GITMO and Pearl Jam - a publicity stunt?

soulsinging

aerial wrote:

If they move those terrorist to a prison in America those guys are going to wish they were being tortured with loud music and water boarding, instead of becoming some big bubbas Bitch........will you guys protest on there behalf then or is that acceptable to you?...

it's acceptable. as long as they are charged and given a trial, i don't care what we do with them. it's kidnapping people and holding them without any trial or any counsel or any contact with loved ones that i find unacceptable and totally un-american. it goes against everything this country stands for.

by all means, let those that are found guilty sit in one of our prisons and pay for their crimes with hard time.

inmytree

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

inmytree wrote:

I heard about them (which here means: their opinions)...from this site...is that not enough...?

and this course you speak of...what course is that...? I thought they were in it to make music and money...

Yes, they are still on the music for money course... Maybe moreso now than ever before.

I think the "course" that Jeanwah is talking about is the band that took ticketmaster to the Supreme Court, who strongly supported a 3rd party candidates (Ralph Nader) and openly spoke out against how the 2 parties were really no different. There's a video out there from 2000, which is an interview with Ed on MTV (I believe), where he talks about the 2 parties being puppets, and uses those exact words.

The course as far as elections go:

Nader (on principle) => Kerry (lesser of 2 evils) => Obama (who they seem to really love, but let's not pretend he's nearly as principled as Nader). Come to think of it, I don't recall any open endorsement for Clinton in '92-- as much as it was NO BUSH '92.

Stance on corporations:

Anti-corporate and anti-ticketmaster, against AT&T for censoring them => partnerships with Verizon and Target.

I'm not judging here, just stating facts. People change... Or maybe the anti-corporate, anti-marketing, anti-establishment image they built for themselves over the first 12 years of their career, was really a very clever, very-corporate, brilliantly-marketed, part-of-the-establishment approach, and we just didn't see it ?

aaaah...the good ol' days...I always love the "back in my day" sort of conversations....

personally I think people attached the "anti-corporate" label to PJ vs. PJ giving themselves that label...correct me if I'm wrong, but they fought Ticketmaster because they were a monopoly, not because the were a corporation...and with ATT it was fight against censorship....not because they were a corporation...

As for Politics...peoples politics change as the grow, earn, and learn...so they supported Nadar back in the day, does that mean they have to support him forever and ever...? I think this past election he was out of touch and wasted his time...but back in the day, I supported him...

you see, times change...along with time changing, people change...it's natural...

I think folks have some sort of Ideal vision of PJ...and when the Ideal is not met, somehow folks are disappointed...in my view, that's not PJ's issue...that's issue of the person putting them on the pedestal...

decides2dream

Jeanwah wrote:

OK, I am just wondering that if you were in Philly, Ed didn't talk any politics. Which seems to becoming the norm since Obama won office. But here's what I'm wondering about...if the band has just come out in support of GITMO's closing and the relation of the closing with using music as torture, one would think it would be on the top of Eddie's mind and he would be voicing his opinion on it, at least since it's recent news, and has really got the Forums talking about it.

I can't help but wonder if it's all a publicity stunt, since Ed's known for speaking his mind...or at least he used to.

i think given the nature of the philly shows, ed purposely kept politics out of it. those shows were to honor the spectrum.

given that the gitmo subject is stickied on the porch, is on the homepage, i don't see it as a publicity stunt, at all. ed and the boys need not talk about evry cause they support, every time they have a show.

VINNY GOOMBA

inmytree wrote:

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

inmytree wrote:

I heard about them (which here means: their opinions)...from this site...is that not enough...?

and this course you speak of...what course is that...? I thought they were in it to make music and money...

Yes, they are still on the music for money course... Maybe moreso now than ever before.

I think the "course" that Jeanwah is talking about is the band that took ticketmaster to the Supreme Court, who strongly supported a 3rd party candidates (Ralph Nader) and openly spoke out against how the 2 parties were really no different. There's a video out there from 2000, which is an interview with Ed on MTV (I believe), where he talks about the 2 parties being puppets, and uses those exact words.

The course as far as elections go:

Nader (on principle) => Kerry (lesser of 2 evils) => Obama (who they seem to really love, but let's not pretend he's nearly as principled as Nader). Come to think of it, I don't recall any open endorsement for Clinton in '92-- as much as it was NO BUSH '92.

Stance on corporations:

Anti-corporate and anti-ticketmaster, against AT&T for censoring them => partnerships with Verizon and Target.

I'm not judging here, just stating facts. People change... Or maybe the anti-corporate, anti-marketing, anti-establishment image they built for themselves over the first 12 years of their career, was really a very clever, very-corporate, brilliantly-marketed, part-of-the-establishment approach, and we just didn't see it ?

aaaah...the good ol' days...I always love the "back in my day" sort of conversations....

personally I think people attached the "anti-corporate" label to PJ vs. PJ giving themselves that label...correct me if I'm wrong, but they fought Ticketmaster because they were a monopoly, not because the were a corporation...and with ATT it was fight against censorship....not because they were a corporation...

As for Politics...peoples politics change as the grow, earn, and learn...so they supported Nadar back in the day, does that mean they have to support him forever and ever...? I think this past election he was out of touch and wasted his time...but back in the day, I supported him...

you see, times change...along with time changing, people change...it's natural...

I think folks have some sort of Ideal vision of PJ...and when the Ideal is not met, somehow folks are disappointed...in my view, that's not PJ's issue...that's issue of the person putting them on the pedestal...

Great points about the differences in anti-monopoly, censorship, versus being anti-corporate. Actual examples of PJ defining themselves as anti-corporate would be more along the lines of turning down the Viagra commercial, or them calling out some arena for having advertisements for General Motors plastered all over the place, and having them covered up / taken down. There are plenty of interviews where you do hear Ed talk about corporations as well... I cannot find that one interview I mentioned earlier.

I realize people change... I acknowledged that. It's the amount of conviction in which they make certain statements that they end up being held up on a pedestal-- because in some ways, they kind of put themselves on the pedestal. Of course, some of us hardcore fans give them the boost onto the pedestal. How many times has Ed sung "No More" since Obama has been in office? How many times a year earlier while Bush was in office? The new boss is in, and he's supposesdly promised to listen to us-- then why isn't Eddie speaking, asking, or demanding change as publicly as he used to?

In the same respect, maybe this is their move away from all of the politics and strong stances, and they just want to focus on the music. For one thing, the problem with making very loud and powerful statements is that they make can be kind of damning if your views change. If PJ were to remain politically neutral for a few years, especially through a Republican administration, they would definitely be viewed as a lot more consistent to me. No one's perfect. "I shit and I stink, I'm real, join the club!"

Pepe Silvia

vedderman71 wrote:

Ya Pepe, do yourself a favor and buy the album. It's my fave since Yield.

And I don't see Ed or the band as selling out just b/c they aren't sermonizing every night. This is a great record, what's wrong w/ being in the moment and enjoying the ride? After all the shit they have taken on over the years who can blame them?

By lending the band's name in support of Gitmo's closing it draws attention to the cause.
Hell look at the other GITMO???? thread...I'd say it worked!
Mission Accomplished

i bought the fixer 7" and thought the song was horrid...the b side, super sonic was better, though. i downloaded the album (as i usually do but still buy a physical copy on vinyl and convert it to a cd later) and was really disappointed, i ended up deleting it to make space not that much later....i heard the album again weeks later on a friend's ipod all the way through twice and while it was good music perse it just didn't grab my attention....i fetl bored

and it has nothing to do with sermonizing or lack of it, i don't think there's a single political song on the new Dinosaur Jr. and i thought that rocked far more than Backspacer. When Backspacer is on i feel bored and my mind drifts, which is the complete opposite with the other 2 albums i mentioned

Pepe Silvia

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

inmytree wrote:

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

Yes, they are still on the music for money course... Maybe moreso now than ever before.

I think the "course" that Jeanwah is talking about is the band that took ticketmaster to the Supreme Court, who strongly supported a 3rd party candidates (Ralph Nader) and openly spoke out against how the 2 parties were really no different. There's a video out there from 2000, which is an interview with Ed on MTV (I believe), where he talks about the 2 parties being puppets, and uses those exact words.

The course as far as elections go:

Nader (on principle) => Kerry (lesser of 2 evils) => Obama (who they seem to really love, but let's not pretend he's nearly as principled as Nader). Come to think of it, I don't recall any open endorsement for Clinton in '92-- as much as it was NO BUSH '92.

Stance on corporations:

Anti-corporate and anti-ticketmaster, against AT&T for censoring them => partnerships with Verizon and Target.

I'm not judging here, just stating facts. People change... Or maybe the anti-corporate, anti-marketing, anti-establishment image they built for themselves over the first 12 years of their career, was really a very clever, very-corporate, brilliantly-marketed, part-of-the-establishment approach, and we just didn't see it ?

aaaah...the good ol' days...I always love the "back in my day" sort of conversations....

personally I think people attached the "anti-corporate" label to PJ vs. PJ giving themselves that label...correct me if I'm wrong, but they fought Ticketmaster because they were a monopoly, not because the were a corporation...and with ATT it was fight against censorship....not because they were a corporation...

As for Politics...peoples politics change as the grow, earn, and learn...so they supported Nadar back in the day, does that mean they have to support him forever and ever...? I think this past election he was out of touch and wasted his time...but back in the day, I supported him...

you see, times change...along with time changing, people change...it's natural...

I think folks have some sort of Ideal vision of PJ...and when the Ideal is not met, somehow folks are disappointed...in my view, that's not PJ's issue...that's issue of the person putting them on the pedestal...

Great points about the differences in anti-monopoly, censorship, versus being anti-corporate. Actual examples of PJ defining themselves as anti-corporate would be more along the lines of turning down the Viagra commercial, or them calling out some arena for having advertisements for General Motors plastered all over the place, and having them covered up / taken down. There are plenty of interviews where you do hear Ed talk about corporations as well... I cannot find that one interview I mentioned earlier.

I realize people change... I acknowledged that. It's the amount of conviction in which they make certain statements that they end up being held up on a pedestal-- because in some ways, they kind of put themselves on the pedestal. Of course, some of us hardcore fans give them the boost onto the pedestal. How many times has Ed sung "No More" since Obama has been in office? How many times a year earlier while Bush was in office? The new boss is in, and he's supposesdly promised to listen to us-- then why isn't Eddie speaking, asking, or demanding change as publicly as he used to?

In the same respect, maybe this is their move away from all of the politics and strong stances, and they just want to focus on the music. For one thing, the problem with making very loud and powerful statements is that they make can be kind of damning if your views change. If PJ were to remain politically neutral for a few years, especially through a Republican administration, they would definitely be viewed as a lot more consistent to me. No one's perfect. "I shit and I stink, I'm real, join the club!"

great points. when i saw the Flaming Lips the other month Wayne brought up politics only once....by the way, they were pretty big supporters of Obama on their last tour....however this time he brought up how vocal they were against the war under Bush and told everyone we still have to fight just as hard if not harder to make sure Obama lives up to all the promises he made and how we need to demand the change we were promised....he received some boos and shouts to shut up

soulsinging

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

How many times has Ed sung "No More" since Obama has been in office? How many times a year earlier while Bush was in office? The new boss is in, and he's supposesdly promised to listen to us-- then why isn't Eddie speaking, asking, or demanding change as publicly as he used to?

he probably just realized how much that song sucks. it's so bad i didn't mind that the lolla show available on itunes wasn't complete becos they cut that one

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

maybe he realised bitching at concerts is largely counterproductive an stupid?

and of course its a publicity stunt. they want to drum up publicity to the torture issue, and did. the smart, correct way. seems obvious to me.

Byrnzie

TriumphantAngel wrote:

i wasn't at any of the shows there jeanwah, but the eddie rants seem to be getting fewer and far between, at least judging by the shows i've been to the last few years. maybe he's thinking that most of the fans just want to share in the love of the music.

Is that how you describe his opinions on certain issues?: 'rants'?

Personally, I like listening to Ed speak and share his views on certain issues. Not only is it interesting, but he nearly always injects some humour into it, and these 'rants' help to build a rapport with the crowd and individualize every show.

If I wanted to just listen to the music then I'd stick a fucking cd on, or I'd be an Oasis fan who is content to just watch a band walk on, play the songs, and leave. But then I'd be a moron with low expectations.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

Byrnzie wrote:

TriumphantAngel wrote:

i wasn't at any of the shows there jeanwah, but the eddie rants seem to be getting fewer and far between, at least judging by the shows i've been to the last few years. maybe he's thinking that most of the fans just want to share in the love of the music.

Is that how you describe his opinions on certain issues?: 'rants'?

Personally, I like listening to Ed speak and share his views on certain issues. Not only is it interesting, but he nearly always injects some humour into it, and these 'rants' help to build a rapport with the crowd and individualize every show.

If I wanted to just listen to the music then I'd stick a fucking cd on, or I'd be an Oasis fan who is content to just watch a band walk on, play the songs, and leave. But then I'd be a moron with low expectations.

what is interesting about his rants? they are seldom funny. i like hearing his goofy little anecdotes and stories, but the political stuff is pretty generic anti-whatever stuff. and the crowd (or at least those around me) are never into it. it usually grinds the show to a halt.

or maybe i'm still just pissed for hearing an amazing Porch get ruined by a long 'get out and vote' speech mid song at Roo last year.

soulsinging

MrSmith wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

TriumphantAngel wrote:

i wasn't at any of the shows there jeanwah, but the eddie rants seem to be getting fewer and far between, at least judging by the shows i've been to the last few years. maybe he's thinking that most of the fans just want to share in the love of the music.

Is that how you describe his opinions on certain issues?: 'rants'?

Personally, I like listening to Ed speak and share his views on certain issues. Not only is it interesting, but he nearly always injects some humour into it, and these 'rants' help to build a rapport with the crowd and individualize every show.

If I wanted to just listen to the music then I'd stick a fucking cd on, or I'd be an Oasis fan who is content to just watch a band walk on, play the songs, and leave. But then I'd be a moron with low expectations.

what is interesting about his rants? they are seldom funny. i like hearing his goofy little anecdotes and stories, but the political stuff is pretty generic anti-whatever stuff. and the crowd (or at least those around me) are never into it. it usually grinds the show to a halt.

i agree with ed most of the time, but i kinda agree. it doesn't often go over well. if anyone has the cleveland 06 boot... listen to him talk about his dream right before ledbetter. talk about killing the momentum in a great show... it's the most nonsensical rambling gibberish i ever heard!

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

soulsinging wrote:

i agree with ed most of the time, but i kinda agree. it doesn't often go over well. if anyone has the cleveland 06 boot... listen to him talk about his dream right before ledbetter. talk about killing the momentum in a great show... it's the most nonsensical rambling gibberish i ever heard!

yeah i agree with much of it too, i just don't need to hear it at a show.

Byrnzie

Jeanwah wrote:

I can't help but wonder if it's all a publicity stunt

Sure, keep the faith.

citizen54 wrote:

Maybe he's getting older and realizing you can only rail against the darkness for so long. It gets tiring fighting the forces of stupidity.

Yep, best just to shut the fuck up and accept being screwed by the media and the fat cats. Shame that Nelson Mandela didn't learn that lesson a long time ago. We might still have apartheid in South Africa. Oh well, at least we can console ourselves with the knowledge that we have it in Palestine now instead.

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

Simply put: political rants by Ed these days = bad for Pearl Jam business.

Funny you should say that, because Eddie Vedder and Pearl Jam have always struck me as just a bunch of greed-heads with no soul and no integrity. I wonder if Eddie is friends with Mick Hucknall and George Michael?

inmytree wrote:

and this course you speak of...what course is that...? I thought they were in it to make music and money...

Yeah baby, it's all about the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

Yes, they are still on the music for money course... Maybe moreso now than ever before.
I'm not judging here, just stating facts. People change... Or maybe the anti-corporate, anti-marketing, anti-establishment image they built for themselves over the first 12 years of their career, was really a very clever, very-corporate, brilliantly-marketed, part-of-the-establishment approach, and we just didn't see it ?

And there was I thinking I was just imagining things when every time I listened to a Pearl Jam record I heard cash registers ringing through the speakers. And all this time I put that down to Matt's cymbals.

aerial wrote:

“If your young and not a Liberal you have no heart...if your older and not a Conservative you have no brain”....or something like that

Tell that to Noam Chomsky, and Howard Zinn. Oh, and Castro's still alive last time I checked.

decides2dream wrote:

i think given the nature of the philly shows, ed purposely kept politics out of it. those shows were to honor the spectrum.

given that the gitmo subject is stickied on the porch, is on the homepage, i don't see it as a publicity stunt, at all. ed and the boys need not talk about evry cause they support, every time they have a show.

Thanks for finally saying something that I agree with, and for keeping it simple and to the point.

MrSmith wrote:

maybe he realised bitching at concerts is largely counterproductive an stupid?

Drawing attention to certain issues, like the Iraq war e.t.c, isn't counterproductive and stupid. It's intelligent, and arguably obligatory for people with integrity who have a platform and are in a position to change things.

Byrnzie

MrSmith wrote:

the political stuff is pretty generic anti-whatever stuff. and the crowd (or at least those around me) are never into it.

Maybe it's an American thing. Maybe why Bill Hicks and Noam Chomsky are virtually unknown in America. 'Just shut up and play the music' is only a sentiment I hear from Americans.

soulsinging

Byrnzie wrote:

MrSmith wrote:

the political stuff is pretty generic anti-whatever stuff. and the crowd (or at least those around me) are never into it.

Maybe it's an American thing. Maybe why Bill Hicks and Noam Chomsky are virtually unknown in America. 'Just shut up and play the music' is only a sentiment I hear from Americans.

is that really surprising? we're probably the most conservative/right-leaning country in the western world. the only countries further right of us are the kinds of countries that don't really allow rock concerts... like iran

Byrnzie

MrSmith wrote:

what is interesting about his rants? they are seldom funny. i like hearing his goofy little anecdotes and stories, but the political stuff is pretty generic anti-whatever stuff. and the crowd (or at least those around me) are never into it. it usually grinds the show to a halt.

Personally, I think a lot of the time his political talks add to the show. A lot of the songs were written in light of some issue or other and when he elaborates on that before playing the song it adds something to it. But then that's just me.
I imagine many people don't know what the songs mean, or in what climate they were written, so him shedding some light on these things from time to time can't be a bad thing. After all, he's a singer with something to say, he's not a pop star.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

Byrnzie wrote:

MrSmith wrote:

maybe he realised bitching at concerts is largely counterproductive an stupid?

Drawing attention to certain issues, like the Iraq war e.t.c, isn't counterproductive and stupid. It's intelligent, and arguably obligatory for people with integrity who have a platform and are in a position to change things.

drawing attention to West Memphis Three, some local issue or something people dont know about is one thing, but ranting about Iraq, not debating or having intelligent conversation, but using a bullhorn to shout at people, is utterly pointless. People don't like to be preached to. do you?

who the fuck ever left a PJ show thinking "wow that rockstar is so right! i'm gonna oppose the war now!" it just hardens people to their own opinion. it has the opposite effect of getting people to oppose it. the choir eats it up, but again, that doesnt do anything.

Jeanwah

soulsinging wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

MrSmith wrote:

the political stuff is pretty generic anti-whatever stuff. and the crowd (or at least those around me) are never into it.

Maybe it's an American thing. Maybe why Bill Hicks and Noam Chomsky are virtually unknown in America. 'Just shut up and play the music' is only a sentiment I hear from Americans.

is that really surprising? we're probably the most conservative/right-leaning country in the western world. the only countries further right of us are the kinds of countries that don't really allow rock concerts... like iran

We Americans only want what we want, too. We want nothing but the music, screw what one's opinion may be. It's all about our entitlement, it sure seems.

Perhaps, they didn't mention anything about Gitmo as was suggested -- to respect the end of the Spectrum. I'll buy that, it does make sense. But for such a public voice that Eddie used to be at shows...to drop off to nothing since the election of Obama...well, it makes me wonder what the Hell happened. Will he ever mention politics or social issues again at PJ shows? Was the Spectrum really out of respect? I guess we'll see. I liked hearing what he had to say.

For those who don't like Ed's "rants", well, if the shoe was on the other foot, what would you do if you had a microphone in your hand for thousands of people to hear you with? A microphone is a pretty powerful tool, would you "shut up and sing", and do as you're told by the listeners? Or would you say what you wanted everyone to hear?

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

Jeanwah wrote:

If you didn't like Ed's "rants", well, if the shoe was on the other foot, what would you do if you had a microphone in your hand for thousands of people to hear you with? A microphone is a pretty powerful tool, would you "shut up and sing", and do as you're told by the listeners? Or would you say what you wanted everyone to hear?

i'd shut up and sing. if someone asked my opinion, i'd give it. i don't send work to my boss with a note attached detailing why Bush should be in jail. its my fucking job. i'll help out my causes on my own time, not when someone else is paying me to do something else.

Jeanwah

MrSmith wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

If you didn't like Ed's "rants", well, if the shoe was on the other foot, what would you do if you had a microphone in your hand for thousands of people to hear you with? A microphone is a pretty powerful tool, would you "shut up and sing", and do as you're told by the listeners? Or would you say what you wanted everyone to hear?

i'd shut up and sing. if someone asked my opinion, i'd give it. i don't send work to my boss with a note attached detailing why Bush should be in jail. its my fucking job. i'll help out my causes on my own time, not when someone else is paying me to do something else.

So you'd "do as they told ya". Very nice.