Justifying The Music Industry's Downfall With Stevie Nicks

[Jondalar]

A perfect example of why the record biz is doomed
BY JOHNNY FIRECLOUD
APR 15, 2009
I don't know who Kim Stolz is, except for that she works for MTV and is a contributing writer for Huffpo. I also know that her writing is on par with that of a retarded chimpanzee- but that's another issue entirely. Miss Stolz recently interviewed classic rock relic Stevie Nicks on the state of the music industry, its relation to the digital revolution, and whether or not all these tech advancements are "worth it" in the grand scheme of evolving interpersonal communication.

In last week's interview, Nicks trotted out the sour-grapes for the form complaint that the digital revolution is ruining the industry and kids have no real grasp of what true rock music is anymore. Finally getting to her product pitch, she explained that part of the reason for releasing her new Live In Chicago DVD was to show "the kids" a real rock show.

What Miss Stolz fails to point out is that Nicks, in her state of complete irrelevance in today’s music scene, has no concept of what a real rock show is in today’s world. She may have been the reigning Queen of Cocaine and pre-disco shimmer pop back in the ’60s and early ’70s, but those days are buried under the detritus of several younger musical movements, most of which passed like fads in the wind. Buried with them is the ideology that rock stars are entitled to a mythical status, a godlike level of adoration, a misplaced sense of self-worth. The middleman is a dying breed, as are the distractions and detractions he represents to the music world.

Unsurprisingly, in the interview, the way, way-past-her-prime singer (who was recently on Late Night With Jimmy Fallon casting “good energy spells” on the host) raged against the digital transition, promising that ”downloads are the end.” The end of what, exactly, remains unclear, although Stolz goes on to bemoan the “utter destruction of the music scene.”

Funny- from where I’m standing, the music scene looks more alive, thriving and vibrant than ever before. Sure, the industry’s pampered relics are rallying against the changing of the guard, but when the music itself once again returns to central importance, rather than the musical product it was replaced by so many decades ago, we will look back on this period as the Great Tipping Point in music.

Nicks goes on in the piece, sharing her unabashed loathing for social networking and convenience of collective awareness: ”You will never see a Stevie Nicks Facebook, Twitter, MySpace or anything else, because I think it’s cheap and it’s sleazy and I hate it!”

It’s at this point where Miss Stolz shows her journalistic colors, musing on the horrors that would’ve unfolded “if Romeo could have just texted Juliet,” and the death of romanticism itself rather than exploring just what it is about the internet that frightens and disgusts the sexagenarian. What’s interesting, and another point that Stolz fails to point out, is that without the internet Stevie Nicks’ words wouldn’t be reaching anyone at all. She’s two generations past her prime, and the market value for the musings of 25% of a band nearly four decades old isn’t hitting any highs these days (shut up, Paul, you’re the exception- not the rule).

Stevie’s part of a beautiful piece in the tapestry of Rock ‘n Roll. Fleetwood Mac was a band our parents smoked their first joints to, learned how to drive to, conceived us to. Their albums, her chief contributions to the music world, is undiminished by her antiquiated philosophies and social ideals. But five years from now you’ll be hard-pressed to find anyone under 30 who’s seen the Live In Chicago DVD, because Nicks represents a different time, a simpler time, a time wildly alien to the present state of music.

However, if she were to put out a five-song EP for free, maybe rerecord and reclaim Landslide from King Pumpkin and Bush’s favorite country bumpkins, adding a cover/collaboration and perhaps even a new jam or two, she’d be the talk of the town. She’s made her millions- she should be moving to set an example these days, not standing on the shoreline rallying against the inevitable tide.

Raging against the internet while trying to get the message out to kids about her new DVD seems wildly backhanded, given that the internet is very likely the only reason any “kids” know about her at all. If she’d leave her yupsy (gypsy yuppie) ideals behind and gave some thought to leaving the past there as well, she could very well be seen as the Cool Grandma of Rock, a bridge between the old guard and modern trends & technologies. The kids would take notice. Hell, if all it took was a click or two they might even give the old lady a chance- provided that their parents were nowhere in earshot, of course.

[RockALittle250]

The person who wrote this article is a disgusting piece of crap and is just a pathetic individual with a chip on their shoulder :mad:

[Moz]

How was she the queen of rock when she was still in high school in the 60s? :laugh:

[LikeAWillow]

The person who wrote this article is a disgusting piece of crap and is just a pathetic individual with a chip on their shoulder :mad:

I thought the guy was spot on. Might just be because I'm one of those kids she can't connect with anymore, though.

[louielouie2000]

While this person's views may be harsh, I think they are spot on. If Stevie wants to remain in the music biz and public eye, she's gotta embrace the internet and all it's trappings. If she'd take time to understand it AND her fanbase better, it'd only benefit her in the end. I might even have to start calling her a "yupsy" myself... that's DAMN cute! :laugh: In the end, this person ended up giving Stevie props for her accomplishments (even though it's through a backhanded compliment). And I really think this was meant to be constructive criticism more than anything. But that's just my two cents... I can view most any criticism as constructive.

Just out of curiosity, where is this from? I'm guessing it's someone's amateur blog?

[PenguinHead]

While this person's views may be harsh, I think they are spot on. If Stevie wants to remain in the music biz and public eye, she's gotta embrace the internet and all it's trappings. If she'd take time to understand it AND her fanbase better, it'd only benefit her in the end. I might even have to start calling her a "yupsy" myself... that's DAMN cute! :laugh: In the end, this person ended up giving Stevie props for her accomplishments (even though it's through a backhanded compliment). And I really think this was meant to be constructive criticism more than anything. But that's just my two cents... I can view most any criticism as constructive.

Just out of curiosity, where is this from? I'm guessing it's someone's amateur blog?

I agree, he does make some very valid assessments.

[David]

I thought the guy was spot on. Might just be because I'm one of those kids she can't connect with anymore, though.The guy was getting a little het under the collar, a little violent, even. But I sympathize with his fundamental argument. It is goofy of Stevie to lash out against the Internet, against computers, against social networking, & all the other paraphernalia we all use to varying degrees at work & at play. She sounds like an ignoramus when she does so because she doesn't marshal compelling or rational arguments against the new technologies. Instead, she speaks generalizations about how kids are all turning into zombies starved for genuine human interaction or brats who have no respect for anything, etc. If she were saying all of this tongue in cheek, it might be amusing. But it's very obvious she is absolutely serious about it all.

Stevie can say, "I don't twitter & I don't have a MySpace page -- I have no interest."

[RockALittle250]

I thought the guy was spot on. Might just be because I'm one of those kids she can't connect with anymore, though.

While this person's views may be harsh, I think they are spot on. If Stevie wants to remain in the music biz and public eye, she's gotta embrace the internet and all it's trappings. If she'd take time to understand it AND her fanbase better, it'd only benefit her in the end. I might even have to start calling her a "yupsy" myself... that's DAMN cute! :laugh: In the end, this person ended up giving Stevie props for her accomplishments (even though it's through a backhanded compliment). And I really think this was meant to be constructive criticism more than anything. But that's just my two cents... I can view most any criticism as constructive.

Just out of curiosity, where is this from? I'm guessing it's someone's amateur blog?

I agree, he does make some very valid assessments.

So you all agree that she is completely irrelevant in the music industry today and that she's way-way past her prime? Yikes, don't think Stevie would enjoy hearing that coming from her "fans". It's one thing to say Stevie isn't as popular as she was 20 years ago, but this guy was down right mean and he completely ripped her apart.

[David]

So you all agree that she is completely irrelevant in the music industry today and that she's way-way past her prime?I think she's way past her prime, yes.

Yikes, don't think Stevie would enjoy hearing that coming from her "fans". I can't be bothered worrying about whether Stevie would enjoy hearing or reading my views.

[RockALittle250]

I think she's way past her prime, yes.

I can't be bothered worrying about whether Stevie would enjoy hearing or reading my views.

She may be past her prime but i don't think she's completely irrelevant at all. If anyone on here thinks that she is irrelevant, then i would find it completely odd that they would be a member of a Stevie Nicks fan forum.

[David]

She may be past her prime but i don't think she's completely irrelevant at all. If anyone on here thinks that she is irrelevant, then i would find it completely odd that they would be a member of a Stevie Nicks fan forum.Well, you know, people have widely different views of Stevie. Who knows why some people post here? I post because I like conversing with y'all.

[starshine]

Well, maybe ...IMO they did make some valid points too. I don't by any means look at Stevie & Fmac or ANY other rock band (or person/actor/actress etc)....I don't look at them with rose colored glasses anymore. Well they all are kinda old...they don't want to change. They do think its still the 70's or want to in someways. They do want to be godlike or worship from afar....Stevie chose's not to be current. Of course someone is doing the 'Twitter' thing for her....I'm sure she isn't ...someone loaded the music on her ipod she didn't......I mean (not that it matters to her/Fmac either) Stevie's web site is a joke & it still looks like it did during TISL times & that was '01 already. Like I've said before & I'll say it again. Fan sites are better than the actual artists site.....thats sad cause her site should and could be the best around but its not. I agree that she doesn't stay current even with her OWN fans really. She could keep in touch more. She could answer those questions on her web site. She could sell tons of stuff on her own web site. The list is so endless.....but because of the Net everything is 'dead' to her. Remember she did call us fans out for stealing her music. It sounds like we get blamed for her not wanting to take some responsibility as an artist & for her own career or her own creativity or something like that. I'll always love her music but its sad that really since what 1990 we've had only 2 solo LP's by her the rest compliations or GH sets. Even though the 'live' cd is great and long over due its still a GH set just live at least to me. Anyway, I don't take what the person said as a bash but the person does make some great points. Points that don't go unoticed by me. No offence......its good to have a different opinion.......:shrug:

[Johnny Stew]

I thought the guy was spot on. Might just be because I'm one of those kids she can't connect with anymore, though.

But isn't that the way it's always been? The younger generations rarely connect with the older generation.

Even if Stevie completely embraced new technology and digital downloads, that's not suddenly going to turn her into the new darling of the teens and twenty-somethings. Ann & Nancy Wilson have MySpace pages and are fans of the internet, yet they're not exactly selling millions of albums these days (or even hundreds of thousands of albums).

I love technology -- always have. If I were a richer man, I'd have just about every new gadget that came down the pike. I also love the immediacy of being able to go to Amazon.com, type in the name of a song, and buy it. In seconds, the song is mine. But I also lament how ephemeral everything is now. Sure, I can easily snag the songs I want, but I can't say that I appreciate that as much as I used to when I'd go to the music store and hunt through all the new 45s (or, later, the cassette and then CD singles) to find the songs I was looking for. I can't lay on my bed and pour over the liner notes of digital purchases. And even if I burn them to CD, it's just a crummy CD-R that I made myself.

I also think that the Kindle device is pretty damn cool, but I certainly hope books don't go the way of the Dodo.

So, yeah, even though I don't agree with Stevie completely, I can see her point and understand her concerns in a lot of ways.

Meanwhile, if Mr. Firecloud had been less hostile and biased in his article, maybe I'd give more respect to what he had to say. I see no "constructive criticism" there -- only bitching.

[RockALittle250]

Well, maybe ...IMO they did make some valid points too. I don't by any means look at Stevie & Fmac or ANY other rock band (or person/actor/actress etc)....I don't look at them with rose colored glasses anymore. Well they all are kinda old...they don't want to change. They do think its still the 70's or want to in someways. They do want to be godlike or worship from afar....Stevie chose's not to be current. Of course someone is doing the 'Twitter' thing for her....I'm sure she isn't ...someone loaded the music on her ipod she didn't......I mean (not that it matters to her/Fmac either) Stevie's web site is a joke & it still looks like it did during TISL times & that was '01 already. Like I've said before & I'll say it again. Fan sites are better than the actual artists site.....thats sad cause her site should and could be the best around but its not. I agree that she doesn't stay current even with her OWN fans really. She could keep in touch more. She could answer those questions on her web site. She could sell tons of stuff on her own web site. The list is so endless.....but because of the Net everything is 'dead' to her. Remember she did call us fans out for stealing her music. It sounds like we get blamed for her not wanting to take some responsibility as an artist & for her own career or her own creativity or something like that. I'll always love her music but its sad that really since what 1990 we've had only 2 solo LP's by her the rest compliations or GH sets. Even though the 'live' cd is great and long over due its still a GH set just live at least to me. Anyway, I don't take what the person said as a bash but the person does make some great points. Points that don't go unoticed by me. No offence......its good to have a different opinion.......:shrug:

It's not considered a greatest hits, because barely any of the songs on there are considered "hits" anyway...jeez, everyone ALWAYS tries to minimize anything that Stevie does. I don't even know why i come on here anymore because most people on here complain about everything and make all these demands of her...it's really annoying and every thread turns into the same thing. It's like beating a dead horse.

[Johnny Stew]

I forgot to add that I find it ironic that Mr. Firecloud's bright idea for Stevie to be the "talk of the town" again, is that she should re-record "Landslide," as well as a couple of covers or collaborations. I guess he didn't glance at the 'Soundstage Sessions' track-listing. Or does it not count because it wasn't a digital-only EP?

[petep9000]

I think it's Stevie's fad of the year. Next year, maybe she'll be on to something else, like how she can't stop knitting.
Remember ballet? Painting? Drawing? Writing a book of her life which would read like a novel? Appeals for Greenpeace? The treadmill with 'Miami Vice'? Her Atkin's Diet craze? Remember recording new material? (LOL)

[ontheEdgeof17]

It's not considered a greatest hits, because barely any of the songs on there are considered "hits" anyway...jeez, everyone ALWAYS tries to minimize anything that Stevie does. I don't even know why i come on here anymore because most people on here complain about everything and make all these demands of her...it's really annoying and every thread turns into the same thing. It's like beating a dead horse.


So is thinking Stevie does no wrong....

No one here doesn't like Stevie. I'm sure everyone has been through their manic phase and thought Stevie was the ****. I've been on this board for 7 years, and I know some of these people on a personal level. We talk about this stuff in person. Sometimes we like to spice things up....it doesn't mean we dislike Stevie, we just like having fun on this board. So, loosen up. It's not life or death.

We still support the technophobe, don't we? :thumbsup:

[starshine]

It's not considered a greatest hits, because barely any of the songs on there are considered "hits" anyway...jeez, everyone ALWAYS tries to minimize anything that Stevie does. I don't even know why i come on here anymore because most people on here complain about everything and make all these demands of her...it's really annoying and every thread turns into the same thing. It's like beating a dead horse. Hey beating a 'dead horse' is good every now & than...LOL.....lighten up.....probably when I started my fandom over some 20 yrs ago I would've probably defended Stevie esp with all the stuff with Lindsey....but I see things different now. I also see Stevie's concerns about the Techno age. I am not a parent either...so I can't image how parents feel with all that there kids can get into now with the computer. (besides adults too--we do have to lump us in there as well)....but with that said. I guess I just wish she'd try something different or surprise us. Give us that 'new' cd or something. Stevie does alot of talking......but I guess I just want action. If I can't make my comments here than were?? I think being realistic is good.....I would love for Stevie to do wonderful things with what is left of her career.....I personally don't think she has the love in her to do it like she once did like when she started with Mac or when she started her solo career. She still wants corporate rock.....it won't be that again. Yes, the live thing (cd/dvd) to me anyway, even if it isn't labeled GH it still is. Yes it is a 'current' vocal of a single or 'hit' song to some degree. Yes , there are cover songs & special guests but that is to help boost sales....its just a repackaged GH with songs thrown in to make one 'think' its something else something 'new'.....at least thats my defintion of it.....but theres nothing wrong with anyones opinion here......its good to agree to disagree......no harm no foul.......ok RAL??.....life does go on........'just like the sea....the house shook a little......just like me I RAL....':wavey: It's all good!!:shrug:

[ShangriLaTroubl]

The person who wrote this article is a disgusting piece of crap and is just a pathetic individual with a chip on their shoulder :mad:

It was a negative article, but he makes a valid point in my opinion. One day she's railing against downloads, the next she's talking about possibly releasing a few songs on Itunes instead of a new album---or giving IPODS to soldiers.

She is bashing things she admits she knows nothing about. She's pretty lucky she hasn't gotten MUCH bad press about it lately. It's surely not the best way to sell more copies of Live in Chicago.

[LukeA]

Jondalar failed to provide the source of where this was originally published.

http://www.craveonline.com/entertainment/music/article/justifying-the-music-industrys-downfall-with-stevie-nicks-75172

A website whose target demographic are 15 year old boys whose existence revolves around two things- girls in bikinis and wrasslin'.

[ShangriLaTroubl]

So you all agree that she is completely irrelevant in the music industry today and that she's way-way past her prime? Yikes, don't think Stevie would enjoy hearing that coming from her "fans". It's one thing to say Stevie isn't as popular as she was 20 years ago, but this guy was down right mean and he completely ripped her apart.

I didn't see anyone say they agreed with that...however she is irrelevant in today's market. Do we all love her? Of course, but her albums aren't flying off the shelf, and she hasn't released a new solo album in 8 yrs.

Let's see, in the last 20 yrs we've gotten a lot of repackaged hits:

Fleetwood Mac Greatest Hits, Timespace, the Chain Box Set, Enchanted Box Set, The Dance (mostly old songs),The VERY Best of Fleetwood Mac, Crystal Visions, Live in Boston, Live in Chicago....

Does this make her RELEVANT?

I would call anyone irrelevant who hasn't released any new material in 5+ years, goes on hits tours every year, and talks about MAYBE doing new music one day..doesn't mean I don't like them.

I also have to add that just because we are honest about Stevie, doesn't mean we aren't "Real" fans. This is a fan forum, it's not just a soundboard for everyone to praise Stevie 24/7.

[RockALittle250]

So is thinking Stevie does no wrong....

No one here doesn't like Stevie. I'm sure everyone has been through their manic phase and thought Stevie was the ****. I've been on this board for 7 years, and I know some of these people on a personal level. We talk about this stuff in person. Sometimes we like to spice things up....it doesn't mean we dislike Stevie, we just like having fun on this board. So, loosen up. It's not life or death.

We still support the technophobe, don't we? :thumbsup:

I don't think Stevie does no wrong, but it does get irritating when all people do is bitch and complain. But, i don't know, i just feel Stevie is allowed to do what she wants and have the strong opinions that she has, like about technology, and we shouldn't try to bring her down because of it.

[ShangriLaTroubl]

I don't think Stevie does no wrong, but it does get irritating when all people do is bitch and complain. But, i don't know, i just feel Stevie is allowed to do what she wants and have the strong opinions that she has, like about technology, and we shouldn't try to bring her down because of it.

We should all just put on the rose colored glasses and praise everything even when we aren't 100% happy about it? I think Stevie should be able to do what the hell she wants too, but if she wants to rely on her hits from the 70s and 80s, I doubt she expects to be considered "relevant" even by her fans.

[RockALittle250]

Hey beating a 'dead horse' is good every now & than...LOL.....lighten up.....probably when I started my fandom over some 20 yrs ago I would've probably defended Stevie esp with all the stuff with Lindsey....but I see things different now. I also see Stevie's concerns about the Techno age. I am not a parent either...so I can't image how parents feel with all that there kids can get into now with the computer. (besides adults too--we do have to lump us in there as well)....but with that said. I guess I just wish she'd try something different or surprise us. Give us that 'new' cd or something. Stevie does alot of talking......but I guess I just want action. If I can't make my comments here than were?? I think being realistic is good.....I would love for Stevie to do wonderful things with what is left of her career.....I personally don't think she has the love in her to do it like she once did like when she started with Mac or when she started her solo career. She still wants corporate rock.....it won't be that again. Yes, the live thing (cd/dvd) to me anyway, even if it isn't labeled GH it still is. Yes it is a 'current' vocal of a single or 'hit' song to some degree. Yes , there are cover songs & special guests but that is to help boost sales....its just a repackaged GH with songs thrown in to make one 'think' its something else something 'new'.....at least thats my defintion of it.....but theres nothing wrong with anyones opinion here......its good to agree to disagree......no harm no foul.......ok RAL??.....life does go on........'just like the sea....the house shook a little......just like me I RAL....':wavey: It's all good!!:shrug:

I didn't see anyone say they agreed with that...however she is irrelevant in today's market. Do we all love her? Of course, but her albums aren't flying off the shelf, and she hasn't released a new solo album in 8 yrs.

Let's see, in the last 20 yrs we've gotten a lot of repackaged hits:

Fleetwood Mac Greatest Hits, Timespace, the Chain Box Set, Enchanted Box Set, The Dance (mostly old songs),The VERY Best of Fleetwood Mac, Crystal Visions, Live in Boston, Live in Chicago....

Does this make her RELEVANT?

I would call anyone irrelevant who hasn't released any new material in 5+ years, goes on hits tours every year, and talks about MAYBE doing new music one day..doesn't mean I don't like them.

I also have to add that just because we are honest about Stevie, doesn't mean we aren't "Real" fans. This is a fan forum, it's not just a soundboard for everyone to praise Stevie 24/7.

I don't think we should be kissing her ass, but most of the time people complain about anything that she does/says. She has the right to do/say whatever she wants to. It's like whatever move she makes, people have to judge her. And it's the same topics over and over, and threads that are unrelated to a topic about her releasing "new" material suddenly get rangled into that big black hole of redundancy. It gets tiring complaining about the same things everyday when there are plenty of exciting things happening out there to enjoy in the world of FM. It's just a saturation of negativity around here most of the time.

[paleshadow]

I don't think we should be kissing her ass, but most of the time people complain about anything that she does/says. She has the right to do/say whatever she wants to. It's like whatever move she makes, people have to judge her. And it's the same topics over and over, and threads that are unrelated to a topic about her releasing "new" material suddenly get rangled into that big black hole of redundancy. It gets tiring complaining about the same things everyday when there are plenty of exciting things happening out there to enjoy in the world of FM. It's just a saturation of negativity around here most of the time.

I agree that the article had a lot of good points if you look past some of the remarks the author made. I don't mean to be critical of you RockALittle, but as much as you complain about people criticizing Stevie being redundant, you just started a thread complaining about someones negative review about Live in Chicago and questioned their fandom. Being a fan of any artist shouldn't mean you are expected to love whatever they produce. Part of being an artist is learning how to accept criticisms. No one needs to jump to Stevie's defense or curse every reviewer who is critical.

[RockALittle250]

I agree that the article had a lot of good points if you look past some of the remarks the author made. I don't mean to be critical of you RockALittle, but as much as you complain about people criticizing Stevie being redundant, you just started a thread complaining about someones negative review about Live in Chicago and questioned their fandom. Being a fan of any artist shouldn't mean you are expected to love whatever they produce. Part of being an artist is learning how to accept criticisms. No one needs to jump to Stevie's defense or curse every reviewer who is critical.

Yes, but i started that thread because that reviewer was not reviewing the product...they gave the DVD 1 out of 5 stars, not because of the content, but because they think Stevie's eyes are strange, and because they were questioning her sexuality. That reviewer should have given a review based on the actual DVD, and left those opinions out of it.

I think constructive criticism is great, but most of the criticism that comes her way is not constructive. It is redundant and sometimes based on character assassinations, or what we think we know about her. So what if she doesn't like computers...if she doesn't utilize technology for her own good then that is her deal, but we shouldn't be judging her based on things like that. That's her personal opinion, and if she feels technology is ruining the music business, she has the right to state her piece without being ridiculed for being old and out of touch.

[starshine]

I don't think we should be kissing her ass, but most of the time people complain about anything that she does/says. She has the right to do/say whatever she wants to. It's like whatever move she makes, people have to judge her. And it's the same topics over and over, and threads that are unrelated to a topic about her releasing "new" material suddenly get rangled into that big black hole of redundancy. It gets tiring complaining about the same things everyday when there are plenty of exciting things happening out there to enjoy in the world of FM. It's just a saturation of negativity around here most of the time.Ok, just as Stevie can do want she wants and say what she wants...well guess what so can I and any of her fans on this site any many fan sites/threads. All of our opinions 'matter'....mine matters even if only to myself. Heck there will always be a 'rehasing' of the same topics and the same threads. Its life. Plus, what you see as negativity....I see it as being realistic about what is really happening. I can't praise what I don't believe to be true either. I do think Stevie could do better. It appears this is what she wants. Sad cause she can do better. Anyway, lighten up....it is suppose to be fun....not always serious.....life goes on even if Stevie or Mac don't ever release anything ever again.......:shrug:

[Jondalar]

Yes, but i started that thread because that reviewer was not reviewing the product...they gave the DVD 1 out of 5 stars, not because of the content, but because they think Stevie's eyes are strange, and because they were questioning her sexuality. That reviewer should have given a review based on the actual DVD, and left those opinions out of it.

I think constructive criticism is great, but most of the criticism that comes her way is not constructive. It is redundant and sometimes based on character assassinations, or what we think we know about her. So what if she doesn't like computers...if she doesn't utilize technology for her own good then that is her deal, but we shouldn't be judging her based on things like that. That's her personal opinion, and if she feels technology is ruining the music business, she has the right to state her piece without being ridiculed for being old and out of touch.

Don't you get it? People are mad at Stevie. Her attitude is entitled rock star. I hate the article too, but there is an underlying anger of opportunities lost when it comes to Stevie.

[Johnny Stew]

No offense to anyone, but what does "relevant" mean when it comes to music? Do your songs have to reach a certain age group to be considered relevant? Are only artists who are currently recording new material, relevant? (Even Yanni?) Are dead artists irrelevant because they stopped recording? Can an irrelevant artist still have songs that are relevant?

What defines "relevant"?

[RockALittle250]

Ok, just as Stevie can do want she wants and say what she wants...well guess what so can I and any of her fans on this site any many fan sites/threads. All of our opinions 'matter'....mine matters even if only to myself. Heck there will always be a 'rehasing' of the same topics and the same threads. Its life. Plus, what you see as negativity....I see it as being realistic about what is really happening. I can't praise what I don't believe to be true either. I do think Stevie could do better. It appears this is what she wants. Sad cause she can do better. Anyway, lighten up....it is suppose to be fun....not always serious.....life goes on even if Stevie or Mac don't ever release anything ever again.......:shrug:

First of all, stop telling me to "lighten up". I think the folks like yourself who are telling me what i am thinking or saying should take your own advice.

Second of all, going back to what i said about folks telling me what i'm thinking or saying, i never said anyone wasn't entitled to their own opinions, what i said was, complaining about the same things all the time is a waste of energy and it becomes a saturation of negativity. Also, just because i try to be positive does not mean i'm looking through rose colored glasses or kissing her ass. There is nothing wrong with being positive or looking at the glass half full. Negativity is just a waste of time and energy.

There are plenty of other artists out there that i enjoy instead of just Stevie or FM, so that's one reason i don't let these things that Stevie says or does bother me.

[RockALittle250]

Don't you get it? People are mad at Stevie. Her attitude is entitled rock star. I hate the article too, but there is an underlying anger of opportunities lost when it comes to Stevie.

Yes, i understand that people are mad at Stevie. My point is Stevie has the right to express her views and opinions about the world, the music industry, computers, or whatever, without being ripped apart for having those opinions.

[paleshadow]

Yes, but i started that thread because that reviewer was not reviewing the product...they gave the DVD 1 out of 5 stars, not because of the content, but because they think Stevie's eyes are strange, and because they were questioning her sexuality. That reviewer should have given a review based on the actual DVD, and left those opinions out of it.

I think constructive criticism is great, but most of the criticism that comes her way is not constructive. It is redundant and sometimes based on character assassinations, or what we think we know about her. So what if she doesn't like computers...if she doesn't utilize technology for her own good then that is her deal, but we shouldn't be judging her based on things like that. That's her personal opinion, and if she feels technology is ruining the music business, she has the right to state her piece without being ridiculed for being old and out of touch.

I understand the review really didn't have anything to do with the product, but you'll only find ones like that if you are sitting there reading the reviews to find ones you like and ones you don't. What's the point of that, especially if you are prone to get upset when you do come across negative ones? My point is that it never matters to me what other people think of things I like, whether it be a movie, a restaurant, or in this case a performer.

[Jondalar]

Yes, i understand that people are mad at Stevie. My point is Stevie has the right to express her views and opinions about the world, the music industry, computers, or whatever, without being ripped apart for having those opinions.

Depends on the opinion I guess. I think Stevie is right in a way, but I can also see why she is wrong. The internet would be the perfect realm for Stevie. People on the internet love fantasy.

[RockALittle250]

I understand the review really didn't have anything to do with the product, but you'll only find ones like that if you are sitting there reading the reviews to find ones you like and ones you don't. What's the point of that, especially if you are prone to get upset when you do come across negative ones? My point is that it never matters to me what other people think of things I like, whether it be a movie, a restaurant, or in this case a performer.

I just happened to be reading some of them and came across that one and was pretty disgusted. I wanted to share that on here because i thought others would also find it ridiculous and that's part of what this forum is about...sharing.

I don't mean to come off so defensively, but it seems that i'm getting attacked from all sides because i told people that there is too much negativity around here. But in posting that, i contributed to that negativity as well. Thanks for opening my eyes to that, because looking back, i did add to something that i'm trying to curtail.

[paleshadow]

No offense to anyone, but what does "relevant" mean when it comes to music? Do your songs have to reach a certain age group to be considered relevant? Are only artists who are currently recording new material, relevant? (Even Yanni?) Are dead artists irrelevant because they stopped recording? Can an irrelevant artist still have songs that are relevant?

What defines "relevant"?

I'm guessing in this context it's commercially relevant? Maybe artistically relevant. I think maybe "Whom defines relevance" would be a better question!

[Johnny Stew]

Don't you get it? People are mad at Stevie. Her attitude is entitled rock star. I hate the article too, but there is an underlying anger of opportunities lost when it comes to Stevie.

Disappointed, I can understand. But mad? Is it really rational to be mad at an artist for not living up to your expectations? I want new music from Stevie as badly as anyone does, but I have to accept the fact that she's not currently recording -- just as I would have had to accept it if she had completely retired.

She's had her downtime (as many artists do), but she seems to be coming around. For the first time in six years, she finally seems inspired again by the idea of recording new material. That's something to look forward to.

[Jondalar]

Disappointed, I can understand. But mad? Is it really rational to be mad at an artist for not living up to your expectations? I want new music from Stevie as badly as anyone does, but I have to accept the fact that she's not currently recording -- just as I would have had to accept it if she had completely retired.

She's had her downtime (as many artists do), but she seems to be coming around. For the first time in six years, she finally seems inspired again by the idea of recording new material. That's something to look forward to.

No it's not rational, but when you buy 4 or 5 copies of an album to support and artist and you promote that artist to all your friends and get nothing back, it tends to piss one off.

[LukeA]

No it's not rational, but when you buy 4 or 5 copies of an album to support and artist and you promote that artist to all your friends and get nothing back, it tends to piss one off.

That's your problem, not hers.

[Jondalar]

That's your problem, not hers.

no, it's one reason why her fan base has shrunk and their has been no THE DANCE to save her

[LukeA]

no, it's one reason why her fan base has shrunk and their has been no THE DANCE to save her

I was referring to your proclaimed frustration ("get nothing back"), not her lack of activity.

[Jondalar]

I was referring to your proclaimed frustration ("get nothing back"), not her lack of activity.

read the posts and reviews, there is a lot of proclaimed frustration

[Moz]

Fleetwood Mac Greatest Hits, Timespace, the Chain Box Set, Enchanted Box Set, The Dance (mostly old songs),The VERY Best of Fleetwood Mac, Crystal Visions, Live in Boston, Live in Chicago....

Does this make her RELEVANT?


The Dance made her "relevant". :shrug:

[Jondalar]

The Dance made her "relevant". :shrug:

hmmm, that is a good question. I think yes in a way. It made people pay attention to Landslide and Silver Springs, it boosted intrest in her and the band

[TrueFaith77]

I forgot to add that I find it ironic that Mr. Firecloud's bright idea for Stevie to be the "talk of the town" again, is that she should re-record "Landslide," as well as a couple of covers or collaborations. I guess he didn't glance at the 'Soundstage Sessions' track-listing. Or does it not count because it wasn't a digital-only EP?



^^^...because it wasn't FREE.

Yes, the guy who wrote this (article?) is as bad a writer as Kim Stoltz :eek:

His advice is bogus.

Stevie shouldn't embrace the internet, she should transform it. Her concerns are valid about the social impact of the internet. In terms of the music business, I'm no expert. Offering a free EP (basically of tracks from the soundstage sessions) is no way to transform the internet -- so the writer of this article is a fool even on the level that he claims expertise. He just comes off as a guy who doesn't want to pay for his music -- no wonder he's so defensive.

Today's music scene is the opposite of vibrant and dynamic.

The death of the rock star may or may not be accurate (?) but it's not an improvement.

[Gypsycat999]

It was a negative article, but he makes a valid point in my opinion. One day she's railing against downloads, the next she's talking about possibly releasing a few songs on Itunes instead of a new album---or giving IPODS to soldiers.

I think with "downloading" Stevie spoke about things you don't pay for. Although she doesn't like the internet she should be alright that people download music after they payed for it. So why shouldn't she put stuff on itunes?

And about relevant...to me it's totally irrelevant if someone sells a lot or is very famous. Stevie's relevant for me because I love her music and I don't care if no one else likes her (just say "if", don't wanna say no one of you likes her). Hell, yes I'd LOVE her to release new stuff but I don't stop loving her or her music because there's nothing new. That doesn't change the old stuff. So I think it's still worth supporting her and tell my friends about her.

But the most important point it's normal and good that people have different attitudes about something and so let's go on disagreeing :wavey:.

[HejiraNYC]

As a long, and I mean a long-time fan of Stevie and FM, I think it would be rather unfortunate if somehow Stevie stepped out of the fog of her mystery into the fishbowl of the internets. Sure, we are all curious and would love to read Stevie's tweets and read blog entries about her life on the road or in the studio. But then what else is there? There is no sense of mystery or surprise- everything would be just so transparent and it would all become mundane and maudlin after a while. What drew me into her persona originally was the mystery- the obliqueness of the lyrics, the vivid, otherwordly imagery and the fantasy of the doe-eyed goddess who wears beaded mudflaps in her hair and stomps around her limestone castle in 5" platforms and gauzy shawls. I don't want to read about her trips to Bed Bath and Beyond. I don't want to read about her recipes for lo-fat guacamole. Yes, it is intriguing and amusing, but I think it tends to cheapen the image that she has cultivated for herself for the past 35 years.

As for her assertions about the decay of civilization- you have to admit that she has a point. What would you do with your time if you didn't spend ____ hours a week on the interwebs? Would you be a healthier person? Would you have a cleaner house? Would you have more friends? Would you have seen more of the world? It seems like people don't talk anymore. It's all about IM or SMS or tweets, etc. Conversation seems to be a dying art... :shrug: I envy people like Stevie who have not become "hopelessly enchanted" by the instant gratification and stimulation of the webs...

[chriskisn]

As for her assertions about the decay of civilization- you have to admit that she has a point. What would you do with your time if you didn't spend ____ hours a week on the interwebs? Would you be a healthier person? Would you have a cleaner house? Would you have more friends? Would you have seen more of the world? It seems like people don't talk anymore. It's all about IM or SMS or tweets, etc. Conversation seems to be a dying art... :shrug: I envy people like Stevie who have not become "hopelessly enchanted" by the instant gratification and stimulation of the webs...

Actually I'd probably be listening to music :laugh:

[IKV Nexis]

As a long, and I mean a long-time fan of Stevie and FM, I think it would be rather unfortunate if somehow Stevie stepped out of the fog of her mystery into the fishbowl of the internets. Sure, we are all curious and would love to read Stevie's tweets and read blog entries about her life on the road or in the studio. But then what else is there? There is no sense of mystery or surprise- everything would be just so transparent and it would all become mundane and maudlin after a while.

I have found this a very confusing and curious attitude from a lot of people about Stevie on the Web. For some strange reason a lot of y'all think that if Stevie were to even dip a toe into the world of on line bloging that all of a sudden she would spill here guts and reveal every secret in her life. Where does THAT come from? There is no law or real compulsion for anyone to do that. Stevie can be as mysterious as she likes in any format. She just has to keep it that way and reveal only what she wants revealed. Even she seems to have the notion that is what will happen to her if she tries. Odd way of looking at it. :lol:

[HejiraNYC]

I have found this a very confusing and curious attitude from a lot of people about Stevie on the Web. For some strange reason a lot of y'all think that if Stevie were to even dip a toe into the world of on line bloging that all of a sudden she would spill here guts and reveal every secret in her life. Where does THAT come from? There is no law or real compulsion for anyone to do that. Stevie can be as mysterious as she likes in any format. She just has to keep it that way and reveal only what she wants revealed. Even she seems to have the notion that is what will happen to her if she tries. Odd way of looking at it. :lol:

But then why would she bother dipping her toe into the blogging world if she wasn't going to reveal her most intimate of thoughts? As it is, her fans have already derided her monosyllabic responses on the Nicksfix. People want more from her, which is perfectly understandable. But if you put too much out there, people will grow tired of you or somehow respect you less as an artist. Do you think people would have given two sh*ts about Greta Garbo if she kept a high public profile?

[skcin]

The person who wrote this article is a disgusting piece of crap and is just a pathetic individual with a chip on their shoulder :mad:


I'm not surprised. :cool:

[IKV Nexis]

But then why would she bother dipping her toe into the blogging world if she wasn't going to reveal her most intimate of thoughts? As it is, her fans have already derided her monosyllabic responses on the Nicksfix. People want more from her, which is perfectly understandable. But if you put too much out there, people will grow tired of you or somehow respect you less as an artist. Do you think people would have given two sh*ts about Greta Garbo if she kept a high public profile?

Oh I have no argument at all at you are saying. I just go with the old saying (especialy on the web) Allways leave them wanting more. Don't dump it all right away. Just put out a few things. How was the concert? Maby a poem or two. A little of her art work to spice up the blog. just enough to whet our palets and come back for more. I know, wishfull thinking...

[HejiraNYC]

Oh I have no argument at all at you are saying. I just go with the old saying (especialy on the web) Allways leave them wanting more. Don't dump it all right away. Just put out a few things. How was the concert? Maby a poem or two. A little of her art work to spice up the blog. just enough to whet our palets and come back for more. I know, wishfull thinking...

Well... I think Stevie is pretty much doing that sort of thing now- with the poems at least. Granted, her time horizon between updates is practically geologic. :eek: And beyond "the concert went well," what else would she say? "We ripped 'Rhiannon' to shreds last night!" :lol:

[wheart]

A perfect example of why the record biz is doomed
BY JOHNNY FIRECLOUD

However, if she were to put out a five-song EP for free, maybe rerecord and reclaim Landslide from King Pumpkin and Bush’s favorite country bumpkins, adding a cover/collaboration and perhaps even a new jam or two, she’d be the talk of the town. She’s made her millions- she should be moving to set an example these days, not standing on the shoreline rallying against the inevitable tide.

Raging against the internet while trying to get the message out to kids about her new DVD seems wildly backhanded, given that the internet is very likely the only reason any “kids” know about her at all. If she’d leave her yupsy (gypsy yuppie) ideals behind and gave some thought to leaving the past there as well, she could very well be seen as the Cool Grandma of Rock, a bridge between the old guard and modern trends & technologies. The kids would take notice. Hell, if all it took was a click or two they might even give the old lady a chance- provided that their parents were nowhere in earshot, of course.

Gotta say, I agree 100% with this part.

[HejiraNYC]

Gotta say, I agree 100% with this part.

Marianne Faithfull has done this sorta thing- getting involved with a bunch of young/hip/ collaborators, putting out trendy modern music, etc. Same with Cher. But these kinds of efforts just ring hollow for me- they are acts of desperation, almost. There is something to be said about moving forward whilst preserving ones own sense of self.

[jedw]

Not really keeping up with the discussions here, but im just gonna reply to this thread as if it was new.

Im not gonna worry about whether a 60 year old rock star doesn't like computers I have been glued to one for more than a decade, I have a degree in computing! But I'm not going to be offended that a celebrity says their "ruining the kids", she might have a point even. Neither am I gonna get bent out of shape about whether she makes comments about the record industry.

On the other hand she hasn't had a penny from me for her "Soundstage sessions" becasue its just a CD of "Karaoke" versions of her MUCH BETTER studio recordings.

And she probably doesn't realise this but before I watched the Dance at a friends house, I knew her only by name. I listened to all her songs for the first time ON THE INTERNET. I don't consider myself a "Kid" but I was born in 1984 and many of my records are plenty older than me- I'd have never bought them without first listening online!

Sorry to state the obvious.:wavey:

[wheart]

Marianne Faithfull has done this sorta thing- getting involved with a bunch of young/hip/ collaborators, putting out trendy modern music, etc. Same with Cher. But these kinds of efforts just ring hollow for me- they are acts of desperation, almost. There is something to be said about moving forward whilst preserving ones own sense of self.

I don't think Stevie should try to "reinvent" herself or work with trendy producers and the like. In fact, I would hate to see her do that, not that she ever would. I do think she should consider utilizing the internet as a way to release new music and hopefully increase her fan base. There are probably a lot of young people who have no idea who she is. But if she were to embrace technology instead of fighting against it so hard, she may be able to touch that many more people with her enormous talent. That's the part of the article I was agreeing with.

[LikeAWillow]

My point is Stevie has the right to express her views and opinions about the world, the music industry, computers, or whatever, without being ripped apart for having those opinions.

Stevie has a right to express her views, but I don't have the right to express that I disagree with them? :confused:

[BTFLCHLD]

A website whose target demographic are 15 year old boys whose existence revolves around two things- girls in bikinis and wrasslin'.
:lol: :lol:

[jwd]

because Nicks represents a different time, a simpler time, a time wildly alien to the present state of music.

I agree!! :laugh: And baby, what a time it was!! :]

[RockALittle250]

Stevie has a right to express her views, but I don't have the right to express that I disagree with them? :confused:





i never said anyone wasn't entitled to their own opinions, what i said was, complaining about the same things all the time is a waste of energy and it becomes a saturation of negativity.

^^

That is what i said.

[strandinthewind]

She may be past her prime but i don't think she's completely irrelevant at all. If anyone on here thinks that she is irrelevant, then i would find it completely odd that they would be a member of a Stevie Nicks fan forum.

She is far from irrelevant. She got HUGE press in the last two weeks. These FM concerts are selling fairly well in a cr*p economy. If she were a has been, she'd be playing 500 seater halls as opposed to the venues she plays on her own and with FM :shrug: Put it this way, what other 60 year old singer can get this much attention? i submit the list is very short and very impressive.

Moreover, I think it is laughable when people go on a tirade and do not even have the facts.

[RockALittle250]

She is far from irrelevant. She got HUGE press in the last two weeks. These FM concerts are selling fairly well in a cr*p economy. If she were a has been, she'd be playing 500 seater halls as opposed to the venues she plays on her own and with FM :shrug: Put it this way, what other 60 year old singer can get this much attention? i submit the list is very short and very impressive.

Moreover, I think it is laughable when people go on a tirade and do not even have the facts.

Exactly...she's received much more press in the past few weeks than other major artists who have released albums around the same time as she just did.

[strandinthewind]

Exactly...she's received much more press in the past few weeks than other major artists who have released albums around the same time as she just did.

Exactly - In the end, younger artists historically sell much better than the older artists. Youth is beguiling :shrug: But and although TISL and SYW did not sell anywhere near the millions in sales of the band and her in the 70's, 80's, and The Dance. They still sold hundreds of thousands of units, which suggests lessened relevance, but relevance nonetheless, esp. when the tour numbers are thrown in.

[starshine]

First of all, stop telling me to "lighten up". I think the folks like yourself who are telling me what i am thinking or saying should take your own advice.

Second of all, going back to what i said about folks telling me what i'm thinking or saying, i never said anyone wasn't entitled to their own opinions, what i said was, complaining about the same things all the time is a waste of energy and it becomes a saturation of negativity. Also, just because i try to be positive does not mean i'm looking through rose colored glasses or kissing her ass. There is nothing wrong with being positive or looking at the glass half full. Negativity is just a waste of time and energy.

There are plenty of other artists out there that i enjoy instead of just Stevie or FM, so that's one reason i don't let these things that Stevie says or does bother me.
I do take my 'own' advice. Stevie isn't the end all & be all of all that I do. Yes I love her music and Fmac's (not all of it mind you). I also don't think that being realistic...that there is anything 'wrong' with that either. I really don't think of it as negative as you state. I'm happy you see things that way just remember that not all people see things the same way you do. We all have our own filters in life that we see life as well as music through. Its not 'right' or 'wrong' really it is what it is. Or its not good or bad. I wish maybe that Stevie had made some better choices through the yrs and could've gotten more of her wonderful material released to us as fans. Of course there is many ways that could be done than just music. I would love to see an outtakes photo book of through the yrs type thing. Or she could just do it of her solo career. I don't think this would sell on a grand scale but she could do limited edition copies or something. I would love more but Stevie (& Fmac) are in the twlight of there careers really. So really if we happen to get one more lp of semi-new or old songs from either of them that would be wonderful but if not & this is all we have than life doesn't end it goes on for all of us ......I have other artists I love too just maybe don't 'collect' like I do Stevie or Mac etc....So I don't say or write these things to make others 'mad' maybe just so that you can see it from a different point of view.....I understand what your saying so can you at least look at it from my point of view even 'if' you don't agree with it?? I don't agree with all Stevie has done. I wish she could've released many more solo lps but she hasn't & thats something that as a fan is 'yes' disappointing but it is what it is and there isn't much we can do about it. So I guess thats all I'm saying. I just hope that we can just agree to disagree ok....no ill will here.....?? OK???:D:blob2::)
Ps: I do agree that being negative is a waste of time---but well I'm a Scorpio---I do tend to see the darker side of issues......if that helps any?? (LOL) Truce??

[BTFLCHLD]

<object width="400" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Msy4DUggOv0&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Msy4DUggOv0&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="400" height="315"></embed></object>

[whitewingdove73]

Oh Stevie.

Get a myspace for god sakes. :rolleyes:

Cocaine is a million times bad then myspace. I promise you :]