Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Sign in to follow this  
caroselambra~

what would you do?

Recommended Posts

everyone must, by now, be sick of the *will they won't they* issue surrounding the remaining members of the band.

it has just occurred to me, amongst all this conjecture, what would i do if i were in robert's shoes?

please don't answer with the *robert can do what he wants* routine as that isn't what this post is about.

if you were part of a legacy as great as their's and had the chance to *do it all again*

would you?

i admire robert's decision not to be part of a reunion - afterall he could have played safe and joined the others, the o2 gig showed he could still do it.

it is also probably right to suggest the zeppelin legacy is safe and whatever happens now will have no effect on how they are written in the history of music.

i am actually surprised jonesy and jimmy want to go ahead with this.

they are both peerless musicians so i would have thought breaking new boundaries would appeal to them more.

i would like to think i would be brave enough NOT to take part in a sure fire hit reunion and that i would be remembered for not living on past glories and playing it safe.

i may have quoted this before, but when asked if the jam would ever reform paul weller's answer was what this subject is all about.

the jam were a very successful band in the uk during the 70's and eighties.

this post is really just a question to everyone who reads it

what would you do if you were in robert plant's shoes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not sure why this Nonsensical gibberish is posted in the News thread.

please forgive me for that

i usually rely on the admin guys to move stuff that's in the wrong place

btw you're a really nice guy mrzoso - i'm so glad you took the time to make me feel about 2 inches tall.

have a nice day

:)

Edited by caroselambra~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
please forgive me for that

i usually rely on the admin guys to move stuff that's in the wrong place

btw you're a really nice guy mrzoso - i'm so glad you took the time to make me feel about 2 inches tall.

have a nice day

:)

I am sure you posted this with the best of intentions, and forgive my lack of tact. You must understand no one can speak for Robert or pretend to be in his shoes. Even his closest of friends could not answer your inquiry. You already have your answer from the direct source. But I will say this... you never know, the guy may just change his mind. It has been known to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
please forgive me for that

i usually rely on the admin guys to move stuff that's in the wrong place

btw you're a really nice guy mrzoso - i'm so glad you took the time to make me feel about 2 inches tall.

have a nice day

:)

:rolleyes: Maybe you can find pants that fit now! :lol: j/k :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i am actually surprised jonesy and jimmy want to go ahead with this.

they are both peerless musicians so i would have thought breaking new boundaries would appeal to them more.

Jimmy and JPJ haven't even talked about exactly what their new project is going to encompass. I'm sure they will be doing Zeppelin material in their shows, but how do you know any new material they may be working on, will not break new boundaries?

Edited by SuperDave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimmy and JPJ haven't even talked about exactly what their new project is going to encompass. I'm sure they will be doing Zeppelin material in their shows, but how do you know any new material they may be working on, won't be will not be breaking new boundaries?

a valid point - especially considering their background

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

right, it's somewhat impossible to say what *i'd* do... were i plant i'd probably have collected my millions, found a willing harem, and spent the rest of my life on a giant couch.

in other words, it's best i'm not robert plant.

he said performing now as LZ makes him feel as if he's in a tribute band. i think the answer lies in that.

to satisfy plant, new material would have to be made. LZ's musical style (i.e., they actually tended to have music in their music) may not fit in with today's, and to change to sound contemporary might make them sound ridiculous, or worse, like musical martyrs. not that it would make a lick of difference, their legacy is solidified, but, still, how many of y'all went out and bought the recent AC/DC album? or the who's from a year or so ago?

so, would i personally be prone to relive past glories? probably not. why, just to hear my new songs played next to the old ones on a classic rock station?

too, being a front man means you have to be hip. not hippie. that was his image in his heyday. his chops can't be as good, either. for an aging singer, it has to be tough to keep up with the times. to me it boils down to his music being on the timeless side, but his image isn't. actual musicians have more leeway, imo.

lastly, what more as an artist does he need to say? a lot of great music comes from personal events happening relatively close to the time of creation, and those have, i think for all intents and purposes, already been hashed through ~ 30 years ago.

sad to say, but LZ main reason for being active today is as a commercial entity. they're culturally relevant to a niche of folk only, and their musical influence is getting harder to spot in today's music. if rock n' roll were to wake up very soon and a mass demanded more zep for their heads, that may have an impact. but, and i have to wonder how i'd feel here, were i to have done a lot of classic songs that i thought was about something and suddenly saw my tune hawking some crappy car, i might feel so inclined to consider my days as rock god as over.

okay, so i'm robert plant. what more can i sing about? sex with young chicks? nah. pain and loss? he's done it. what's left? growing old? how my old woman treats me bad?

tell me what he has left to say and maybe someone will tell him. since he doesn't have a reason, or so he might think, to head back into the studio, there's no incentive. being reminded that his day is done also isn't a very good motivator, either. oh, a tour would kill financially, i'm sure, but they're also reminders of past glories, and one has to wonder how that plays out in a hero's mind.

...then again, he's swaggered about in his youth under a label called swan song, so maybe it's time to prove that mythology true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
right, it's somewhat impossible to say what *i'd* do... were i plant i'd probably have collected my millions, found a willing harem, and spent the rest of my life on a giant couch.

in other words, it's best i'm not robert plant.

he said performing now as LZ makes him feel as if he's in a tribute band. i think the answer lies in that.

to satisfy plant, new material would have to be made. LZ's musical style (i.e., they actually tended to have music in their music) may not fit in with today's, and to change to sound contemporary might make them sound ridiculous, or worse, like musical martyrs. not that it would make a lick of difference, their legacy is solidified, but, still, how many of y'all went out and bought the recent AC/DC album? or the who's from a year or so ago?

so, would i personally be prone to relive past glories? probably not. why, just to hear my new songs played next to the old ones on a classic rock station?

too, being a front man means you have to be hip. not hippie. that was his image in his heyday. his chops can't be as good, either. for an aging singer, it has to be tough to keep up with the times. to me it boils down to his music being on the timeless side, but his image isn't. actual musicians have more leeway, imo.

lastly, what more as an artist does he need to say? a lot of great music comes from personal events happening relatively close to the time of creation, and those have, i think for all intents and purposes, already been hashed through ~ 30 years ago.

sad to say, but LZ main reason for being active today is as a commercial entity. they're culturally relevant to a niche of folk only, and their musical influence is getting harder to spot in today's music. if rock n' roll were to wake up very soon and a mass demanded more zep for their heads, that may have an impact. but, and i have to wonder how i'd feel here, were i to have done a lot of classic songs that i thought was about something and suddenly saw my tune hawking some crappy car, i might feel so inclined to consider my days as rock god as over.

okay, so i'm robert plant. what more can i sing about? sex with young chicks? nah. pain and loss? he's done it. what's left? growing old? how my old woman treats me bad?

tell me what he has left to say and maybe someone will tell him. since he doesn't have a reason, or so he might think, to head back into the studio, there's no incentive. being reminded that his day is done also isn't a very good motivator, either. oh, a tour would kill financially, i'm sure, but they're also reminders of past glories, and one has to wonder how that plays out in a hero's mind.

...then again, he's swaggered about in his youth under a label called swan song, so maybe it's time to prove that mythology true.

Gee, sounds like poor Robert is all washed up. What a shame. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sad to say, but LZ main reason for being active today is as a commercial entity. they're culturally relevant to a niche of folk only,

Given the millions trying to get O2 tickets, seems a pretty big niche . . . :whistling:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a relatively large niche, yeah, and exactly in terms that i said ~ culturally relevant. in other words, just because you want to see them very badly doesn't mean their music is part of your personal culture. sure, they're the end all be all to some, but those people are hardly the legion it once was. i mean, would it shock anyone if you saw steadily declining album and merchandise sales after all these years? and why should they be culturally relevant like they were even twenty years ago, a decade or so after they broke up? cultural relevance for kids today means kayne west and (maybe) three doors down, or whomever. can you say with a straight face that for most people under 30 that zep is more culturally relevant to them than nirvana?

i can only speak for myself here, but i'm going on 40 and no longer are my walls adorned with giant zep posters, i don't wear zep t-shirts, and my cd is just as likely to hold classical music as it to have PG in there. priorities and tastes change for us aging guys, and things we were obsessed with in high school don't always mean it'll be that way forever. and for the younger generation, zep is indeed a niche.

still, i think they'd do as well on tour as any stones concert would. for that matter, ABBA would be a huge tour event. hell, i think michael jackson would sell stadiums out. even the who and AC\DC, bands with relatively new material, don't mean as much to as many people as they once did, but i'd go see them. to say that just because you want to see a band perform means they're culturally relevant to you *now*... i don't know, that seems like a leap. i saw a lot of bands i really don't get too excited about, like the eagles a few years back, but that's not to say they're a real part of my life. what is it about people clamouring for tickets says they're culturally relevant? you have to look at the demographics, right? it'd be a dream to me, sure, but i'm much closer to that era and want to come into contact with that again. certainly there are two million guys just like me out there wanting that, and certainly the majority of them have grown up and music has been better prioritized in their lives. or i would sure hope so. elton john and billy joel are performing here soon ~ i'd love to see that show, but i can honestly say neither of them had ever influenced me. i think the mistake here is that by someone asking for a ticket means to some people that the ticket-asker simply *has* to see the show else their lives are for naught, as opposed to just a fan wanting to hear some great music. i have to wonder if the correlation is exactly that close.

is robert plant washed up? i never said he was, not like that. define what *you* mean by 'washed up' and i'll elaborate if i have to. he's not going to get up there in an open blouse like he used to 35 years ago. and what do you want out of him even if he did new zep songs? the same old stuff? what possible motivation would there be for him? he said he doesn't want to get on stage and feel as if he's part of a tribute band. and i think he's absolutely correct. really, i'd rather not watch him if he's just going through the motions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Define what *you* mean by culturally relevant. Relevant in what sense? Is it possible to have value without being relevant to whatever it is? How are you defining culture, in itself?

This is one of those meaningless buzzphrases that drives me nuts, but perhaps you can finally give it some substance for me! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
is robert plant washed up? i never said he was, not like that. define what *you* mean by 'washed up' and i'll elaborate if i have to. he's not going to get up there in an open blouse like he used to 35 years ago. and what do you want out of him even if he did new zep songs? the same old stuff? what possible motivation would there be for him? he said he doesn't want to get on stage and feel as if he's part of a tribute band. and i think he's absolutely correct. really, i'd rather not watch him if he's just going through the motions.

I should have said something about LZ being washed up.

*I* was responding to dismissing remarks you made, like:

so, would i personally be prone to relive past glories? probably not. why, just to hear my new songs played next to the old ones on a classic rock station?

Why in the world couldn't they be new glories?

too, being a front man means you have to be hip. not hippie. that was his image in his heyday. his chops can't be as good, either. for an aging singer, it has to be tough to keep up with the times. to me it boils down to his music being on the timeless side, but his image isn't. actual musicians have more leeway

Sounds like you're saying Robert can't be cool anymore. Why is that? I've seen him twice this tour and he's awesomely cool. By that I mean he has the same self-confidence and love of what he's doing that he's always had, and he lets it show.

As for his "chops". This has turned into a major pet peeve of mine, and I know it's one for Aqua as well. His voice actually sounds better now than it did. No, he can't hit those soprano notes all the time anymore. So? He has a much richer voice, and he has more control over it. His voice is his instrument. If you can't hear that, then you don't listen very hard.

lastly, what more as an artist does he need to say? a lot of great music comes from personal events happening relatively close to the time of creation, and those have, i think for all intents and purposes, already been hashed through ~ 30 years ago.

He still has a lot to say. Many of his songs are about love in some shape or form (not sex). Hell, a lot of Zep's songs were about love in some shape or form. I don't think you can ever say enough about love. He also writes about current events. Listen to "Another Tribe". Very political song. Take a listen to the Mighty Rearranger album, and tell me he has nothing to say.

sad to say, but LZ main reason for being active today is as a commercial entity

What does that mean? They would only do it for $$? That's rather cynical.

and their musical influence is getting harder to spot in today's music. if rock n' roll were to wake up very soon and a mass demanded more zep for their heads, that may have an impact.

But see, that's the hope. Today's rock music, for the most part, sucks. It has no meaning and it's only concern is to be catchy. If they were to release some new material (and I include whatever project Jonesy, Jimmy and Jason do without Robert), then there is a chance to wake the sleeping lethargic beast also known as the music industry. They can be the ones to wake up rock n' roll.

Is it likely? Who knows. Is it a romantic notion? Most certainly. But artistic changes are often the result of romantic notions.

And hell no, I wouldn't want him to prance around on stage in skin-tight trousers and shirtless. That would be ludicrous. His motivation for getting on stage would have to be something that moved him obviously. Maybe he likes performing? Hmmmm, that's a new thought. <_< What I personally would want from any new Zep material would be just that, new material. The opportunity to hear and experience more of the most dynamic and creative music collaboration in the history of the rock genre. And, as I stated above, the possibility of giving music a much needed infusion of creativity and meaning.

I remember Jonesy saying they would be a tribute band if they got a Robert clone. I remember Robert saying he didn't want to be a bunch of old men running around playing oldies. I applaud both comments. A reformed Zep would not be a tribute band. And with new material, they wouldn't be a bunch of old men running around playing oldies. I know he doesn't want to do it. I don't want him to since he doesn't. But I don't see any reason to imply that anything new they did wouldn't be "relevant" or well accepted. You can't know that. No one can know that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i honestly didn't mean to be dismissive. however, i'll reply as best i can:

'Why in the world couldn't they be new glories?'

it's entirely possible. if you consider what music they've put out post-LZ, decide for yourself what new material would sound like. i'm talking about official led zeppelin material. do you think it would sound like their old stuff? i somewhat doubt it, especially taking into consideration their often forward-thinking mentality. i also question whether or not they would rehash their old musical cliches. so, musically speaking, i think we should be wary of what we ask for: it's going to be hard, if not prit near impossible, to live up to their legacy.

too, LZ never meant to be a commercial band. of course they meant to make money, but not by towing the line. ironically, they're much more commercial in an advertising way than ever. merchandising, well, not so much, but i imagine they still turn a buck off that stuff seeing as how it's not terribly difficult finding a tie-dye with the swan song logo for $27.99 (just saw one yesterday in a catalog, along with KISS and AC/DC ~ the same catalog was also hawking such need-to-have stuff like 'dorothy's cookbook' from the 'wizard of oz,' dog coffee mugs and foot warmers). but, were it me and i was making the first album in almost 30 years, i'd wonder how much i needed a 'hit' single to stir up interest in the younger generation. it is a business, after all, and that fact needs ne'er be forgot.

it could be wonderful. it could be the musical equivalent of 'star wars: the phantom menace.' i think that's a good comparison, too, because the older star wars fans dismiss that as the pure tripe and mess it is, while the young generation love having 'their own' star wars. the question is if the younger generation needs or even wants 'their own' led zeppelin. that, i say, satisfies a niche of music-listeners (note: i didn't say music *lovers*).

Sounds like you're saying Robert can't be cool anymore. Why is that? I've seen him twice this tour and he's awesomely cool. By that I mean he has the same self-confidence and love of what he's doing that he's always had, and he lets it show.

As for his "chops". This has turned into a major pet peeve of mine, and I know it's one for Aqua as well. His voice actually sounds better now than it did. No, he can't hit those soprano notes all the time anymore. So? He has a much richer voice, and he has more control over it. His voice is his instrument. If you can't hear that, then you don't listen very hard.'

plant is still cool. again, though, he's not the hippie on stage of old, and if that's what people expect then they're going to be disappointed. i don't know how old he is now, but he's got to be pushing 60 if not there already, and were i that age, i'd have to wonder how i could resonate with a new generation who's already been there, done that. would you simply want to satisfy your original fans of grandfather age, and part of their kids (the ones with good musical taste, those not duped by country 'music'). partly this is what i mean by being relevant.

'He still has a lot to say. Many of his songs are about love in some shape or form (not sex). Hell, a lot of Zep's songs were about love in some shape or form. I don't think you can ever say enough about love. He also writes about current events. Listen to "Another Tribe". Very political song. Take a listen to the Mighty Rearranger album, and tell me he has nothing to say.'

yeah, love never goes out of style. no one wants to hear every song on an album be just about that, though. and let's face it, zep made their name on sex more so than on love. you don't get banned ('the lemon song') if you're being mistaken for the monkees. plant was known for his sexual nature. the entire band was notorious for their... antics. remember the 'red snapper' incident? remember how page, who'd be in jail today for being a pedophile, was nailing that 14 year old girl? (as i recall she was 14. sorry, i can't remember her name off the top of my head.) i want to say at least plant had played around with 'the plaster casters.' the point is zep's earlier years was very much about sex, not only in their music but in their lifestyle. they certainly eased off that the more mature they got.

and, no, the absolute last thing i EVER want to hear is a zep song about politics. that, imo, would go over about as well as a fart in a spacesuit. that plant material you're reference i'm not familiar with, but that's in no way, shape, or form what zeppelin is about. and this is exactly what i'm afraid a new zep album would contain.

'What does that mean? They would only do it for $$? That's rather cynical.'

i agree, it's too cynical. i doubt any of the members are strapped for cash. as i mentioned above, it is a business, though, and once your classic music starts being used for car commercials ('rock 'n roll'), that, i think, has a certain connotation. would they tour without new material? just to do it for the fans? they had 30 years to do that and didn't. to tour with new material? that's usually when you go on tour to begin with. i'm going to start a new thread about new material, which i hope will stir a little debate.

that said, they're not going to tour for free, either, nor should they. i think this deserves its own discussion, that of how commercially viable LZ is today (which i think would well cover aqua's apparent contention of them being more relevant than i think they are now).

ABBA famously refused a reunion and tour, a deal that would make them around a billion dollars. that's billion with a B. unreal, huh? oddly enough, they were all about being commercial. then again, they sold somewhere in the neighbourhood of 270 million albums, have had a play based on their music made and a movie based on the play based on their music produced, so they're probably doing all right financially. i think they see it as their time as being over.

that's what i feel it boils down to, that no matter how sad it is to think about, led zeppelin's time has come and gone, and to want more from them now is just being selfish, not to mention unrealistic. at our most altruistic we want others to share in the same joy we find in their music that we have. for us (well, at least me), i want more of the same, meaning that i don't want to see them attempt to be on the cutting edge of music. no, i just want someone to find a cache of old music that happens to contains about ten more classics of the stripe i'm used to. i don't want new material containing songs about geriatric sex or political opinions. love and loss, okay, and some story songs, some kick ass tunes about being a fool about this or that and maybe jesters traipsing up a mountain to find spiritual health and knowledge or something.

i'm not advocating letting go of the past. i'm just saying we shouldn't live in it as if it's magickally going to return and all will be right with the world, even if it's 'just' music. zep's been out of practice as zep for 30 years. what do we expect of them now, and could they possibly be anything like what we hope for? i think it's a lot to ask for.

'But see, that's the hope. Today's rock music, for the most part, sucks. It has no meaning and it's only concern is to be catchy. If they were to release some new material (and I include whatever project Jonesy, Jimmy and Jason do without Robert), then there is a chance to wake the sleeping lethargic beast also known as the music industry. They can be the ones to wake up rock n' roll.

Is it likely? Who knows. Is it a romantic notion? Most certainly. But artistic changes are often the result of romantic notions.'

that's the hope. and believe me, i'd love to see it happen. on the flip side, if we're realistic, the odds are against them bringing it roaring back. people and tastes change. i think there's a lot of things that have happened over the past several years to bring it back, like old bands making new music, and several reality shows, and even some good rock bands churning out listenable music sans the clunky arrangements and generic sound. (okay, the arrangements are still pretty basic for the most part....)

am i the voice of reason? ha! hardly. i kinda feel like i'm the villain on this, lol. with new material and a big tour, you'd be a fool not to get behind it. LZ is the beatles of the rock 'n roll world, so commercially they'd be justified. artistically, hm, that's always the question no matter who it is. there aren't many classic bands or artists that don't need a great opening act these days, but LZ is one of 'em that could just go on stage without anyone priming the crowd. the eagles are another. you'd think aerosmith would be on that list, but i saw them in an arena with cheap trick.

anyway, the question is would you get back with your old bandmates. if i haven't strayed far enough off the topic, i think i've answered definitely 'i don't know.' what would plant's motivation be for doing so?

what does being culturally relevant to me mean? let me start off by saying that for some people LZ is still culturally relevant. certainly to people on this board they are. however, we're hardly representative of the masses in that regards, eh?

culture: the sum total of ways of living built up by a group of human beings and transmitted from one generation to another. artisic and intellectual pursuits and products. a quality of enlightenment or refinement arising form an acquaintance with and concern for what is regarded as excellent in the arts, letters, manners, etc..

webster's definitions, not what i pulled from my arse (for a change). correct me if i'm wrong, but i don't think i'm going out on a limb here by saying most of us here, and most people in general, think today's music sucks, no? if you agree with that, isn't it worth considering that if LZ were influential musically as they had been then that quality would show through in today's music? granted, zep attained an aesthetic practically impossible to rival in any genre, but it feels as if that bar isn't even being tried to hurdled. in rock, i think the last band that even tried was def leppard (i'd say aerosmith, but i think they went fully commercial). so, there doesn't seem to be a lot of bands reaching for the stars quality and content-wise as zep. and a few people try to hand down their musical tastes to their kids, but, gawd, have you listened to what they do? half of it literally isn't even music.

i believe a good guage of how relevant a thing is if you hear people talk about it, people not already predispositioned to bring the subject up. be honest, when was the last time someone brought up led zeppelin in a conversation without being steered? how many zep posters do kids have on the walls these days? hm, i'm 16 ~ zep, nirvana or nickelback? who means more to me?

okay, a friend of mine is here, so i asked him. he's 23 and i asked him about zep's cultural relevance. he said he and his friends talked about them three days ago. that was brought up by playing guitar hero. other than that, no, he says he never talks about them. his friends who are into zep are potheads, which is basically what i'm talking about niche. he said a few of his friends are metal fiends, so for those guys it's metallica and zep, et al.. asked why he and his friends don't listen to zep, his answer was that there's just so much else to listen to. 35 years ago, and there wasn't a question as to what you were listening to ~ now, with all those years of music to choose from, zep isn't listened to as often by younger people. that doesn't bespeak of the quality of the music, naturally, and that's just a by-product of time, but it's another reason why zep isn't on the tongues of people in general on any level. zep's music *does* explimplify a lifestyle, too.

you talk to guitarists and, sure, zep's going to come up. most people aren't guitarists, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...