Eddie Vedder

nozzferrahhtoo

Imallrightjack wrote: »

IMO. theres a time and a place for it and that wasnt it especially when it was not even his audience.

That is one, highly valid way of looking at it. I can not rebut or negate it in any way, nor would I want to.

But I would say another EQUALLY valid way of looking at it, is that the things an artist wants to say in or between songs is PART of their show, their art, their message, their narrative.

So I never look at it like "It is not even his audience" or "There is a time and a place" or any of the words you use. I personally look at it like "This is an artist, and every artist wants to communicate a message or a theme or a narrative............ either in image, word, music, lyric, form or some other method of turning their meme into something communicated to the punter".

And when you look at it that way the whole idea of "time and a place" and "Who's audience is this?" stops parsing sensibly.

It is a way I developed of looking at it when I was very young and into Van Morrison, the first musician that got me interested in music at all (I was relatively late liking ANY music compared to my school mates).

Around that time he started using Brian Kennedy as a backing singer and in his live shows he would even leave the stage for a song or two and leave Brian Singing.

The complaints I heard on the Van Morrison Mailing List (An Email only mailing list, back in the days before internet forums and message boards) were predictably "We pay to see Van..... why do we get 2 or 3 songs from this other guy???". And I kinda felt that way myself briefly, especially as one of the songs (Vanlose Stairway) that he would leave the stage during was, at the time, THE best song for me. I loved it maybe 10 times more than any other that he does live.

But I realized after a time I saw it differently. You do not pay to see Van, you pay to see the art that Van constructs. You pay to see the SHOW he puts on. And if the show he puts on involves arranging music and singers and setting them to play his arrangements and productions..... then that is what you pay for.

I would see Hansard or Moore preaching their political views in that same way. That's his show that he is producing. Take it or leave it as you will. I too much prefer when he tells the personal anecdotes, some of which can be very very funny and you do not even care if they are true or not.

From the time he met Van Morrison, to the time he ended up naked in the bath drinking wine naked with a male fan, to the time he met Jeff Buckley and played him a song that Jeff then shocked glen by saying "That song..... that was written by my dad!". The stories are so good, and told so well, you suspend any disbelief and stop even caring if they are true or not. He just puts you in the moment like you were there.

Imallrightjack

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

That is one, highly valid way of looking at it. I can not rebut or negate it in any way, nor would I want to.

But I would say another EQUALLY valid way of looking at it, is that the things an artist wants to say in or between songs is PART of their show, their art, their message, their narrative.

So I never look at it like "It is not even his audience" or "There is a time and a place" or any of the words you use. I personally look at it like "This is an artist, and every artist wants to communicate a message or a theme or a narrative............ either in image, word, music, lyric, form or some other method of turning their meme into something communicated to the punter".

And when you look at it that way the whole idea of "time and a place" and "Who's audience is this?" stops parsing sensibly.

It is a way I developed of looking at it when I was very young and into Van Morrison, the first musician that got me interested in music at all (I was relatively late liking ANY music compared to my school mates).

Around that time he started using Brian Kennedy as a backing singer and in his live shows he would even leave the stage for a song or two and leave Brian Singing.

The complaints I heard on the Van Morrison Mailing List (An Email only mailing list, back in the days before internet forums and message boards) were predictably "We pay to see Van..... why do we get 2 or 3 songs from this other guy???". And I kinda felt that way myself briefly, especially as one of the songs (Vanlose Stairway) that he would leave the stage during was, at the time, THE best song for me. I loved it maybe 10 times more than any other that he does live.

But I realized after a time I saw it differently. You do not pay to see Van, you pay to see the art that Van constructs. You pay to see the SHOW he puts on. And if the show he puts on involves arranging music and singers and setting them to play his arrangements and productions..... then that is what you pay for.

I would see Hansard or Moore preaching their political views in that same way. That's his show that he is producing. Take it or leave it as you will. I too much prefer when he tells the personal anecdotes, some of which can be very very funny and you do not even care if they are true or not.

From the time he met Van Morrison, to the time he ended up naked in the bath drinking wine naked with a male fan, to the time he met Jeff Buckley and played him a song that Jeff then shocked glen by saying "That song..... that was written by my dad!". The stories are so good, and told so well, you suspend any disbelief and stop even caring if they are true or not. He just puts you in the moment like you were there.

what your saying makes a lot of sense.
but i believe there is a fine line between him performing his act and preaching while performing his act, which is what is on the other side of that line.
audiences are mainly there to hear him sing,if he over does the migrant, homeless speeches id imagine it pisses people off.anecdotes and funny stories are not the same.
audiences are fickle things ,they get pissed off with being preached to all the time.im not saying glen does that all the time, but listening to him the other night i just thought not now not now.
and having a mic does not give you the right to say anything you like, no matter who you are.it gives you the right to sing and entertain the people who have paid their hard earned money for tickets to see you.

EyesClosed

Imallrightjack wrote: »

what your saying makes a lot of sense.
but i believe there is a fine line between him performing his act and preaching while performing his act, which is what is on the other side of that line.
audiences are mainly there to hear him sing,if he over does the migrant, homeless speeches id imagine it pisses people off.anecdotes and funny stories are not the same.
audiences are fickle things ,they get pissed off with being preached to all the time.im not saying glen does that all the time, but listening to him the other night i just thought not now not now.
and having a mic does not give you the right to say anything you like, no matter who you are.it gives you the right to sing and entertain the people who have paid their hard earned money for tickets to see you.

Glen is passionate about a serious problem in Ireland. If he wants to take a few minutes to talk about it and spread his message the only way he knows. Who are we to say stop? Personally I think what he is doing is great.

nozzferrahhtoo

Imallrightjack wrote: »

what your saying makes a lot of sense.
but i believe there is a fine line between him performing his act and preaching while performing his act

I guess. But to make my long post above much much shorter I guess I just see it as: "He is not preaching between his act, the preaching is PART of the act". And the whole thing just parses differently in the brain when you look at it that way.

But sure, audiences might not like "that show" and if that is what he sees being part of "his show" then he either needs to live with negative reactions, or change "the show".

Imallrightjack wrote: »

and having a mic does not give you the right to say anything you like, no matter who you are.it gives you the right to sing and entertain the people who have paid their hard earned money for tickets to see you.

That is where I differ I think. I DO think it gives him that right. It is his act, and he can make what he wants part of it. The punter then in turn has the right never to pay to see him or to walk out and not listen to it because they do not like his show.

But he has every right to get up there and read recipes for salsa dip in latin backwards if he wants! Once he accepts any loss of earnings or audience he gets for doing so.

Koptain Liverpool

Imallrightjack wrote: »

what your saying makes a lot of sense.
but i believe there is a fine line between him performing his act and preaching while performing his act, which is what is on the other side of that line.
audiences are mainly there to hear him sing,if he over does the migrant, homeless speeches id imagine it pisses people off.anecdotes and funny stories are not the same.
audiences are fickle things ,they get pissed off with being preached to all the time.im not saying glen does that all the time, but listening to him the other night i just thought not now not now.
and having a mic does not give you the right to say anything you like, no matter who you are.it gives you the right to sing and entertain the people who have paid their hard earned money for tickets to see you.

Maybe a Robbie Williams gig would be more up your street so.

flasher0030

Koptain Liverpool wrote: »

Maybe a Robbie Williams gig would be more up your street so.

Ooooh. Low blow. Have to agree with Nozzferathoo. I was at his gig in some church before Christmas. Only time I ever saw him live. (Well, think I saw the Frames in college. But who didn't back then!!). They were giving it loads about homelessness. It was just before the Apollo house thing. I thought it was brilliant. Stayed with me for a long time afterwards. Why? Because what he was talking about was a real life problem right in front of our eyes. I didn't see it as preaching. It was creating profile for a terrible problem. Just like Vedder was on about Trump at the Dublin gig anyway. It's a big problem. And if I did not believe in the views of the speaker, I don't think it would be a problem either. Unless some entertainer is shouting from the rooftops in support of ISIS or something like that.

Robotito

Interesting that the thread title is 'Eddie Vedder' and all people are talking about is the other performer. Speaks volumes. I'm a big PJ fan but these gigs were a no go for me.

Mushy

Robotito wrote: »

Interesting that the thread title is 'Eddie Vedder' and all people are talking about is the other performer. Speaks volumes. I'm a big PJ fan but these gigs were a no go for me.

Did you skip the dozens upon dozens of posts highlighting how good the gigs were?

greenspurs

Robotito wrote: »

Interesting that the thread title is 'Eddie Vedder' and all people are talking about is the other performer. Speaks volumes. I'm a big PJ fan but these gigs were a no go for me.

Did you hate Dylan before he went Electric?

david75

I didn't go to the gig but I'm gonna complain about it anyways.



Alrighty then

flasher0030

Robotito wrote: »

Interesting that the thread title is 'Eddie Vedder' and all people are talking about is the other performer. Speaks volumes. I'm a big PJ fan but these gigs were a no go for me.

Doesn't speak volumes about anything.
The thread initially started with a reference to Eddie Vedder live gigs and Dublin. The gig happened a week ago. Everybody proclaimed their admiration for the gig. Then the comments moved on to other issues like the support on the night of the gig. And an unfair personal reference was made about G Hansard. So, unless you want us all to go back in and declare how good/bad we thought Eddie Vedder was, get over it.

Incidentally, if you are such a big PJ fan, why wouldn't you go? I cannot think of any reason. I love Pearl Jam. But (unexpectedly for me), the Eddie Vedder gig was streets ahead of PJ in Dublin in 2010, in my opinion. There was something really special about last Friday's gig.

delbertgrady

flasher0030 wrote: »

... the Eddie Vedder gig was streets ahead of PJ in Dublin in 2010, in my opinion. There was something really special about last Friday's gig.

I would agree with this. The 2010 Dublin gig was fine, but it was definitely the weakest time I've seen them, and I know a few others who also felt it was a bit below par. But the following night in Belfast was phenomenal.

greenspurs

delbertgrady wrote: »

I would agree with this. The 2010 Dublin gig was fine, but it was definitely the weakest time I've seen them, and I know a few others who also felt it was a bit below par. But the following night in Belfast was phenomenal.

I thought i was the only one !! ~ :rolleyes:
It really felt like an inconvenience for them in 2010, twas like a "Jet Lag" gig...
I was really dissapointed ... But Hyde Park in 2012 was stunning, really was.

"Unplugged at the Marquee" - i wonder would other artists go for it ?

david75

Dublin is always the sound check gig for pj.

Upshot of that is we get all the first plays. Of the earth, education etc. So it has benefits.

Imallrightjack

Koptain Liverpool wrote: »

Maybe a Robbie Williams gig would be more up your street so.

jeez ridicule a guy for having an opinion.

PropJoe10

Robotito wrote: »

Interesting that the thread title is 'Eddie Vedder' and all people are talking about is the other performer. Speaks volumes. I'm a big PJ fan but these gigs were a no go for me.

Haha the only one that missed out was you, then. Cork was absolutely amazing and going by the reviews, so was Dublin.

Erik Shin

Realistically, when is the next time we can expect to see Pearl Jam in Ireland ?

david75

Erik Shin wrote: »

Realistically, when is the next time we can expect to see Pearl Jam in Ireland ?

At least two years. That's *if* they go into the studio next year and choose to start the tour for it in Europe. And that's if we're included in that tour. We've been skipped the last four or five European tours.

david75

Ps there's no indication at all that they're planning to hit the studio.

Erik Shin

david75 wrote: »

Ps there's no indication at all that they're planning to hit the studio.

Yeah, was just going to say, didn't hear anything about a new album in the works...... 2020 unless someone has a word with them beforehand

david75

Erik Shin wrote: »

Yeah, was just going to say, didn't hear anything about a new album in the works...... 2020 unless someone has a word with them beforehand

I hate the way they make records now. Band demos seperate to ed and send him everything and he picks what he likes.
That's no way to make great music. He has left the benevolent dictator thing so with the result everyone gets a song or two on the record. That's not the way to go. Pick the best songs. Not one from each member.

Be brilliant if they just went in and jammed out on ideas and knocked one out in a week. Never happen though. They haven't done that properly since Avocado.
The demos from that album are better than the album funny enough.

Yellowledbetter

While I would love to think of the 5 of them in a room jamming and coming up with songs organically I'm more than happy for them to do it the way they see fit. The chemistry when they get onstage together more than makes up for it IMO,that's when the magic happens and that's when they're are their very best.
I'm hoping for for some kinda tour next year,seeing Ed in Dublin was brilliant but I'm having serious PJ withdrawal since Amsterdam and Milton Keynes in 2014. Hopefully they include Ireland next time around but anywhere in Europe and I'd happily make a couple of trips

MisterAnarchy

david75 wrote: »

At least two years. That's *if* they go into the studio next year and choose to start the tour for it in Europe. And that's if we're included in that tour. We've been skipped the last four or five European tours.

Why has Ireland been skipped on the last few tours,its baffling ,as Pearl Jam are very popular ,I've no doubt that they could sell out the 3 arena a few nights .

Eddie really seemed embarrassed that it was 20 years since he last played in Cork and he promised he wouldn't leave it so long again.
Hopefully after the great audiences he saw in Cork and Dublin ,he will be back with Pearl Jam next tour ,otherwise I'm gunning for you Eddie.:p

david75

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Why has Ireland been skipped on the last few tours,its baffling ,as Pearl Jam are very popular ,I've no doubt that they could sell out the 3 arena a few nights .

Eddie really seemed embarrassed that it was 20 years since he last played in Cork and he promised he wouldn't leave it so long again.
Hopefully after the great audiences he saw in Cork and Dublin ,he will be back with Pearl Jam next tour ,otherwise I'm gunning for you Eddie.:p

Hey. I Love ed as much as any of us. But he says a lot of things


It's just a money thing. the promoter they're attached to here doesn't believe they'd be capable of filling or selling out a bigger/much bigger venue.

Pj base rate is over a million a show. They're not cheap to bring over at all.


But we are overdue. Let's hope for next summer.

david75

^ed selling out the point alone may change that notion in the promoters head.

greenspurs

Pearl Jam - Slane 2018 ....
Cmon Aiken , MCD, Live Nation, Lord Henry ....... Whoever the f*** , just do it.... !
25 years.... " Its been so long, never dreamed you return ....."

Imallrightjack

greenspurs wrote: »

Pearl Jam - Slane 2018 ....
Cmon Aiken , MCD, Live Nation, Lord Henry ....... Whoever the f*** , just do it.... !
25 years.... " Its been so long, never dreamed you return ....."

Jesus.25 years.god i feel old.
But yes definitely get them over!
I swore id never go to slane again but id go for them!

sparrowcar

Imallrightjack wrote: »

Jesus.25 years.god i feel old.
But yes definitely get them over!
I swore id never go to slane again but id go for them!

They couldn't do Slane, nor would I want them too, horrible venue for accessibility.

Would love to see them do somewhere a bit more intimate, speaking of which what would be a good venue. I'm thinking around the 15-20k mark??

seachto7

After this year, my second time there, I'd like to see them in a smaller venue. But maybe the demand would be there for Slane?

Imallrightjack

sparrowcar wrote: »

They couldn't do Slane, nor would I want them too, horrible venue for accessibility.

Would love to see them do somewhere a bit more intimate, speaking of which what would be a good venue. I'm thinking around the 15-20k mark??

Yea accessibility is a nightmare.but why do you say they couldn't do it?
The new pairc ui chaoimh perhaps?