Quote:
Originally Posted by David
The band (or its label) went back and forth about what to release. The earlier intention—advertised in Patrick Goldstein's Pop Eye column in the L.A. Times—was to record the then-upcoming Hollywood Bowl concerts for a live album. But minds must have changed. The last Bowl show was Sept. 1 and the album was released Dec. 8, so the group must have recorded the show still believing it was going to be for the album. I think the final live album was a rush job—the time frame of no more than two months lends credence to that. I have the impression of Mick, Lindsey, and Christine (Stevie was in South America learning to stand on her own) sitting in a studio while some other cats play them various cuts of their own concerts from 1975 to 1980, and just randomly picking what sounded good (or odd) to them. There's such a mishmash of different years on the album, I'd bet things weren't even labeled well. And then, of course, there's cocaine. I think if anyone involved was doing any thinking about this whatsoever, it was Lindsey, and he probably wanted to make a second Tusk statement—idiosyncrasy, explosive energy, incoherence, etc. LIVE is a postmodern live album avant la lettre.
|
Yes, I agree with this post completely. "Live" does sound like an extension of the "Tusk" style, meaning very little cohesiveness and just a sprawling sound of chaos. In that sense I think it is a very original live album (i.e. it does not flow like a typical live album cash grab with only the hits).
However, I brought this topic up as I do think the live album was also a means for Lindsey to assert himself as the important player that he was in the band's success. Truly, it is his album. He has the most live cuts and they go on the longest due to massive guitar solos. I can imagine that by the time 1980 rolled around and the general public had pretty much identified Fleetwood Mac with Stevie Nicks, this would have had to have some less than positive reactions from the band. In the case of Lindsey, he must have felt some frustration with the fact that it was essentially his production that brought the band to its height of popularity (in addition to the songs of all three, of course). I think that "Live" was in some ways a statement to the public that when you take away the theatrics that Stevie added to a show, it was essentially Lindsey guiding the energy (I would argue that this is still the case). "Live" certainly proves this. However, this does, of course, come at the expense of the others. It would have been great if Christine got at least one other live cut ("You Make Loving Fun" would have been nice, or, if they wanted more album tracks, "Oh Daddy" / "Songbird").
I do enjoy the album considerably as is. However, much like "Tusk", there are moments of the record where in fact we are listening to the Lindsey Buckingham show.