Quote:
Originally Posted by sodascouts
Mick said Spencer played some piano on it, so technically....
However, I do see your point in that light, if you truly believe they would have destroyed their legacy by releasing Then Play On under another name. I understand why you believe it could have been called a Fleetwood Mac album, even why it should have been called a Fleetwood Mac album.
But... if I hadn't been warned beforehand, I would have felt cheated and misled if I had bought an album which claimed to be a Fleetwood Mac album only to discover it was missing a key member, Stevie Nicks. I don't think I am the only one who would have felt that way.
Indeed, I think most fans would have considered it to be false advertising. "We were told we were getting a Fleetwood Mac album, but there's no Stevie Nicks on this. We've been lied to."
I believe it would have dishonest to call it a Fleetwood Mac album. I believe what you consider Lindsey's worst sin was a virtue.
I just wish that you could see that from one perspective, the choice was actually ethical.
|
We’ll have to agree to disagree. They went in with the idea they were making a new Fleetwood Mac album, not a duet album. The way they danced around it not being called Fleetwood Mac was embarrassing.
As for “false advertising,” all they needed to do is have a band photo without Stevie for the front cover. During the press for the album, they only needed to explain that Stevie wasn’t involved in the project due to solo commitments, but was still a member in good standing and would be rejoining them for the upcoming world tour.