Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Johnny Stew
As has been said, it was two different sets of circumstances.
Lindsey quit the band in 1987 after a tour was booked. Christine, on the other hand, made it clear from the outset that she wouldn't be touring after 1990, only recording with the band.
There were no expectations that Christine would tour... however, there were expectations that Lindsey would tour. So feelings were hurt, and folks (fans as well as his bandmates) felt letdown or "betrayed."
If Lindsey had given a firm "no" right from the start, and made it abundantly clear that he was not going to tour for the album, and if he hadn't allowed dates to be booked, then I'm sure it would have been completely different.
[...] And as far as I'm concerned it's all water under the bridge, but since you're asking why there's a different reaction from many of the fans in regards to Lindsey not touring and Christine not touring, these are the reasons as I see them.  |
Exactly. Seems like a pretty significant difference to me. And it's a pretty straightforward one as well. Not hard to imagine why one would be viewed more negatively than the other.
Without getting bogged down into hypotheticals, though, I will venture to say that Lindsey's departure would still have been viewed more negatively than Christine's, simply because so much depended on him. Where were Fleetwood Mac without him? Up on of those rivers Carne talked about in the Rumours forum without any toilet paper.
P.S. Not that a lot didn't depend on Christine too! The stakes were just a lot lower when she left, as has been stated above.