”The other band members was very tired of the Syd, but their managers did not stop believing in him. They wanted Barrett and Wright to leave the others. 'Richard Wright - Peter Jenner and Andrew King felt that Syd and I were the musical brains of the band, and they insisted we would form our own band at an effort to keep Syd on his feet and save him. And believe me I would have stuck with Syd at once if I was sure he would make it'”.
I'm wondering who would be the other member(s) of that band? Jeff Beck.....?
There were probably no end of unknown musicians they could have tapped to make up the band. But even Rick knew his colleague Syd was just too far gone.
History suggests that the right decision was made. It would have been good had there been some way of saving Syd. But, by the time this was being considered I believe that the damage was done.
Maybe someone can write an alternative history novel for National Novel Writing Month, if it happens this year. Maybe Alan Parsons is bought in to replace Rick in Pink Floyd. There's a fight over the name, and eventually the Syd/Rick band (with Roger Glover choosing them over Deep Purple, and young teenager Phil Collins joining on drums) takes the name Gigolo Aunts. A rivalry then ensues between the two bands.
space triangle wrote: ↑Thu Apr 30, 2020 5:26 pm
Syd and Rick could have bought back Bob Klose in their band. Take the name Lucifer Sam. It would be an interesting rivalry with the Pink Floyd.
But that would be a return to the 12 bar and chugging sound that would only become more outdated as the surviving Pink Floyd eclipsing.
The Soft Machine guys? I think what Ratledge, Hopper and Wyatt did with No Good Trying is amazing... probably my favourite drumming on any song. Obviously it's one of many 'what ifs?'... perhaps if he could've joined something like Soft Machine as a guitarist and not a frontperson, that might have had some mileage?
Personally I'm not convinced with the idea that Barrett was 'too far gone' (perhaps bearing in mind especially Duggie Fields' recollections) although neither am I inclined to reopen that can of worms of a debate which I doubt will ever be resolved.
I suppose I am still interested in Barrett and the others' relationship with Jenner and King. Jenner seemed to have been too close to Barrett, also apparently often getting stoned with him (a thing that Jenner has since offered a really sincere apology for)... I've found the numerous recent Nick Mason interviews interesting - I think there's a bit of gentle revisionism where Mason seems keen to emphasise that if Barrett was put under pressure by expectations and a gruelling schedule, this was down to the rest of the band's level of ambition and lack of proper internal discussion rather than a 'Have a Cigar' sort of management scenario. Although perhaps that goes for Bryan Morrison, as his memoir maybe suggests.
I'm of the opinion that Syd Barrett was better suited for a group as it was Gong, rather than Pink Floyd. And, it seems the Soft Machine would also suit him better.too.
Yeah - iirc Mick Rock says something like 'Syd was very much a solo act' (in the promo clip for the as-yet-unreleased Storm Thorgeson-curated Barrett documentary) but that's not my impression (not claiming to be any authority on the subject).
Barrett seemed to have a desire and willingness to collaborate - perhaps Gong or Soft Machine might've offered a situation of a supportive environment more aligned to Barrett's interests and a collective which Barrett didn't necessarily need to front. Lately I've wondered if perhaps Barrett's decision to quit Stars following Roy Hollingworth's review could have been as much to do with the level of focus on him, put on a pedestal - the inescapable narrative of a damaged genius in the shadow of (mythological) former glories, rather than simply being hurt by criticism of a (probably fairly traumatic) dud gig experience.
