Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Johnny Stew
I still find it interesting that the reasons many fans express as to why they've grown disenchanted with Stevie's performances in recent years, mirror complaints made by critics nearly thirty years ago, during what are typically considered to be the "glory days" of her live performances.
|
I'm not sure that the critical establishment, by & large (& it's been said that most music critics are both bi & large), ever averred to any significant degree that Stevie had a "glory" period as a performer (although many fans certainly did & do aver).
Quote:
|
Meanwhile, critics seem to review her current live performances in a more consistently favorable fashion than thirty years ago.
|
Of course, as I've said before, it's a mistake to treat critics past & present as a single monolithic lump of Stevie treatment. Not only do different individuals think different things, but Stevie herself has aged & changed & the times have changed, & all of this affects public & critical reaction to her. As far as your view that critical reaction to Stevie's performances in recent years is a lot more favorable than in eras past, I agree completely. What accounts for that? No one knows, but my view is that it's attributable at least as much--if not more--to sociological reasons than to aesthetic ones. Also, Stevie herself was never the kind of figure over whom most of the rock press had much at stake: The widespread view was that Stevie a sort of after-dinner mint at the Fleetwood Mac meal. Tasty but not exactly essential to the music-making business onstage. To stick with Rolling Stone or Stereo Review to demonstrate the perspective, neither publication to my knowledge ever published a review of any of Stevie's solo shows.
Tell me what you think, Stew. We can start a dialog here! One hopes others will join in, too.