Should Bob Brunning be regarded as a member of Fleetwood Mac?

[chriskisn]

Yes Bob Brunning was a member of Fleetwood Mac, I don't think that point can really be argued, but should he be really be considered as such?

For my part I think that he should, for without Bob Brunning there might not be a Fleetwood Mac, perhaps Peter having failing to convince McVie to join and having failed to recruit a bass player (remember that Bob was the only one who replied to the Melody Maker ad), might have decided to give the whole idea away and finish his butcher's apprenticeship...

[holidayroad]

I agree that he should be considered a member. If he had not joined, there may have been no Fleetwood Mac. So I should say 'Thanks Bob!!!"

[PenguinHead]

Bob can be considered the most brief member of Fleetwood Mac. Blink a minute, and you'll miss him. In comparison, Dave Walker could be considered a long-term member.

[ButterCookie]

Of course he should! Bekka gets regarded as a member doesn't she

[chiliD]

What is, IS. He WAS a member of Fleetwood Mac, fact, game over.

It's not like he's some "dwarf planet" whose definition can be changed by some panel of scientist geeks. (Sorry, Pluto, couldn't resist)

[MacShadowsBall]

Well from what I have understood, they wanted John - but he passed. They got Bob and then John said "Okay." So if Brunning was there first, John can't be considered an "original" member - as he is always referred to as along with Mic.


Of course some think of Stevie and Lindsey as "original" members!!

[chiliD]

Originally Posted by MacShadowsBall

Well from what I have understood, they wanted John - but he passed. They got Bob and then John said "Okay." So if Brunning was there first, John can't be considered an "original" member - as he is always referred to as along with Mic.


Of course some think of Stevie and Lindsey as "original" members!!

Although, recently, I've seen Mick referred to as "the only remainin original member" of Fleetwood Mac. John's been recategorized on that count.

[aleuzzi]

The only answer is yes, but boy do I hate to admit it. His book on the band was one of the worst things I ever read--good lord all those errors of well-known facts! And his affiliation with a recent dvd documentary which has no band footage and no interviews with any member of the band, save him, was worse.

[Almost Simon]

Yes, he was and should be considered a member.

[TrueFaith77]

I voted "No." Otherwise, aren't there many musicians who should also be considered members? Do we have the names of all of the members of the 1979 USC band? For me, it's Mick & John and the singer/songwriters. Perhaps I am misunderstanding Bob's contribution to the band, but if he only played on a few recorded tracks, that's not enough to rate him above other musicians who did the same.


p.s. -- My dream of a Mac reunion album with ALL the past members would not necessitate a return of Bob Brunning, for example. ... In fact, I'd prefer the return the of USC marching band.

[chriskisn]

Originally Posted by TrueFaith77

I voted "No." Otherwise, aren't there many musicians who should also be considered members? Do we have the names of all of the members of the 1979 USC band? For me, it's Mick & John and the singer/songwriters. Perhaps I am misunderstanding Bob's contribution to the band, but if he only played on a few recorded tracks, that's not enough to rate him above other musicians who did the same.


p.s. -- My dream of a Mac reunion album with ALL the past members would not necessitate a return of Bob Brunning, for example. ... In fact, I'd prefer the return the of USC marching band.

Surely though, he was actually hired as a member of the band (admittedly a temporary one) rather than as a session musician or a backing musician. It doesn't matter that he was only there for a few short months...

Otherwise, where do you draw the line? If a few months isn't enough, then does Dave Walker count? How many months/years are required for someone to be classified as a band member?

How many songs does someone have to contribute to? Would he be considered more important (and more of a band member) if he had been a vocalist rather than the bass player?

[TrueFaith77]

Originally Posted by chriskisn

Surely though, he was actually hired as a member of the band (admittedly a temporary one) rather than as a session musician or a backing musician. It doesn't matter that he was only there for a few short months...

Otherwise, where do you draw the line? If a few months isn't enough, then does Dave Walker count? How many months/years are required for someone to be classified as a band member?

How many songs does someone have to contribute to? Would he be considered more important (and more of a band member) if he had been a vocalist rather than the bass player?

Well I defined MY line. But I agree that MINE should not be everyone's--and that someone should define exactly what constitutes a Mac member. On how many studio tracks did Bob play bass with no McVie?

[chiliD]

Originally Posted by TrueFaith77

Well I defined MY line. But I agree that MINE should not be everyone's--and that someone should define exactly what constitutes a Mac member. On how many studio tracks did Bob play bass with no McVie?

What difference does it make how many studio tracks he played on? During his tenure, Fleetwood Mac was basically a LIVE band, not a RECORDING band. How many live Fleetwood Mac gigs did he play between August & November 1967 while McVie was still schlepping to gigs for John Mayall?? There's your benchmark.

[chriskisn]

Originally Posted by TrueFaith77

Well I defined MY line. But I agree that MINE should not be everyone's--and that someone should define exactly what constitutes a Mac member. On how many studio tracks did Bob play bass with no McVie?

Well didn't he only officially play on one studio track - Long Grey Mare?

However, he may have played on others uncredited when McVie was too drunk - I seem to remember something about that from his book?

[sharksfan2000]

Originally Posted by chriskisn

Well didn't he only officially play on one studio track - Long Grey Mare?

However, he may have played on others uncredited when McVie was too drunk - I seem to remember something about that from his book?

According to Mike Vernon's notes in the Complete Blue Horizons Sessions box set, Brunning also played bass on "I Believe My Time Ain't Long" and probably contributed backing vocals on "Rambling Pony". And as chiliD notes, he played a number of shows during his tenure in the band (the number varies depending on the source - according to Christopher Hjort's book, it may have been as few as 10 shows, while both Fleetwood's and Brunning's books imply it was considerably more).

But there's no denying that he was an original part of the band, and regardless of what you may think of Brunning's book or anything else about him, by definition he was a band member. And an anecdote from Fleetwood's book shows that's how other band members thought of him - he notes that Peter Green had Brunning step up to the mike to announce the first song they ever played at their debut gig at Windsor! You think Green would have had someone he didn't consider a fellow band member - even one he may have hoped would be replaced at some point - do that?