The narcissistic, the bland, and the paranoid

[Villavic]

Reading the Tango sessions thread, I was looking for Christine's opinion about those. Didn't find any interesting/new info, beyond what we already know.

ButI did find the album review at RS magazine, and what caught my attention was these qualifiers:

The members of Fleetwood Mac are better off together. As solo acts, Nicks is too narcissistic and spacey, McVie too bland, Buckingham too paranoid. Together, at their best, they’re Every-lover. Yet even with Buckingham’s ingenious arrangements for distraction, Nicks stays pretty insufferable on Tango. The album’s duds are her Gone with the Wind fantasy “Welcome to the Room … Sara” (“This is a dream, right/Deja vu/Did I come here on my own/Oh I see”) and the cloying “When I See You Again,” on which she burbles the line “What’s the matter, baby” until the answer is obvious.

Buckingham and McVie, meanwhile, have developed a collaboration that gives McVie an edge and Buckingham some ease. “You and I, Part II” (“You and I, Part I” is the B side of the “Big Love” single) grafts McVie’s affection (“Keep your heart open and your eyes shut tight”) to Buckingham’s dread (“The phantoms crawl out of the night”) in a gentle, trotting tune laced with, of all things, the melody from “March of the Wooden Soldiers.”

In a way, Tango in the Night tries to do with emotions what Buckingham and Dashut do with guitar tones, sculpting highs and lows that grab attention without blowing out speakers. Although the album dishes out ear candy, it’s not only about the pleasures of popcraft. Its sonic overlays, dissolves and zooms show how passion swirls behind the neatest of facades — melting in McVie’s songs, babbling in Nicks’s, howling in Buckingham’s. In the cool, chastity-belted 1980s, that’s still worth remembering.

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/m...-night-106347/

[David]

Steve Pond, doubling on the Rolling Stone staff and the LA Times, reviewed Stevie’s fantastic Inglewood Forum concert from October 2, 1983: “Nicks is simply too fluttery and flighty to command a stage.”

[BombaySapphire3]

Originally Posted by David

Steve Pond, doubling on the Rolling Stone staff and the LA Times, reviewed Stevie’s fantastic Inglewood Forum concert from October 2, 1983: “Nicks is simply too fluttery and flighty to command a stage.”

I was there and it was fantastic. it would be sharply downhill from there for the most part.

[Macfan4life]

Originally Posted by David

Steve Pond, doubling on the Rolling Stone staff and the LA Times, reviewed Stevie’s fantastic Inglewood Forum concert from October 2, 1983: “Nicks is simply too fluttery and flighty to command a stage.”

The Pittsburgh Press review of the Wild Heart show described the concert as "what happened to Stevie game show since her band seem as confused as her wondering where she went after each song." It also said "in all fairness Stevie may have been suffering from some sort of illness" The review went on to say she relied too much on her sex appeal.

[rhiannondontgo]

Originally Posted by Villavic

The members of Fleetwood Mac are better off together. As solo acts, Nicks is too narcissistic and spacey, McVie too bland, Buckingham too paranoid.

Reminds me of one of the very early Buckingham Nicks reviews:


Couple Show Appeal

Lindsey Buckingham (a he) and Stevi Nicks (a she) call themselves and their debut album Buckingham Nicks (Polydor PD 5058).
Neither is of soloist caliber, but together they produce a pleasant, albeit a whiny, vocal blend on some pretty fair songs, notably "Don't Let Me Down Again" (good rock despite hackneyed lyrics), the slower “Races Are Run”, and the progressive "Frozen Love. "Without A Leg To Stand On" and the pretty ballad "Crystal," though, are definitely for a stronger lead performer, a Cat Stevens, perhaps.
Still, even though Lindsey and Stevi aren't great, they somehow appeal, more so when singing together than apart.
And if you don't like the record, you might like the costumes they’re wearing on the cover - a couple of those oh-so-chic birthday suits.

[michelej1]

That's a funny BN review. Even Lindsey is aware that they sounded whiny. Well, I guess he said they were too nasal together and that's why merging with Christine's honey tones suited them so well.

[michelej1]

I think it's a good assessment of the trio. I would call Lindsey more manic than paranoid though.

[bwboy]

Originally Posted by michelej1

That's a funny BN review. Even Lindsey is aware that they sounded whiny. Well, I guess he said they were too nasal together and that's why merging with Christine's honey tones suited them so well.

When I mentioned once on a thread that my sister thought the Rumours FM were whiny, I got raked over the coals LOL. I totally can see that, so I’m not surprised even way back then, even before they joined FM, that their music was called whiny. That’s ok, I must like whiny music because I love FM.

[aleuzzi]

I remember that Tango review in RS. It was/is pretty accurate, though it doesn’t account for the best moments in each lead’s respective solo career. Still, by 1987, it was clear Stevie’s initial solo attack had become a parody of itself, Lindsey was pretty much unmarketable, and Christine’s unrelenting modesty wasn’t charismatic enough to command mass appeal. Within the context of the band, each’s shortcomings worked as an asset to the overall group chemistry. Alone, their limitations were exposed.

[HomerMcvie]

Originally Posted by aleuzzi

I remember that Tango review in RS. It was/is pretty accurate, though it doesn’t account for the best moments in each lead’s respective solo career. Still, by 1987, it was clear Stevie’s initial solo attack had become a parody of itself, Lindsey was pretty much unmarketable, and Christine’s unrelenting modesty wasn’t charismatic enough to command mass appeal. Within the context of the band, each’s shortcomings worked as an asset to the overall group chemistry. Alone, their limitations were exposed.

That pretty much assesses their careers in their entirety.

Goat had a couple good albums. Other than that, they lack mainstream appeal. Quirky, bland, drugged out goat.

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by David

Steve Pond, doubling on the Rolling Stone staff and the LA Times, reviewed Stevie’s fantastic Inglewood Forum concert from October 2, 1983: “Nicks is simply too fluttery and flighty to command a stage.”

Yeah, the bros at RS hated Stevie no matter what she did, and would never give her credit for anything.

I take anything written about her during this time with a HUGE grain of salt.

[HomerMcvie]

Originally Posted by bombaysaffires

Yeah, the bros at RS hated Stevie no matter what she did, and would never give her credit for anything.

I take anything written about her during this time with a HUGE grain of salt.

Other than lyrics, for what did she deserve credit? Seriously?

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by HomerMcvie

Other than lyrics, for what did she deserve credit? Seriously?

Melody and especially harmony?

[Macfan4life]

Originally Posted by bombaysaffires

Yeah, the bros at RS hated Stevie no matter what she did, and would never give her credit for anything.

I take anything written about her during this time with a HUGE grain of salt.

Yeah they kiss her butt today but in the 70s and 80s was another thing. She resented how they categorized her singing on the White album. I never could understand why Irving advised her not to talk to Rolling Stone for their Mirage interview. "on the advice of her manager, Stevie did not partake in the interview" This was retaliation? Or was it cover why she did not show up? The next year RS trashed The Wild Heart album.

[aleuzzi]

Although Lindsey was/is pretty much unmarketable to a mass audience, I have loved most of his solo albums. They are exquisite and eccentric and special. I have also derived more genuine pleasure from Christine’s ITM than anything on the band’s Say You Will. On almost every Stevie record there is at least one or two outstanding songs/performances that confirm she still has what she needs to continue.