jillions" of dollars because Lindsey didn't want to record and tour. If the band thought that Lindsey had left, I think they would have moved earlier to replace him, rather than waiting for Christine to do an Elvis song that would bring them back together.

Michele

^^^^ (for David's post)

I disagree in that I think CM and La Nicks were always wanting to go back to FM. Stevie certainly said this in interviews at that time. I can't recall LB ever saying that. I think LB did not want to go back to FM after the truncated Mirage tour. Again, he also discusses the TITN sessions as a return. To me, that sounds like he had all but left after Mirage. I also think he agreed to TITN because the sales of Go Insane were disappointing and FM could give him a needed boost, then he remembered why he "left" in the first place. Just my opinion though.

But, yes, based on what we know from the press, La Nicks was incorrect in saying he left the band in 1983. That is why I termed it as mostly correct - maybe effectively correct would have been a better phrase.

I said "So, for him to say he was totally committed to FM until he left in 1987 is not that accurate." :shrug: Then, I clarified what I meant by that.

I think they were giving him time - and likely giving themsleves a rest. I also think LB made no official announcement in 1983. I think they all got the hint though. I also think that if Mick and John had canned LB, La Nicks would have walked away and there would go a significant portion of the sales and notoriety. Again, I am not alone in this thought as the band chose to address the rumours that many thought they were broken up. I nfact, I was shocked when I read in Rolling Stone that they were recording again because I thought they would never do so again.

Again, I think that if Go Insane had been a big hit, he would not have rejoined, returned to, reconvened with, recorded with, etc., FM again. I think he has since Rumours resented working with a group that does not do exactly what he thinks they should production wise. Just my opinion though.

But there were no rumors that they had broken up in 1983. The rumors only arose over time, because there had been a 5 year lapse between records. So yes, by the time 1987 rolled around people were saying, "Wow, you were gone so long, we assumed you had broken up." But there were no rumors of an actual break up, official or unofficial, just prolonged inactivity.

Michele

I remember rumours in 1983 after The Mirage tour, which was only 18 American cities, a tiny amount when compared to the far larger prior four tours. I always thought the tour was shortened because they were not all that happy being together again. But, who knows.

Put it this way, the TITN album was couched in terms of reuniting :shrug:

You really don't think that LB had all but unofficially walked away from FM after the Mirage tour? To me, it's obvious - though I readily admit he publicly did not officially leave the band until 1987. I think this is why Stevie went ful steam ahead in the solo market. I think she thought that there was no use waiting for FM and IMO LB to get back together and in the studio. And, she realy did not need them anymore as a vehicle to release her songs, though she remaind loyal to them. Would any of us have gone back to a hostile work environment when we did not need to? So, I think she went back out of loyalty. Others may disagree, but that is my opinion.

As an aside, what if La Nicks' comment about 1983 was a slip and indeed was a rare glimpse into what really went on in 1983.

On edit -- was FM under any kind of record deal in the 80's that bound them to produce a certain number of records?

Yes, I believe they were. I don't think the contract had a duration, but I think it called for another album from them. At least, I think Stevie said that.

The thing is, Tango was not just a cursory appearance by Lindsey, like you could say Chain was. He was intricately involved in every aspect of Tango, production, songwriting, videos, press. To say that he was, indeed, in a band that he was working diligently with throughout the Tango process, is not just lipservice. It can't be said he had "all but left" the band and he just made it "official" in 1987. His integral band involvement did not stop until the album was complete, the publicity for it was done and he actually left. From 1982-1987 he wasn't out of the band any more than anyone else was out of it. The whole band was on hold.

As for your comment that Stevie did not need the band, had a successful solo career and did not have to come back, yeah maybe. But that has nothing to do with whether Lindsey left the band. It sounds like arguments you could make explaining why Stevie left the band from 1982-1987, but I don't think she left it either.

Michele

Oh - TITN is very LB. I did not say it was not or that he did a half effort. I am saying that I do not think LB wanted to go back to FM after Mirage. But, he did (IMO because Go Insane sold poorly) and his solo record, which he wanted to sell well, became TITN, which did sell well and the pretty much all LB Big Love (a no. 5 hit) was a huge part of that. Interestingly, would Big Love have sold as well without the Stevie sounding love grunts - who can say? I am not in any way saying FM had officially broken up or that LB had officially and/or publicly left. I am saying I think they were ready to go to work and he was putting them off for awhile after Mirage. I think LB just did not want to go back, but in the end did and he certainly put a great deal of effort into TITN. Put it this way, if LB had not morphed the solo record into TITN - what would the status of FM have been? I suggest it would have been over until at least 1990. While that is not an official break up, it is an effective one, which is all I am asserting.


I think it is relevant in that she was moving full steam ahead with a sort of "I am ready, willing, and able and if FM is never going to make up its mind (read LB IMO) to record again, then I am not waiting" attitude. I think she never viewed herself as the hold out. Just speculation, but the playing of events does suggest it. Another difference is La Nicks never was portrayed in the press and by her own words as ever begrudgingly going back to FM, save for perhaps now. It is usually the opposite.

Actually, now is a similar situation to the 1983-87 era. Is FM currently broken up? Will we get another record from them? Only they know I supose.

Yes, I know that's what you're saying, now. You are always saying that. I just don't know why you brought Lindsey and Stevie's discussion as to whether or not he had officially left the band in 1982 -- and whether she was correct in claiming that he had -- back to that favorite point of yours.

Michele

You remember nothing of the sort, strandford. There was no rumor that the band had split in 1983.

I'm going to hit you. How did you know at the time that the tour was shortened? At the time (& I followed the tour very closely by attending, reading news & staying in constant touch with the fan network), I just thought it was a short tour. (Actually, to be a bit more brutally honest, it was STEVIE who was periodically written about & talked about as the cause of Fleetwood Mac's short tour & periods of inactivity -- see the Record article in 1982 by David Gans.)

You're being disingenuous (the way you were with "sovereign). "Reuniting" can mean "We broke up but now we're reuniting" -- like VAN HALEN in 2007 -- & it can mean "We haven't done anything for a long time & now we're working on something new." The latter is what applies to the Fleetwood Mac situation in 1986.

No, I don't! At least not in the all-or-nothing terms you frame it in. It's a really myopic view of yours that Lindsey walked away in 1983. They ALL walked away -- the band went into one of its lengthy periods of inactivity. The band did not break up, & none of its members left. As has been said a million times, by people inside & outside the band, things were put ON HOLD.

What would Lindsey have been walking away from, incidentally? Inactivity?

Gee, are you sure you want to go out on a limb like that?

Well, you've neatly wrapped that sucker right up.

"Lindsey refuses to come back & work with Fleetwood Mac, so I'm gonna have a solo career! Muaahahahahaaahaaa!!"

I was making the point that I thought that though La Nicks was techinically incorrect, she was effectively correct because I think LB for all practicle purposes left in 1983, only to be roped in to TITN.

So what exactly were La Nicks and CM disputing in those articles, as well as others like this one from Hit Parader (1983) - where she is cagey about it :wavey:

She isn't exactly saying FM staying together is a sure thing, which added to the rumours :shrug:

Thanks for posting the article. I enjoyed reading their exchange. Very normal with no unnecessary drama...wish their fans could get to that place as well...they seem very comfortable with each other, buttons and all... ;)

Strandy, you are cruisin' for a bruisin' ... you are trailin' for a flailin' ... you are chuggin' for a muggin' ...
:xoxo:

Strandy, with your impeccable logic, your command of rhetoric, & your crack research abilities, I would say that you have won this debate.

But now it's Miller time.

http://www.neonsign.com/eng_tackers/...lertimetin.jpg

I preferred it when you were slapping the newspaper loudly in your hand to correct the bad act.

Of course, I defer to Miller time any time :nod:

I agreed with you on all your points except this one David. In 1983 Stevie did a now famous MTV interview with Mark Goodman. At 3:48 in this interview Stevie says, " I loved being in Fleetwood Mac because it was a Band." And rumor should Always be spelled rumour.:laugh::lol:And thank you for teaching me how to embed videos.:)

I would like to see that again in 2009 perhaps. If not, well I did get to see one of my other favorite couples come to terms with their differences: After all, Cher gave an excellent eulogy at Sonny's funeral. Guess I can always look forward to that in Macland.

Michele

Stevie is full of crap. She was so out of it she wouldn't even remember. Lindsey, John, Mick, and Christine worked on TITN. Stevie came in for a few days sang some subpar songs and was on her way. She had nothing to do with that record IMO. Lindsey deserves the major credit on that one. I love that TITN was FM's second highest selling record because it proves to me that the lineup minus stevie could have succeeded without her.

Just some food for thought.

I do not think you are responding to my statement, though you quoted it. I do not think I ever said La Nicks deserved any credit for TITN. In fact, I said LB did most of the work on TITN, though I suspect CM had a significant say as did Richard. I simply said that I think La Nicks was somewhat correct in asserting LB had left FM after Mirage, though he came back (begrudgingly?) for TITN (which was his solo record at the beginning) and then officially left :shrug:

As for TITN being a success without her - that is not really a comparison or conclusion you can correctly draw IMO. She was on the record, albeit in a sub par fashion save for 7W IMO. She has routinely said that LB and the band worked on her songs on the prior records when she was not around, mostly because she does not play an intrument like they do. She also was a far larger "star" (which equated to commercial success which is what you are talking about) than LB or CM (though both IMO have more musical talent) at the time and even now. In the end, FM sells best when it is the five and IMO, the use of the individual talent (via competition perhaps) escalates when the five are together, which results in a better musical product and, somewhat separately, commercial success.

Interestingly, I often wonder what La Nicks was thinking around the TITN sessions. History demostrates that she was not as present for the other records as LB, CM or the rest of the band. Maybe she thought they don't want me there anyway. Who knows. I personally think she would have liked to have been there for all of it but could not because of obligations and the rehab, which she clearly needed. Is that her "fault?" I suppose the answer is yes. But, what was she supposed to do, not put out RAL on the hope that FM (read LB IMO) would get back together and release a record three years later. To me, that is an unreasonable expectation to place on her. I mean LB apparently was going full steam ahead on his solo record, but morphed it into TITN. Are we to fault him for proceeding with a second solo venture since Mirage? True, he morphed it into a FM record, but the reasons he did that IMO are business reasons. Conversely, Wild Heart sold around two or so million records and produced three hit singles ("Stand Back" (Billboard #5), "If Anyone Falls" (#14), and "Nightbird" (#33). So, though I think she would have liked to go back and record with FM, she had no reason to use FM in IMO the way LB did, albeit to brilliant results and success.

Well, then you have the Petty and Dylan tour she went on as well, which took her further away.

Of course, Lindsey needed FM so much that he waited three years after his solo album to work with them again and then decided not even to tour on the group album, although touring is where he would have made most of the money. But thinking about him not touring, that refutes the argument that if Christine recorded she would have to tour (which I suppose needs no refuting, because they all know it's a stupid argument).

Michele

OMG...I hope we don't have to wait for a palm tree fatality for their press to change from terms of enderament to settling terms of differences...that would be too depressing. How about we get new publicists? Maybe Sheryl Crow joining is not a bad idea - then they can spout how Sheryl and Lindsey hate each other and clash all the time and Stevie can be the innocent go-between trying to keep the peace. And, they can finally make that Rumours II album... :rolleyes:

Which, incidentally, Stevie did while Fleetwood Mac were recording TANGO, & which, incidentally, had nothing to do with publicity for her own album. Her own people were more than a little confused as to why she took off with Dylan & Petty instead of getting her own tour under way. (She didn't start her own tour until the second week in April, about five months after her album was released.)

I would imagine that the other members of Fleetwood were a little peeved when they found out about that. Strandford, I want you to figure out a way to explain how jetting off to the southern hemisphere was an example of Stevie's "loyalty" to Fleetwood Mac at the time. But hang on -- let me grab a chair & get comfortable.

I need an exact timeline of events. When exactly did FM (as a unit) go into the studio to start to record TITN as opposed to some of the members lending help as Mick did on WH for La Nicks. When exactly was La Nicks concert booked for RAL. Also, if Mick was so pissed about it, then why was he at the Red Rocks concert?

Then again, I kind of no longer give a shiitte. If you want to think La Nicks had no loyalty to FM, so be it. I am entitled to my opinion and it has been expressed enough. So, unless something new is said, everyone please see this thread and the other threads on this topic.