++++ HW: Covers All Final Call/ Studio album

[Colin J Allen]

<large snip>

>         Are you being deliberately ironic, or do I really need to make
> clear that I was questioning your right not to post what the hell you
> like, but to try and shut down others' discussion?

Call it deliberate irony if you want to; perhaps with a little thought you
might arrive at the reason for the post.

> > Strangely, we have not heard anything more of this suit and neither have
> > most of the people listed in the Hawkethos post.  Draw your own
conclusions.
>
>         Thanks for this. A little unclear as to whom "we" is in this
> case. Does it include Dave, whom Nik was claimed by hawkethos to have met
> about this?

"We" is Hawkwind and its management, which obviously includes Dave; as I
said, Hawkwethos was not believable. I seem to remember that Lemmy was one
of those named as suing Dave; a few weeks later the band were invited to
play with Motorhead at Wembley...as I said, draw your own conclusions.

>         And, um, what about Dave's suing of Nik?

Dave did not sue Nik; Hawkwind took legal action against Nik to prevent him
from using the name.  This was done for a range of reasons.  Also, this is
not connected to the supposed suit against Dave so would appear to be
immaterial here.

> > >         Normally I'd preface something like this with a phrase along
the
> > > lines of `I hope you'll forgive me for saying' or some such, but
actually
> > > I won't pretend to care. `This album' has been in the works for five
> > > years, in the course of which at least one other notionally `new'
Hawkwind
> > > album (_Spacebrock_) has come out thus using up a precious third of
the,
> > > what, six at most new tracks we've seen the band play in that time. In
> > > *five years*.
> > >
> > >         Furthermore, in that time we've seen, um, at least five people
> > with
> > > previous writing credits leave the band (though none of them were on
the
> > > last studio album billed as Hawkwind anyway), and Moorcock at least
once
> > > publicly disavow any further involvement with Hawkwind. This bloody
album
> > > could hardly get more unexpected. *If* it finally emerges, which I no
> > > longer believe anyone saying, I'm sure some people will think it's
good,
> > > but one of the people Brock pays to lie to the fan-base about this is
> > > not going to be the person whose opinion I trust on this. You can
safely
> > > let me make up my own mind thanks. Yours,
> >
> > Jon, when making comments it is rather useful to get one's facts
correct,
> > rather than allowing your own delusions free rein.  I am sure that you
can
> > make up your own mind (you seem already to have done so).  As usual,
your
> > logic is so flawed as to be amusing.
>
>         That wasn't logic (because you know what logic is, right?), it was
> an opinion, but it did contain facts, which you imply, without saying as
> usual, that I've got wrong. Challenging me on facts can sometimes be a
> highly effective strategy but not, I think, this time. Let's gather them
> in.

Yes, I do know what logic is.  Despite the fact that Birkbeck beat Cranfield
in the final of University Challenge, the latter institution, among others,
still does some excellent and rigourous academic work, much of which
involves an understanding of logic.  I quote your comment: "in the course of
which at least one other notionally `new' Hawkwind album (_Spacebrock_) has
come out thus using up a precious third of the, what, six at most new tracks
we've seen the band play in that time."  This is deeply flawed; albums do
not "use up" new tracks.  New tracks may appear on particular albums or they
may not. Some of the, admittedly, very few new tracks played in the last few
years did also appear on Spacebrock; does that have any impact on anything
else?

>         "This album has been in the works" since it was announced that the
> next project would be on the Death Generator theme, on the old
> hawkwind.com.  That's where I remember it anyway, but in case I was wrong
> I searched the archives of this list and you'll find it was being talked
> of as early as August 1998, by Dave Brock, to the US press. See
> <http://listserv.spc.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9808C&L=BOC-L&P=R2451>. You'd
> prefer "four years eight months" instead of "five years" would you? Fine.
>
>         Last Hawkwind studio album was _Distant Horizons_. My copy says it
> was recorded 1997, what does yours say? Since then, we've had, from
> current line-ups, _Hawkwind 1997_ (live and limited), _Hawkwind In Your
> Area_ (half live, and most studio tracks not with the whole band), _Family
> Tree_ (not a Hawkwind album), _Spacebrock_ (mostly recycled and with only
> two current Hawkwind members on it, one of those only on a few tracks) and
> _Yule Ritual_ and  _Canterbury 2001_ (both live). Tell me I missed a
> studio album in the last nearly *six* years, go on.

Jon, you appear to be going off on a wild goose chase yet again by replying
to arguments that I have not put forward.

>         New tracks, leaving aside stuff released on _In Your Area_: `Anna
> Seed', `Spacebrock' & `Money Tree', whatever the name of Ron's rework of
> `The Owl and the Pussycat' was, `Earth Calling' in two different versions
> and I *think* there was another Ron one about aliens in 1999. That would
> be seven maximum, and two of those alternative versions of another
> two. Oh, and `Strange Fruit', sorry, six or eight. I counted six, and one
> third of those have been issued, `Spacebrock' (and indeed `Money Tree'
> though in this case the tracks are the same) and `Earth Calling'.

Your point being? Apart, that is, from the creation of yet more non-existent
arguments.

>
>         People with previous writing credits leaving: Ron Tree, Jerry
> Richards, Captain Rizz, Simon House, Harvey Bainbridge, Keith Kniveton. Do
> I need to point out the songs as well? I expect you'll quarrel with the
> word "leaving" as none of them officially have, indeed the website still
> thought the line-up was Brock-Chadwick-Tree-Richards when it last had such
> information, but none of them bar Rizz and possibly Keith will be
> appearing with the band any time soon I suspect, and that's something one
> might expect from a band member, really.

Although this has no relation to my comment, I will state here that you are
wrong on at least one of the people you name as having left.  However, once
again, I would enquire as to the point of your list.

>         I'm not going to hunt through <http://www.multiverse.org> for
> Moorcock's public post supporting Nik and refusing to work with Dave any
> more, because they don't have searchable archives yet, and there are
> enough people on this list who did see it at the time. Not the first time
> he's said he'll never work with Hawkwind before of course and I imagine it
> won't be the last. But say it he did.

Mike has said that he does not want to be involved in working with any
Hawkwind related bands; this also appears (more recently) on his site.  I
would not take everything that Michael says as being literal truth, however,
for a range of reasons, none of which reflect badly on him.

>
>         In fact, the only fact I'm not sure of here is whether or not Dave
> pays you. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't, though. Feel free to
> correct me on that. Not sure which other of my facts you think are deluded
> though.
>

Jon, do you really think that, in your words, there are "people Brock pays
to lie to the fan-base about this"?  I would suggest that is delusional.

>         I have indeed already made up my mind. I've made it up, as I said,
> to believe only my own eyes and ears about this album. If it finally does
> emerge and I get it and think it's good you'll see me here saying so,
> access permitting. If I think otherwise you'll see me saying that too. If
> my expectations are too high, well, I don't think that's my fault. But
> currently I don't *expect* to have to test them. Yours again,
>                                                               Jon

For a moment, I thought that I would be able to congratulate you on your
open-mindedness, but then I read to the end of the paragraph.

Basically, your position appears to be that you are upset that Hawkwind
have:

1. Not released a studio album  for a long time.

2. Not kept the fans up to date with what is going on with the album.

On point 1, I agree that it has been far too long since an album was
released; however, your view that there will not be an album is an illogical
extension of your disappointment.

On point 2, I agree that information has not always been updated as
regularly as it could have been.  However, once information appears, your
reaction is to denigrate the information; where is the logic in that?

Strangely, many of our views are not that far apart; you just seem to be
obsessed with replying to arguments that have not been made.

Colin


> ObCD: The Heads - _Relaxing With... _
> --
> "I recognise that I have transgressed many of the precepts of the divine
> law, and that I am subjected by various vices and iniquities, disobedient
> to the words of the divine mystery brought unto me and a worshipper of the
> delights of this military age." Marquis Borrell of Barcelona, 955 A.D.
>
>              (Jonathan Jarrett, Birkbeck College London)
>