Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lux
Ah, and what if he sat down on Stevie and Lindsey, for an hour or any randon length of time?
|
I don't care whether Stevie sits down with an ass-kisser, but at least let it be an ass-kisser with some brains & some interesting comments to make. I can practically predict the vacuous garbage that a numnut like Oprah Winfrey would generate. In any serious consideration of Stevie -- & I would say it's about time to take her seriously -- Oprah has absolutely nothing to say & nothing to add. She is utterly irrelevant in the evolving story of Stevie Nicks. (Consequently, I'm not surprised to see great numbers of Stevie fans support the idea of Stevie on Oprah.)
Many years ago, Jim Ladd -- that great old hippie -- was going to bring his esteemed Innerview show to television. Stevie was going to be one of the first guests, maybe even the first. Too bad that plans for the show fell through. Ladd, despite adoring her & being in love with her, always had the knack for getting her to talk, & the things he said in return weren't numnuts.
Of all the press Stevie did for TISL in 2001, my favorite was the series of face-to-face interviews she did with an intelligent music critic, Anthony de Curtis. Anthony is no Stevie idolator, but he thought highly enough of her career that he was able pose engaging questions that we ourselves might have wanted to ask. He also had enough of a brain to keep an interview on a businesslike keel instead of letting it sink into sanctimonious James Lipton crap.
I'd also love for any of the great writers on Fleetwood Mac from the past -- David Gans, Steve Morse, Robert Hilburn, Ken Tucker, etc. -- to take on a lengthy conversation with Stevie. (The guy who recently died -- the chief editor at Billboard -- would have been good, too.)
As for Charlie Rose, bah. Lindsey's interviews with him were embarrassments; Rose has no clue but, like the chirpy little bright kid up front in class, wants to be thought of as "on the wavelength." Rose is a numnuts.