Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird14
I can see where Mouse was coming from in his original point and to a degree, I agree with him.
I personally don't mind people posting YouTube videos from shows OR posting their opinions on them, providing they take into account that some videos aren't going to be much of a true representation of what a show really sounded like and to judge Meat's performance based on those would be unfair to him.
|
I think that's a fair middle ground. Some people may well be able to listen to a poor quality bootleg and not make ill-founded judgements, but we have seen many occasions when this has not been the case. I wouldn't argue that on some bad recordings you may be able to identify that a note is on or off key, but I still believe to judge the strength of a voice may be a very different matter.
Paul Richardson wrote:
Quote:
|
Basically there are two opinions, those who believe Meat Loaf can do no wrong and those that believe Meat Loaf has a career of highs and lows, with the former wanting to censor the latter in case Meat Loaf reads anything even remotely critical and becomes upset ...
|
I don't believe to polarise people like this helps, nor is it really accurate. I'm one of the people who has over the years frequently been accused of believing Meat Loaf can do no wrong .. you may think this. Yet repeatedly I will post that yes, Meat will fluff the odd note here and there, is occasionally off pitch, may miss a cue, may struggle at times. Mouse, who suggested and argued his case, will be critical of performances, and has not suggested at any time that he thinks people should not criticise, providing it is done with some respect for Meat's feelings .. which has been the position of Rainer and his team continually, because the performer in question is entitled to that. Phrases like "even remotely critical" just do not help imo.
People often say that they should be able to offer constructive criticism to "help" Meat. fair enough. However if you know someone is sensitive to criticism (and I'd say most people are .. you only need to look at how quickly people here get can get angry when their views are dismissed or countered) it seems pointless to say "He should have a thicker skin". He doesn't .. and if your criticism is to be helpful to anyone, they need to hear it without reacting defensively, so wise critique and advice will be couched in such a way as to make it easier for them to hear ie bearing in mind their feelings.
Monstro suggested that one way forward might be to not post bootlegs in the show review threads. That seems to me a good compromise. Meat is likely to read those threads. He has not given permission for people to privately record at his shows (most tickets actually prohibit it), and if he does not like this being done he, as the artist, is perfectly entitled to have that view. If it will irritate, upset or anger him to see a poor bootleg being used as a basis to deliver a negative judgement on his performance, why should we, as people who profess to be his fans, want to do this on a forum dedicated to him, on those threads we can be pretty sure he will read .. let alone see our right to do it as some principle we need to fight for?
Meat himself says frequently, he doesn't consider himself a singer first and foremost. He knows his voice isn't perfection every night from start to close. He puts on a SHOW .. a performance from an actor who sings, and every thought, effort and scrap of energy goes into giving people who go to those shows an entertainment. I do understand that the many who cannot get to shows want to see extracts from them. Julie said that she saw merit in the suggestion that sometimes those at a live show, being caught up in the excitement and pleasure of being there may not be totally objective. I wouldn't disagree, but surely this is what Meat's shows are about .. not a list of songs to be delivered one after the other, but an evening's entertainment, a spectacle he has conceived, planned and delivered to ensure several thousand people that night experience two hours of excitement and pleasure.
To me it's not surprising if he gets upset to read that someone who was not there to experience everything he's put together to deliver that night of excitement, finding his performance wanting based solely on vocals which they have only heard on a bootleg tape which may be distorted. His performance is more than his vocals, the night is more than his vocals. So given his over-riding objective is to give a great show to his fans, why would we not want to consider his feelings, and deliver any comments carefully and in such a way as to not make him feel bad? That's what I don't understand. Consideration for his, or indeed anyone's feelings, does not compromise my rights or principles at all.
I've seen the phrase "keep Meat happy" a few times, as if this is a bad thing. He works so damn hard to make us happy when we buy an album or a ticket to a show, why would we see that as something bad .. or let's flip it round .. why would we not want to try and avoid making him unhappy or distressed? I do not see a request for thoughtfulness as censorship, nor is it something I see as something unique to be afforded Meat alone. Thoughtfulness in how we address others is surely something for everyone. Meat deserves this respect, and we know he will read these review threads, so we know what we say will be read by him.
And just to confirm .. I do not worship him as a God .. do not think he is perfect and can do no wrong. I think he is a warm, passionate, sensitive, talented human being who works his ass off to do his best and give his fans a wonderful night of entertainment that will take them to a better place for a couple of hours. That earns him some thought and care from me.
Caryl