I know full well that Stevie is not Bonnie Tyler, et al. She's also not Cher or Tina Turner or Debbie Harry, but that sure doesn't stop folks from bringing those ladies up in relation to Stevie.
My point is that "crap" is a relative term.
I've heard what I would call utter crap, and it's
not any of the "garbage" songs you named.
Are they as good as some of Stevie's earlier work? That's highly debatable.
I'd personally have to say no, in regards to those particular songs.
But the implication is always that there's nothing of value to be found in them, and, on that, I whole-heartedly disagree.
In my eyes, they all have merit. They're all essential components in Stevie's oeuvre.
And, with my deepest apologies, I simply don't have the unrealistic expectation for a songwriter to match or top what I consider to be their best songs, with every single attempt.
It's the natural ebb and flow of things. I expect to be bowled over by certain songs, and underwhelmed by others. It's bound to happen.
I'm risking being accused of making this a Lindsey vs. Stevie thing with this comment, but Lindsey is the quickest example of someone who releases material only very sporadically, so here goes:
Even with the great amount of years that go between Lindsey's releases, there are still songs he puts out there, that leave me cold.
There's nothing horrible about that. As I said, it's bound to happen. And, obviously, it's bound to happen whether someone releases new songs every couple of years or every seven years.
When I hear a song that I'm not crazy about, I simply trust that another will come along in a few minutes, that I
will be crazy about.
No major letdowns at some songs not living up to my demands. Or towards the artist for including material
they happen to like.
At best, certain songs will hit me where I live and rattle me to my core. At worst, I'll have 4 minutes of an "ok" song.
That's all I expect, and I haven't been disappointed yet.
