Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lagringader&r
Yep. I don't think it was a bad review.  Nobody but hardcore fans are ever going to write a review about Stevie and talk about how fresh her material seems, how great her skin looks, how her hands are soft, etc. If she released a new cd with all fresh material and it was really, really good (Rumours-like or Belladonna-like good in the casual fan's opinion) then she would get some nods. Rooms on Fire? If you ask someone who isn't a hardcore fan to name a Stevie Nicks' hit, ROF won't be on that list. I'll place bets on that. Dreams or Rhiannon or Edge will. In truth, she hasn't had a significant hit in 20 years. SYW doesn't count. The cd was marginally successful in sales and the single didn't get played much on the radio. Casual fans don't download or trade boots of Stevie's songs either. Most people don't get Stevie unless she's with FM 20 years ago.  I'm sure she probably accepts that. I don't think this review was all that bad. He was just being honest about what the majority of peeps would think about a Stevie show right now, on this tour. It's different for us. We're obsessed.  |
I think the issue of the review was far more one of word choice. Questioning one's significance is dangerous ground because there is a big difference beween the absence of success and the absence of message. There is a difference between resting on your laurels and an audience just not hearing all that you still have to say. And while I wouldn't argue with anyone about Stevie as a marketable hitmaker of the past 20 years, she is to me still just as relevant and significant as she ever was. When was the last time Bob Dylan had a radio hit? Or Neil Young? They (and a lot of other artists over a certain age) are not hitmakers, but they are anything but insignificant.