Lack of Productivity Makes Fleetwood Mac Irrelevent.
 

Fleetwood Mac takes forever to create anything of real importance, for example a new studio album. This is how it always is, yes. But back in the 70's and the 80's it was alright for them to take such time between breaks because it was their heyday. Back then people were eager for new Fleetwood Mac material. Now that the heyday is over, they really can't be taking this much time between projects and here is why: people forget. Fleetwood Mac is not in demand, no matter how many concerts they may or may not sell out. Fleetwood Mac has become forgetable and now completely irrelevent. I love Fleetwood Mac, they are my favorite band but unfortunately for me it's not become out with the old and in with the new.

Lady GaGa has won over my heart. She's quirky, she's hip, she's relevent, she's definately not forgetable, she's a trendsetter, she's smart, she's talented, she writes her own songs. She's the new Stevie Nicks. I'm sorry Stevie, I'm sorry Fleetwood Mac, but now it is time to hang in the towel. Finished.

Gag me with a spoon.

I'm sorry, you are totally entitled to your own opinion, and Lady Gaga makes fun and catchy pop-songs, but she's a hype, I seriously doubt she'll still be around in 3 years. No way in hell she's going to be the new Stevie Nicks, or the new Britney Spears or Madonna for that matter.

However, I do agree with you on the fact that the Mac should be more productive.

I have her potential ceiling as a poor-man's Pink.

I agree, Duffy's really good.

I'm curious as to why you think a more productive FM would be more relevant? They could turn out an album every six months, they still wouldn't re-live that heyday.

Their relevance is more the influence they have had on the artists of today.

Oh and Elvis has been mighty quiet for the past 30 years - I'd suggest he's not quite irrelevant yet (though maybe heading that way).

They aren't irrelevant to those that still love their music.

Google Missing Persons or Dale Bozio. The new Stevie Nicks? Not quite.

or more to the point, to those who love decent music

Sure, they're both female singer/songwriters that play piano, but Lady GaGa and Stevie share one specific, if less obvious, trait - mystery. Both have tailored very specific, eccentric stage personas without sacrificing sincerity.

I attended a Lady GaGa concert at the House of Blues and she was incredible. She performed a few songs cabaret style (she sang & played piano), and those songs were just as dynamic as her big production numbers. She can sing her ass off and demonstrated a considerable amount of charm, humor and smarts.

Her two recent number one hits (Just Dance, Poker Face) are setting records for paid downloads, having sold four and three million, respectively. Only five songs have hit the four million mark. She currently has three songs in the top 40 on Billboard's Hot 100 chart: Poker Face (#2), new single Love Game (#22) and Just Dance (#26, with 42 weeks on the chart). She's on the cover of this week's Rolling Stone.

I have to disagree, strongly and passionately, with those who dismiss GaGa as a weightless fluke or underestimate her musicianship.

P.S. In response to the opening post, Stevie said she's relieved you've moved on, because she never liked you and the strain of faking it was killing her. She like to return the teddy bear and your fan letters, which she corrected herself with a red pen. And, yes, she'd like to confirm your longheld suspicion about that Edge walk in '98. She did purposely recoil from your pleading, out-stretched hand. She didn't know where it had been. That, and the fan-gifted crystal ball/snow globe in her other hand had just predicted your future betrayal, so her gesture was intended to haunt.

I agree that FM is irrelevant. But :
a] spell irrelevant right
b] don't compare to Duffy: that's a very good but reactive pastiche-act. Not a great "new ground"-breaking act.
c] Fleetwood Mac will never be finished: they've had too much influence. Also on todays relevant acts like the Decemberists, Elliott Brood, Death Cab For Cutie, Ryan Adams, Greg Dulli etcetera.

So move over to Duffy's board and feed your undying need to be "relevent", you modern newyawka.

I question the age of the the original poster, Fleetwood Mac's core audience is 35 and up. To the majority of the fans they have no clue who Lady GaGa is, nor do they care. Every artist gets about a five year span of "relevance" after that you get to coast on your past. How long you get to coast depends on how relevant you were. Fleetwood Mac's heyday ended around 1987 with Tango In The Night. Now here we are twenty-two years later and they touring the country to sold out venues. I'd say that's a pretty good coast.
How about we look up Lady GaGa around 2044 and see how well she's doing huh?

I wouldnt say Lady Gaga is the new Stevie Nicks. They are quite similar, but totaly different. They are both VERY different, write their own songs, "sex symbols", and non forgetable. BUT Lady Gaga isnt Rock and Roll shes POP/Dance. Her songs dont have the same message that Stevie's does. I DO LOVE Lady Gaga her songs are VERY catchy and I love ALL of her songs on her cd...not one I dont like(kinda like Stevie). but I definatly wouldnt say Lady Gaga is the new Stevie Nicks.

First of all, who the **** is this Duffy? I never said anything about a "Duffy." I said "Lady GaGa has won over my heart." And to the person who responded to me liking Duffy after the original poster of the whole "Duffy" comment, maybe if you took the time to read my post in it's entirety before commenting you wouldn't have made that comment and sounded like a dumbass who has no idea what's being discussed.

Secondly, yes, I am twenty-years old so I admit that I don't quite fit the age group for the average Fleetwood Mac fan but I still appreciate their music, I'm just disappointed in what they've ultimately become.

Thirdly, the fact that I misspelled irrelevant is your main argument? Why did you even bother to post?

And finally, I was not dissing Stevie Nicks because honestly, it's Stevie Nicks who's still kept the band from becoming a total bore.

Also, to the person who spent probably five minutes writing that paragraph on how Stevie is relieved that she doesn't have to bear the burden of me being her fan...what a total waste of time on your part.

I've made my peace...for now. :wavey:

[QUOTE=newyawka;822816]
And finally, I was not dissing Stevie Nicks because honestly, it's Stevie Nicks who's still kept the band from becoming a total bore.

No, that would be Lindsey Buckingham.;)

Gotta disagree with you there. That paragraph was the best thing about this thread :D. I liked it so much I'm going to repeat it.....
:laugh:
It's called humor, an entity that's been known to make occasional appearances in the Ledge. Try reading it with a smile. :)

I have never heard of this kind of mentality...who "replaces" one band or artist with another? I have about 50 different artists on my iPod and i am constantly expanding my music catologue almost every day, but i certainly don't delete the Fleetwood Mac songs on my iPod to "make room" for the newer artists that i add. You are basically saying Fleetwood Mac has to take a back seat to newer artists that are coming out, when in actuality, there's plenty of room for everyone.

You don't have to call another ledgie a dumbass.

Don't worry about that. Bad grammar & rotten spelling are hallmarks of the fans, & anyone who calls you on it (except me) is bound to need a little editing, too.

Some of these guys think Stevie Nicks is the one who MAKES the band a total bore.

I think this notion of relevance (& irrelevance) needs defining. In most contexts, it seems to mean nothing more than marketing mumbo-jumbo -- popularity measured in sales figures, & only in current sales figures, at that. Only here & there (for example, in Gerald's post) is relevance discussed in terms of artistic influence or even more general ideas as status in popular culture. In that sense, Fleetwood's relevance is higher than most of their contemporaries in the late 1970s but not so high as, say, the Stones, the Who, U2, Dylan, Mitchell, & the other seminal figures in rock & pre-rock.

...what a total waste of time on my part.
 

Why is relevancy so important?

I personally think this whole thread is stupid. I LOVE Lady GaGa but she has nothing on Stevie. They are COMPLETELY different artists, in different generations. I give a lot of respect to both of them, but she has been around nowhere NEAR as long as Stevie.

And as far as the whole "relevance" topic, to many many people Lady GaGa is irrelevant, as well as major icons like Britney Spears and Madonna. Over at the Britney Spears forum, people are complaining she's irrelevant, even though she JUST had a #1 album and three hit singles, as well as the #2 tour of any current artist. And guess who's currently #6? Fleetwood Mac! Relevance (spelling?) is all about the individual person's interest.

And as far as Stevie on this current tour, IMHO, she kicks ass! I haven't seen her this energetic since The Dance/Enchanted era. JUST MY OPINION. I think both she and Lindsey add equally to these shows!

I agree that Lady GaGa IS NOT the new Stevie Nicks! She can NEVER, EVER, EVER be like Stevie. Stevie's songs is affecting people like Lady GaGa's songs don't do. Well, maybe for some people but NOT for me and other huge Stevie/Mac fans.

They are completely different.

Oh and I LOVE ur sig! :thumbsup:

This thread is funny :lol:

But seriously, aside from specialising in a completely different genre of music, I think it's pretty weird to compare an act who has the sum total of two singles and one album under her belt with a band with a vast discography and one of the best selling albums of all time, who have been around for more than 30 years.

Ten years ago you could have written the same post and replaced Lady GaGa with, say, Alanis Morissette. Alanis was very "relevant" back then, now, to put it mildly, not so much.

Anyway, I'm with Gerald on this one, I don't think it's got that much to do with productivity. I'd say Johnny Cash is still relevant, and he's not even with us any more. But he's so iconic, his music is still played and his influence is so huge it would be silly to say he's irrelevant.
As it is more and more new bands are coming out and claiming the Mac as an influence from The Decemberists to Bat For Lashes and Ladyhawke (all very "hip" and relevant artists) and the band is still out there and getting plenty of press and attention, maybe not the kind that Lady GaGa is getting but I'm pretty sure the next big thing will come along and steal some of her light too.

Yeah, entertaining people in a time when life is so difficult is irrelevant.

You can keep Lady GagGag. I'll stay gaga over the Mac, thank you.

So is this thread about whether FM's irrelevancy is making them less appealing or simply a Lady Gaga vs. Stevie Nicks debate? I'm confused. Because, if it is the latter, I'll hand it to Ms. Nicks simply because I find her music to have a lot more heart in it than that other chic. However, this is all completely based on the fact that I really like Stevie Nicks and Lady Gaga isn't quite comparable.

But (once again) I TOTALLY DISAGREE with the people that are saying it is Stevie, and only Stevie, who is preventing FM from being boring. Uh...huh? I guess it goes with the territory of complete biasness in Stevie's favor but I would hardly consider Lindsey, his music, or his performances boring. I mean, really.:rolleyes:

I also agree that it's strange to "replace" artists because they aren't doing something new and fresh. Why can't we just love a song because it rocks or is beautiful and not expect any more from it than that? Why does it always have to be about some kind of movement or whatever is "hip?" I realize that it makes sense to feel a connection to something when it corresponds to a time or a moment, but is that a really valid reason to consider an artist relevant over another?

I go back and listen to a lot of things I used to rave about in my youth, that were connected to some period and realize now I can't really enjoy the song because it's meaning is so topical and dated that I have a hard time separating that from the music. Nowadays, I listen to music to just enjoy the music, the voice, the words and not expect it to be pertinent to things happening in the world. I can attach my own interpretation, but it doesn't have to be a popular song with words about such and such to sway me. I mean, I LOVE artists who make statement songs, but I can also really appreciate the Scissor Sister because they make me dance.:shrug:

And Fleetwood Mac is a timeless, classic rock band that (I feel) anybody should be proud to be a fan of and own records of. They have beautiful songs, consistent albums, and they put on great live shows. I don't feel they are resting on their laurels when I see how much effort they put into showcasing the songs that have really been a part of people's lives. I think it's lovely and I love loving them, quite frankly. But please...if Lady Gaga is more your thing...by all means replace them with her.

This made The Ledge worth visiting today.

My first argument was that I agreed with you that FM has become irrelevant. Case closed. Gaga, Duffy, whaever. :shrug: You should go over to Gaga's board and stop posting about an oldfarty band that has actually played an important role in our lives. Let Gaga stuff your Duffy and leave us with our geriatric patients.

Everything you've said is a matter of opinion. For me, it's Buckingham of late that's kept Fleetwood Mac from being boring. Go back and give a listen to TUSK, or RUMOURS...or even the white Fleetwood Mac album. Renew your love, and relevancy, for the MAC.

The red pen was an especially nice touch, because it reminded me of what Stevie said about Mick's book.

Michele

I forgot.....what did she say? Something about taking a red pen to Mick's manuscript?

It comes down to this, the original poster said he's 22, so my guess is his first "taste" of Fleetwood Mac probably came with "The Dance". Like most people who discover a band they believe (albiet briefly) that whichever album they first hear is the bands first album. They then hope they can enjoy the ride not realizing that the ride is almost over.
Fleetwood Mac's impact was in the 70's if you missed it, then that's too bad. They aren't trying to be relevant to today's music buying public, they are doing what they want, when they want. They aren't trying to get a #1 album or single because they know it's not going to happen. They just go out and do it because they want to not because they have to. They don't need to try and make a name for themselves, they've already done that. Your GaGa's and Duffy's etc are new artists, so they are heading down the roads that others have already paved a long time ago.
Fleetwood Mac is not trying to appeal to a 20 something year old. This isn't to say that can't, it's just that those aren't the people they are trying to please. I guess they could be like the other bands from the 70's who are still racing up the charts and scoring #1 albums and singles and are wowing the Hannah Montana generation like.....um....uh....hmmm....oh yeah there aren't any!!!!

She said she'd be marking it: not true, never happened, BIG LIE.

She's a droll doll, when she wants to be.

Michele

Looks like I need to do some research on Lady Gaga because I don't know anything about her music.

Only thing I know she and Stevie have in common are their first names.

Wasn't there someone on here with insider information about Hannah Montana (Miley) joining Fleetwood Mac?

Lady Gaga...her music, like much of today's top 40 that is being force-fed to MY generation (yes I'm 21), is of absolutely no substance. She is a passing fad just like all the other technicolor clad idiots. She is just a rip off of all the other pop singers now. Wow, she is a trendsetter...she dresses in ways that would make a drag queen blush. Real music (like Fleetwood Mac) is everlasting and timeless. In five years, people will say Lady who? she is already tired and worn out...Just Dance? just give up.

the new Stevie Nicks? that is just blasphemous

My brother's wife claims to have lost all her baby weight by simultaneously dancing to this Lady Gaga woman and doing the wii Fit. So...:shrug: There's some legitimate good in her I guess.

I found this quote from her:
"I’m quite sure that if it were 1968 I may not be the Lady GaGa that I am today...I might be arguing with Yoko Ono and trying to win John Lennon’s heart and chasing The Beatles in a bus on LSD, hoping that one of them hands me a microphone one day," she added.

And then a pic with the Pet Shop Boys and Brandon Flowers:
http://www2.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/T...gv7zCcqyil.jpg

So she has some good taste and can't dress for *&%. But I'll have to actually sit through her stuff a little more attentively to really understand her greatness I suppose.

This is just weird. Lady GaGa is on the cover of this week's "Rolling Stone" magazine wearing bubbles. A buddy of mine saw the magazine in my kitchen this afternoon and said "Is that Stevie Nicks!?" So maybe GaGa IS the new Stevie!!! ;P

Just the simple fact that the person who created this thread is leaving the Mac for LADY GAGA makes HIM/HER irrelevant..give me a break, Lady GaGa? "Where are my keys I lost my phone?" Yeah her sounds are catchy, but there's not much substance there, just because she dresses like catwoman.

I hope they dub her "The Reigning Queen of Rock & Roll" so we can finally put into perspective a 28-year-old headline concocted by an associate editor.

As for GaGa, what's with the babytalk? Is it a tribute to the old Queen song?

Okay, no substance there? Maybe lyrically, yes. But the impact that song has had on culture so far is substantial enough. You're basing the substance of her lyrics on one song, though. Try listening to other's such as "Paper Gangsta," "Paparazzi," "Brown Eyes."

Plus the "Poker Face" lyric:

"Russian roulette is not the same without a gun
And baby if it's love if it's not rough it isn't fun"

That's a great ****in' lyric if I ever did hear one.

And yes, she was called GaGa in reference to the Freddie Mercury song. She stuck with the name and became famous with it.