"Run Like Hell (Session Musicians)"

Well, things are changed since AMLOR and even since the interview you report, you know. It's ten years old actually. Pink Floyd have never been *good friends* (Roger and Nick was closer in the past though) as we know. But Rick and Dave played together during Gilmour's minitour and Dave played a Wright solo song, so it's safe to say they are in good terms these days.

p.s. This was a reply to sarah goode, I didn't quote her and after BoaB post it was not so clear

__________________
"Don't you know there ain't no devil, it's just god when he's drunk." Tom Waits

Amen to Sarah's posts!

I have to fully agree wit that. I have been saying it for a long time and I will agian.
Floyd without Roger just ain't Floyd and Floyd without Gilmour just ain't Floyd and so on and so on.
But who says that Nick and Roger can't start jamming , then add Rick to the equation and they coud start a new phase of Floyd without Gilmour. If Gilmour was allowed to go on without Waters why can't Waters do the same.
Its ridicilousto say that one meber can continue on while the other can't. But tell me FWr if Richard wanted to continue on the Floyd legacy you wouldn't mind would you?

cheers

__________________

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

Amen, Sydney.

Sydney, that doesn't even seem like a possibility to me.

Right now, I don't even think Pink Floyd will ever even happen again, and I'm expecting solo albums.

BTW, Sarah, I think I said in a post somewhere else that I did not approve of the way Mr. Gilmour and Mr. Mason did not help stand up for their friend. And I agree that is not a nice comment at all that Mr. Gilmour made. Truth be known, I am not always impressed with Mr. Gilmour's decorum in the Pink Floyd feuds--he seems to speak sometimes before he thinks. But, as Yannis points out, it's been a long time, and things are probably different now. In the end, we do not know what goes on with the Floyd.

__________________
"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

when all's said and done they'll do what they want to do, they are grown men formerly in a band together...if they get back together, hey, that's great. They produce new stuff together or split, good for them. They tour and play the hits, terrific. But if they don't, it's no big deal, it's not like they've left us with a shortage of great material in their catalogue. Though I know, we all deep down want a little more, because we just can't get a big enough dose of our Pink Floyd

I'm not saying any of it is a possibility all I am saying is that you are being unreasonable in saying that one member can continue on the Floyd legacy and the other can't. I don't think any of it is ever going to happen but like Icarus said wouldn't it be nice?

cheers

ps FWr you never answered my question

__________________

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

Sydney, I think FWr already has answered your question in thinking it not a possibility of Richard continuing on the Floyd legacy.

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

Oh dear I'm physically restraining myself from breaking something at the moment...so if what I write here is a little caustic...please forgive me.

Fwr...your comments are incredibly biased, one sided and hypocritical. From what you have said, anyone who didn't know the Floyd story would think Dave, Roger, and Nick were terrible people, and poor little Richard was an angelic bleeding heart who did nothing wrong. Wake up for feck's sake, he's just a normal bloke, is probably just as greedy as the others (shown by the quote someone else gave from Gilmour), and appears to be the only one left still harbouring deep bitterness (Gilmour would have Roger back, so would Nick, Rick is still sulking); and that doesn't sound like the saintly, forgiving, world-peace aspiring christ that you believe he is. I know you're response will include words to the effect "He is the only one with a REASON to harbour resentment"...but I think that's garbage. He was tossed 'cause he wasn't DOING anything. Period. End of story.

Secondly, on one hand you claim the PF legacy is a "five person" legacy, and in the next breath you claim it now only belong to three. I can't find words to explain my frustration at such an argument.

Thirdly, "I think it's sad he feels this need to ride on the coattails of the composite PF legacy" is EXACLTY what the three present member have done...and Dave himself has admitted as much. But I guess the "angel" is included in the present three, and he can do no wrong. (Read dripping sarcasm there).

Lastly, if you have noted my opinions before, you would know that I love the present line-up of Pink Floyd, and still think they are legitimate Floyd. However, I am not biased against Waters, and if he were to take the dormant name it would be just as legitimate as the present line-up. Let's face it, the present Floyd is Gilmour (with a few tinklings from Wright). It is really a choice between Gilmour as Floyd or Waters as Floyd.

That is all. And I didn't break a thing.

__________________
Only the very safe,
Can talk about wrong and right.
Of those that are forced to choose,
There's some who will choose to fight.

Whew! This is what this site is all about.

But before the beleaguered FloydWright begins to think we don't appreciate her viewpoint, I must come to her defense, if only slightly, to disagree with Driven in that I think David would have serious reservations about performing with Roger under any sort of PF banner (with or without pig, with or without nads).

But, apart from loving the present line-up and the urge to smash things, I have to agree with the rest of Driven's post.

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

This is NOT correct. Rick Wright DID meet Roger a couple of years ago after one of Roger's shows. He doesn't appear to have those bitter feelings you say. And he admitted his part of fault.


This is a false problem. The name Pink Floyd is now *owned* by Gilmour, Mason and Wright. Without their will nobody can claim it. If they (all of the three) don't want to use it anymore nobody else can use that name.
It's not matter of what we think it's right or wrong, it's law, the name is their property.

__________________
"Don't you know there ain't no devil, it's just god when he's drunk." Tom Waits

Well I've chilled out a little now.

Mad Yannis > Regardless of whether Wright spoke to Waters (and I concede he is less bitter than I thought a few hours ago) my point remains unchanged. He's no better or worse than the others.

Your second point...well...we ARE talking about right and wrong champ. It's a hypothetical conversion based on the assumption that Gilmour (yes AND Wright FWr, keep yer pants on) would be willing to let Waters have the name (because he...woops...they have no intention of using it again). FWr's argument is that he shouldn't use the name, 'cause he left it behind, and the argument of just about everyone else is that he should, 'cause the PF fame is based just as much on Water's efforts as anyone else.

__________________
Only the very safe,
Can talk about wrong and right.
Of those that are forced to choose,
There's some who will choose to fight.

He also admits to lack of contributions in the ITAOT liner notes.

Quote:

This is a false problem. The name Pink Floyd is now *owned* by Gilmour, Mason and Wright. Without their will nobody can claim it. If they (all of the three) don't want to use it anymore nobody else can use that name. It's not matter of what we think it's right or wrong, it's law, the name is their property.

Thanks, Yannis--the legacy is one thing, belonging to all five, but the name itself is the property of the current three.

__________________
"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 if we're getting technical about it...property is something that can be sold.

So let's now discuss whether the present line-up, if they have no intention of using the name again, should SELL it to Waters.

I personally have no problem with that proposition (for reasons somewhat forcefully outlined above).

__________________
Only the very safe,
Can talk about wrong and right.
Of those that are forced to choose,
There's some who will choose to fight.

They could sell it, but they wouldn't.

__________________
WrightSatellite #2