Why does everyone say Lindsey Buckingham IS Fleetwood Mac? - Page 3

David · #31 10-02-2003, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by EricBliss12345
It's his strengths as an arranger, instrumentalist, and producer that I respect more than his songs.

As does he!

David · #32 10-02-2003, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by wondergirl9847
Today, she's off drugs and YAY to that, although, we get a more subdued Stevie, but would you rather have an unhealthy Stevie giving a wild, crazy show or a healthy, more subdued Stevie giving a good show?

I'm gonna plead the Fifth here. . . .

David · #33 10-02-2003, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by reebokandlace
I think Stevie IS Fleetwood Mac. Regardless of Lindsey's on stage antics on this tour, let's face it, his solo albums have flopped. I know the albums without Lindsey didn't do that great, but people DID show up for the concerts (Tango/BTM/Best Of) with Billy Burnett and Rick Vito because they were coming to see STEVIE.

I'm a fan & I showed up back then to see & hear Christine &, of course, my fave rhythm section, beside whom other rock rhythm sections just seem to have no infectiousness. I had tired of Stevie's doughy, enervated shtick by then.

Quote:

My opinion: I think if Fleetwood Mac had Lindsey but no Stevie, ticket and CD sales would flop. Her solo albums sell, his flop. Fact.

Her solo albums are greeted by the rock press & by other musicians thus: "How can someone so hip also be so incredibly stupid?" His solo albums are showered with praise & comparisons are drawn to Brian Wilson. Fact.

This whole thing is really silly. Stevie has strengths as a singer & performer & weaknesses as an arranger, producer & instrumentalist. Lindsey also has various strengths & weaknesses, as do Christine, John, Mick, Peter, Danny, Bob, etc. Fleetwood Mac was always about the group, not the individual star-czar. Peter saw that truth way back in the beginning.

cliffdweller · #34 10-02-2003, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by darklinensuit
(Minor correction: I don't think you meant to put that Stevie was in the Time band or album.)

- JAKE

You're right, I meant to write something else there and forgot to delete it all!

-Tracye

strandinthewind · #35 10-02-2003, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by David
Her solo albums are greeted by the rock press & by other musicians thus: "How can someone so hip also be so incredibly stupid?" His solo albums are showered with praise & comparisons are drawn to Brian Wilson. Fact.

I think you are not reading enough articles/reviews.

Although they may call her stuff a fairy tale, I do not remember any of Stevie's solo recording a being totally dissed in any major periodical and I cannot recall anyone calling her stupid. In fact, the TISL reviews were calling her an icon and a survivor in a tough music world. Also, the Timespace reviews from the major sources showered her with praise and some even said she was finally proving she was substantial within her fairy tale

Even Street Angel got okay reviews by Rolling Stone and other magazines.

#36 10-02-2003, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by strandinthewind
I think you are not reading enough articles/reviews.

Although they may call her stuff a fairy tale, I do not remember any of Stevie's solo recording a being totally dissed in any major periodical and I cannot recall anyone calling her stupid. In fact, the TISL reviews were calling her an icon and a survivor in a tough music world. Also, the Timespace reviews from the major sources showered her with praise and some even said she was finally proving she was substantial within her fairy tale Even Street Angel got okay reviews by Rolling Stone and other magazines.

obviously, you're a newer fan....David's right. I've been a fan since 1981 and back then (and even before that) she wasn't NOT getting praise all around as an icon. She definately was viewed as airy fairy and ditzy. It wasn't until the 90's that she was getting more of the praise. I think when she first started her solo career she was still considered relatively new and they type of persona she adopted was not really the norm so a lot of people didn't know what to do with her except roll their eyes and chuckle. When you're a little off center that's the kind of reaction you're going to get. The public has to have enough time to really adapt and then appreciate you. It also helps that she was in a legendary band like FM.

#37 10-02-2003, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by David
I'm gonna plead the Fifth here. . . .

David...you kill me!!! hahahaha....cause you know i think i'm going to do the same!

strandinthewind · #38 10-02-2003, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by joe
obviously, you're a newer fan....David's right. I've been a fan since 1981 and back then (and even before that) she wasn't NOT getting praise all around as an icon. She definately was viewed as airy fairy and ditzy. It wasn't until the 90's that she was getting more of the praise. I think when she first started her solo career she was still considered relatively new and they type of persona she adopted was not really the norm so a lot of people didn't know what to do with her except roll their eyes and chuckle. When you're a little off center that's the kind of reaction you're going to get. The public has to have enough time to really adapt and then appreciate you. It also helps that she was in a legendary band like FM.

Actually, I have been a fan since 1975 - so I remember the really bad reviews with FM in the early days

But, when Bella Donna came out, it got good and some great reviews. Yes, "they" (mostly men who had no clue what she was talking about and/or her delivery of it) were calling her music a fairy tale, but Rolling Stone and other main stream periodicals did not 100% slam her for Bella Donna. To wit - "Bella Donna proves that Fleetwood Mac's blond priestess of the occult can stand on her own as a solo act." See http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/....asp?aid=49138 Granted the article slams her writing as airy fairy, but concludes it has a place in the world and it works - they gave it three stars out of five, which is a good review. In fact, that review is where the phrase "how can anyone so hip also be so incredibly silly," not "stupid," came from. Also, it is important to remember the times were changing about then from rock and roll being basically male dominated in every aspect (producer on down) to stronger women asserting themselves and demanding respect a la Pat Benatar which made the road easier for the women in rock today. All in all, I think that for as dizzy as Stevie's lyrics can be, the critics (again mostly male) were somewhat nice to her solo stuff and her longevity and popularity even in the 1989-94 years certainly proved her critics wrong as many of them have admitted.

My $0.02

Also, to be fair, Rolling Stone slammed her next three records and then Street Angel

Yet, even in the slamming, the reviewers always complimented her. It was all a little schizo to me. It was like they were saying "Well, if I don't slam her I am out of the boys club, but I will put enough in there so that I do not betray the fact that I really like her stuff even though it is not considered cool by my peers to do so"

Actually, my favorite quote is from the Rolling Stone review of "The Other Side of the Mirror" - "Though she's a performer whose reputation is tightly entwined with her personality, Stevie Nicks is usually only as good as the collaborators with whom she chooses to make music" and then "Like her previous records, The Other Side of the Mirror shows Nicks can stand tall with the top rank of contemporary rockers, but she's not nearly consistent enough to sustain a whole album."

Interestingly, Stevie has pretty much always admitted she is only as good as her producers.

wondergirl9847 · #39 10-02-2003, 03:34 PM

Hindsight is 20/20...in regards to Stevie's solo albums. Belladonna may have been looked at as airy fairy, but today, it's a classic album, IMO. It's her best and my fave.

Look at everyone's take on Tusk...back then, it was "You screwed up, Lindsey." Today, it's "WOW, that album frickin rocks. Good job, Lindsey."

CarneVaca · #40 10-02-2003, 04:05 PM

To the original question: Because he is.

dissention · #41 10-02-2003, 06:15 PM

Sorry, but besides for Bella Donna and TISL, all of her solo efforts were met with *mostly* (not all) lukewarm reviews. They were viewed as definitely rocking, but flakey and dumb. Rock A Little was especially singled out as being gawd-awful. I especially loved Rolling Stone's view on I Sing For the Things.

And their take on SA was dead-on.

Here are some of my fave review quotes, even though I don't agree with all of them:

"In "Stand Back," she sings, "No one knows/How I feel/What I say/Unless you read between my lines." Well, whose fault is that?"

"It's hard to believe that the woman nominally responsible for such fine pieces of songcraft as "I Don't Want to Know" or even "Edge of Seventeen" could have concocted the inchoate ramblings that pervade this record [The Wild Heart]. Stanzas don't hang together, and choruses verge on the utterly meaningless..."

"Both the atmosphere and language of Bella Donna are so insular and self-enraptured that Stevie Nicks' sentiments seem as weightless as those of a pampered, pretty high-school girl."

"The real shame is that Stevie Nicks could make good records again, if she'd only follow her own advice and rock a little."

"On the rest of Rock a Little, she comes on like an AM-radio psychologist, dispensing stem but friendly advice, spinning little parables and probing deep feelings with incredibly vague language."

"As for a statement of purpose, "I Sing for the Things" ("that money can't buy," natch) is definitely postfeminist: "I'll take off my cape for you ... Anything you want me to do.... I'll sit at home and wait for you." Maybe it's just my taste, but the combined synths and steel guitars on that track achieve the consistency of curdled milk."

"Too often Nicks is stuck in a mid-tempo funk, bellowing about witches, gypsies and twisted love. Like her previous records, The Other Side of the Mirror shows Nicks can stand tall with the top rank of contemporary rockers, but she's not nearly consistent enough to sustain a whole album."

"Although Stevie Nicks' child-woman persona has served her well for 20 years, it's long overdue for the doe-eyed innocent to get tough. Her steadfast adherence to a fairy-tale world is endearing but frustrating."

"Refusing to spit and kick like Bonnie Raitt or Kim Gordon, she trembles instead, a little girl made helpless by uncaring men and her own isolation."

"Nowadays, singing more like a female Bon Jovi than the exuberant sprite she was in bygone Lindsey Buckingham/Richard Dashut years, Nicks flounders in gossamer and overpowering guitar licks, too entangled in her own fantasy to open her musical vision to the rest of us."

strandinthewind · #42 10-02-2003, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CarneVaca
To the original question: Because he is.

Too bad poor spoiled brat, runny nose, whiny baby LB couldn't sell a record or get his allegedly oh so great latest solo album out after about eight years of trying; during that same time, Stevie finished her two highly successful and critically acclaimed records and tours. Then, she came on board as a favor - AND I do I believe LB was with John and Mick (i.e. Fleetwood Mac) at least part of the time!!!!!

I guess LB, John, and Mick add up to three but LB, John, Mick and Stevie add up to five because Stevie represents not only talent but sales!!!!

(For those who do not realize it, I am ribbing Carne in a good natured way and really do not mean to be so hateful

)

sulamith · #43 10-02-2003, 09:16 PM

Strandie, son, that's why I LUV ya, you silver-tongued Nawleans mojo devil!!

Preach IT!

LMAO!!!

-Sharon

dissention · #44 10-02-2003, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by strandinthewind

Too bad poor spoiled brat, runny nose, whiny baby LB couldn't sell a record or get his allegedly oh so great latest solo album out after about eight years of trying; during that same time, Stevie finished her two highly successful and critically acclaimed records and tours. Then, she came on board as a favor - AND I do I believe LB was with John and Mick (i.e. Fleetwood Mac) at least part of the time!!!!! I guess LB, John, and Mick add up to three but LB, John, Mick and Stevie add up to five because Stevie represents not only talent but sales!!!!

(For those who do not realize it, I am ribbing Carne in a good natured way and really do not mean to be so hateful )

Ah, but she obviously didn't help sales with Behind the Mask.

And besides for TISL, no other album was critically acclaimed. The boxed set for Enchanted was noted as being the best representation of her solo work, but was faulted for being a bit too much of a good thing. And while the Enchanted tour was critically acclaimed, the TISL tour wasn't exactly acclaimed. It was noted for her going through the motions, almost robotically, and not having much stamina vocally. Of course, this could be attributed to her health. But while the TISL tour made good money, the Enchanted tour didn't do as well, which was disappointing considering the success of The Dance.

Johnny Stew · #45 10-02-2003, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dissention
Ah, but she obviously didn't help sales with Behind the Mask.

Ah, but one could easily disagree with that!
'Behind The Mask' charted in the Top 20, and quickly went gold.

Without Stevie, 'Time' didn't even chart, and sold only around 250,000 copies.

Not even Christine's presence, or a guest appearance from Lindsey, saved 'Time' from quickly dropping off the radar... meanwhile, the year prior, 'Street Angel' (Stevie's least successful solo album), peaked at #45, and eventually went gold (though it did take quite some time).

Like it or not, Stevie's presence in Fleetwood Mac is just as important as Lindsey's... perhaps moreso, where album and ticket sales are concerned.

But again, as I've stated, no one person is Fleetwood Mac.