"Run Like Hell (Session Musicians)"

That "um" would be the Wright Answer!

(Paying my dollar for that pun... )

For Sydney, I think the issue at hand that Monty was pointing out was NOT who is more or less important--but what kind of treatment of others is and is not good.

__________________
"And with these words I can see
Clear through the clouds that covered me
Just give it time then speak my name
Now we can hear ourselves again..."

WrightSatellite #1

People trying to run a business often have to hurt peoples feelings and get on their case when they are not getting the work done. It is harder on everyone else pulling the weight. Husbands and wives are together in love for years and then they break up and the passion and emotion invested turns into bitter hatred. After all those years they might say horrible things about each other. Gilmour, Wright and their associates have not shown themselves to be anymore honest then Waters! I frankly don't believe it was the way they said it was. Pink Floyd in '83 was a bomb shell dropped on alot of fans. Not many fans knew of all the fighting. They KEEP things FROM the public. And I don't blame them. I wish Waters would have kept his contempt more or less private. It's possible Nick and David are not really interested in working together anymore. They don't announce it. They could be on the outs. Waters, for the first time since he left is drawing great crowds. This is new for him. He started the tour with a 6 piece band that only had one back up singer and now he has a 12 piece. He started very small. The Tide is Turning for him.

Indeed.

Hmmm...could it be the wheel has come round again to have the PF light shining on Roger?
Could he audaciously reclaim the name and begin again?

__________________
Count me in on the journey, don't expect me to stay.

cheers

__________________

Cancel the apocalypse
Cartons of the milky way with pictures of a missing planet
Last seen in pursuit of an American dream

I certainly don't think Waters should have the NAME pink floyd. Not at all. I wish The Wall was their last album.

He should not have the name, IMHO, and personally, I think it's sad he feels this need to ride on the coattails of the composite PF legacy. I would think his solo work would be strong enough to stand on its own (and I mean that!).

Personally, I can understand why PF likes to keep away from the media...what the media does to a lot of other celebrities is really not good. Nor is camera-hogging.

We really can't know what the personal relationships are in PF right now. It is POSSIBLE that Mr. Mason's meeting with Mr. Waters could've cost him some esteem in the eyes of the other two--or then again, they might not mind at all.

__________________
"And with these words I can see
Clear through the clouds that covered me
Just give it time then speak my name
Now we can hear ourselves again..."

WrightSatellite #1

As you say, FWr, none of us can know for sure what exactly the situations is currently amongst the FOUR PF members. But remember this is just our own wild speculation so we shouldn't think anything we're imagining will ever really happen.

One thing though: how can a significant architect (pun intended) of a band be considered to be "riding the coat-tails" of that band's legacy?

Say Roger and Nick were talking and considering jamming together sometime, and since Roger has rediscovered Live performing - of his own and old PF standards - AND hearing David repeatedly deny an interest in touring again as Pink Floyd, why shouldn't he and Nick (and Snowy and others) put on a show with the name?

__________________
Count me in on the journey, don't expect me to stay.

Because that was a legacy crafted by FIVE people. For one member to try and claim it all for himself (creative genius of Pink Floyd? How overblown!) is nuts. Mr. Waters left the group by choice, and officially served notice that he was no longer a member. When he did that, HE by choice renounced Pink Floyd. Only later, when Pink Floyd moved on and he realised he didn't like all the implications of what he did, did he make a scene about it. Instead of letting his solo career take off on its own merit, he touts himself as the "creative genius of Pink Floyd". Funny, for someone who wanted so badly to be RID of Pink Floyd...

I guess I'm just disgusted with his attitude. In the case of the current Pink Floyd, we have the three members who stayed on, and have the legitimate claim. Yes, Mr. Waters was a significant contributor. Mr. Gilmour himself will acknowledge that. But the Pink Floyd legacy belonged to all five. When he renounced the Floyd, he also gave up his right to their legacy. That was HIS choice. He should have thought that through before he severed his contract as a band member.

I'd be pretty disgusted with those two IF they went and did something like that. There's no indication they plan to, really, but I would be disgusted. I also think that would be quite a betrayal on Mr. Mason's part, given that he chose to stand with Pink Floyd. It is three people--Mr. Gilmour, Mr. Wright, and Mr. Mason--who decide whether Pink Floyd continues or not. Mr. Waters does not even enter into that equation, any more than the band's other two ex-members do. For Mr. Mason to just TAKE that name and that right from the other two and hand it to Mr. Waters would be ridiculous, and I hope they'd get after him for it, if he did.

As I said, though, I do not think he'd do that. More likely if they performed together they'd just do something like what Mr. Wright and Mr. Gilmour did--a Roger Waters performance with him as a guest.

__________________
"And with these words I can see
Clear through the clouds that covered me
Just give it time then speak my name
Now we can hear ourselves again..."

WrightSatellite #1

uh, why is Rog living off everyone else and everyone else not living off rog?

__________________
stchrissie is not me.

Simple. HE is the one that made the choice to leave--and then went back and tried to claim a legacy to which he'd renounced his rights.

Furthermore, the other three, regardless of what Mr. Waters might say, had every right to carry on as Pink Floyd. And unlike some of Mr. Waters' fans seem to think, the others were also significant contributors. No one band member could have got off the ground without the help of the others, IMHO. The way Mr. Waters acts totally denies that.

__________________
"And with these words I can see
Clear through the clouds that covered me
Just give it time then speak my name
Now we can hear ourselves again..."

WrightSatellite #1

Well FWr, it appears you have a particular bee in your bonnet on this subject. But really, do you think that's going to stop me responding in just as heated a fashion? No? You're right.

Now just hang on a minute. As we are all aware, Pink Floyd is not some immutable entity which hasn't or can no longer undergo myriad transformations. The band has experienced changes since it's very beginning - Klose out, Barrett out, Gilmour In, Wright out, Roger out, Wright in - but to hold to the current line-up as sacrosanct is just plain doolally.

Roger may not be a current bandmember, but wasn't he involved with Echoes: The Best of...? Does he not still have an interest in Pink Floyd Inc.? Does he still earn royalties from the songs he composed for the band? I think Roger is still very much part of the PF equation. Is it false that David has said he is not planning any more Floyd work, or something to that effect?

If the band name is going spare and unused, why shouldn't Roger take up the mantle and use it? Of course the others were also signifcant members, but between Syd's Departure and Roger's departure, which band member wrote the lion's share of the songs? Was it Richard, David or Nick? Who has more right to the "composite" legacy than Roger himself?

And you overplay the significance of Syd's contribution. We all know Syd isn't currently, nor ever again likely to be performing Live so that issue is irrelevant. And okay, they may not be where they are today without Syd, but his influence was no more by the time their third or fourth album rolled out. And you couldn't say they owed their success with DSOTM, WYWH, ANIMALS or THE WALL in any way to Syd (all heavily Roger-influenced), could you?

Perhaps your ire is only a protective reaction to the possibility of Richard being excluded again? I would happily trade Richard for Roger in the line up but I'd prefer not to. I would rather they all got back together under the name, but that's as likely as Roger using the PF name again, i.e., not very.

I don't think it's a question of TAKING the name away from anyone. If David or Richard have no more need of it, then why not let Roger (and Nick?) use it? I mean, jeez!

Shine on!
Byron

__________________
Count me in on the journey, don't expect me to stay.

Yes, Mr. Waters has a share in the corporation--but it is the current three who make the decisions, due to its setup. It is also the three who currently hold the name.

If we had been discussing the time of TFC, I would (though I'd not be happy about it) say that it was THOSE three who could make the decisions about the name. It has to do with those who are officially on the lineup--Mr. Waters voluntarily renounced his position. What right should he have, for instance, to control what the band does with The Division Bell? He has no more right to do that than he does to control any future uses of the Pink Floyd name.

If the current three (and Mr. Mason is in on the decision) have no need of the Pink Floyd name, they will retire it completely. Mr. Gilmour plans no more work--I don't know what the other two plan, but it'll probably not be retired until all three of them say something.

As for Mr. Waters back in the lineup? I think I'd rather see his next solo album; if the two songs thus far released are any indication, it ought to be quite good.

__________________
"And with these words I can see
Clear through the clouds that covered me
Just give it time then speak my name
Now we can hear ourselves again..."

WrightSatellite #1

Let's be fair. Mason and Wright were not a part of the first post Waters record. It was not all 3 members. Now, what I say here is NOT trying to convince anyone who is floyd or who is right or who is better. What you like and consider to be floyd is floyd to you. Fine. However, Waters may not have treated anyone worse than Gilmour. The interview from 1992 in 'Musician' has Gilmour saying, and look this up it's a straight quote: "Well, I'm a really selfish person, and Rick is not realistically going to put in as much effort next time as I do. I'm very happy for Rick to be part of it all, but I can't see any point, it's still my life, and a lot of my life, and I didn't fight my way through all that lot just to start handing out larger chunks than they deserve to anyone who comes around. (laughs) If that sounds ruthless, it's not - its just the hard reality. Rick's happy to sail off on his yacht and be part of this thing, and earn very good money out of it. He doesn't like shouldering responsibility, so it's a very good arrangement".

This is not reprinted to put anyone down for what they believe but it shows that Gilmour is just as capable of disrespecting Rick Wright as Waters ever did. This 3 man floyd is not what we would like to think it to be. Gilmours' statement is not to support my opinion but rather a fact. Something that points to the real truth. He put his foot in his mouth as much as Roger on that one. I think he took advantage of Rick, too.

One more point. Waters NEVER wanted to call himself Pink Floyd!!! FloydWright, you didn't think Waters wanted the name do you? That would be lame of him. He just wanted the name retired.

Look what Gilmour said about " I don't want to be handing out larger chunks of cash to JUST ANYONE." He was referring to Wright! Rick Wright is not just anyone! He is an original member of the band!! Which is more than you can say for Gilmour. Waters is not better without floyd but this new line up will break your heart if you think it is a democracy. I doubt Mason OR Wright are very close to Gilmour. Who knows, maybe Nick realizes what has happened and maybe even misses Roger Waters.