The Ledge

Go Back   The Ledge > Main Forums > Christine McVie
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 05-04-2004, 12:24 PM
Les's Avatar
Les Les is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 1,207
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomerMcvie
I think the main difference is their ages. Lindsey was how old in 1987? 38? Christine is 60!
I don't know. Sure, fans are ready to accept a "retirement" at 60 moreso than at an earlier age, but I seriously doubt that it was simply "the road" that made the decision for either one of them anyway. It played a role for each because the road represents time away from being able to focus on something besides the band. But I think they both made their choices on far more than that, including personal issues, relationships, other interests & band burnout.

It is a selfish choice on some level - one that was going to disappoint others - but it's the kind of selfish choice that I don't think anyone should be denied or have held against them. I don't doubt it was a difficult decision for both. But it was the best choice for his and her life at the time that each made the choice. They're real people with other things to tend to in life and they know what they're ready to deal with at any given point far better than we do. In those circumstances, thirty-eight or sixty is neither here nor there.
__________________
madness fades
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-04-2004, 12:35 PM
Les's Avatar
Les Les is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 1,207
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePenguin
No problem. I knew she said that, but thought I'd be looking for the article for hours. Since age 11 I've had an obsessive memory when it comes to FM quotes LOL. The problem is finding the actual source!

-Lis
By the way, I don't think I've ever read this 1997 Mojo article. Any chance you might be able to post it in the BLA?
__________________
madness fades
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05-04-2004, 01:01 PM
jbrownsjr jbrownsjr is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 16,381
Default

I can honestly say I didn't hold it against LB for exiting. I remember being really sad.

At the same time, I was also curious to see what CM and SN could do without him after so many years. I think it was very a respectable job covering the TITN tour on such short notice. I also thought the BTM tour was very good. I know many people did not think so, but I thought that FMac put on a very good show w/o Lindsey. The crowd in Cleveland (where i lived at the time) was going bezerk!

I remember when they opened with BTM the crowd errupted. CMcVie stole that show. Stevie looked a little out of it but she was still solid and the RV and BB were explosive at times.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-04-2004, 01:21 PM
CarneVaca CarneVaca is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,228
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomerMcvie
I think the main difference is their ages. Lindsey was how old in 1987? 38?
Christine is 60! That's a BIG difference in putting up with being on the road. I think Lindsey was being selfish(not that that's necessarily wrong), whereas Chris has just decided it's time to bow out gracefully.
Age shmage, dude. There's plenty of people touring into their 70s these days. How old is BB King? 80? Etta James? 75? Keith Richards? 112?

And as for the selfish commment, I'll just repeat what I said earlier:

Quote:
So if you're contractually obligated to contribute songs but don't want to tour, that's OK. However, if you agree to bail Mick out of bankruptcy by canning your solo record, giving the songs to FM instead, and then decide that you really can't tour with this band anymore, well... that's a huge betrayal?
If bowing out gracefully entails reluctantly contributing songs that you are contractually obligated to provide and then grousing about it, I guess we have a fundamental difference of opinion on what that means. If selfish is putting your own solo career on hold to bail out a bankrupt drummer, then we'll have to disagree on that too.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 05-04-2004, 01:57 PM
jbrownsjr jbrownsjr is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 16,381
Default

Yeah but I think Christine and Stevie said they would still record but not tour again. This was well before Time. LB on the other hand said he would tour then backed out. That's kind of what got the promoters and band mgmt a little miffed.

But like I said I respected his decision not to tour. His life was pretty messy back then. I was sad because he is amazing, and his work on TITN w/ Christine was amazing work!

Wayne Shorter sax - just saw him 2 weeks ago in Los Angeles, he is 71. Blew me away!
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 05-04-2004, 02:20 PM
ThePenguin's Avatar
ThePenguin ThePenguin is offline
Administrator
Supporting Ledgie
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 2,244
Default

>>>>By the way, I don't think I've ever read this 1997 Mojo article. Any chance you might be able to post it in the BLA? >>>>

I may get around to that eventually. :-) Right now I'm buried in info regarding the Chris/John bio I'm working on...but maybe after that I can transcribe it for the BLA.

-Lis
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 05-04-2004, 02:48 PM
Johnny Stew's Avatar
Johnny Stew Johnny Stew is offline
Addicted Ledgie
Supporting Ledgie
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 12,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarneVaca
So if you're contractually obligated to contribute songs but don't want to tour, that's OK. However, if you agree to bail Mick out of bankruptcy by canning your solo record, giving the songs to FM instead, and then decide that you really can't tour with this band anymore, well... that's a huge betrayal?

Help me out here, folks, because I think there's some kind of double standard going on.
You're just trying to start the Christine Forum's very first thread war, aren't ya?

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.
Yes, fans would have still been disappointed he left the band, just as they're greatly disappointed Christine has left, but there wouldn't be that vibe of "broken promises."

I'm not criticizing Lindsey in the least, and you're right, it was a very selfless thing he did by folding his solo album into 'Tango,' and giving up his time to tackle the producer/arranger duties. 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.
__________________
"Although the arrogance of fame lingers like a thick cloud around the famous, the sun always seems to shine for Stevie." -- Richard Dashut, 2014
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 05-04-2004, 03:09 PM
strandinthewind's Avatar
strandinthewind strandinthewind is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York City
Posts: 25,791
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Stew
You're just trying to start the Christine Forum's very first thread war, aren't ya?

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.
Yes, fans would have still been disappointed he left the band, just as they're greatly disappointed Christine has left, but there wouldn't be that vibe of "broken promises."

I'm not criticizing Lindsey in the least, and you're right, it was a very selfless thing he did by folding his solo album into 'Tango,' and giving up his time to tackle the producer/arranger duties. 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.
Well said Brian. Plus, is no one willing to give Stevie the credit for returning to FM at all when she clearly did not have to. I mean that was as big of a "sacrifice" as LB turning his solo record over
__________________
Photobucket

save the cheerleader - save the world
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 05-04-2004, 03:19 PM
CarneVaca CarneVaca is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,228
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by strandinthewind
Well said Brian. Plus, is no one willing to give Stevie the credit for returning to FM at all when she clearly did not have to. I mean that was as big of a "sacrifice" as LB turning his solo record over
Dude, we're talking Christine now. Get with the program...

Besides, in 1987 a solo Lindsey album would have done well. Keep in mind he had fairly big hit with the Go Insane single.

But we're talking about Christine anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 05-04-2004, 03:40 PM
Les's Avatar
Les Les is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 1,207
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Stew
... then I'm sure it would have been completely different.
It would have been somewhat different, but I tend to think that allegations of betrayal would still have been tossed around mostly because it was a product of where they were in their lives back then. And the pressures they were under, and the pressures they were putting on each other back then. If any of it happened now, when all of them are more clear-thinking and level-headed, it would be different. I don't think the band would handle it the same way. Among other things, I don't think they would relentlessly pressure Lindsey to tour when he clearly didn't want to, leading him to a reluctant decision that he soon realized he really couldn't handle and shouldn't have made.

There are a few vocal people who view Lindsey very harshly still. But I don't know how many really do. I think most people are actually able to look at it in a pretty human way. I can't really imagine looking at Christine's departure harshly either.
__________________
madness fades
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 05-04-2004, 03:45 PM
sodascouts's Avatar
sodascouts sodascouts is offline
Addicted Ledgie
Supporting Ledgie
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Memphis area
Posts: 4,498
Default

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.
__________________
- Nancy


Last edited by sodascouts; 05-04-2004 at 03:48 PM.. Reason: Clearing up any implied diss of Christine.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 05-04-2004, 04:11 PM
jbrownsjr jbrownsjr is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 16,381
Default

Is it really a sacrifice for LB to give up his solo work to fold into a FM album?

LB average sales just over 100,000 units
FMac average sales TITN 1,000,000 plus and then this also did huge internationally

I love LB, but the sacrifice thing kind of cracks me up.

Seems like he's always sacrificing albums for FMac, poor guy!
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 05-04-2004, 05:42 PM
strandinthewind's Avatar
strandinthewind strandinthewind is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York City
Posts: 25,791
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrownsjr
Is it really a sacrifice for LB to give up his solo work to fold into a FM album?

LB average sales just over 100,000 units
FMac average sales TITN 1,000,000 plus and then this also did huge internationally

I love LB, but the sacrifice thing kind of cracks me up.

Seems like he's always sacrificing albums for FMac, poor guy!
I am glad you said this instead of me Although - clearly LB, SN, and CM all gain in sales and marketability from FM
__________________
Photobucket

save the cheerleader - save the world
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 05-04-2004, 06:12 PM
dissention's Avatar
dissention dissention is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 26,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Stew
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.
Were any contracts signed? I don't remember reading anything about anything being signed by Lindsey, so anything he said before he did so was tentative at best.

And, from what I hear, fans weren't really disappointed once they went to the concerts. I'll let Chili pipe in with how ecstatic the crowds were.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 05-04-2004, 06:46 PM
Les's Avatar
Les Les is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 1,207
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrownsjr
Is it really a sacrifice for LB to give up his solo work to fold into a FM album?
Oh goodness, I'm tired of this argument. Do we really want to argue that their solo work is less meaningful to them (or us for that matter) because it sells less? I certainly don't.

Belittling the man's solo sales doesn't negate the fact that he stopped his personal project and gave two years of his life to the whole band instead. A band that he was thinking of leaving. It was a commitment that few in the band - perhaps only Christine - were willing or able to match. He could have left without doing the album. He could have insisted that they wait for him to do the solo album first. He could have insisted upon being allowed to do both, and just doing his personal little bits for Tango and then taking off again with little care about what else happend with the album. He didn't, thankfully.

-----
Lis - thanks for the response about the article. If you can scan it, I can probably transcribe it for you if you're interested. Just let me know.
__________________
madness fades
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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


Billy Burnette - Billy Burnette [New CD] Rmst, Reissue picture

Billy Burnette - Billy Burnette [New CD] Rmst, Reissue

$15.38



Billy Burnette - Memphis in Manhattan ***PROMO*** 2006 Release picture

Billy Burnette - Memphis in Manhattan ***PROMO*** 2006 Release

$19.99



BILLY BURNETTE S/T Self-Titled  1980 Columbia In Shrink w/Hype Sticker Rock  NM picture

BILLY BURNETTE S/T Self-Titled 1980 Columbia In Shrink w/Hype Sticker Rock NM

$11.99



Billy Burnette - Billy Burnette [Used Very Good CD] Rmst, Reissue picture

Billy Burnette - Billy Burnette [Used Very Good CD] Rmst, Reissue

$12.47



Billy Burnette, Tangled Up In Texas / Into The Storm, 7

Billy Burnette, Tangled Up In Texas / Into The Storm, 7" 45rpm, Vinyl NM

$12.99




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 1995-2003 Martin and Lisa Adelson, All Rights Reserved