The Death Of Fleetwood Mac...Time

[louielouie2000]

I guess I just fail to see how the Time chapter qualifies as forward movement or natural progression. To me it just seems utterly formulaic.

"A pretty blond front woman brought us fame before? Let's get another!"

"Bluesy music is how Fleetwood Mac got started? Let's capitalize on that!"

To me, the entire Time era just seems utterly contrived. If it was truly a step forward and a new beginning, the Time lineup would have come out with a new sound, a new look, they wouldn't have recruited random past members, or put a pretty blond girl out front in a shawl to sing Gold Dust Woman. I guess I just fail to see how a certain subset of folks on this board pan chiffonheads for their blind allegiance to Stevie, when they give the Time incarnation of the band the exact same latitude. It's pure hypocrisy. The whole Time experiment failed because it wasn't genuine, period. Yes, Fleetwood Mac is known for it's lineup changes... but by the time Time was released their image and persona was frozen in the public's mindset. There were no rebirths left in Fleetwood Mac.

The bottom line for me? Fleetwood Mac's namesake members have dismissed the Time incarnation... that's all I need to hear.

[TerraRhiannon]

Originally Posted by louielouie2000

I guess I just fail to see how the Time chapter qualifies as forward movement or natural progression. To me it just seems utterly formulaic.

"A pretty blond front woman brought us fame before? Let's get another!"

"Bluesy music is how Fleetwood Mac got started? Let's capitalize on that!"

To me, the entire Time era just seems utterly contrived. If it was truly a step forward and a new beginning, the Time lineup would have come out with a new sound, a new look, they wouldn't have recruited random past members, or put a pretty blond girl out front in a shawl to sing Gold Dust Woman. I guess I just fail to see how a certain subset of folks on this board pan chiffonheads for their blind allegiance to Stevie, when they give the Time incarnation of the band the exact same latitude. It's pure hypocrisy. The whole Time experiment failed because it wasn't genuine, period. Yes, Fleetwood Mac is known for it's lineup changes... but by the time Time was released their image and persona was frozen in the public's mindset. There were no rebirths left in Fleetwood Mac.

The bottom line for me? Fleetwood Mac's namesake members have dismissed the Time incarnation... that's all I need to hear.

I agree with everything you just said, Louie. And another thing if the Time lineup was a step forward it probably would have stayed like that, and they would have made more records. When you say the image of the band was frozen in the public's mindset you are absolutely right - along with the band's mindset. During The Dance rehearsal interview Mick said: This is THEE lineup of Fleetwood Mac." 'Nuff said. Also I find it odd that the band doesn't even acknowledge Time, I think I said that in another thread somewhere. That makes me not want to listen to it. While we're picking, just for fun - what is up with the album art? That alone makes me not want to listen to it - B-o-r-i-n-g. I'm not apologizing for that one.

[chiliD]

Originally Posted by louielouie2000

I guess I just fail to see how the Time chapter qualifies as forward movement or natural progression. To me it just seems utterly formulaic.

"A pretty blond front woman brought us fame before? Let's get another!"

"Bluesy music is how Fleetwood Mac got started? Let's capitalize on that!"

To me, the entire Time era just seems utterly contrived. If it was truly a step forward and a new beginning, the Time lineup would have come out with a new sound, a new look, they wouldn't have recruited random past members, or put a pretty blond girl out front in a shawl to sing Gold Dust Woman. I guess I just fail to see how a certain subset of folks on this board pan chiffonheads for their blind allegiance to Stevie, when they give the Time incarnation of the band the exact same latitude. It's pure hypocrisy. The whole Time experiment failed because it wasn't genuine, period. Yes, Fleetwood Mac is known for it's lineup changes... but by the time Time was released their image and persona was frozen in the public's mindset. There were no rebirths left in Fleetwood Mac.

The bottom line for me? Fleetwood Mac's namesake members have dismissed the Time incarnation... that's all I need to hear.

What the Time bashers seem to overlook is that Bekka had been in Mick's sideband The Zoo for three years before Mick asked her to be in the newly reconstituted Fleetwood Mac. Same with Billy Burnette...he was in The Zoo a couple of incarnations prior to Bekka. Nothing contrived there...it was just a natural progression. It wasn't as if Mick & John held 12 hour a day auditions until they found "THE" blonde singer to take Stevie's place. (Unlike, let's say, JOURNEY, who purposely did a worldwide search for a Steve Perry soundalike) IF Mick was TRYING to find a "replacement" for Stevie Nicks, there are a whole lot of Stevie Nicks wannabes floating around Southern California that he could've chosen f rom. He didn't.

The only part of "contrived" was Dave Mason...Mick was looking elsewhere for a lead guitarist and Dave just bugged him until his defenses were down and Mick relented.

The problem is that once again (just like when he had the choice of making less money but keeping Peter Green or going for the "green" and eventually LOSING Peter Green), Mick went for the almighty dollar over doing something more creative with a new lineup of Fleetwood Mac. Instead of possibly reinventing Fleetwood Mac into an entity with integrity, he went for the quick payday and sold out to "what had already been"...you can't recreate the past...but, Mick tried, got his payday, but lost a whole lot of respect in the process.

[bretonbanquet]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

I'm looking at the album within the context of its time. With bands like Wilco and Death Cab for Cutie now a dime-a-dozen, Tusk doesn't sound all that radical. But at the end of the '70s, no mainstream rock group was making music like this; considering that a sequel to Rumours was practically a given, they completely threw everyone a curve ball. This album came completely out of left field. It is as important in rock music as the trifecta of late 60s albums from the Beatles.

I'll agree that 70s mainstream rock bands weren't doing anything radical, particularly in the US, but over here, punk had pushed rock bands into doing different things. It might be a US/UK thing - Tusk is all but forgotten here. I have to disagree strongly about that last sentence though...

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

I have to disagree. Yes, Lindsey went the furthest afield... but being different simply for the sake of being different does not automatically make you "creative." I think everyone flexed their creative muscles on this album. Christine, the master of 3-minute pop treats, delivered a surprisingly spare/unembellished jazz-tinged song like "Brown Eyes." Stevie took her ethereal persona to the nth degree in the sprawling epic "Sara." Sure, other songs remained true to form. But you simply can't have a Fleetwood Mac album that tries too hard not to sound like Fleetwood Mac!

"Brown Eyes" was a little different for Chris, but her other songs were typical Christine. I'm not really knocking that as such, because she had a formula which worked. So did Stevie, and changing it was a risk - they were already a bit shackled by their success.

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

I really don't think you've listened to Say You Will. Sure, there are some safe, pleasant, radio-oriented singles on there- those are a given. But what about songs like "Everybody Finds Out," "Illume," "Murrow" and "Red Rover?" They've never, ever done anything like that before. And although the production of "Smile at You" has been almost universally hated (myself included), you can't deny that it ventures into totally new musical territory for FM.

"Illumé" I find hard to listen to "Murrow" and "Red Rover" were a bit of a departure, but not in terms of what Lindsey had been doing outside Mac, which most Mac fans would have been familiar with. That's what I mean by it sounding half like a Lindsey solo album.

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

I know. I know because people have the audacity to defend Time.

Gotta stand up for your beliefs! I think the big difference is whether you view it as a standalone album and take it on its merits, or compare it to what went before.

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

Given your somewhat dubious praise of Time above, I think "Stand on the Rock" would have fit perfectly on it! In fact, I wish it was there and not on BTM.

Probably true, but then Bekka's backing vocals might have dragged it up a notch or two.

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

Um... because Lindsey is an ass and Stevie misses Christine. Oops... it's no longer 2009. Um... I think Lindsey has been giving us nothing but "new ideas" since SYW. And Stevie is in the process of giving us something new. I think the fact that they have not gotten together is more of a political issue than an artistic issue.

Lindsey has had new ideas, but clearly nobody felt they were suitable to become Fleetwood Mac songs. Stevie's coming up with new stuff? I sense the fabric of the space-time continuum straining under the shock I'd say a new album hasn't happened because of both political and artistic issues.

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

Well, I think legions of Stevie fans would disagree, but she seems to be one of those extremely polarizing figures- you either love her or hate her. There is no such thing as being indifferent about Stevie Nicks.

Oh, I definitely don't hate her. I rather like her actually - she seems like a decent sort, and I do like her Mac stuff up to and including Mirage. After that, not so much, and her solo stuff I find a bit patchy. I do understand the fascination with her (I had expert help ) even though I don't join in.

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

Well, when Peter Green left the band, they really had no choice but to carry on as Fleetwood Mac due to contractual obligations. And it seems that, in the past, whenever Fleetwood Mac changed its lineup, it was done in small increments for the sake of continuity- a member here, a member there, etc. I think the next logical step after BTM would have been a Chris, Billy, Rick, John and Mick lineup. Instead, Mick did the unthinkable... the almost unforgiveable... he tried to replace Stevie Nicks! He can deny it all he wants to, but it was no mere coincidence that he enlisted this new member who was a cute blonde chick singer who stood center stage. He failed to grasp then what he now knows the hard way- Stevie Nicks cannot be replaced. Period. Ask any Chiffonhead. There are just some things in the world that you just don't f*** with. You just don't f*** with Mama!

Originally Posted by louielouie2000

I guess I just fail to see how the Time chapter qualifies as forward movement or natural progression. To me it just seems utterly formulaic.

"A pretty blond front woman brought us fame before? Let's get another!"

"Bluesy music is how Fleetwood Mac got started? Let's capitalize on that!"

To me, the entire Time era just seems utterly contrived. If it was truly a step forward and a new beginning, the Time lineup would have come out with a new sound, a new look, they wouldn't have recruited random past members, or put a pretty blond girl out front in a shawl to sing Gold Dust Woman. I guess I just fail to see how a certain subset of folks on this board pan chiffonheads for their blind allegiance to Stevie, when they give the Time incarnation of the band the exact same latitude. It's pure hypocrisy. The whole Time experiment failed because it wasn't genuine, period. Yes, Fleetwood Mac is known for it's lineup changes... but by the time Time was released their image and persona was frozen in the public's mindset. There were no rebirths left in Fleetwood Mac.

The bottom line for me? Fleetwood Mac's namesake members have dismissed the Time incarnation... that's all I need to hear.

I think new members were brought in for different reasons in the early 70s - generally non-musical reasons. I don't know if Bekka was supposed to be a direct Stevie-replacement - after all, the only thing they had in common was that they were both blonde and cute. It was a bad idea to have her sing Stevie's songs - I don't really see the point in that. But at that time, Chris wasn't there, and maybe it seemed odd not to have any girls in the band. I'd say that it was more cock-up than conspiracy - it sounds like a risky idea that didn't work on the grounds that it wasn't popular with the existing fans. It worked musically as a standalone thing, but yes, Mac had gone too far along the Rumours road for anything else to really catch on. So that's why Mac are where they are. Incidentally, they have all but dismissed the '70-'74 incarnations as well - I'd say because there's no money in it.

[tilthefirefades]

If the Behind The Mask and Time lineups were so progressive, unique, or even great, why didn't they last? Because the fans wanted Stevie, Lindsey, and Christine, hence The Dance's success. No matter what anyone says, without Stevie, there is no Fleetwood Mac. In the real world, outside of The Ledge, and outside of hardcore fans, the only song that people will always know is Landslide. Then you have some people that know Dreams, Gold Dust Woman, and Go Your Own Way. Then you have even less people that know Don't Stop and maybe Gypsy or Hold Me. I know this because at my job, Gypsy or Don't Stop will play and I'm all "omg!!!" and they give me blank stares. I say "Fleetwood Mac?", and their response is "Oh..". I am in no way saying that Stevie is the most important, most talented, or most anything other than that she has become Fleetwood Mac.

Also, I would say Oh Well is much more tired than Rumours.

[SuperFleetwood]

i kinda liked btm and time, i liked christines song, nights in estoril!

[elle]

Originally Posted by tilthefirefades

the only song that people will always know is Landslide.

Uhmm - can it be b/c of Dixie Chicks version? If you check youtube comments it seems that many people were saying "oh, I didn't know this was FM song!"

Originally Posted by tilthefirefades

Then you have some people that know Dreams, Gold Dust Woman, and Go Your Own Way. Then you have even less people that know Don't Stop and maybe Gypsy or Hold Me.

Everywhere? Little Lies? The Chain? Tusk/USC? SHN seems to be used as a background for everything and everywhere these days...

[Street_Dreamer]

Originally Posted by tilthefirefades

If the Behind The Mask and Time lineups were so progressive, unique, or even great, why didn't they last? Because the fans wanted Stevie, Lindsey, and Christine, hence The Dance's success.

Which is why Fleetwood Mac is in the quagmire it's in. Same old same old.

Originally Posted by tilthefirefades

No matter what anyone says, without Stevie, there is no Fleetwood Mac.

Wrong. Fleetwood Mac starts with Mick Fleetwood and ends with John McVie. Without either, Fleetwood Mac does not exist.

Originally Posted by tilthefirefades

Also, I would say Oh Well is much more tired than Rumours.

Not by a long shot. It took the band almost 20+ years to cave in and perform this classic. Meanwhile all incarnations of the band between continued to play songs from Rumours. The same tired old songs.

Matt

[tilthefirefades]

Originally Posted by elle

Uhmm - can it be b/c of Dixie Chicks version? If you check youtube comments it seems that many people were saying "oh, I didn't know this was FM song!"

That was my point

Originally Posted by Street_Dreamer

Wrong. Fleetwood Mac starts with Mick Fleetwood and ends with John McVie. Without either, Fleetwood Mac does not exist.
Matt

Wrong? I want you to go out and poll people on which Fleetwood Mac member they recognize. It won't be either of them.

[elle]

Originally Posted by tilthefirefades

That was my point .

Ah - I was jumping to the conclusions obviously, after just glancing over "... without Stevie, there is no Fleetwood Mac. ... the only song that people will always know is Landslide. ... I am in no way saying that Stevie is the most ... anything other than that she has become Fleetwood Mac. "

[Street_Dreamer]

Originally Posted by tilthefirefades

Wrong? I want you to go out and poll people on which Fleetwood Mac member they recognize. It won't be either of them.

It doesn't matter how many people recognize them in comparison to Stevie or any other member for that matter. It's THEIR band. They are the ones who've kept it going more than four decades. Stevie and every other member of the band after 1969 not named Mick Fleetwood or John McVie are beneficiaries of their tenacity (or in Mick's case hunger for money.)

Matt

[bretonbanquet]

Originally Posted by tilthefirefades

If the Behind The Mask and Time lineups were so progressive, unique, or even great, why didn't they last? Because the fans wanted Stevie, Lindsey, and Christine, hence The Dance's success. No matter what anyone says, without Stevie, there is no Fleetwood Mac. In the real world, outside of The Ledge, and outside of hardcore fans, the only song that people will always know is Landslide. Then you have some people that know Dreams, Gold Dust Woman, and Go Your Own Way. Then you have even less people that know Don't Stop and maybe Gypsy or Hold Me. I know this because at my job, Gypsy or Don't Stop will play and I'm all "omg!!!" and they give me blank stares. I say "Fleetwood Mac?", and their response is "Oh..". I am in no way saying that Stevie is the most important, most talented, or most anything other than that she has become Fleetwood Mac.

Also, I would say Oh Well is much more tired than Rumours.

I don't think anyone would disagree that Stevie has the most fanatical fans, and therefore she has the biggest fan presence. Yes, those fans just want Stevie, which is why Fleetwood Mac are what they are today - their own tribute band.

Frankly nothing is more tired than Rumours. That album has been worked to death, regardless of its undeniable quality.

I can't speak for the US, but here in the UK, Stevie really isn't a well-known figure these days. Very few people under 30 would have a clue who she is. Fleetwood Mac were well-known as a band, without any individual standing out. Probably because Christine had the most hits, as many as Lindsey, with Stevie having very few. I'd take a stab and say that either "Albatross", "Everywhere" or "Little Lies" are the best-known Mac songs here, then "Don't Stop" and "Go Your Own Way". I'd be surprised if many people knew "Landslide" at all. The end of "The Chain" is very well-known thanks to TV, but I doubt many people know it's Fleetwood Mac.

[elle]

Originally Posted by bretonbanquet

I can't speak for the US, but here in the UK, Stevie really isn't a well-known figure these days. ... Fleetwood Mac were well-known as a band, without any individual standing out. Probably because Christine had the most hits, as many as Lindsey, with Stevie having very few. I'd take a stab and say that either "Albatross", "Everywhere" or "Little Lies" are the best-known Mac songs here, then "Don't Stop" and "Go Your Own Way". I'd be surprised if many people knew "Landslide" at all. The end of "The Chain" is very well-known thanks to TV, but I doubt many people know it's Fleetwood Mac.

I have to absolutely agree with that, being originally from the European side of the pond. And, I'd probably extend your statement beyond just <30 crowd. Most people there know/knew FM band, not the individual members. I'd suspect if Stevie would ever tour solo in Europe, that tour wouldn't fill any more seats that if Lindsey toured solo - but I may be overstreching...
Still can't get over how almost nobody in the US knows Albatross - from what I could remember it was as huge as something like "Smoke on the water" all around Europe at its time, and it's still played on every summer terrace...

[tilthefirefades]

Originally Posted by bretonbanquet

I don't think anyone would disagree that Stevie has the most fanatical fans, and therefore she has the biggest fan presence. Yes, those fans just want Stevie, which is why Fleetwood Mac are what they are today - their own tribute band.

Frankly nothing is more tired than Rumours. That album has been worked to death, regardless of its undeniable quality.

I can't speak for the US, but here in the UK, Stevie really isn't a well-known figure these days. Very few people under 30 would have a clue who she is. Fleetwood Mac were well-known as a band, without any individual standing out. Probably because Christine had the most hits, as many as Lindsey, with Stevie having very few. I'd take a stab and say that either "Albatross", "Everywhere" or "Little Lies" are the best-known Mac songs here, then "Don't Stop" and "Go Your Own Way". I'd be surprised if many people knew "Landslide" at all. The end of "The Chain" is very well-known thanks to TV, but I doubt many people know it's Fleetwood Mac.

I'll admit that I no nothing about Fleetwood Mac's impact and influence in other countries, so I apologize for my post's ignorance in that respect. I still can't imagine Fleetwood Mac being half as successful in the past decade without Stevie. At this point, unfortunately, she is what Fleetwood Mac is remembered for.

[bretonbanquet]

Originally Posted by elle

I have to absolutely agree with that, being originally from the European side of the pond. And, I'd probably extend your statement beyond just <30 crowd. Most people there know/knew FM band, not the individual members. I'd suspect if Stevie would ever tour solo in Europe, that tour wouldn't fill any more seats that if Lindsey toured solo - but I may be overstreching...
Still can't get over how almost nobody in the US knows Albatross - from what I could remember it was as huge as something like "Smoke on the water" all around Europe at its time, and it's still played on every summer terrace...

I think you might be right. Neither Stevie nor Lindsey would ever sell out big venues over here, and if anything, Lindsey might fare better. I agree about "Albatross" - it went Top 5 here twice in about three years, and it was the same in Germany, Scandinavia etc, and you still hear it all the time.

Originally Posted by tilthefirefades

I'll admit that I no nothing about Fleetwood Mac's impact and influence in other countries, so I apologize for my post's ignorance in that respect. I still can't imagine Fleetwood Mac being half as successful in the past decade without Stevie. At this point, unfortunately, she is what Fleetwood Mac is remembered for.

That's okay And yes, she is what Fleetwood Mac is known for. In the States.