Who are the most talented members of Fleetwood Mac?

[BBALLGYPSY17]

I couldn't have said it better myself!

LOL
~alex~*

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by Johnny Stew
Stevie has been recording since 1973, and has enjoyed a tremendous amount of popularity in the 29 years since. True, her popularity waned for a period, but that was more of a reflection on changing tastes, than on her abilities... as evidenced by the fact that she's "popular" once again.

So the fact that she lost her voice, had to go to rehab a couple of times and went through an extended period of no creativity had nothing to do with it?

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
So the fact that she lost her voice, had to go to rehab a couple of times and went through an extended period of no creativity had nothing to do with it?

Stevie had some troubles in her life... so let's all crucify her for being human.

Which is it... Stevie, The Perfect Goddess... or Stevie, the human who makes mistakes like the rest of us?


Johnny Stew

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by Johnny Stew


Stevie had some troubles in her life... so let's all crucify her for being human.

Which is it... Stevie, The Perfect Goddess... or Stevie, the human who makes mistakes like the rest of us?


Johnny Stew

No one is crucifying her for being human. You said that her popularity waned for a while as more of a reflection of "changing tastes" than of "her abilities." The record simply does not reflect that. I would say it was a confluence of all of these factors that made her unpopular, not just changing tastes. And I would say "unpopular" without hesitation, as opposed to saying her popularity "waned." Remember Letterman's anti-Stevie rants? Remember the Rolling Stone review of Street Angel?

[The Tower]

Originally posted by CarneVaca


I couldn't disagree more. Talent is not subjective. Taste is.

Well, not really..... One may think that there is some book out there that states what is talent and what is not talent, but it's not quite that simple.

Many people think that Celine Dion is a talented singer, however, I think she's just screaming.

Webster's definition of the word "talent" is this: a special, superior ability in art, mechanics, learning, etc.

Is Stevie a talented vocalist?? I think so. She can harmonize really well, and I know from experience that singing harmony is no easy task.

The idiots from "American Idol" have one idea of talent and I have another. So, I would consider the idea of talent as subjective.

[Johnny Stew]

Originally posted by CarneVaca
No one is crucifying her for being human. You said that her popularity waned for a while as more of a reflection of "changing tastes" than of "her abilities." The record simply does not reflect that. I would say it was a confluence of all of these factors that made her unpopular, not just changing tastes. And I would say "unpopular" without hesitation, as opposed to saying her popularity "waned." Remember Letterman's anti-Stevie rants? Remember the Rolling Stone review of Street Angel?

Actually I dont remember any "anti-Stevie" rants from Letterman. His beef was always directed at her management. He never said anything derogatory against Stevie personally.
Additionally, those "rants" occured in 1986... so if you're going to refer to 'Street Angel,' which was released in 1994, then the Letterman thing has nothing to do with the discussion, as Stevie appeared on his show at this time.

Rolling Stone, as a rule, has always reviewed Stevie's albums unfavorably, so they're not a very accurate gauge of Stevie's popularity.
As for the reviews of 'Street Angel,' I have a positive one from Entertainment Weekly that I'd be more than happy to post... so obviously not every critic deemed it a failure.

It's true that 'Street Angel' doesn't stand up as one of Stevie's best efforts, but it was by no means an artistic disaster, or a sign that her talent was lost forever.
She was suffering from personal demons, and that album reflects this.
Again, she's human... she's allowed to have an off day, or even a less-than-stellar album.


Johnny Stew

[The Tower]

Originally posted by golddustwoman77
quote:
I started this thread to be positive and to celebrate all the great talents of Fleetwood Mac. I had not planned on some of the negativity. I think a true Fleetwood Mac fan would celebrate the members and discuss their positives and not look to comment mostly on their negatives, nor would they look to slam the members of the band. I guess KIND criticism is okay, but slamming them is not cool!

Well, when I stated that Stevie can't play piano for ****, I think that's more of a truth than a negative. I think Stevie knows that. I certainly wasn't slamming her.

I know for a fact that my guitar playing is pretty pathetic, but I still play rhythm guitar in bands every once and awhile.

It's all cool.

[joe68]

I check these posts everyday and rarely write. But...

Oh good grief. Not this Carna-whatsa person again. More needless nasty comments written to provoke. I'm wondering if you got picked on by the "popular" kids in high school and now start arguments as some sort of validation.

I wont take up this space to defend Stevie, I see no reason to on one of her own fan sites, but I will give some advice:

Please Stevie fans, do not get your dander up based on the rants from the person mentioned above. How many of you would visit the sites of other artists just to pick on that person and the fans that visit the site. I find it pathetic and pointless. And if this person is call themselves a FM fan, I havent seen any proof of that either.

Just remember some people get off on being rude and insensitive and the way to get them to stop is not to reply.

[chiliD]

Every artist has some kind of "image," but if you strip away that image and there's nothing left, then they're not going to be around very long.

If it were really all about some glam outfits, and some cool boots, she would have been long forgotten by now...

I wasn't saying it was her "outfits" in particular...I'm saying it was the whole "Rhiannon" mystique that got her noticed...along with her stage presence (her vocal technique, or lack thereof, is what ruined her voice). And, it's the same "Rhiannon" mystique she's kept throughout her career. Same as the band itself beating the "Rumours" horse to death, the "Rhiannon" thing is old & tired. I would think that she would've at least ONCE in her career done a "reinvent" (like Bowie does every few years...the big one being from Ziggy Stardust to the Thin White Duke), just to have the opportunity to re-Rhiannon herself again at some point to much hoopla & hype. But, no, she's kept the same persona through her entire career and, to me (and apparently I'm not alone) it's gotten a bit stale. The thing is, that she's got ENOUGH of a following that DOES buy in to the "Rhiannon" mystique, so consistently, deeply, and avidly, that she doesn't HAVE to have "substance". It's like the blind faithful following the Grateful Dead had/has...is there/was there "substance" behind the Grateful Dead mystique? I don't think so, and I'm a Grateful Dead fan, too. It just boggles my mind how they kept a following for all those decades and the mystique just kept growing (VERY much like Stevie's does). I don't understand how Stevie's mystique keeps drawing people, as well. But, it does.

[Johnny Stew]

Ok, so let's discuss this "image" thing for a minute.

Yes, we can say that the whole "Rhiannon", mystical thing makes for a great image... something for fans, and critics, to latch onto, and do with what they will... but at the same time, Stevie has always maintained that this "image" wasn't terribly calculated. She wore the clothes that she liked... and moved around the stage the way she wanted to move.

Granted she plays it up... which any entertainer worth their weight in gold, should know how to do... but it is very much a part of HER personality, on or off the stage.

She's not a Bowie or a Madonna... she's not someone who needs to change herself from album to album or video to video.
She's got her thing and she sticks with it, and I think that's something her fans tend to really appreciate about her.

Bowie's last few albums have been VERY different from anything he's ever recorded... and the public at large doesn't seem to be the least bit interested.
Am I saying an artist should never change, or try new things?
Absolutely not.
I'm just saying that innovation doesnt inherently equal substance, or appeal.

And yes, I can see how Stevie's "mystique" would get stale to some people... I look at Michael Jackson still doing the exact same dance moves 18 years after 'Thriller,' and I'm bored to tears. But Stevie never did purport to be on the cutting edge of anything. Her performances were never about innovative dance moves, and her music has never been intended to be a harbinger of new fads.

If someone finds that uninteresting, then by all means, look elsewhere for your entertainment... but again, it's unfair to dismiss Stevie as nothing more than a well-used image.



Johnny Stew

[seteca]

Originally posted by joe68
...Oh good grief. Not this Carna-whatsa person again. More needless nasty comments written to provoke. I'm wondering if you got picked on by the "popular" kids in high school and now start arguments as some sort of validation.

I wont take up this space to defend Stevie, I see no reason to on one of her own fan sites, but I will give some advice:

Please Stevie fans, do not get your dander up based on the rants from the person mentioned above. How many of you would visit the sites of other artists just to pick on that person and the fans that visit the site. I find it pathetic and pointless. And if this person is call themselves a FM fan, I havent seen any proof of that either.

Just remember some people get off on being rude and insensitive and the way to get them to stop is not to reply.

Hi joe68,

please explain to me (as I'd really like to know), exactly what part of CarneVaca's posts are "pathetic" or "pointless" or "needless" or "nasty" ?

He's merely contributing to this thread by giving his opinion. As ChiliD stated, threads tend to take up a "life" of their own after the first few posts, and so although the post is meant to be "say who u think is the most talented", one shouldn't be surprised if people give related comments, like what their opinion is about the talents of Stevie Nicks. His is a negative opinion. So what? He was not rude about Stevie, and he was not rude to any Ledgie in any way (as far as I can see). Surely it's healthy to have a mix of views on any *discussion* forum?

He even went out of his way to write "In my humble, most subjective opinion", so that we know he is merely expressing his views, which, he doesn't have to do seeing as his posts have his screenname next to them so obviously they are HIS opinions.

I don't think he has to "prove" to you or anybody else that he is a Fleetwood Mac fan. (Incidentally if you do visit this site as often as you say you do then surely you would have seen the countless positive contributions he has made on the Lindsey Buckingham forum, including being the first to inform us of CVB's "Tusk" album release.)


Personally, I think

"Oh good grief. Not this Carna-whatsa person again"

and

"I'm wondering if you got picked on by the "popular" kids in high school and now start arguments as some sort of validation."

are some of the "nastiest" and "needless" comments i have ever read on The Ledge,

I'm not trying to "start" anything with you, and i'm not trying to defend CarneVaca either (if he feels the need to defend himself i'm sure he is more than capable), I just think what you said was a little OTT and uncalled-for...if CarneVaca posted anything in the past which was "wrong" in any way, I don't think it should be an excuse to attack every negative comment he says from then on.

I've said it (and many others have aswell) before and I'll say it again, this is NOT a Fleetwood Mac PRAISE board, it is a Fleetwood Mac DISCUSSION board.

And that last sentence, is the only part of my post which is not my opinion, but a FACT.

[The Tower]

I keep coming back to Stevie because of her passion and her unique, universal insight.

I don't care a rat's ass about what she wears or any of that witchy crap. It's interesting, but it's not what drew me to Stevie.

(I'll kind of get back to the idea of this thread...)

As an example, I think that, in general, the lyrics to "I Miss You" from TISL are pretty trite and routine. However, when sung by Stevie, the lyrics have soooo much more meaning and deep emotion. That kind of stuff you CAN'T fake and has nothing to do with the shoes and the shawls and all that crap.

I mean, either you feel it or you don't.... I know I do.

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by seteca


Hi joe68,

please explain to me (as I'd really like to know), exactly what part of CarneVaca's posts are "pathetic" or "pointless" or "needless" or "nasty" ?

He's merely contributing to this thread by giving his opinion.

Seteca, thank you. I was about to let the guy have it when I read your post. You said all that needed to be said.

[CarneVaca]

Originally posted by Johnny Stew

Actually I dont remember any "anti-Stevie" rants from Letterman. His beef was always directed at her management. He never said anything derogatory against Stevie personally.
Additionally, those "rants" occured in 1986... so if you're going to refer to 'Street Angel,' which was released in 1994, then the Letterman thing has nothing to do with the discussion, as Stevie appeared on his show at this time.

Johnny, you are obviously very well informed about the band. But I recall clearly Letterman playing the ending of "Big Love" back then and having a grand ole laugh at Stevie's expense. (Of course, he didn't know that the ooh aahs were actually Lindsey's). And while he did direct a lot of his rants at the management company, he most certainly poked fun at her in a major way. Besides, the management company represents her, so any comments directed at them in their handling of the artist are ultimately directed at the artist.

Secondly, you accurately point out that the examples I picked are eight years apart. Which if anything just goes to show that this lack of popularity was pretty lenghthy. The tide didn't turn until about 1997. Already when Tango came out, there was a lot of antipathy toward Stevie; people were having great fun at mocking her image. And this goes to ChiliD's point. Look at Madonna, she's been loved, she's been hated. She redid her image as often as a normal person might change underwear, and now she is credited as being a great artist, rightly or wrongly.

But beyond the image thing, the fact is that Stevie, as far as I can see, has not written a good song in more than 15 years. And her voice is shot. And, in my humble opinion, the reason she gets so much attention and respect now is because she is a survivor, not because of her music. No one can take that away from her. But can she sing now? No. Can she write a good song now? Possibly, but I haven't heard it.

[bjk3047]

Well hey now, hold on a minute. I agree with a lot of what you said, but "Her voice is shot"? If you can say that, than I can sau Lindsey's voice is "shot". C'mon now, her voice has changed as has Lindsey's as well. If her voice was shot, she wouldn't be performing anymore. I'm sorry, she wouldn't be performing WELL anymore. And if you wanna go that route, at least she HAS been singing. What can be said for Lindsey (if you'd like to make a straight up comparison)? My preference between the two is LB, don't get me wrong, I just think that's a bit of a cheap shot.
-Brian