HW: Glastonbury 90 and the Dog Re: HW: .com
Jon Jarrett
jjarrett at CHIARK.GREENEND.ORG.UK
Mon Nov 5 16:06:10 EST 2001
On Sun, 7 Oct 2001, Alice wrote:
> > Yeah, gotta love that dog.
> > I think there's a section later in between songs where one of the band
> says
> > something about a "dog has swallowed some broken glass", and I get so
> happy
> > that finally that stupid dog will quit barking now that he's got glass in
> > his throat.
> > So has anybody else heard that? Or was I dreaming again while I listened
> to
> > some Hawkwind?
No, that's there all right, though I think it's an organiser
rather than the band--voice doesn't sound right.
> Yea, right!
>
> They never claimed that it is high quality recording and they played very
> well on this one.
It is a good performance. You can just about tell. It most surely
wouldn't be released by any label with a less lackadasical attitude than
Voiceprint. It's one of those collectors' issue that means `only a
collector would want it'. Your attitude suggests that the buyer should
beware but I think most people would be rather happier to see some kind of
warning of just how poor the quality is. Most bands that release bootlegs
of themselves do so in such a way as to indicate it; Zappa, Pearl Jam and
Man all spring to mind.
> Nik and Co were completely out of tune on their live recording.
I haven't got it and don't know if I shall. But I don't think
Nik's fault exempts the HWVPCDs from being lousy. Nik's not a
byword for quality himself. Sadly, these days, neither can Hawkwind be.
On which subject, indeed, on Mon, 8 Oct 2001, Alice wrote:
> It's very sad for me to see this list falling apart on this question...
That's not an argument, that's just a friendly disagreement. You
should see us in a flame-war.
> The real true band, Hawkwind leading by Brock, should be giving full
> support. And Nik and Co should be put to shame publicly by all who claim
> themselves "honest people".
I take it you mean `given' there but even so I don't agree. The
real band are guilty of some fairly low dealings themselves. I see no need
to take a side as I will still go to their gigs and expect Nikwind to be a
shaky affair. But there are two sides to this, and in some lights Nik can
be seen to be holding the moral advantage. As Steve Pond said, at this
Hawkestra everyone got paid, which is more than can be said for the
previous one. I don't have to buy the "Nik is the spirit of
Hawkwind" argument to see that he's better at playing towards it than Dave
Brock ever has been. There are in this sense two spirits of Hawkwind, even
if there can only be one band.
> Maybe I should sign off this list...
Not for me to say. You seem still to be here.
On Mon, 8 Oct 2001, Alice wrote:
> > the endless releases by Dave Anderson's crew have done a lot more damage
> > to Hawkwind's reputation. I'd rather see that stopped now that the
> > lawyers have been asked to Choose Their Wigs.
>
> It would be good to make Anderson pay Hawkwind all money he robbed off them.
Here is an example of the two sides. Anderson owns those
recordings and can do what he likes with them, as they're live and thus
not subject to performers' copyright. He has thus not stolen any money
from HW as they're not entitled to make any from those tapes anyway. Maybe
they should be, but legally they aren't. What he arguably has done is
damaged the reputation of Hawkwind by releasing subquality crap. And
unfortuantely things like _Glastonbury 1990_ rather prevent the band
showing any damage thus done. But hey! _Yuri Gagarin_ was a good gig,
right? At least they were in tune! That makes it OK!
I was however surprised to see him in the same building as any of
ICU and still in apparently good health. Yours,
Jon
n/p Apocalyptica, `Harvester of Sorrows' (someone called Anna is to blame
for this)
--
Jonathan Jarrett 01223 514989
jjarrett at chiark.greenend.org.uk
----------------------------------------------------------
"Wilhelm Reich died for your sins" (ST37)
More information about the boc-l
mailing list