RPITI wrote: "HOWEVER, I do like to compare Pink Floyd to a marriage, with The Final Cut being the divorce papers. I think carrying on after The Wall Tour, without Rick, was a bad idea, and I am not sure why they did so. It has been said that Roger Waters was more than willing to do The Final Cut under his own name, on his own, but Nick and David insisted the project carry on under the "Pink Floyd" banner, for whatever reason(s). In 1985, Steve O'Rourke, the manager of "Pink Floyd," gave Roger some flak over some contractual obligations for a future Pink Floyd product. Due to this fact, one can infer that perhaps contractual obligations "as a member of Pink Floyd" were involved in the decision to carry on as Pink Floyd for The Final Cut. The fact they did not tour without Rick could also lead one to believe that, indeed, putting out The Final Cut under the name Pink Floyd was all about just fulfilling some contractual obligations. Roger knew releasing The Final Cut under the banner Pink Floyd was rather preposterous at least by 1985, when he decided he would never partake in a pseudo-Floyd project again. "
The objectivity of all this info is rather low, very speculative.
The current Floyd-issue
-
- Judge!
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:31 pm
- Location: The Dark Side of Neptune
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 543
- Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 5:35 pm
-
- Judge!
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:31 pm
- Location: The Dark Side of Neptune
Sometimes You Have To Read Between The Lines...
I see The Wall as being the final "genuine Pink Floyd album".....
....Roger knew releasing The Final Cut under the banner Pink Floyd was rather preposterous at least by 1985, when he decided he would never partake in a pseudo-Floyd project again.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 11555
- Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 5:54 pm
- Location: In the editing bay...working on the final cut...
Alrighty...this is what I see happening here...
R.PITI considers "true" Classic Pink Floyd product to be the result of collaboration between Waters/Wright/Gilmour/Mason...that is to say, the words of Waters with the music of Wright, Gilmour and Mason.
R.PITI acknowledges the importance of the lyrics.
Spinoza does not acknowledge any such thing.
It seems that to Spinoza the music of Gilmour and Wright is paramount...the words could be inane drivel sung in a foreign language and Spinoza would still consider it Floyd as long as Gilmour and Wright wrote music on it. (Note that I did not say "All of the music on it.")
Is this pretty much it?
R.PITI considers "true" Classic Pink Floyd product to be the result of collaboration between Waters/Wright/Gilmour/Mason...that is to say, the words of Waters with the music of Wright, Gilmour and Mason.
R.PITI acknowledges the importance of the lyrics.
Spinoza does not acknowledge any such thing.
It seems that to Spinoza the music of Gilmour and Wright is paramount...the words could be inane drivel sung in a foreign language and Spinoza would still consider it Floyd as long as Gilmour and Wright wrote music on it. (Note that I did not say "All of the music on it.")
Is this pretty much it?
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 7074
- Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2002 12:54 pm
- Location: Edinburgh or Aberdeen depending on the time of year
I know, just drop the argument. I know i instigated it a bit, but come on, this argument comes up all the time. Just come to the agreement that Floyd without Waters is essentially The Sex Pistols without Lydon and that AMLOR and TDB are ultimatly The Great Rock And Roll Swindle. Argue what is or isn't Pink Floyd all you want, but i think it's undeniable that Roger was the heart and soul of the band as Lydon was with the pistols.
I have to agree with Mosespa on all issues here. This argument is based upon what aspects of Floyd we prefer. I am putting a new post up in a second just to see what everyone else thinks, but ultimatly i do agree more with RPITI (nice name how did you come up with it?) Floyd are about lyrics and music, and with the style of on of these main aspects being changed it's just not the same is it?
I have to agree with Mosespa on all issues here. This argument is based upon what aspects of Floyd we prefer. I am putting a new post up in a second just to see what everyone else thinks, but ultimatly i do agree more with RPITI (nice name how did you come up with it?) Floyd are about lyrics and music, and with the style of on of these main aspects being changed it's just not the same is it?
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 543
- Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 5:35 pm
Mosespa: it would be better for you to read, think, reread , formulate a consistent thought then and Then write it down. In that order. Point of the discussion was: Can Floyd still be floyd after Roger left the band. I was not talking about quality, quantity, a legacy to be destroyed, lyrics or music. I was only using RPITI's definition of Pink Floyd ( as being WATERS GILMOUR MASON WRIGHT ) and using that on a Floydalbum called TFC. I still consider TFC a Floyd-album, yes, even without Wright. I still think that Lyrics are important, but be fair, the lyrics on DSOTM are everything but deep ( a fact even Waters-aknowledges). Fact is: Floyd is diverse: from UMMAGUMMA, ASOS, MORE, MEDDLE ( deep lyrics ????? ) to THe WAlL and TFC ( very good Lyrics ). As i stated before, if i want "deep" literature i take books and articles by some famous philosophers or other thinkers. TFC is very good not only because of it's words but also because of the emotion you can feel in the singing, but hey most of Floyds albums are lyrically quite emotionless or emotionlesssung ( eg TIME )
PS what do you do with Piper At the Gates Of Dawn , not a Floyd-album ?
PS i never stated that lyrics were not important. Question is: what are GOOD-lyrics ???? Cause the lyrical style on Floydalbums changed album after album, and the way they were sung too. So its logical to suppose that after Roger left the lyricalstyle would change, just as the lyrical style would change after Barrett left the band
PS Words in a foreigne language: WOW, how many Floydlisteners have English as their motherlanguage. Me not, still i understand english
PS what do you do with Piper At the Gates Of Dawn , not a Floyd-album ?
PS i never stated that lyrics were not important. Question is: what are GOOD-lyrics ???? Cause the lyrical style on Floydalbums changed album after album, and the way they were sung too. So its logical to suppose that after Roger left the lyricalstyle would change, just as the lyrical style would change after Barrett left the band
PS Words in a foreigne language: WOW, how many Floydlisteners have English as their motherlanguage. Me not, still i understand english
-
- Judge!
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:31 pm
- Location: The Dark Side of Neptune
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17151
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 6:54 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Cheshire, England
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 7074
- Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2002 12:54 pm
- Location: Edinburgh or Aberdeen depending on the time of year
-
- Judge!
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:31 pm
- Location: The Dark Side of Neptune
There used to be an individual who went by the alias Pink In the Inside (P.I.T.I.) on a Pink Floyd message board that is now long gone (The old PinkFloyd.com webboard). We once got into a discussion similar to the one in this thread. He basically argued "Pink Floyd is just a name!" We also got into an argument over whether KAOS is virtually the same thing as K.A.O.S. (Anal? VERY).
One day I decided to create the handle "Real Pink In The Inside" and to use the acronym R.PITI (Before this, I was known as Spectrum, or something silly like that). Of course, if I was P.I.T.I. I would have a problem with someone using the handle "Real Pink In The Inside" and the acronym "R.PITI." However, according to P.I.T.I. KAOS and K.A.O.S. are totally different from one another and "Pink Floyd is just a name," so obviously he had no problem with my new handle and acronym, right? WRONG!
I think I proved my point to him
One day I decided to create the handle "Real Pink In The Inside" and to use the acronym R.PITI (Before this, I was known as Spectrum, or something silly like that). Of course, if I was P.I.T.I. I would have a problem with someone using the handle "Real Pink In The Inside" and the acronym "R.PITI." However, according to P.I.T.I. KAOS and K.A.O.S. are totally different from one another and "Pink Floyd is just a name," so obviously he had no problem with my new handle and acronym, right? WRONG!
I think I proved my point to him
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 505
- Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2002 12:44 am
- Gender: Male
MlahahahaReal Pink in the Inside wrote:There used to be an individual who went by the alias Pink In the Inside (P.I.T.I.) on a Pink Floyd message board that is now long gone (The old PinkFloyd.com webboard). We once got into a discussion similar to the one in this thread. He basically argued "Pink Floyd is just a name!" We also got into an argument over whether KAOS is virtually the same thing as K.A.O.S. (Anal? VERY).
One day I decided to create the handle "Real Pink In The Inside" and to use the acronym R.PITI (Before this, I was known as Spectrum, or something silly like that). Of course, if I was P.I.T.I. I would have a problem with someone using the handle "Real Pink In The Inside" and the acronym "R.PITI." However, according to P.I.T.I. KAOS and K.A.O.S. are totally different from one another and "Pink Floyd is just a name," so obviously he had no problem with my new handle and acronym, right? WRONG!
I think I proved my point to him
Great story, there.