What's in the name?

[elle]

reading through various threads, the issue of whether or not the 4 should have called themselves Fleetwood Mac and tour with Mick and John pops up in at least every other thread. then others think that maybe they should have made up a name like the BuckVie we all use, as if they are a new band.

in the last month plus, since the album came out and they started touring, i actually slowly came to the conclusion that what they did is incerdibly smart (and i'm the first one to never ever consider these people smart ) - they called the album and the tour by their 2 names, like so many other duos that came together in the past and present did. makes sense! why make up a band name if it may only be a one-off? and - this actually puts their 2 names out there more than they've ever been (except i'm guessing during their 70s heyday but i was not around for that so have no clue?). SN was the only known FM name, and now people are starting to know CM and LB as also names within FM. i was the first one, yelling the loudest that this album should have been Fleetwood Mac. and it is much more so than SYW as far as macy-ness goes (SYW as far as i'm concerned was a spectacular LB solo album torn apart, depleted of additional fantastic LB songs that should have been on there and spoiled with mostly much weaker SN songs that had no place being there). but now i'm kinda happy they put it out under their 2 names - and that it's doing so well on the charts, especially in this day and age - much better in the UK than the Fleetwood Mac monikered album SYW ever did!

soooooo - here 's a poll for ya!

what name should they have used to release this album:

Fleetwood Mac (it's Lindsey, Christine, Mick and John = no brainer!)
Lindsey Buckingham / Christine McVie
BuckVie (or some other similar combo of their 2 names)