Weighing current events

brianlux

Somebody please clarify something for me. Eddie Vedder and PJ have supported a number of causes. Of those, MW3 has recieved a lot of coverage here. The band also supports various environmental issues which, at least in the year I've been posting here, seem to receive less attention than MW3. Do you think this is because this one social issue is more important to the band? Is it more important in general to PJ fans? Does it get more coverage because it is more emotional in nature than environmental issues? My feeling is that as important as the MW3 issue is to the lives of those involved in that case, the issues of environment should garner more attention because they affect all of us and eventually will have a much greater impact on us all. Am I wrong? If so, please set me straight on this.

Jeanwah

I've been following the social issues of the band for years, and I've always looked up to them for standing up for what they believe in. But I have no answer for ya Brian. I wonder the same thing, why the environmental news just doesn't get as much coverage. I do think that over the years the band members have become less of activist figures and seem to have fallen back and have chosen not to be foreground activists of much of anything, other than EV and WM3.

Jason P

The ironic thing about PJ and the environment is that I'm going to plow through at least 80 gallons of gas this weekend to go see them play live.

Anyway, that's what Bono is for.

Jeanwah

Remember in '06 when the band ran their tour on biodiesel? They either don't do that anymore or at least don't promote it at all. So perhaps, they (other than Stone) have changed face about being so Green?

STAYSEA

Tar Balls

pandora

WM3 case was interesting, involved, horrific, sensational,
smacked of injustice, it was very newsworthy
and grabbed attention and commanded emotion for those who followed it.

no way for me the environment can compete with that

Eddie's crusade for the WM3 had a human bond to it... I found that compelling and helped
me to understand the beautiful man behind the incredible talent that is Eddie Vedder.

brianlux

Jeanwah wrote:

Remember in '06 when the band ran their tour on biodiesel? They either don't do that anymore or at least don't promote it at all. So perhaps, they (other than Stone) have changed face about being so Green?

That's a good question, Jeanwah. By now, of course, most people involved in environmental awareness realize that there just isn't enough feedstock from vegetable oil to produce enough biodiesel to make much of an impact on our petrelium consumption, but it does help some and further research will hopefully turn up other sources of clean energy. I can pictuer PJ getting being involved that way. And I do believe PJ still implements its policy to plant trees to offset their carbon output from touring. True, trees have to be at least 15 years old (I believe that is the correct statistic) to begin abosrbing carbon dioxide effectively but this doesn't mean we shouldn't plant trees, but again I applaud the band- especially Stone- for looking ahead this way.

Another interesting question is: To what degree should we expect a band to be activists? That puts a lot of pressure on a band sometimes too much in the way of expectations from fans. I guess a balance has to be struck that way. And since resources are limited should we make allowance for PJ to eat up huge amounts of these resources because we love them but not bands W, Y and Z (Notice I spared "X"!) Of course we love PJ and want to them to tour (wish I could be there) but how do we find the balance necessary to keep this human experience ongoing? There are no easy answers.

Jeanwah

brianlux wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

Remember in '06 when the band ran their tour on biodiesel? They either don't do that anymore or at least don't promote it at all. So perhaps, they (other than Stone) have changed face about being so Green?

That's a good question, Jeanwah. By now, of course, most people involved in environmental awareness realize that there just isn't enough feedstock from vegetable oil to produce enough biodiesel to make much of an impact on our petrelium consumption, but it does help some and further research will hopefully turn up other sources of clean energy. I can pictuer PJ getting being involved that way. And I do believe PJ still implements its policy to plant trees to offset their carbon output from touring. True, trees have to be at least 15 years old (I believe that is the correct statistic) to begin abosrbing carbon dioxide effectively but this doesn't mean we shouldn't plant trees, but again I applaud the band- especially Stone- for looking ahead this way.

Another interesting question is: To what degree should we expect a band to be activists? That puts a lot of pressure on a band sometimes too much in the way of expectations from fans. I guess a balance has to be struck that way. And since resources are limited should we make allowance for PJ to eat up huge amounts of these resources because we love them but not bands W, Y and Z (Notice I spared "X"!) Of course we love PJ and want to them to tour (wish I could be there) but how do we find the balance necessary to keep this human experience ongoing? There are no easy answers.

I follow the non-profit Headcount (headcount.org), an organization devoted to bands and music fans devoted to social causes such as getting out the vote, humanitarian issues and environmental awareness. Phish, DMB, and other great bands are involved, but I always wondered why Pearl Jam has never associated with this group. It doesn't make much sense. :? This group does great things and always has booths at shows that the bands playing are involved with them. PJ20 would have been a perfect place to have one of their booths.

satansbed

i think its mainly because people find the environment boring but the WM3 is a fascinating legal case no matter where you stand on it

catefrances

brianlux wrote:

...
Another interesting question is: To what degree should we expect a band to be activists? That puts a lot of pressure on a band sometimes too much in the way of expectations from fans. I guess a balance has to be struck that way. And since resources are limited should we make allowance for PJ to eat up huge amounts of these resources because we love them but not bands W, Y and Z (Notice I spared "X"!) Of course we love PJ and want to them to tour (wish I could be there) but how do we find the balance necessary to keep this human experience ongoing? There are no easy answers.

i dont expect any band to be activists to any degree more than they can be. theyre like everyone else, right? its a double edged sword when you think about it. the more popular a band gets, the more they tour.. the more they tour chances are the bigger their carbon footprint is going to be. i dont think we should make allowances for pj over other bands simply cause we love them. it would be awesome if when pj toured the US, for example, they utilised the amtrak system. ive no doubt it could be done.. it just needs commitment and a killer logistics manager. anyhoo id be happy if the least they did was all catch the same plane to wisconsin.. or hitchhiked.

oh and while i dont think there are easy answers, i dont think theyre as difficult as we make them out to be.

brianlux

catefrances wrote:

brianlux wrote:

...
Another interesting question is: To what degree should we expect a band to be activists? That puts a lot of pressure on a band sometimes too much in the way of expectations from fans. I guess a balance has to be struck that way. And since resources are limited should we make allowance for PJ to eat up huge amounts of these resources because we love them but not bands W, Y and Z (Notice I spared "X"!) Of course we love PJ and want to them to tour (wish I could be there) but how do we find the balance necessary to keep this human experience ongoing? There are no easy answers.

i dont expect any band to be activists to any degree more than they can be. theyre like everyone else, right? its a double edged sword when you think about it. the more popular a band gets, the more they tour.. the more they tour chances are the bigger their carbon footprint is going to be. i dont think we should make allowances for pj over other bands simply cause we love them. it would be awesome if when pj toured the US, for example, they utilised the amtrak system. ive no doubt it could be done.. it just needs commitment and a killer logistics manager. anyhoo id be happy if the least they did was all catch the same plane to wisconsin.. or hitchhiked.

oh and while i dont think there are easy answers, i dont think theyre as difficult as we make them out to be.

Thank you for mentioning rail service, catefrances! Trains us less fuel per passenger/freight weight miles than cars, planes, ships, boats or trucks. We need more rail service!

Do members of PJ really tour in more than one plane? I'm not sure I want to see the boys out there hitchhiking, but more than one plane? Wow... (scratching my head).

catefrances

brianlux wrote:

catefrances wrote:

brianlux wrote:

...
Another interesting question is: To what degree should we expect a band to be activists? That puts a lot of pressure on a band sometimes too much in the way of expectations from fans. I guess a balance has to be struck that way. And since resources are limited should we make allowance for PJ to eat up huge amounts of these resources because we love them but not bands W, Y and Z (Notice I spared "X"!) Of course we love PJ and want to them to tour (wish I could be there) but how do we find the balance necessary to keep this human experience ongoing? There are no easy answers.

i dont expect any band to be activists to any degree more than they can be. theyre like everyone else, right? its a double edged sword when you think about it. the more popular a band gets, the more they tour.. the more they tour chances are the bigger their carbon footprint is going to be. i dont think we should make allowances for pj over other bands simply cause we love them. it would be awesome if when pj toured the US, for example, they utilised the amtrak system. ive no doubt it could be done.. it just needs commitment and a killer logistics manager. anyhoo id be happy if the least they did was all catch the same plane to wisconsin.. or hitchhiked.

oh and while i dont think there are easy answers, i dont think theyre as difficult as we make them out to be.

Thank you for mentioning rail service, catefrances! Trains us less fuel per passenger/freight weight miles than cars, planes, ships, boats or trucks. We need more rail service!

Do members of PJ really tour in more than one plane? I'm not sure I want to see the boys out there hitchhiking, but more than one plane? Wow... (scratching my head).

i doubt pj travel in more than one plane.. i was just saying.. cause you hear of some bands whose members cant stand each other and travelling separately is what can happen.

brianlux

catefrances wrote:

i doubt pj travel in more than one plane.. i was just saying.. cause you hear of some bands whose members cant stand each other and travelling separately is what can happen.

Sadly, that does happen fairly often.

catefrances

brianlux wrote:

catefrances wrote:

i doubt pj travel in more than one plane.. i was just saying.. cause you hear of some bands whose members cant stand each other and travelling separately is what can happen.

Sadly, that does happen fairly often.

i also wonder about private air travel over commercial as well. seems a bit indulgent.

mickeyrat

catefrances wrote:

brianlux wrote:

catefrances wrote:

i doubt pj travel in more than one plane.. i was just saying.. cause you hear of some bands whose members cant stand each other and travelling separately is what can happen.

Sadly, that does happen fairly often.

i also wonder about private air travel over commercial as well. seems a bit indulgent.

well , smaller engines is a plus. I do think this is also a part of why PJ does such short mini tours now too, in addition to the personal family reasons.

mickeyrat

catefrances wrote:

brianlux wrote:

catefrances wrote:

i doubt pj travel in more than one plane.. i was just saying.. cause you hear of some bands whose members cant stand each other and travelling separately is what can happen.

Sadly, that does happen fairly often.

i also wonder about private air travel over commercial as well. seems a bit indulgent.

well , smaller engines is a plus. I do think this is also a part of why PJ does such short mini tours now too, in addition to the personal family reasons.

catefrances

mickeyrat wrote:

catefrances wrote:

i also wonder about private air travel over commercial as well. seems a bit indulgent.

well , smaller engines is a plus. I do think this is also a part of why PJ does such short mini tours now too, in addition to the personal family reasons.

however private planes PLUS the readily available commercial planes still equals more. saying theyre smaller engines so thats a plus is an empty argument. imo.

mickeyrat

catefrances wrote:

mickeyrat wrote:

catefrances wrote:

i also wonder about private air travel over commercial as well. seems a bit indulgent.

well , smaller engines is a plus. I do think this is also a part of why PJ does such short mini tours now too, in addition to the personal family reasons.

however private planes PLUS the readily available commercial planes still equals more. saying theyre smaller engines so thats a plus is an empty argument. imo.

I would think they fly charter anyway. At least overseas. Do you think they would trust comm airlines with the gear they bring?


For the big weekend Mike drove with a bodyguard/friend(?) from seattle to chicago. In your opinion, better or not?

catefrances

mickeyrat wrote:

catefrances wrote:

however private planes PLUS the readily available commercial planes still equals more. saying theyre smaller engines so thats a plus is an empty argument. imo.

I would think they fly charter anyway. At least overseas. Do you think they would trust comm airlines with the gear they bring?


For the big weekend Mike drove with a bodyguard/friend(?) from seattle to chicago. In your opinion, better or not?

from seattle to chicago???? what happened did they get lost??? thats just wasting gas. :P


better than what?