Stevie Nicks: Fleetwood Mac will tour in 2013. Rehearsals start in January".

[TrueFaith77]

Originally Posted by CADreaming

Um. Ok.

Rephrase: Why would you think Stevie shouldn't be in it for the money? Or why do you insinuate that she is wicked, evil, mean and nasty because "it's all about the sales for her"?

I also don't see how that insinuation could be made from my statement. The thing to disagree with me about would be to say: She's not ONLY in it for the money; there are surely artistic or even social or recreational incentives as well, I could even surmise, although I didn't "insinuate" as much.

[CADreaming]

Originally Posted by TrueFaith77

I also don't see how that insinuation could be made from my statement. The thing to disagree with me about would be to say: She's not ONLY in it for the money; there are surely artistic or even social or recreational incentives as well, I could even surmise, although I didn't "insinuate" as much.

You said now we know she's only in it for the money, as if that was a bad thing. That's how the statement reads and I'm sure that is how you meant it. Unless, of course you were saying well, now we know she is only in it for the money - ballyhoo for her! That's where the "insinuation" comes in.

And, I do disagree; I don't think she only does it for the money. I think it is her prime motivation at this point in her life. The integrity of the art is always sold somewhere along the way.

[WildHearted]

Originally Posted by FM77

Stevie can't be making a bunch of money on this solo tour...yes she gets her guarantee but she has a lot of musicians to pay as well. I saw a Groupon offer for Va Beach tix. At least Lindsey tours lean and mean and plays smaller venues. He wants $$ too...his wife spends it quickly plus he has three kids etc...his expenses are growing. Literally.

Well, they did cut out Lenny Castro this time around.

And she's also doing the Rod tour which, according to what I've read around these parts, is just a cash grab since it will bring her more $$$$ than usual.

[TrueFaith77]

Originally Posted by CADreaming

You said now we know she's only in it for the money, as if that was a bad thing. That's how the statement reads and I'm sure that is how you meant it. Unless, of course you were saying well, now we know she is only in it for the money - ballyhoo for her! That's where the "insinuation" comes in.

And, I do disagree; I don't think she only does it for the money. I think it is her prime motivation at this point in her life. The integrity of the art is always sold somewhere along the way.

My insinuation was: Now WE know she's only in it for the money. Meaning: No more reading the tea leaves; we need to watch when it's favorable economically to determine when we will--if ever--get new Mac music. So I guess you failed at mind-reading me.

[CADreaming]

Originally Posted by TrueFaith77

My insinuation was: Now WE know she's only in it for the money. Meaning: No more reading the tea leaves; we need to watch when it's favorable economically to determine when we will--if ever--get new Mac music. So I guess you failed at mind-reading me.

I didn't fail at mind-reading. I wasn't trying to read your mind. You failed in your sentence structure.

You stated that WE now know, so that part wasn't insinuated. The Mac thought would definitely be your insinuation, although since they weren't even mentioned that would be a really difficult to conclude. You worded it so the reader would assume you were being derogatory toward Stevie's quest for financial gain.

Were you not?

[TrueFaith77]

Originally Posted by CADreaming

I didn't fail at mind-reading. I wasn't trying to read your mind. You failed in your sentence structure.

You stated that WE now know, so that part wasn't insinuated. The Mac thought would definitely be your insinuation, although since they weren't even mentioned that would be a really difficult to conclude. You worded it so the reader would assume you were being derogatory toward Stevie's quest for financial gain.

Were you not?

I think it was a failure of sentence structure only if I did not take into account how defensive her fans sometimes get about every statement made about her. And I admit: I did not.

[CADreaming]

Originally Posted by TrueFaith77

I think it was a failure of sentence structure only if I did not take into account how defensive her fans sometimes get about every statement made about her. And I admit: I did not.

Lol. Right. I wasn't being so defensive of her as much as I was pointing out that it's a business, with making money being the primary goal.

[TrueFaith77]

Originally Posted by CADreaming

Lol. Right. I wasn't being so defensive of her as much as I was pointing out that it's a business, with making money being the primary goal.

You imposed a tone upon my rather innocuous sentence (i mean, you really made a big leap there). I maintain that is because of either a) your defensiveness about stevie nicks or b) your prejudices against me.

You wrote:

You worded it so the reader would assume you were being derogatory toward Stevie's quest for financial gain.

Or why do you insinuate that she is wicked, evil, mean and nasty because "it's all about the sales for her"?

There is nothing in my sentence that suggested being derogatory much less suggested I was thinking: "wicked," "evil," "mean," "nasty." You claim that a derogatory tone could be gleaned by my "sentence structure." What possibly in my sentence structure = wicked evil mean nasty?

Here is my sentence:

"Well now we know it's all about the sales for ms. nicks."

"Well" would suggest "resignation" on my part

"now" -- as opposed to before

"we" would suggest all of us (meaning: I'm referring to the participants in this thread's parsing of the possibilility of new material)

"know" means that we now have information

"all" that's where it's arguable; she may other considerations in making music, but not in actually releasing it, is my point. thus: all. I stand by it. Even if i'm wrong.

"the" -- maybe the gratuitous use of "the" suggested the phrase "the moolah" or something and that could be read as somehow suggesting greed (rather than calculation), but I think I meant it like "the sales" to mean "the circumstances surrounding sales, i.e., the market"

"sales" the state of the record industry, the circumstances for moving units

"ms. nicks" -- now I see. I didn't capitalize her name! and I called her ms. (because i had forgetten how y'all refer to her as "la" or whatever). Yes: lower-case and ms. = mean evil nasty wicked. You caught me!!!!! Best not make that mistake again. Move over, Roland Barthes. When, in fact, the tone in which it was intended was like Sherlock Holmes with his pipe: as if I had solved a mystery (not that it was all great shakes to solve anyway).

[MrStevie]

Originally Posted by TrueFaith77

"all" that's where it's arguable; she may other considerations in making music, but not in actually releasing it, is my point. thus: all. I stand by it. Even if i'm wrong.

It would be highly arguable if you used "only" but "all" still leaves some wiggle room for me.

I don't think Stevie writes, records, or tours ONLY for the money. She's totally in it for the fame. She could stop working tomorrow and she'd still be flush. Isn't she due her Social Security next May?

Serioulsy, I think touring has more to do with everyone else who makes a living when she tours, and why she still does it regularly. Oh, let's not forget the fame too.

As for recording, I can see why there's a lack of desire to work seriously on a new Mac release, knowing in advance there's a limited audience. I don't think it should play the key role in her decision making, and I'm not sure it does. Band politics are probably more at issue than anything else. Things we don't know about or ever hear about likely come up in the negotiations of recording and releasing new music, and that stuff is a turn off for both Nicks and Buckingham.

[CADreaming]

:l

Originally Posted by TrueFaith77

You imposed a tone upon my rather innocuous sentence (i mean, you really made a big leap there). I maintain that is because of either a) your defensiveness about stevie nicks or b) your prejudices against me.

You wrote:

You worded it so the reader would assume you were being derogatory toward Stevie's quest for financial gain.

Or why do you insinuate that she is wicked, evil, mean and nasty because "it's all about the sales for her"?

There is nothing in my sentence that suggested being derogatory much less suggested I was thinking: "wicked," "evil," "mean," "nasty." You claim that a derogatory tone could be gleaned by my "sentence structure." What possibly in my sentence structure = wicked evil mean nasty?

Here is my sentence:

"Well now we know it's all about the sales for ms. nicks."

"Well" would suggest "resignation" on my part

"now" -- as opposed to before

"we" would suggest all of us (meaning: I'm referring to the participants in this thread's parsing of the possibilility of new material)

"know" means that we now have information

"all" that's where it's arguable; she may other considerations in making music, but not in actually releasing it, is my point. thus: all. I stand by it. Even if i'm wrong.

"the" -- maybe the gratuitous use of "the" suggested the phrase "the moolah" or something and that could be read as somehow suggesting greed (rather than calculation), but I think I meant it like "the sales" to mean "the circumstances surrounding sales, i.e., the market"

"sales" the state of the record industry, the circumstances for moving units

"ms. nicks" -- now I see. I didn't capitalize her name! and I called her ms. (because i had forgetten how y'all refer to her as "la" or whatever). Yes: lower-case and ms. = mean evil nasty wicked. You caught me!!!!! Best not make that mistake again. Move over, Roland Barthes. When, in fact, the tone in which it was intended was like Sherlock Holmes with his pipe: as if I had solved a mystery (not that it was all great shakes to solve anyway).

That's funny.

1. I didn't quote you in my original post.
2. I don't harbor prejudices against you. I don't even know you.
3. I didn't insinuate the tone - you did.
4. Stevie was not mentioned specifically in my original post, so I was not defending her.
5. My "wicked, evil, mean and nasty" comment was supposed to be funny...

By the way, it wouldn't matter how you referred to her, it reads the same. If I'm the only one who read it that way, then so sorry. (I kind of doubt it, though).


Maybe we should just let the discussion continue and drop it. I don't see the point really.

[elle]

Originally Posted by TrueFaith77

You imposed a tone upon my rather innocuous sentence (i mean, you really made a big leap there). I maintain that is because of either a) your defensiveness about stevie nicks or b) your prejudices against me.

there might be a c) CAD is ferocious in defending her point of view on any of the issues she seems to be really fond of. (which may come back to your a) i guess lol)

i have met random people at LB shows who told me "that CAD woman seems to really hate you!" b/c we've have had similar *discussions* to the one you are having here. she can correct me if i'm wrong but i don't think that's true at all!

[CADreaming]

I wish more people were interested in posting on this board. lol

[CADreaming]

Originally Posted by elle

i have met random people at LB shows who told me "that CAD woman seems to really hate you!" b/c we've have had similar *discussions* to the one you are having here. she can correct me if i'm wrong but i don't think that's true at all!

Wow. Reallly?!? Sometimes I really hate the internet...

Too funny.

[David]

I think everybody here is very creamy and all of us are delightful. There is humor in our pores. We are a tiny microcosm of society—we search for love and truth and honor, and we all fear tsunamis.

I want Les to come back........

[CADreaming]

Originally Posted by David

I think everybody here is very creamy and all of us are delightful. There is humor in our pores. We are a tiny microcosm of society—we search for love and truth and honor, and we all fear tsunamis.

I want Les to come back........

I'm not sure who Les is, but that was beautiful.