Quote:
Originally Posted by DownOnRodeo
The artist's management would definitely be orchestrating it all behind the scenes.
Because it plays into brand image etc.
|
Much as I've always liked Sheryl Crow, I thought she was kind of a lightweight in 1998 when she inducted Fleetwood (she grew in musical stature later with
The Globe Sessions). Everything she said was really vapid; do you remember her talking about the trendy shag haircut? And she didn't mention the great blues-rock years of the band at all.
Then again, the Eagles were inducted that same year by Jimmy Buffett, so let's be thankful for small favors.
I'd have been thrilled in 1998 if REM had done the honors, or Smashing Pumpkins or Courtney Love or Jane's Addiction or the Verve or Tonic or Ben Folds Five. But Sheryl in 1998 was more like the Dave Matthews Band—hitmakers but very adult-contemporary, which just reinforced Fleetwood Mac's innate blandness. Even Matchbox 20 would have been a little more exciting than Sheryl in 1998. The Foo Fighters wouldn't have done it in 1998—they probably hated Mac the way the Heartbreakers hated Mac in 1977, before realizing (uh, d'uh) that it was a great band.
Speaking of all these big music stars in 1998, has anyone played their copy of the Rumours tribute from 1998 in the last dozen years or so? See how bad musical choices become camp? That's why you have to listen to critics and people with judgment instead of to Mick Fleetwood.
Jon Pareles would never have given the green light to such a pukey album.