The Ledge

Go Back   The Ledge > Main Forums > Rumours
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read


Make the Ads Go Away! Click here.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 09-08-2018, 02:54 PM
bombaysaffires bombaysaffires is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: West Coast
Posts: 4,650
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DownOnRodeo View Post
Aha!!
This proves that the Ellen performance (unlike the 100% live-to-air Today Show performances) was operated on during editing.

They spent SO much dedicated time on rehearsing and post-mixing, and yet half the band was still completely inaudible???
that was the first thing that popped into my head as soon as I read that line as well.

Why would they hang around? to FIX things!!

This points to how bad the SN team has gotten. They also ask for copies of audio recordings of interviews she does, and then go through them and tell reporters which parts to edit out. I don't have time to find it now but one reporter wrote about it.

She's OBSESSED with herself. I mean, she always has been....who else stays up all night taking pics of themselves and then spending countless hours hand tinting and tweaking them oh, wait....Kim Kardashian.... except you know what? Kim K has managed to get married and have multiple children as well. And she has family members who (for better or worse reasons) will call her out on stuff. Stevie has her career, and that's it. Sad. She really is on her way to becoming Norma Desmond.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-08-2018, 05:58 PM
Moz's Avatar
Moz Moz is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,236
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sodascouts View Post
They sounded not only better than ever, they sounded fresh, like a new band.
Yeah, because Lindsey was so stale.
__________________

"Or maybe she's a witch, who transcends the boundaries of time and space, and traveled back to 1981, for her own reference."
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 09-08-2018, 06:41 PM
David's Avatar
David David is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: California
Posts: 13,544
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bombaysaffires View Post
She's OBSESSED with herself. I mean, she always has been....who else stays up all night taking pics of themselves and then spending countless hours hand tinting and tweaking them oh, wait....Kim Kardashian.... except you know what? Kim K has managed to get married and have multiple children as well. And she has family members who (for better or worse reasons) will call her out on stuff. Stevie has her career, and that's it. Sad. She really is on her way to becoming Norma Desmond.
Norma Desmond, Miss Havisham, Sylvia Browne, Elizabeth Taylor. The references aren't very flattering—not the way they're intended.

Everything Stevie says and does is forced through her own gills. She romanticizes herself. She writes about other women real and fictional in the third person—Rhiannon, Mabel Normand, Garbo, Julia, Cecilia, sisters of the moon (or the moon and her sisters). But everybody knows those "characters" are really Stevie. That's why fans all interpret Stevie's hundreds of songs autobiographically. Those third-person princesses suffer just like Stevie. They're waifs with flowing golden hair trapped in ancient windswept castles, and it's all metaphorical for Stevie Nicks and her life circumstances. (Notice how the female faces in all the Maxfield Parrish paintings all look like the same girl?)

Back in her heyday, concert critics used to say the same thing about her in every review: "She has shed some, though far from all, of the spacey narcissism that has made her something of a caricature in rock," "Stripped of all her dying swan poses and faerie queen pretensions, Nicks was riveting," and so on. I know them all practically from memory. One of them wrote, "She is simply too flighty and fluttery to command a stage." The rock press accurately called out her narcissism back in the day, and we Macheads got really pissed off at them. (Treat yourself to the old reviews in the Blue Letter Archives.) But they were right. Stevie can't talk about anything without referring back to herself—the movies she loves, the movie stars she believes she resembles, the career choices other people make, the other members of Fleetwood Mac or Lady Antebellum or the Heartbreakers or any other band she takes a shine to, or those dozens of younger singer-songwriters she promotes in creepy ways, like Vanessa Carlton. Stevie thinks they're all younger versions of her.

She is obsessed with herself to a degree that seems to indicate a certain degree of pathology. It was compelling in a 30-year-old, but it seems twisted or creepy in a 70-year-old. Last year's 60 Minutes piece on Stevie and Chrissie Hynde was intended to celebrate two tough old rock stars, but the incongruity in their respective psychiatric health left me with a sour stomach and a crabbed fatigue. Chrissie sounded like a normal, healthy post-Freudian woman ("Why should I care if other people don't like the way I talk about my rape? I did some stupid sh|t when I was younger. I'm not here to give my critics the warm fuzzies."), and there was Stevie, locked in her self-worship, romanticizing her every golden curl, engaging in ditzy, pre-Freudian Barbie doll commentary. What other 60-year-old woman was moved beyond description by the Twilight movies? She has something wrong with her.
__________________

Last edited by David : 09-08-2018 at 06:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 09-08-2018, 07:06 PM
jwd jwd is online now
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Fleetucky
Posts: 3,198
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
Norma Desmond, Miss Havisham, Sylvia Browne, Elizabeth Taylor. The references aren't very flattering—not the way they're intended.

Everything Stevie says and does is forced through her own gills. She romanticizes herself. She writes about other women real and fictional in the third person—Rhiannon, Mabel Normand, Garbo, Julia, Cecilia, sisters of the moon (or the moon and her sisters). But everybody knows those "characters" are really Stevie. That's why fans all interpret Stevie's hundreds of songs autobiographically. Those third-person princesses suffer just like Stevie. They're waifs with flowing golden hair trapped in ancient windswept castles, and it's all metaphorical for Stevie Nicks and her life circumstances. (Notice how the female faces in all the Maxfield Parrish paintings all look like the same girl?)

Back in her heyday, concert critics used to say the same thing about her in every review: "She has shed some, though far from all, of the spacey narcissism that has made her something of a caricature in rock," "Stripped of all her dying swan poses and faerie queen pretensions, Nicks was riveting," and so on. I know them all practically from memory. One of them wrote, "She is simply too flighty and fluttery to command a stage." The rock press accurately called out her narcissism back in the day, and we Macheads got really pissed off at them. (Treat yourself to the old reviews in the Blue Letter Archives.) But they were right. Stevie can't talk about anything without referring back to herself—the movies she loves, the movie stars she believes she resembles, the career choices other people make, the other members of Fleetwood Mac or Lady Antebellum or the Heartbreakers or any other band she takes a shine to, or those dozens of younger singer-songwriters she promotes in creepy ways, like Vanessa Carlton. Stevie thinks they're all younger versions of her.

She is obsessed with herself to a degree that seems to indicate a certain degree of pathology. It was compelling in a 30-year-old, but it seems twisted or creepy in a 70-year-old. Last year's 60 Minutes piece on Stevie and Chrissie Hynde was intended to celebrate two tough old rock stars, but the incongruity in their respective psychiatric health left me with a sour stomach and a crabbed fatigue. Chrissie sounded like a normal, healthy post-Freudian woman ("Why should I care if other people don't like the way I talk about my rape? I did some stupid sh|t when I was younger. I'm not here to give my critics the warm fuzzies."), and there was Stevie, locked in her self-worship, romanticizing her every golden curl, engaging in ditzy, pre-Freudian Barbie doll commentary. What other 60-year-old woman was moved beyond description by the Twilight movies? She has something wrong with her.
Excellent post David! You summed up our long lost Queen so well.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 09-08-2018, 07:43 PM
sodascouts's Avatar
sodascouts sodascouts is offline
Addicted Ledgie
Supporting Ledgie
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Memphis area
Posts: 4,407
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
...those dozens of younger singer-songwriters she promotes in creepy ways, like Vanessa Carlton. Stevie thinks they're all younger versions of her.
I'd never thought of it that way, but now that you mention it... you're right.

Quote:
What other 60-year-old woman was moved beyond description by the Twilight movies?
Because Bella reminded her of herself.

Now that you've laid it all out like that... it's a pretty depressing read.
__________________
- Nancy

Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 09-08-2018, 07:54 PM
Storms123 Storms123 is online now
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 673
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moz View Post
Yeah, because Lindsey was so stale.
After seeing "Fleetwood Mac--High School Musical" the other day--I've really faced the reality that Stevie and Christine COULDN'T keep up with Lindsey anymore. He's a year younger than Stevie, but his energy level indicates far younger than that (and yes I agree Stevie looks fantastic for her a 70 year old) but whenever I see her moving in those heals on stage--I see a broken hip. With every twirl..... Mike and Neil are perfect for Christine and Stevie as we have them now. Mike doesn't move and if Neil moves to much, Stevie will just remind him to stop because she owns him now.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 09-08-2018, 07:58 PM
jwd jwd is online now
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Fleetucky
Posts: 3,198
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Storms123 View Post
After seeing "Fleetwood Mac--High School Musical" the other day--I've really faced the reality that Stevie and Christine COULDN'T keep up with Lindsey anymore. He's a year younger than Stevie, but his energy level indicates far younger than that (and yes I agree Stevie looks fantastic for her a 70 year old) but whenever I see her moving in those heals on stage--I see a broken hip. With every twirl..... Mike and Neil are perfect for Christine and Stevie as we have them now. Mike doesn't move and if Neil moves to much, Stevie will just remind him to stop because she owns him now.
You're not serious. Neil Finn is an adult man, with a little more self respect than that.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 09-08-2018, 08:23 PM
Storms123 Storms123 is online now
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 673
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sodascouts View Post
In his "Mailbag," Lefsetz published two emails from readers who agreed with him.

Those two readers just happened to be the executive producer and music producer of Ellen.

I imagine Lefsetz is counting on the fact that very few people will actually take the time to click on those links to the performance to verify what he says, and just accept his claim that their performance on Ellen was so incredible that it has outshone anything they have done in recent memory. Read: Buy tickets to see them now, folks!

I've subscribed for years, and I've never seen a more blatant example of Lefsetz being a "company man."

If you're curious, here are the employee emails of which I speak:
Subject: Re: The Chain

This piece made me very happy, Bob. During the soundcheck I turned to a younger co-worker next to me and said, "...and all of those sounds are actually coming from the band!" They even count themselves in, instead of clips or digital tracks counting them in. Mick Fleetwood on drums sounded incredible. And the whole band looked so happy to be performing together. It was a booking Jonny Norman, our Co-EP and music booker wanted so badly, and it was so much fun.

Ed Glavin
Exec. Producer, The Ellen Show

_____________________________________________________

Subject: Re: The Chain

Longtime fan, first time caller!

Thanks for this Bob, I'm the Music Producer at Ellen, and this booking was 15 years in the making, and let me tell you, they were incredible. I wish you had been in the room, because it was electric. They sounded not only better than ever, they sounded fresh, like a new band. I?m not sure even the band thought it could be possible, that they could reinvent the wheel at this stage of their career and succeed, but they did it.

And their work ethic. So many acts show up, perform their song, and get right back into their car. Not these guys. They show up early, they rehearse, they stay long after to make sure it sounds great, they work HARD. And that's why it works. And why this machine has been working for so long. They actually CARE about the music. And they?ve been smart. They have an amazing team of people around them, from the top - down. It was an extraordinary thing to be a part of and to watch them create their magic. And I'm so happy you posted our clip and felt the same way.

Best,
Jonathan
_______
Jonathan Norman
Co-Executive Producer
"The Ellen DeGeneres Show"
Karen probably wrote these emails
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 09-08-2018, 08:30 PM
elle's Avatar
elle elle is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: DC
Posts: 10,416
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Storms123 View Post
Karen probably wrote these emails
if these people really did this, it's as sad for them as it is hilarious.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 09-08-2018, 08:45 PM
Storms123 Storms123 is online now
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 673
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elle View Post
if these people really did this, it's as sad for them as it is hilarious.
HA--I said it in jest, but honestly--it's pretty amazing the backlash they are getting. If they didn't lie from day 1, it probably wouldn't be so bad, but when you think about it--the Rumours 5 haven't put out new music collectively in what, 30+ years--yet OWTS was virtually sold out. People want to see them. Fast forward to now, this tour isn't selling well. Yes it will likely do "fine" but with so many bands and performers of their era out doing tours/farewell tours now, this is a sad way to end. And I understand many disagree, but their legacy is tarnished. The backlash, nasty-grams on line, etc is still pretty vocal 5 months later. I know Stevie lives in a bubble and her people shield her from everything, but she's not a stupid woman. She knows what people are saying about this. Mick is not an idiot either. He may look like a court jester, but he's not. Even Azoff is probably saying "WTF" right now. Promoters are on the hook for a lot right now. I don't think it's an accident that no dates beyond the US have been announced yet. The next few months will be telling ( I would imagine)
There is a nostalgia to seeing the Rumours 5 play together. And I am not saying they don't play well together, because they do (or did) OWTS was amazing. Even with Chrisitne missing a note and Stevie sounding pitchy--it was okay they were singing 40 year old songs because the songs tell THEIR story. People don't feel that beholden to shell out money to see this iteration. There's no history, there are no stories, there is no thread pulling them together. Their "people" need to do something to entice broader masses of people to want to see this group. Better interviews ( and preferably telling the truth in them) better performances to promote, etc. It seems like any promotion around this tour has been slow to build and I have to wonder if it's because their PR folks didn't expect what's happened and are hoping it will blow over (i.e. after Ellen (not) or after iHeart Radio) We shall see.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 09-08-2018, 09:11 PM
jwd jwd is online now
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Fleetucky
Posts: 3,198
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Storms123 View Post
HA--I said it in jest, but honestly--it's pretty amazing the backlash they are getting. If they didn't lie from day 1, it probably wouldn't be so bad, but when you think about it--the Rumours 5 haven't put out new music collectively in what, 30+ years--yet OWTS was virtually sold out. People want to see them. Fast forward to now, this tour isn't selling well. Yes it will likely do "fine" but with so many bands and performers of their era out doing tours/farewell tours now, this is a sad way to end. And I understand many disagree, but their legacy is tarnished. The backlash, nasty-grams on line, etc is still pretty vocal 5 months later. I know Stevie lives in a bubble and her people shield her from everything, but she's not a stupid woman. She knows what people are saying about this. Mick is not an idiot either. He may look like a court jester, but he's not. Even Azoff is probably saying "WTF" right now. Promoters are on the hook for a lot right now. I don't think it's an accident that no dates beyond the US have been announced yet. The next few months will be telling ( I would imagine)
There is a nostalgia to seeing the Rumours 5 play together. And I am not saying they don't play well together, because they do (or did) OWTS was amazing. Even with Chrisitne missing a note and Stevie sounding pitchy--it was okay they were singing 40 year old songs because the songs tell THEIR story. People don't feel that beholden to shell out money to see this iteration. There's no history, there are no stories, there is no thread pulling them together. Their "people" need to do something to entice broader masses of people to want to see this group. Better interviews ( and preferably telling the truth in them) better performances to promote, etc. It seems like any promotion around this tour has been slow to build and I have to wonder if it's because their PR folks didn't expect what's happened and are hoping it will blow over (i.e. after Ellen (not) or after iHeart Radio) We shall see.
Well said Stormy! It's all about the Rumours 5, not some karaoke band.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 09-08-2018, 11:33 PM
Storms123 Storms123 is online now
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 673
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwd View Post
Well said Stormy! It's all about the Rumours 5, not some karaoke band.
I'm still heart broken--can you tell?
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 09-09-2018, 12:11 AM
HomerMcvie's Avatar
HomerMcvie HomerMcvie is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Indiana/Tennessee
Posts: 10,889
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jwd View Post
You're not serious. Neil Finn is an adult man, with a little more self respect than that.
If he had self respect, given his own career, he wouldn't have joined this FARCE. Seriously, WTF was he thinking?

Mike, I get that. He's lost his lifelong gig...
__________________
I will CRUSH YOU!!!! KAREN BRING ME MY FLIP PHONE!
And I'm David, not Homer!(we all should be able to change our name, at least once)
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 09-09-2018, 12:27 AM
Nathan's Avatar
Nathan Nathan is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,143
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bombaysaffires View Post
This points to how bad the SN team has gotten. They also ask for copies of audio recordings of interviews she does, and then go through them and tell reporters which parts to edit out. I don't have time to find it now but one reporter wrote about it.

She's OBSESSED with herself. I mean, she always has been....who else stays up all night taking pics of themselves and then spending countless hours hand tinting and tweaking them oh, wait....Kim Kardashian.... except you know what? Kim K has managed to get married and have multiple children as well. And she has family members who (for better or worse reasons) will call her out on stuff. Stevie has her career, and that's it. Sad. She really is on her way to becoming Norma Desmond.

Which part of this is news to you?

And you can say that it's "sad" that the woman doesn't have a family in the traditional, nuclear sense of the word but that's really just your opinion. Hers is a life lived on her own terms, with more freedom than you or I can comprehend, as a result of her excessive wealth. I don't know this firsthand but my guess is that with her level of access, domestic bliss might seem a little unimportant.

Also, if I recall correctly, Kim Kardashian is famous because of a sex tape.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 09-09-2018, 01:13 AM
Nathan's Avatar
Nathan Nathan is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,143
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
Norma Desmond, Miss Havisham, Sylvia Browne, Elizabeth Taylor. The references aren't very flattering—not the way they're intended.

Everything Stevie says and does is forced through her own gills. She romanticizes herself. She writes about other women real and fictional in the third person—Rhiannon, Mabel Normand, Garbo, Julia, Cecilia, sisters of the moon (or the moon and her sisters). But everybody knows those "characters" are really Stevie. That's why fans all interpret Stevie's hundreds of songs autobiographically. Those third-person princesses suffer just like Stevie. They're waifs with flowing golden hair trapped in ancient windswept castles, and it's all metaphorical for Stevie Nicks and her life circumstances. (Notice how the female faces in all the Maxfield Parrish paintings all look like the same girl?)

Back in her heyday, concert critics used to say the same thing about her in every review: "She has shed some, though far from all, of the spacey narcissism that has made her something of a caricature in rock," "Stripped of all her dying swan poses and faerie queen pretensions, Nicks was riveting," and so on. I know them all practically from memory. One of them wrote, "She is simply too flighty and fluttery to command a stage." The rock press accurately called out her narcissism back in the day, and we Macheads got really pissed off at them. (Treat yourself to the old reviews in the Blue Letter Archives.) But they were right. Stevie can't talk about anything without referring back to herself—the movies she loves, the movie stars she believes she resembles, the career choices other people make, the other members of Fleetwood Mac or Lady Antebellum or the Heartbreakers or any other band she takes a shine to, or those dozens of younger singer-songwriters she promotes in creepy ways, like Vanessa Carlton. Stevie thinks they're all younger versions of her.

She is obsessed with herself to a degree that seems to indicate a certain degree of pathology. It was compelling in a 30-year-old, but it seems twisted or creepy in a 70-year-old. Last year's 60 Minutes piece on Stevie and Chrissie Hynde was intended to celebrate two tough old rock stars, but the incongruity in their respective psychiatric health left me with a sour stomach and a crabbed fatigue. Chrissie sounded like a normal, healthy post-Freudian woman ("Why should I care if other people don't like the way I talk about my rape? I did some stupid sh|t when I was younger. I'm not here to give my critics the warm fuzzies."), and there was Stevie, locked in her self-worship, romanticizing her every golden curl, engaging in ditzy, pre-Freudian Barbie doll commentary. What other 60-year-old woman was moved beyond description by the Twilight movies? She has something wrong with her.
Well said, as usual David.

I felt the same way about that 60 Minutes piece. I was also front row center for the 24 Karat Gold Tour, and the difference between Chrissie and Stevie's musical styles, personalities, and interactions with the crowd, was equally stark in that setting, and in exactly the way that you describe.

"She has something wrong with her." Yes, for sure she does. I think that it has a great deal to do with (1) the small mountain of cocaine she spent ten years shoveling into her face, (2) the brain rot that resulted, (3) the pharmacy of pills she ingested over the better part of a decade, (4) far, far too much money, and (5), a "team" (to use their corporate lingo) of handmaidens and homegirls that are probably a little bit overindulgent.

She's also old.

But the fact that she has something wrong with her isn't new. That paper that someone wrote for a college film class likening her to Norma Desmond (right down to her fashion sense) was done in the mid-90s, during the Street Angel-era. So that's been 25 years. In my view, the likeness between SN and Desmond began even earlier - around 1987 or so, after she had gotten off the blow, and record sales had slowed.

Jim from Boston (SaidSomething is his username) has some fantastic stories about serving her in restaurants during that time period. I will PM him to see if he would like to chime in for those who haven't heard them.

For me, the Desmond connection has always been part of the appeal and the make-up of the whole package. She is at least half, and perhaps wholly, off of her rocker, and has been for some time. Her relationship with reality or lack thereof is one of the many contradictions that play a part in her image, and keep people engaged. If we remain tuned in, we might be able to figure her out completely. I call it the Stevie Nicks Scavenger Hunt, and I think it's the puzzle that many fans are intent on putting together. Is she crazy? Or just rich and eccentric? Or both? Is she strong or fragile? Impassioned performer or just high as a bat? Gifted writer or lifter of Oscar Wilde, the Spinners, Joni Mitchel, et al? Controlling diva or, humble woman who is aware that she got lucky by virtue of destiny and Lindsey Buckingham? An artist living life on her own new-wave feminist terms or, a giant B. who is so insufferably self-involved that she was unable to maintain a marriage or have children?

I subscribe to the theory of "I don't know."
__________________

Last edited by Nathan : 09-09-2018 at 02:53 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump

1997 Pretty Blond Singer Bekka Bramlett With Billy Burnette Press Photo
$20.0
1997 Pretty Blond Singer Bekka Bramlett With Billy Burnette Press Photo picture1985 Press Photo Billy Burnette, rock guitarist, singer, and songwriter.
$19.99
1985 Press Photo Billy Burnette, rock guitarist, singer, and songwriter. picture1986 Press Photo Billy Burnette, recording artist for MCA Records. - nop11855
$18.88
1986 Press Photo Billy Burnette, recording artist for MCA Records. - nop11855 pictureRARE 1980s Original 35mm Negative Strip of (3) Rock Star BILLY BURNETTE
$15.88
RARE 1980s Original 35mm Negative Strip of (3) Rock Star BILLY BURNETTE pictureRARE 1980s Original 35mm Negative Strip of (5) Rock Star BILLY BURNETTE
$15.88
RARE 1980s Original 35mm Negative Strip of (5) Rock Star BILLY BURNETTE picture



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 1995-2003 Martin and Lisa Adelson, All Rights Reserved