"I'll Make It Worth Your While" Part Two - Getting Back To What Matters: Alan Doyle In Black And White (Journal Entry and Shamrockfest photos/video), Something About Sean & Who Owns The Band

Starting off again, after way too long of a pause, with what truly does matter to me.

Spring is in the air.  Somewhere.  - Alan Doyle, March 27 journal entry

The Sweetest Face of all.

Tonight, Alan Doyle/Great Big Sea, Shamrockfest, Wash. DC, March 2008      215 MB   (warning for those prone to motion sickness - I got kicked in the head right at the start and it takes a bit to recover and re-adjust the camera's aim)

Bohemian Rhapsody Singalong, Alan Doyle/Great Big Sea, Shamrockfest, Wash. DC, March 2008    50 MB

A few close views of the ever-fascinating man in the midst of what was a compelling (and unruly-crowd-captivating) performance at Shamrockfest.

I love Spring here. I went for a walk the other day on a Spring afternoon in Western Washington: When I walked out of my door, the sun was shining brightly, the breeze blowing gently; a bit more than a mile down the road, the looming clouds had busily begun to gather. It did not take long at all for a stiff wind to kick up, and soon after came the sudden burst of hail. I had taken shelter at a covered bus stop, watching and waiting for this storm to pass through. The rain swept in, huge splatting drops putting an exclamation mark at the end this episode. Then the same stiff wind that blew the brief but fierce tempest in blew it straight back out again, and in the space of perhaps 45 minutes, the sun was once again shining with a brilliance that refracted and prismed off the lingering raindrops still clinging to the flowers in full bloom, sparkling with a brilliance that dazzled my eyes. The soft breeze touched my cheek gently, and I continued along my path. It was a perfectly glorious Spring afternoon.

I see that same perfectly glorious Spring afternoon in Alan's face.

****************************************************************************************************************************

More black-and-white views of Alan eventually, but first some lingering over Alan in his own black-and-white words.

I’ve managed to have a healthy apathy about the weather for most of my life.  With the exception of the occasions when GBS is slated to play outdoor concerts, I barely check the forecast.  Most days I could care less if it rains, shines or freezes.  I generally go about my day, indoors or out, regardless of the conditions. I’m convinced this Weather Zen is key to being a happy Newfoundlander, especially in the weeks that follow Paddy’s Day and lead to Summer. (Known most commonly as ‘Spring’, a season that skips the Rock annually)

Right now the sideways drifts of the third snowstorm in as many days are whipping up my street. Through the squalls, I cannot see my parked Grey Toyota Sienna, a rather large Mini Van, parked less than ten feet from my office as I type.  I can feel my Zen resolve slipping; I can sense my apathy breaking.  This winter is bringing me down a wee bit, I confess.

I must cast my gaze backward and forward on days and nights past and future as the present is cold and frozen.

Those who grow up in Southern California tend more toward the arrogance of a Weather anti-Zen; there, the weather is confidently expected to cooperate with the inhabitants' wills and whims ("I don't feel like mowing the lawn today...I'll do it tomorrow or the next day instead"). Winding up in a place where choosing not to mow the lawn on one particular non-rainy Saturday could mean the grass grows unchecked for the next sixstraight soggy weeks required quite the attitude adjustment when it comes to Alan's Weather Zen notion. Spending long stretches of time in Newfoundland during the Winter and non-Spring months (I have been saying that there is no Spring in Newfoundland since the very first non-Spring I spent there) has required further adjusting of, perhaps better to call it "banishing of," the last, lingering vestiges of that anti-Zen arrogance, My own weather apathy grows healthier each year.

Then again, I appear to have skipped out on some of the worst of it. Considering how persistently shitty the weather has been in St. John's since about an hour before I left, I've been wondering if perhaps I got out right before the onset of Fimbulwinter. And barely before the onset at that:  Not only did my still-shower-damp hair freeze almost solid in the short amount of time it took me to unload my bag from the car and scurry into the terminal, nearly swept off my feet by the howling wind and effectively blinded by the horizontal snow/ice fall, I then spent my time in the check-in line  listening apprehensively as subsequent flights for the day - including the one scheduled a mere 45 minutes after my own - were cancelled right and left.

But my plane had come in the night before and Air Canada was bound and determined to get that plane back to the Centre Of The Universe that morning. Lucky me. That has to be the first time I have ever had to time my step from the loading ramp onto the plane because of how much the plane was rocking in the wind; it felt like climbing aboard a storm-tossed boat about to tear loose from its mooring. That tossing became even more noticeable once in the seat; we were rocking and swaying noticeably while stll on the ground. This was going to be an interesting flight, if our two de-icings were going to be enough to get us off - and keep us off - the ground.

And so it was, interesting indeed.  I was told later we were the last flight to take off out of St. John's until that evening, and there would have been a very sensible argument that could have been made for our waiting too.  But we made it, even if a bit green around the gills for some, perhaps. My silly - but cheap - flight plan kept me travelling all day, from St. John's to Ottawa, then from Ottawa to Toronto, and from Toronto to Philadelphia, where I waited some four hours for my friend to pick me up for the drive to Atlantic City.  After that initial wild ride out of St. John's, all of the rest was comparative smooth sailing, to be sure. By the time we got out of the Philly airport and on the road to AC, Winter, even Incipient-Fimbulwinter, had turned to Spring.

And since it is indeed Spring instead of non-Spring, it is raining here tonight. At least for the next ten minutes it is.

Grand Paddy’s weekend a little while ago.  Great fun to have Russell join us in DC for a song or two.  Hard to beat his performances.  I’ve learned a lot from his presence on stage and his conviction to the moment.  I can think of few so eager to give themselves so completely to a performance when the curtain rises, the lights go down, or someone yells, “Action”. 

Like many in the GBS camp, he also prides himself on hosting the best parties.  The after show sing-along at the Hotel was one for the ages, with The Shantyman shining at his best, and Rachel M leading a lovely version of “Time After Time”.    Grand, Grand Night.

What Alan says here about Russell Crowe - how he is one of few so eager to give himself so completely to a performance  - is as apt and as truthful a description of Alan himself as it is of Russell. The two of them together, each filled with conviction and each giving himself completely to the performance, were nothing short of awesome each and every time they took the stage during The Ordinary Fear Of God 2005/06 Australian tour.  Impassioned, intense, vulnerable, and most of all, possessing the courage to take themselves and what they had created seriously:  As wonderful as it was to discover Russell's prodigious musical performance abilities while seeing him for the first time on stage, how much more wonderful it was to see Alan - the man whose performances had awed and moved me so many times before - in a  completely different light...a stronger, clearer, brighter light that revealed previously unknown depths and talents and capabilities.

As good as Alan has always looked to me, as well as he has always done in my eyes, he looked even better and achieved even more in the clarity of that light. Those shows permanently shaped the way I see Russell Crowe, and they forever changed the way I see Alan Doyle.  It was so good, such a rekindler of precious memories and stubborn hopes, to see the two of them together again at Shamrockfest. I hope it happens again soon. 

There's just no downside at all to Alan's getting this kind of Grand, Grand Night. He spends time and sings songs with a friend he doesn't get to see very often, and if there is one host who can be trusted to make sure that every partygoer present truly is an invited (and wanted) guest, that host is Russell Crowe. One of those times when it really is all good.

 

 

The visit to Atlantic City proved to me that places can’t be as bad as people say.  I thought the boardwalk was cool.  I enjoyed the kooky old games areas.  Reminded me of Tom Hanks and “BIG”, one of my favourite films.

Our NYC taxi went past FAO Schwartz on the way to our hotel this past January, and when I saw the store sign, my first thought was of Tom Hanks and Robert Loggia dancing the notes to Heart And Soul on the giant keyboard in Big. I think of that scene every time I see an FAO Schwartz sign. That this sweet film about a boy who longs to become a man and a man who yearns to return to his boyhood would be one of Alan's favourites is no surprise whatsoever. It fits, perfectly, like one more puzzle piece sliding quietly and satisfyingly into place, making the larger picture a bit more clear.  Puzzle pieces and bread-crumb trails, knowledge of the heart and discovery of the soul.

We had fun on the AC boardwalk too, cataloguing as many of the Monopoly streets as we could find. I wish the amusement park had been open; we missed it by a day, I think.  A strange place, Atlantic City, maybe just a bit too haunted by the conflicting ghosts of gaudy tourists, desperate gamblers, petty thugs, and cocky wiseguys. Too many stories to sort out one from the other. We did manage to find a decent pub, though. I'm betting we did much better with our pints of Guinness there than what was being offered up in the HOB FR.

And the Under The Boardwalk singalong during the show was priceless.

A long flight from DC to Edmonton (for a fun gig) and back to Toronto overnight, followed by a snow delay, another snow delay, a detour to Montreal for three hours and a near crash landing 24 hours later in a windy St. John’s was not a fun way to end a fun weekend.

But things are looking up.  Way up.  Labels, management, and band are gearing up for the launch of the new CD.  “Fortunes Favour” will be out on Tuesday June 24th in Canada and the US.  Much work going on behind the scenes for touring throughout the Summer and Fall.

Given the chaos of the Edmonton airport the morning after St. Pat's Day - chaos for all those attempting to fly east that is, we westward-bounders had no troubles once we got past the two-hour check-in line - I was sure enough that it was a rough road home for GBS cast and crew.  Alan's description of his St. John's landing sounds queasily similar to my St. John's takeoff at the start of that weekend.  Why am I absolutely convinced that next winter will find them touring the frigid expanse of Canada, with myself cautiously ice-walking along after them?  

The excitement of a brand new CD has to be a thrill for all of them, no matter that they've been around this dance floor a few times already. And this CD is, by several accounts, truly something different from Great Big Sea, words that have sure got me excited. I love what they have done so far, and I love even more the promise of their reaching out and realising yet more of their own potential. Growth and change are necessary parts of life, and there is still so much they are capable of accomplishing. I like it best of all when Alan is looking up, way up.

It will be an impatient wait until June 24th. I'm going to try my best to keep an open mind about that Fortune's Favour title until then, since Sean did say the title would "make sense" once the CD was out.  But the writer in me is going to have to point out that the best titles make sense from the first moment you hear them. Then again, Something Beautiful as a CD title would have had much less meaning if title had been heard before song, though the titles Sea Of No Cares and Turn and even The Hard And The Easy would have impressed on their own merits.  Hard to tell. 

All I know at the moment is that the expression "fortune's favour" has a "looking back to the past" connotation to it, perhaps because it was used fairly often in Victorian writing, for that matter in Elizabethan writing as well. A quick Google of the expression turned up a Burns' poem I long ago consigned to memory's recycle bin. It's hard not to wonder how such a title fits in with a CD that contains the likes of which has not been heard before from GBS...but an open mind it is going to remain. Times like these, it is good to remember all the past good cause for trust in such matters. Sometimes, it is quite nice to be pleasantly surprised by hope beyond expectation.   

 

 

We are scheduled have photos taken and do a video for the first single, yet to be determined, in Toronto between April 12th and 15th.  And by a wonderful coincidence, that puts us in town for the Oysterband Show on the 13th at Hugh’s Room.

For those of you who don’t know, the Oysterband have been heroes to GBS long before me, Sean and Bob ever got together.  They are the quintessential British Folk Rock group that ran down the same corridors as the Pogues and Billy Bragg in England and Europe.  They still have a huge following in Britain, Germany and Scandinavia, as their concerts are legendary and their songs are even better.

Ever heard of a song called “When I’m Up I Can’t Get Down”?  GBS did pretty well with that track, thanks to the Oyster Gents who wrote and recorded many years before us.  When we were compiling material for the ‘Play’ CD, we considered a couple of dozen Oysterband tunes to cover.  We picked a good one, but there are literally several albums worth of songs as good or better in the Oyster catalogue.

We are not the only Canadian folkies to love their songwriting.  John and Geoffrey from SOTW count the Oysters as early influences.  Check out the Bara McNeils cover of “Northern Lights”, or Shanneygannock’s “This Town”.

Their song catalogue is Blue Rodeo Deep. Trust me.  Check them out at Oysterband.co.uk  

Check out the tour dates and see if there’s a date near you.  Like I said, they play Hugh’s Room in Toronto on the 13th, and unless wild horses drag us away, so will the whole GBS Cast.

As much as I love Oysterband, and even though Christina and I have had tickets for the Hugh's Room show for a month now and David and I have had tickets for the Oysters' Vancouver show since the day that show went on sale, still, first things first here: The first single/video from the new CD. 

The take-no-prisoners marketing guerilla in me still wishes that the first single from Fortune's Favour could be Oh Yeah, accompanied by a video of Air-Force-recruitment-style footage of fighter pilots commanding sleek, soaring, suggestively-shaped, love-bomb-dropping jets mixed together with edgy footage of screaming lead-guitar solos played by Alan Doyle The Rock Star Guitar God. If nothing else,  such an approach by GBS would never be forgotten. Or forgiven, mostl likely.

Therefore I will keep a hope-fire burning for a truly incendiary Straight To Hell single release and video (How about performing on some iconic TO stage while 'The Big Smoke' burns to the ground around them?...probably not a big enough budget for such pyrotechnics, but wouldn't it be fun for a pack of Newfoundlanders to burn the Centre Of The Universe to the ground?).  How about Walk On The Moon with space-shuttle/astronaut footage? I love Walk On The Moon with an abiding passion, but I don't know if the label would allow a ballad, even this beautiful of a balland, to be the first single release.

Actually, my best guess is that the first single from Fortune's Favour will be Tonight, and a very good call that would be. Tonight made for an excellent opener at their Atlantic City show, it's a mid-tempo tune with a persuasive drum part, a singalong bridge, an unforgettable melody line, and best of all, it plays with sincerity and honesty. Tonight comes across as genuine and true, and that gives the song a sense of power and purpose.  In clumsy hands  (and, to be  honest, some of GBS's videos have been the product of just such hands) a Tonight video could wind up unfortunately insincere in the kind of way that steals power and purpose back away from the song.

If some perky little missus winds up dancing around in her skimpy PJs in the video or if the camera winds up lingering on an inexpertly inserted shot of a clearly fake audience member, that is going to do a serious disservice to what this song deserves. The song is genuine, so too should the video at least aspire to be.  Maybe something as simple as pre-show routines, ruts, and anxieties, intermixed with the repetition of stage entrances, the lights going up and trickling down, the crowd roaring, again and again.  Or anything else that rings equally as true as does the song. I still think their Clearest Indication video is the most genuine and real video they've come up with so far, one of their best as well.

And now, Oysterband. 

When I first stumbled across Alan's Songwriters' Circle performance in 2001 and then went on to find out about Great Big Sea, I had all of these high hopes that I had come across an entire previously-unknown-to-me genre of music.  I had scant interest in the Irish/Celtic music I'd heard, but GBS didn't sound at all Irish/Celtic to me anyway, not then any more than they sound that way to me now. They sounded completely unlike anything I had ever heard before, and I was eager to find all of the other bands who would also sound this new and fresh and wonderful.

I started following all of those "If you like this band, you will be sure to like _____" recommendations from GBS fans and critics.  I followed and followed and followed, hunted and searched high and low, but wound up finding precious little that appealed to me, and most of what I finally did find that I liked actually sounded very little like GBS, at least on the surface. Ron Hynes, Carbon Leaf, Duane Andrews, Bruce Guthro, Art Stoyles, Joel Plaskett (non-Emergency), Lennie Gallant, Gearbox, Timber, Crush, the Young Dubs - newly discovered treasures all...but about the closest to GBS was my fondness for the sweetly poignant timbre of Con O'Brien's voice; I wished I could hear Alan's and Con's voices together long before I had any clue at all just where either Petty Harbour or Bay Bulls were situated on the face of this planet.

As more and more of the "If you likes" led to frustrating dead ends of musical non-appreciation, my brilliant husband noticed in the liner notes (which I almost never read) that When I'm Up was written by someone other than GBS. We'd both been intrigued by that song's lyrics from the start - puzzled by how those lyrics did or did not mesh with the manner in which GBS performed the song live, as well as how the GBS crowds we had seen responded to the song - and when we saw those completely unfamiliar names (Telfer/Prosser/Jones) it was Google Time.

That Googling led to some (ahem) unpaid-for downloading, which led to a trip to the local "good" music store where they would order anything you wanted.  After a wait of some weeks, we had Granite Years, Volume 1.  It still didn't sound much like GBS, but it sure sounded good. I was most impressed by the connections with the likes of Billy Bragg (discreetly letting the Pogues matter quietly slip off the edge of the table); I'm not sure why it is I had never so much as heard of Oysterband, but I've admired and respected Billy Bragg for years. Discovering yet another group of artists with the same integrity of both professional and personal lives, the same courage of convictions, was a delight.

I wonder sometimes about the friendship/admiration that the men of GBS have for these politically aware, fiercely intelligent, ethically uncompromsing fellow artists, wonder what might happen should these men begin to express more of their own awareness, intelligence, and ethics in their own artistic arena. What would happen if they chose to write more songs after the fashion of Demasduit's Dream or Feel It Turn or Young Triffie, or even to speak more in the voice of Alan's journal lambasting of the anti-sealing movement and his lament over the Virginia Tech shootings, or Sean's poem in the Independent, or even Bob's snarkily shrewd back-and-forths with the local arts board in regard to the allocation of government funding?  How much of worth and value could be heard from them, and how satisfying and fulfilling might it be for them to be able to write and perform some of the same types of songs written and performed by these fellow artists whom they so admire and respect?   

Then I remember that I won't even let David wear one of his favourite Oysterband merch t-shirts around a GBS-fan crowd because I do not want to deal with the shit that would likely come from it, even though I agree with the sentiment expressed on that shirt (GOD PROTECT US /From Your Followers on the front and More Truth Is What I Need on the back) as much as he does. But I know how relentlessly negative the reaction to something as simple as that t-shirt would likely be among many GBS fans; the mere thought of GBS trying to sell anything at all controversial or provocative in any way to their own fan-customer base elicits an immediate snort of derision.

And that derisive thought leads inexorably to the question of whether any Newfoundland band that struck an openly political (or even a particularly intellectual) stance would have gotten the initial Lower Deck gig that opened the door to so many other gigs for them back in the early '90s. I wonder just how many gigs of what kind a politically aware, intellectually challenging, ethically uncompromising Newfoundland band might or might not get today. What might much of Mainland Canada make of their very own favourite Newfie Party Band should those aware, intelligent, creative men begin to act as if they expected to be taken as seriously as they deserve to be taken? More important, what kind of wonderful music might be the result of such an insistence?

Then once again, that trend of thought leads me straight back to a very familiar place: Whatever music they do or do not want to do, whatever people they do or do not want to be...I hope they find a way to do and to be all that they want, at the very least to do and be as much as they need to make them feel happy and creatively satisfied, within GBS or without GBS.

The next thought that follows hard on the heels of that one is how promising a collaborative songwriting effort between a member or members of GBS and the Oysterband fellows could very well be.

But while I tend to focus on the affections and issues and the politics and the meaning of the songs and the creative satisfaction of the artists, for David it has been from the start first and foremost a pure and simple joy in Oysterband's music. A lifelong music-lover whose wide-ranging tastes go all the way back to dinosaur prog-rock, his second-favourite band these days is Oysterband; I think at last count, GBS perhaps came in somewhere around fifth.

Alright, this is as good a place as any for his Oysterband/GBS story. After a few years of devoted Oysterband fandom-from-afar, the fellow who most prefers his music live began to get frustrated by reading about Oysterband shows on the other side of the Pond; he wanted to see the band live too. By now he knew that the Oysters simply did not tour the States at all, and that it had been nearly a decade since they'd even toured Canada. So he decided to go across the Pond to see a band whose music he'd come to love.  Since I'm always in favour of shameless promotion of the band whose music I love best, I encouraged him to pack an extensive selection of GBS tour-merch shirts, the "walking billboard" approach to tourist travel, and off he went to see Oysterband.

Early in the evening of the first of four Oysterband shows he was going to be seeing, he went into a Chinese restaurant next to the venue to get some supper; he was wearing one of his GBS shirts, at least partly because he did not have very many alternative choices in his suitcase. While he was eating, two fellows walked into the restaurant, and when one of them glanced over at him, the fellow said, "Hey, Great Big Sea! Those guys are really good!" David is a sociable fellow; it took no time at all for the three of them to be chatting away about just how great GBS's music really is. And he is also a proselytising fellow; when he believes in a band, the whole world is going to hear about that band. He figured these fellows already like GBS, so maybe they would like Oysterband too. Probably a good time to note that, in fairly typical male fashion, David had never bothered to pay much attention to band photos or personal info; his interest was always the music.

So he launches into a PR spiel for this other great band, a great band who will be playing a show right next door to this restaurant on that very night. On and on he goes, lauding and praising and persuading, apparently oblivious to any signs of amusement across the table from him. Either that, or there are two fellows who could be deadly poker players. Eventually, they can't take it anymore. They burst out laughing, slap him on the back, and tell him he has been persuading the Oysterband drummer and equipment tech about how grand a band the Oysters are. That night was the beginning of a very good time for him at those four Oysterband shows. He hasn't seen them since then, and he can't wait for Vancouver. He is trying very hard not to envy me for Toronto.

I can't wait for both TO and Vancouver. I've never seen Oysterband live, although I did see John Jones on stage with GBS for When I'm Up in Tonder (the video of that can be found in the righthand column here, in the GBS in Europe section). I really hope Alan accomplishes what he clearly wanted to achieve by putting the Oysterband information up in his journal; I hope he helps sell tickets and fill seats for a band that deserves to be playing to sold-out-to-the-doors houses all across the continent.

In an ideal world, each and every one of those houses would be filled with people who had come solely for the purpose of seeing and hearing and delighting in Oysterband, and for the umpteenth time I will futilely wish this were indeed that ideal world. I know Alan has to be aware of the inevitable result of announcing the presence of GBS in the close confines of Hugh's Room, and if he chose to go ahead and make that announcement anyway, then I hope everything that could possibly make doing this worth it to him will work out the way he wants it to. I hope the Oysters wind up with the attentive, appreciative crowd they deserve at Hugh's. I hope Alan gets to spend another one of those Grand, Grand Nights with his friends, though I will be honest and also admit that I hope a minute or two can be spared from that Grand, Grand Night in the answering of a somewhat simple question.

 

 

Spring is in the air.  Somewhere.

Look in the mirror, dear. You will be sure to find Spring fretting/scowling/puzzling/pondering/smiling/laughing/fretting/scowling... right back at you.

************************************************************************************************************************

Some full-size views of that same compelling performance, that same ever-fascinating man.  I've got more of the rest of the show, some of all of the bands that played that stage at Shamrockfest, both colour and black-and-white, although, intriguingly enough, the ones of Alan are their most  powerful in black and white, while most of the rest of the photos come across better in colour (due in part to Sean's wearing that vibrant Rabbitohs shirt, I think).

It was a very dark show - GBS's post-sunset part of it, that is - not only dark up on stage but also extremely dark out in the crowd...we were out on huge stadium parking lot after all, with not much for "venue lighting" to make things a bit brighter. I suppose we were far enough away from the stage edge to make using flash only moderately rude, rather than totally assholish, but I still chose against that option. In addition to not wanting to do "rude" to the band, there was the matter of the poor security guards standing right in front of us, the same security guards who had been working their arses off most of that long day hauling flailing moron crowd-surfers over the barrier (and over our heads); I had no heart at all to begin blinding these weary fellows with my own flash, and enlightened self-interest also reminded me that the chances of my own head not getting kicked over and over, again and again, by flailing moron feet would be distinctly increased if the security fellow directly in front of me were permitted to keep his eyesight intact.

Because it was so dark, the quality of the pictures varies. A few had to be edited fairly extensively so that their content would show, which makes for a great deal of "noise" in the photo, but sometimes noise is so worth it, as is the case with the second photo here, which shows Alan fully aloft during Captain Kidd. Alan looks almost as right with both feet off the ground as he does with both fists pumped high in the air; each is a position that eminently suits him.

I'll put up all of the colour versions, along with the rest of the Shamrockfest photos, when I finally get around to actually writing about that show. For now, this is my strongest and most enduring memory of that show, as well as of that whole weekend of shows, Atlantic City and Edmonton included:  Light and shadow, constancy and changeability, power and longing. And a beauty that endures.

Donkey Riding.

Captain Kidd.

Jack Hinks.

When I'm Up.

An absolutely unforgettable Lukey face.

A Walk On The Moon that inspires and haunts, in equal measures.

Paddy Murphy.

A dear and complex King, and frigging sexy to boot.

Consequence Free.

 

Mari Mac.

Ordinary Day.

 

Sometimes, you really do have to be there to appreciate the full context of a moment.  Here, Alan stands at stage edge during Ordinary Day, gazing out into the massive crowd, gazing out into what has been made his crowd and GBS's crowd, listening as they get it right on the second go-round, hearing his own lyrics come thundering back up to him. And how cool it was to realise that Russell was backstage, listening too.

And after that, Russell came out and joined them for the encores, which can be seen on the videos in the entry before the last (interminable) entry. If anyone was kicking me in the head during that encore, I surely did not notice. That moment went beyond the mutable promise and hope of Spring; that moment was more like being suddenly transported into the blazing warmth of a Summer that had just reached out to grasp its full potential.

Then the show ended, and it began to rain again, for a short while. Still Spring, for now. And I do love the sweet face of Spring.

*************************************************************************************************************************

This next bit could wait until I finally get to writing about the Paddy's Day Weekend shows, but I've already let myself get distracted for much too long by silly fan stuff as it is. So I'm just going to say it now and be done with it.

Not long before I left St. John's this last time, someone attempted to persuade me, in a very roundabout and maintain-plausible-deniability sort of way, that Sean was the primary motive force in a recent action which I personally thought was petty and cruel, along with being completely unnecessary. At least, I think that was what the person was saying; one huge problem with trying to speak without having to be held accountable for what you have said is that it so often leaves as great a potential for misunderstanding as it does for arse-covering.

I was left quite unsure just what to think about this. Having been on the receiving end of people believing I have done all sorts of shitty things I never did and would never do, the last thing I want to do is commit that same offence of unfair and untrue misbelief against someone else. And what puzzled me the most of all was that this particular cruel and petty unnecessary action seemed so much like something I'd think was beneath Sean's even bothering with.

I headed into this most recent series of shows curious and puzzled and concerned, as well as resolved to watch Sean closely during these shows to see if there might be some glimmer of "True" or "False" to be ascertained. Bob's disdain for "speculation" notwithstanding, my own opinion is that damn few of us are so inscrutable that some part of who we are and where we are at in the present moment does not show on our less-than-poker faces; there is often as much to read in the experiential patterns on a human face as there is in the erosional patterns on a sea cliff, especially when you have some idea of what material each is comprised of and some idea of the nature and magnitude of the forces assailing each.  It helps to have observed closely over a period of time as well.

So I went and I watched, certainly I watched Sean more than is my usual tendency. This effort was helped tremendously by the photo prohibitions in both Atlantic City and in Edmonton - yes, you really do see so much more of the whole show sans camera (for the first time, I even noticed idiots bribing security for setlists - $40 bucks for a frigging setlist! I still can't quite get over that)...photography is at times hard work and can require a great deal of concentration, plus I tend to have a persistent point of focus  - and helped even more by winding up smack dab in front of Sean in Edmonton.  I watched (when he was not holding that revisionist-Guthrie self-mocking guitar, that is...that was too difficult to watch for more than a few seconds at a time) and I  listened and I wondered. And by the time the final strains of Old Black Rum had died out in that weird casino-attached tent, I'd come to a conclusion about my opinion of Sean's possible instigation of the petty and cruel and unnecessary action.

That conclusion was twofold: First, for all of my self-vaunted observational acumen, I decided that I could not, and most likely would not, be able to tell for sure (point awarded to Bob on this one). I think not, but I have been mistaken enough about a few people recently to begin to feel some doubt about my own perceptions. Second, I then decided that at the end of the day, it does not matter if he did or did not do this.

If Sean had not done this thing, if I had either misunderstood the carefully vague comments made by a Plausibly Deniable One or if there had been an intentional attempt to persuade me of something untrue, then it would be the highest injustice to believe that he had done it, an injustice with which I am far too familiar and therefore have least excuse of all at perpetuating. Well and good on that option. But what if he actually had been the motive force in this action?  Why would it still not matter if it were indeed true?

Because the more I watched Sean, especially at the Edmonton show, the more I thought about all of the times I have seen him over the past years. I thought about how it was his eyes - that damaged expression of initial optimism being remorselessly battered by relentless reality -  that struck me so forcefully at the first GBS show I ever saw. I thought about all I have seen and heard from Sean and about Sean over the past six years, I thought about the kind of people who speak of him with the most affection (when good and decent people again and again wind up befriending a particular person, that can say much about that person), and most of all I thought about how happy he has appeared to be over the past few years. This petty and cruel and unnecessary action about which I was presently puzzling was not the action of a happy man, not at all. 

I decided I do not want to believe it's true Sean did this because I want more to believe it's true that Sean is a happy man. And if against belief it should turn out that he actually did do it, if the truth I do not want were to trump the truth I do want, then all I would really care about is hoping he that might find his way back to being happy; I would not care about the act itself, and that is why it does not matter. There are other things which matter more.

***************************************************************************************************************************

One final comment here, tangentially related to some of what was discussed in that prior interminable entry. Someone made a comment to me last night about the matter of "ownership of the band" and that comment has been on my mind for a good part of today.

The conclusion I've come to - a conclusion prefaced with the customary "This is only my opinion" boilerplate disclaimer - is that in an ideal world, ownership of the band should rest in the hands of the men who make up that band, and nowhere else. Again, this unfortunately not being that ideal world, the next best option would seem to be sharing some part of that ownership with the people whose own lives are genuinely impacted by decisions made and actions undertaken by the members of the band, as well as a pragmatic acceptance of it being inescapable that market forces will also stake their own claim to some ownership powers, at least if the band intends to remain a viable financial enterprise.

Fans are customers. Some are casual customers and some are ardent customers. While there are and apparently always will be those in every group of fans who strive to be or who insist that they already are "more" than mere fans, they are still customers, nonetheless. Many businesses find themselves having to deal with that subgroup of intensely loyal customers who firmly believe that their loyalty (the money they continue to spend on a business's product) earns them the inalienable right to special treatment and doting consideration. They insist on being treated as if they were special, as if they were "inside" in comparison to some lesser customer's "outside". Some businesses give such customers targeted discounts or special perks, and some call them by euphemistic names (such as "clients" or "guests" - even though a rose by any other name has just as many thorns and aphids)...but customers they remain, albeit demanding customers.

Unless a business is selling off shares of itself to those customers, then no matter how loyal they have been and no matter how much money they have spent, even the most ardent customers still have no claims of ownership of the business. Their pleasure (or displeasure) can certainly have an impact upon that business's bottom line - more so the smaller and less-established a business is - but the business that allows itself to be held hostage by a small percentage of its most rapaciously insistent customers is the business that runs the risk of alienating many more new customers, along with a sizeable number of its current less-ardent customers, many of whom will grow weary of the incessant demands of those endlessly in search of their self-entitled MORE, MORE, MORE! from that business. The business that never forgets that it is owned by the principals who created it and who keep it on the go is the business least likely to wind up in such a hostage situation.

Who owns the band? The band members do. No matter what anyone else might prefer to believe. In my opinion, of course.

****************************************************************************************************************************

A very last note for Honey: It is always good to hear from you. I was unsure if you did or did not want that last comment posted. Anytime at all you want to talk GBS or anything else with me, I am here. Banff in July sounds like Heaven right now; if it should happen, I would very gladly see you there. Whether it does or does not happen, take care of yourself. Who knows? Maybe everything really will be alright when Summer comes.  Though I must confess to being quite partial to the tempestuously sweet mutability of Spring.

Comments

[Stephen]

One crude joke that circulates among some of my own 'customers' is about the man who's convinced the prostitute he's sleeping with really does love him. I won't go into the lewd details but the punch line hinges on whether he's still paying for what he gets from her. If you still pay to play, you're still a customer.

I have to reserve judgment about the CD title too. It sounds like a folk album title but the music we've heard from it so far doesn't sound like folk music. We have a mystery.

I think your roses have a good chance for survival. It's an old bush so it must be strong and used to our weather conditions, even if this isn't the best place for roses to begin with. It's lasted in a place like this for 25 years so and that's got to be a good sign.

[Mike]

Good post.Long, but good. Oysterband rocks.

[Laura]

I'd offer up a moderately neccessary organ to get you to take pictures of Sean the way you take them of Alan, Lynda. I was going to offer you my first born instead but then I realized that's a threat not a bribe. :D

When I saw what Alan wrote this time I thought he's done it now, big time. Now the people who want to see the OysterBand are going to have to put up with GBS fans there just to get their hands on GBS and if they want to go anywhere after they'll be followed to the ends of the earth. That's a lot to pay for selling tickets.

I'd like to see Walk On The Moon be the first single from the new CD. Honestly, I'd like to see one of Sean's songs be first but I know that ain't gonna happen, so I go with Walk.

We've got spring here too. I can't stop sneezing.

L.

[Christina]

Having spent his entire adult life and a good chunk of his adolescence performing, Alan has to have known exactly what would happen when he made the Oysterband announcement.

I hope it works out the way he wanted it to.

Do I know the topic of this question you want to ask Alan?

[Lynda]

Stephen, your comment brought to mind Sean's "Whores that we are..." aside from one of the podcasts. Is this joke a bit of corollary humour to the "Why buy the cow?" joke? What you've said goes a long way toward explaining why "getting on the guest list" is such a ballyhooed coup (or "coo," I'm not fussy) for those who have a need to feel more important than someone, than almost anyone, else is.

I agree about the title, but mysteries can be fun sometimes, don't you think? And I will be keeping my fingers crossed for the roses; we really won't know for sure for months, though.

Hello, Mike. If this is your first time commenting here (a few Mikes have commented in the past), welcome. Actually, welcome no matter how many times you have commented here. You are impressively succinct. Yes, Oysterband does rock. Feel free to comment here again (succinctly or verbosely) whenever you choose.

Laura, thanks for not making the first offer and could I take a rain check on the second offer? Who knows what moderately necessary organ I might have need of in the future?

Separate from my own feelings about Alan, there's another reason I don't think I'd ever take pictures of Sean the way I do of Alan. There are some people in this world who really do want to be known for who and what they are, and there are other people who really want to be seen as an enigmatic mystery. I believe Alan wants to be known for who and what he is (and then accepted, admired, respected, loved for exactly that) . Except for perhaps those in a select, chosen inner circle, Sean wants (again, I believe) to be seen as that enigmatic mystery. I don't want to interfere with that, not even in some small, inconsequential way. So I stick to the photos that are of his performance faces and personae, and I try to steer as clear as I can away from those fleeting glimpses that give away too much about the truth that lies at the heart of the unsolved riddle. If someone really prefers to be an unsolved riddle, then they should be allowed that much.

My initial response to Alan's Oysterband mention was decidedly mixed. I was delighted he and the rest of them would be able to be at this show, of course for my own sake as well as for theirs and for the Oysters. I was (and am) glad that this will likely give Oysterband the full house they deserved to get all on their own, and there are some other good-music-loving people I'm genuinely happy have decided to come to Hugh's (even more so to some of the other shows) because of what Alan said.

But I also knew right away that this would mean some others would come whose presence is not something to be glad about, that inevitable handful who will come not giving a shit about Oysterband and even less of a shit about those who do want to hear and see Oysterband - the ones who will come just to see and hear GBS are bad enough; the ones who come in pursuit of their opportunity to "hang with" GBS during and after the show are even worse.

Actually, I might have that reversed, depending on point of view. The here-for-GBS-only fans who are already talking about buying the (cheaper) standing-only tickets and then pushing up onto the main floor and standing by the stage in front of the dinner-table patrons when GBS is up there are the ones who will most likely disrupt the enjoyment of the show for the rest of the audience; the determined pursuers who are coming for their Magic Moment With GBS will for the most part only disrupt the enjoyment of the GBS cast and crew.

But it is what it is. Rare are the instances of GBS being some place where all-that-goes-with-GBS is not also in that same place. (That was to a large degree what was so wonderful about the European shows last summer.) It is how they live their lives, and from the evidence of my own eyes over the past six-plus years, it has always been and will always be this way; the faces may change but the behaviour never does. Being appalled by it is pointless, fighting it is pointless, detesting it is pointless, growing sick-to-your-stomach weary of it is pointless, feeling mind-numbingly bored by it is pointless.

(And because there will apparently always be those who choose to misunderstand, no matter how many times I explain that I am not talking at all about the number of shows anyone goes to and am instead talking about how people behave during - and before and after - their one, or two, or ten, or twenty-five, or umpteen shows, consider it explained yet again....to understand or otherwise yet again will be your own choice, as always.)

When Christina and I were in Melbourne a few summers (Australian summers) ago, we found ourselves being driven to distraction by the bush flies there. Bush flies live on moisture, specifically the moisture in the eyes, nostrils, and mouths of all other animals, humans most definitely included. If we stopped moving at all, even just long enough to look at a map or take a photo, they swarmed all over us, fighting each other to get in our eyes and noses and mouths. We kept swatting and ducking and running away, but no matter what we did or where we went, they continued to plague us.

We were there only for about four days, but the flies were driving us frigging nuts, to the point of our not even wanting to go outside because of them, and we finally asked at the hotel if the flies were this awful all the time and if so how in the world did the locals stand it.

"What flies?" was the initial startled response, followed by, "Oh, you mean the bush flies? You just get to the point where you don't notice them very much anymore. What else can you do, after all? They're a nuisance, but they're here for good, and so are we. There's no sense letting them get in the way of what we want to do."

I think it's way past time for me to follow the example that's been set and start seeing predator fans the same way the Melbourne folks see bush flies. A nuisance, to be sure, but they are here for good. And so am I. There's no sense letting them get in the way of what I want to do.

Maybe in time I won't notice them much anymore either. Who knows? Maybe I will get so good at not paying attention to them that one day someone will ask me about predator fans and my initial response will be a startled "What predator fans?" Then again, maybe not.

But I sure don't plan on letting the actions of any bush flies spoil my TO weekend. I have a feeling I am not the only one with those same plans.

I think you are right about it not being likely for a Sean song to be the first single release. I think the label is invested in Alan's voice being "GBS's voice" in terms of recognisability and familiarity. I always suspected that was the reason why Captain Kidd wound up the TH&TE single, that and jumping on the "pirates are trendy" bandwagon.

Damn, I still want a video of screaming cigar-shaped fighter jets and exploding love bombs and sexy, sultry, strutting, clothing-optional instrumental solos performed by my favourite lead guitarist. As I said before, it would never be forgotten. I'd sure never forget it.

I have not yet begun to sneeze. It's tree pollen that gets me...should be very, very soon.

Yes, Christina, Alan knew. Not a bit of doubt in my mind. Which means what he hoped to accomplish was worth the likely cost to him. It may or may not be worth the cost to others, but I'm going to be honest and say that if it's worth it to him, then it's worth it to me. Feel free to remind me I said that that when some pushy jerk sticks their arse front of my face during the show, will you?

Nope, you do not know the topic of this question. These questions, actually, since there are two, one I have been thinking about asking him for ages, the other that occurred to me during the Shamrockfest show. And talk about succinct, even more so than Mike was here: Two questions, a total of four words. How impressive is that, especially from the every-wordy likes of me? Now we shall see if there's a reasonable and considerate time and place for the asking of these splendidly pithy questions.

[Laura]

Bwahaha!! Bush flies! :D Omigod that's hilarious.
Write.the.book.now.

I forgot about the title. I have a wait and see attitude too. It doesn't make me say Wow! What a great title! but I think only "Sea Of NC" and "Hard And Easy" did that for GBS CD's. SB sounded to general and "Road Rage" made me think about people getting shot. I always thought that was a stupid name for a CD. Maybe a rap CD but not GBS. "Up and "Play" were okay, I guess and "Rant and Roar" was kind of obvious. Not many CD's have really good titles. I loved "American Idiot."

Part of my trouble is I keep reading it as "Fortunes Flavour" it reminds me of a cookbook title.

Heheheh. Bush flies. What about fleas? Does that work too?

L.

[Lisa]

Hmmm, comparing predatory fans to bush flies. I wonder who will be taking offence this time? Hope you and Christina (and everyone else who goes) enjoy the show in Toronto. Brian and I have our tix to the Vancouver show so we'll see you there.

[lynda]

Well, Lisa, I suppose the only people who have any real cause to get offended by the entomological metaphor are the people who recognise themselves in the behavioural description. And even then, if they don't think there's anything wrong with that behaviour, why bother getting offended in the first place? By their offence shall ye know them, maybe as much as by their actions. Intent is something only known to the individual.

I did say I think there are some really great folks going to the TO show (wish you could have joined us, but I am very glad both of you are making it to the Vancouver show), the kind of people who are coming to hear a great band recommended by Alan. The kind of people would be coming to this show even if not a single member of Great Big Sea were going to be present (and presumably accessible) in that tiny little club. Just like you and Brian will be doing in Vancouver.

But I promise not to let this set of comments get taken over by those who choose to take offence. The point of the bush-fly metaphor was to acknowledge that I badly need to learn how to give such matters the scant amount of attention they actually deserve. Should have learned that a long time ago...it isn't as if I have not had behavioural examples being set right before my eyes. Better late than never, I suppose.

So, yes, I certainly plan to have a grand time in TO, the whole weekend, including Hugh's. We are seeing "The Crystal" and the dinosaurs at the ROM, hitting Eaton Centre for shopping, getting some more of those tasty little sausages at the customary pub, and for sure stopping by the usual brunch place. And then there will be Oysterband for the very first time live. WooHoo!

Still wish you could have joined us, but Vancouver will be fun too. We're taking in the tulip fields either on the way up or back, depending on weather. We were going to go there tomorrow, but I don't think those tulips are much more in bloom than my own are yet.

Nope, Laura, fleas don't work for this metaphor. I was going for something that ceaselessly plagues and pesters that you really can do nothing about. Fleas torment my cats, which means I most certainly do something about them: Fleas get annihilated here. No mercy.

Maybe something more like blackflies or mosquitos in areas that are seasonally swarmed by such nuisances. I've hiked a few times in such swarms and I've heard some eye-opening stories about what it is like in places like Labrador and other places during blackfly season. Nothing you can do about them either, other than use barrier protection and endure, though repellent does some good.

But bush flies are still the better metaphor. I don't think even repellent works particularly well with bush flies because they aren't after the places you customarily apply repellent, not unless you want to slather DEET on your lips and put it up in your nostrils and blind yourself by trying to get it all around your eyes. There will still be moisture, and so there will still be bush flies. You can hide behind some kind of barrier, or you can endure.

We were in Melbourne first, and I had about six weeks in Australia ahead of me after that. At the time, I didn't know if the bush flies would be everywhere, including up in New South Wales and Queensland, the places to which I was headed after Melbourne. It turned out that they were not - even our unpleasant exposure in Melbourne was somewhat seaonal- and weather-related - which left me very glad and thankful. Four days of that was plenty at the time. Which gives me some perspective on the challenge of learning how not to let such matters get in the way of what you want to do in the place you have no intention of leaving.

I think that particular reaction to the title Road Rage was probably more American than Canadian since we were reading about those kinds of incidents in the headlines here and for some of us it was happening very close to home. It's what I thought the first time I saw the Road Rage CD, but I wasn't around when it first came out, so I've no clue about initial reaction on either side of the border.

I think how we react to a title differs when we hear it for the first time before the CD comes out, before we've heard all of the music on the CD yet, from how we react when we start off seeing the whole CD (title, music, liner notes, cover photo) as a single product. Sometimes you need that complete view, same with individual song titles. While Straight To Hell and Walk On The Moon are what I think of as "stand-alone" titles (titles that pretty much give you a clear view into the heart of the song they describe), titles such as Tonight and Oh Yeah don't really tell you ahead of time how perfectly they too describe the song you have not yet heard. There really is no other title for Oh Yeah other than Oh Yeah...it is perfect. And the same is true for Tonight. But you can't know that until you actually hear the songs.

So I am hoping the same is going to be true for the CD's title, even if right now it is not necessarily giving me any glimpses into some larger truth. When I hear the whole CD, I am hoping I'll think the same way about it being the perfect title for what it is describing.

Though now I am also wondering just what kind of recipes might be found in a cookbook with that almost-the-same title.

[Christina]

Bush flies. Heh heh. I was planning on wearing something at least halfway sophisticated to Hugh's, since it looks like a pretty classy place, but maybe I should be wearing a hat with corks on strings all the way around the brim.

I like that analogy; I really do.

[Ellen]

Especially beautiful pictures this time, lynda. Alan looks good in black and white.

I think you've come up with a good measure for motivation at the Oyster Band show. If you would go if GBS was not there, then you're going with good reason, though all the better that GBS will be there to see them play together. But if Alan and Oysterband and others went to some different pub after the show to play songs together wouldn't you want to go see that too? I would.

Have a wonderful weekend! I think I need to check out this new band. I've found a lot of wonderful music because of GBS too.

[lynda]

I don't know about the corked hat for Hugh's, Christina, but as for the rest you can pretty much be as sophisticated or not as you choose. The last few times I've been to Hugh's, I think it's been jeans, either a sweater or t-shirt depending on time of year, and my usual boots. But others who go there certainly get gussied-up, so go with whatever you like. Come to think of it, it might be kind of fun to dress up a bit.

Ellen, I'm still intrigued by just that: How right Alan does look in the black-and-white photos. Sean tends to look better in the colour ones, the whole-band ones tend to look better in colour...but Alan looks most right - I tend toward that word even more than "best" - in black and white. There are a few fascinating conclusions which can follow after that realisation.

Everyone has his or her own behavioural measures to live up to - or not, as the case may be - as well as to use as a guide for coming to personal conclusions about others. To each his or her own measures, as well as conclusions.

As always, I tend toward spectrums. Even though I do think those who'd be at Hugh's even if GBS were nowhere near the place have the most laudable motives, I can certainly understand coming for the purpose of seeing GBS play with another band, even another band you know nothing about. Whenever you genuinely love the music/performance of one artist/band, it's always exciting to see that artist/band in a new light, performing with somebody else.

If I had known nothing at all about Oysterband and read Alan's journal, would I have decided to fly to Toronto on two weeks' notice to see GBS perform maybe a song or two with this unknown band? Maybe. Probably, if the time was free and the airline fare reasonable. Would I have done the same to see Alan perform with some unknown band? Without a doubt, if at all possible.

But that is still coming for the music and the performance, of both bands/artists, not coming to see one band and pay scant attention to the other and not coming to make the evening be all about yourself and how much attention you try to get from some GBS band member. Those who come for the music, anyone's music, and who remain attentive to the rest of the music and polite to all of the patrons and performers present (including GBS cast and crew) get no complaints from me. As for any who might behave otherwise...What flies?

You know, because of how the BNL fans are such intrepid videographers (and God bless 'em for that trait), I have seen almost all of many of the performances from the S&D3 cruise. Honestly, what I most regret missing are those moments at the Final Jam where Alan sings and plays Mercury Blues and Keep Your Hands To Yourself with Ed and Kevin and God only knows who else.

Well, that and the Songwriters' Panel. It cuts like a knife to have missed out on hearing Not For The Money Alone and the acoustic Straight To Hell and Tonight done live (while most of the rest of what I missed on the cruise elicits little more than a shrug, and some of it, in particular some of what I've heard about a few "interactions," causes a distinct feeling of relief for my having been nowhere near such behaviour), but again, I am grateful for decent video footage.

What I've seen of the three GBS shows on the cruise is alright, but not something I'd have paid a few thousand dollars to see (yeah, I know, I know...it's not just about the shows). But those Final Jam moments, and those SC moments, where Alan is sharing the art and the passion of music with his peers...that is what would have made it all worth it to me. Those moments are what I regret missing. Those are some of the best moments of all, whenever and wherever they happen.

So, yes, if they (in any combination) wanted to go play more music in some public place (as opposed to heading off to a rude-to-intrude-on private party) after the Hugh's show, I would absolutely love to see and hear that. Anytime and everytime.

I am still kicking myself in the arse for being so stunned as to leave the pub after the Grey Cup Show and missing out on Alan's and Jim Cuddy's stage time there. There's a perfect example of successful bullying. I had myself so tied up in knots, worried that staying would look like something it was not, that I simply turned tail and ran away. I was an idiot and a coward and I missed something I would have loved to see and will always regret not seeing. I am not making that same mistake ever again.

I strongly encourage you check out Oysterband, Ellen . Start with their latest, Meet You There, maybe (David ordered ours off of their site - they are very reliable with orders but do have issues with credit cards), or maybe begin where we did, with the Granite Years, Vol. 1. Or perhaps both.

I wish you could see them live too. David's been hoping forever for a Seattle date at the Tractor Tavern, maybe even Bumbershoot, but that's still something possibly in the future. And even that's still quite a ways from you. David's amazed he is going to get to see them at the other end of a 2.5 hour drive - quite a bit less than having to go across the Pond. He's still trying to finagle making it to the Kelowna show too - he'd probably go to every show on the Canadian tour if he could - but I don't think work is going to cooperate.

No matter what happens with shows, get the music. And then, enjoy.

[Martha]

Hi Lynda -

We met at a show in Edmonton but it's all right if you don't remember me. I've enjoyed reading your blog and the photos and videos.

Would it be impolite of me to take a little time for a small rant? I hope not. This is something that bothers me in many arenas of life and I see it here too.

Why does the actions of 2% of the population take up so much time and get so much attention? Watch the news and see how a few people doing bad things are all that's talked about. Ask your child how much time the teacher spends with the one or two children who disrupt the class every day. Why does bitcher and complainer at work get noticed and the quiet steady worker is invisible?

No offense intended, but you do it too. Out of all the Great Big Sea fans who never act like crazies or bitches you say more about the ones who do. Why not talk more about the rest of us? How about all the fans who never try to push GBS out of the spotlight and put themselves in it instead? Without us there wouldn't be a GBS.

OATUS, I can't get over how cruise people already have counters going and can't wait for an event that's almost a year out and the same for how they keep rehashing every detail of the past cruise. Are they seriously that in need of a real life in the present? Is it because they pay so much money for it they have to make it last all yearlong? You really should take a look at The Rock Boat and BNL cruise forums. There's some funny stuff there.

[Kath]

Could you help me out about the new CD? What songs do we know are going to be on it? So far I can only think of 3 and I'm sure there are more than that.

[lynda]

Kath, as best as I know, based on what Alan's said at shows and in writing, the following songs are going to appear on Fortune's Favour:

Walk On The Moon
Straight To Hell
Tonight
Oh Yeah

And at the Atlantic City show, Sean sang this traditional tune and said it too would be on the upcoming CD:

The Rocks Of Merasheen

In addition to these five songs, the video that was put up on gbs.com from the recording session at the Great Big Studio (the one with Hawksley Workman in it) shows them recording a tune we can call The Shores Of England (for lack of an official title). This one, with lead part by Sean and a lovely guitar part by Alan, sounds like a trad tune, but since not a single lyric line gives any info at all when Googled, chances are excellent it's an original written to sound like a traditional.

There are also two more new songs which were played live last spring - 1-2-3-4/Hold On For Your Life, which was played quite a few times at shows, and Where I Belong, played just once (but still unforgettable) - but it looks for sure that the first one will not be on the new CD and I have a hard time believing the second one will either. All kinds of hope, but not much belief.

Then there are a couple more songs I've heard about from a trusted source, that are apparently on the new CD too. Neither of these has been performed publicly, to the best of my knowledge, and I've no clue what their final forms might be. But from what I've heard of the "working drafts," they sure sound good to me. Again, both of these are originals too.

So that's one traditional and seven originals (assuming Shores Of England is just that) for sure, making at least half of Fortune's Favour written by members of GBS and those with whom they've collaborated, excellent news for those of us who think highly of the songwriting skills of these men.

You know, there is something else I heard about a song that's on the new CD, and for the life of me I can't recall what it is. Total brain-freeze. If I recall later, I'll mention it.

Hello, Martha. I am going to have to be honest and say that if it's this most recent Edmonton show I met you at, I have forgotten your name, because it's an uncommon-enough name to recall having come across just a short time ago. If you have a very nice hubby who is a closet Habs fan, then I do recall you, even if not your name. And if you're talking about some other Edmonton show - and there have been quite a few - then I will have to plead yet more brain-freeze. But I bet I'd recognise you in a heartbeat if I could see your face, and I am very glad to hear you've enjoyed reading/perusing this blog.

No worries about the rant. Your rant was unfailingly polite and quite reasonable, and you made some very pertinent points. I'm not sure if my responses will be equally pertinent, but I'll give it a try.

The most simple answer as to why the bad actions of tiny fraction of people wind up being the most talked about/written about on the news is that this is what a large number of the remaining percentage of the population wants to see/hear about. "If it bleeds, it leads" is less a philosophical or moral statement and more a pragmatic acceptance of audience desire.

Why such a large percentage of the audience desires this is a matter for the sociologists, but my own theory is that we want to hear about bad things that happen near to us because we want to know how close to our own door the wolves might be howling (so we know how many more locks to put on that door) and we want to hear about bad things happening to other people far away because that makes us feel better in comparison to buddy way over there who's really gotten the shit end of the stick.

The classroom situation is more pragmatics. One of my most humbling experiences was discovering just how bad I was at teaching a large group of students (and this was college-aged, not even taking on the much greater challenge of unruly children). I had been a great classroom aide and a very good teaching assistant, but in both cases, that had been a matter of one-to-one and small-group teaching. When it came to teaching the full group...I sucked. Part of why I sucked was not knowing what in the world to do with the disruptive individuals who would not (or maybe could not) become a part of that group. It wasn't until some time later that it occurred to me that all of the professors and teachers I had worked for had someone to help them with those disruptive non-group joiners...me, and others in similar teaching-assistant-type roles. I might have only kind-of-sucked if I'd had such assistance.

With K-12 teachers, where so ridiculously much is expected of the classroom teacher, maybe the reason why the out-of-control few wind up stealing education time away from the larger group is because there is a deficit of that same kind of assistance. In an ideal world, the persistently disruptive 2% should be taken off the field of play until they stop being disruptive (it sure was the norm whenever I was disruptive in school...the vice-principal and I were very familiar with one another), but if there is no place to send that child and no person there to assist...then, yes, the majority wind up being held hostage to the minority.

But, again, responsibility for this goes back onto the shoulders of the majority, in this case the parents of all of those children whose education time is being stolen away. They could either stop expecting teachers to do a lot of what the parents themselves should be doing for their own children, or they could bite the bullet and vote in favour of school district levies/bond measures that would provide for more of that classroom assistance and support. They could insist on such assistance and support being funded and implemented.

At work, again, pure pragmatics. The bitchers and complainers get noticed because there is a motivation to do whatever must be done to get them to shut the fuck up. The squeaking wheel gets the grease, and don't ever underestimate the effectiveness of tantrum-throwing, even among adults...tantrums are one of the very most effective of all the bully methods. This is why people bitch and complain and pitch fits in the first place - to be such a nuisance they get what they want in order to get them to stop squeaking and tantrum-ing. The diligent, quiet workers will remain invisible (in most work places) for as long as they allow themselves to be invisible. No, it is not fair, but neither is life.

Yes, I do it too. Point granted. It's a good point, and I've spent some time thinking about it before answering.

Part of it is simply a matter of writing about what I see very often. I don't write very much about the nice couple back in the 32nd row at the GBS show, the couple who go see GBS once or twice a year when they play nearby and buy the new CD within a few months of when it comes out and maybe mention to a friend or two how good that new CD sounds; the reason I don't write much about that couple is because I don't see them very much. I still run across them before and after shows, even more while travelling, but not so much at shows, and even less so recently at shows.

For my own reasons, I see shows from up front, and that means my path crosses less with the people who are content with 27th or 35th or 51st row or the nosebleed seats of a show and more with those who, for their own reasons, also see shows from up front. All by itself, this fact of positioning impacts and shapes my view of GBS fans, and that does come through in what I write; it has to, because it affects how I see and think about those fans. So pure pragmatics again for that part of it.

That's not all of it, though. While GBS is better than so many at bringing individuals together and getting them to take a step outside of themselves and become part of something larger than themselves - which is to say that GBS is better at creating and then playing to a whole crowd than so many other performers are - and while the participation of every person in that entire crowd is necessary and important to that accomplishment...still, the fact remains that it is the people up at the front who are the individual fans the band members wind up seeing, show after show after show after show. This is why it's so bloody important to some to be up front in the first place.

Now add in the other simple fact that a disproportionate number of those who are repeatedly up front at shows (as always, there are notable exceptions) are also often among those most likely to hang by the stage door, stake out the tour bus, intrude at the pub, try to cosy up to band members' friends and even family members, stay in the St. John's B&B that has a window that faces onto the street most likely to be walked down by several band members, ruthlessly use their cute children to get attention for themselves, etc, etc...what that all adds up to is a small group of people who have a larger impact on the band members than their actual numbers would (or should) indicate.

My own opinion is that this impact is predominantly negative, that this small group does an inordinate amount of damage that goes considerably beyond their numbers. And because I happen to care about (as well as have a desire to understand) the damagees, I tend to focus on the damagers.

This whole dynamic appears to be intensifying with the Best Seats Presales program. It used to be that I'd encounter a wide mix of people up front at shows - local folks who never travelled to shows but who had the time and ability to wait in long lines when the shows were near home, especially the teenagers, and almost always some displaced Newfoundlanders too. Now, with so many shows falling under the Best Seats program, what I find up front are mostly the already-established fans who had the desire and the ability (meaning, the money) to buy those presale tickets ahead of time, often way ahead of time. Now it's rarely the local teens and almost never the Newfoundlanders. It is a changing demographic, or perhaps more accurate to call it an "intensifying demographic," to be sure.

I agree completely that there would be no GBS, not a GBS as we know it, without that legion of fans who do not think it is all about themselves, the fans who come to see and appreciate the music and performance GBS gives them and then walk away fully contented with exactly that and no more. But, to some degree, I believe it is also true that the individuals who make up GBS would not be who they are today (for better and for worse) if not for the impact done by that small group of individuals I do tend to write about much more than the larger group.

Or at least I have, and probably too much at that. Past a certain point, all that ever needed to be said has been said. If I have grown weary of writing (or thinking) about this group of people whose behaviours apparently keep endlessly repeating in a predictable and overly-written-about cycle, I can't begin to imagine how weary some must be of reading about them, especially when the same things keep getting said. One thing if some sort of new insight is being noted, quite another to keep singing the same old song for years on end.

As a (somewhat contradictory to the point I just made, but there you go) aside, just for clarification, the kind of person you're talking about doesn't want to push the performer out of the spotlight, not really; if that happened, if there were truly no spotlight on that performer anymore, the pursuer would lose interest immediately. The spotlight has to remain on the performer, so the pursuer can push into it and feed on being in it too.

Classic example: A woman I know wanted desperately to be "inside" a local music scene. She couldn't worm her way into the inner circle of the Big Fish who was her primary objective, so she settled instead for a somewhat stunned middling-sized fish. She caught his attention the usual ways, and this gave her the opportunity to bask in his middling-sized spotlight and revel in being envied by all those who, of course, wished they were her.

She bought Buddy Fish a hat, one that looked absolutely foolish on him, unless he wanted to go out and make a few bucks doing middle-aged men. But Buddy Fish dutifully wore the foolish hat on stage, and then when he came down to sit at the table next to her (with all of the enviers watching them in the spotlight together, of course - watching her most of all), she plucked the foolish hat off of Buddy Fish's head and put it on her own.

Lo and behold! The hat that looked so foolish on Buddy Fish looked fantastic on her. It was perfect for her...no coincidence, that, since this was the hat's true purpose all along, why she had bought the bloody thing in the first place. Buddy Fish had done his part by wearing the hat up on stage so everyone would know where it had been, and now it was on her pointed little head. Which made her a Star, of course, one fully entitled to her due share of Buddy Fish's spotlight. Her spotlight, by extension, her Audience made up of all those envious ones.

People who crave the spotlight but who lack self-esteem, lack the belief in themselves that they could ever go out and earn that spotlight by their own efforts and abilities, often become parasites on the spotlight that others have earned. For sure they want the performers to keep right on doing all of the hard work needed to keep the spotlight shining bright...and then they will push in and feed on the labours of another.

I've come to the conclusion that one reliable measure of the merit of any person who wants to associate with someone who makes a living up on a stage might be whether that person would be content with nary another soul ever knowing about such a relationship (kind of a tweaked version of Gyges' ring). No parasitic spotlight, no trophy photos, no strategically casual mention of deliberately obscure "insider" moments to frustrate those doomed to remain outside, no ostentatious slipping past the barrier and sashaying backstage in full view of those who cannot follow after, no vanquished competitors wishing they had been the ones to win this evening's prize. No envy. Not a soul to watch and wish they could be you. No one to suck up to you because "Alan likes ____" or "Sean always smiles at ____." Nothing at all beyond seeing another person with affection and without illusion - still seeing that person exactly the same way even if the spotlight were to be switched off for good - and with nothing to gain beyond what might possibly be shared with that one single person. And never once shared with anyone else. Imagine that.

I took your suggestion and did some reading on the cruise message boards. The Hanson Hysteria was indeed amusing, probably somewhat justified too. That is going to be an interesting cruise; I have met some Hanson fans and that whole scene is quite fascinating, more than a bit boggling. It sounds as if those Hanson Walks (yeah, I wandered over to the hanson.net board too) are a laudable attempt to channel some of the fan craziness into something halfway manageable. I hope it works out for them ("them" meaning the members of Hanson, that is). Interesting stuff.

The Ships & Dip "chastising" from Sixthman was amusing too, but rather hypocritical, to my way of thinking. They market artist access - and appear to be making a boatload of money off of that marketing approach - and then get pissy about some fans' assholish obsession and boorish entitlement behaviour? That's kind of like Lotsa Cheap Drinkz Rite Here! bars complaining about all the obnoxious behaviour from the drunken idiots who have taken them up on their offer and off of whom they have just made a sizeable profit. More often than not, you reap what you sow.

As for looking ahead and looking back, I suppose these cruises are how some people spend their annual vacations, and I've known lots of folks who endure 50 -51 basically miserable weeks of the year so they can have their 1-2 weeks of vacation. And who plan for that vacation all year long, as well as drive everyone else nuts talking about it for weeks after they get back. You must be so lucky as to not have friends who just have to show everyone their vacation photos over and over. ("There's Frank in front of the Eiffel Tower...there's Frank in front of the Washington Monument....there's Frank on the edge of the Grand Canyon.")

I think living that way - disliking your day-to-day present so much that you invest that much energy and focus into a future (or past) event, especially one that only lasts a few days - is a rough way to live. One of the saddest things I've read about that S&D cruise was a young lady who wrote that she hasn't been happy since she got off the boat.

But, then, I have heard people say the same thing about GBS shows, how they haven't been happy since the last show ended and won't be happy again till the next one begins. Personally, I find that more than a little horrible, but in more of a compassionate context than a contemptuous or dismissive one. I sure as hell wouldn't want to feel that way.

There's probably also a financial incentive toward self-persuasion that Everything Was Wonderful (or All Will Be Wonderful) in regard to the cruises. That's a consistent human trait: if we spend thousands of dollars for something, there's a very strong motivation to want to believe that the costly thing was so perfect that it makes us really, really smart for having spent all of that money on it. I know people who are that way about their cars too, or about anything else they pay through the nose to get or do.

I don't know how well this answers your polite rant, Martha, or even if answers it at all. Regardless, I am glad you had your say. Feel free to do it again, anytime at all.

[Monica]

Lynda, are you sure, are you absolutely CERTAIN that the reason for your vitriol towards the girl who wormed her way into the outskirts of the inside via the "usual methods," as well as her GBS-oriented peers, isn't because a part of you wished YOU were the "victor"?

I will venture to say that the reason so many in the GBS fandom feel such weirdly personal animosity toward you is that they see a lot more of themselves in your blog than they'd like. (Even those of us who do not act like "bush flies" frequently have to tamp down the urge to do so.) But the principle illustrated in that statement cuts both ways - we only feel truly bothered by things that tap into a deep-set, unspoken-of, often hidden part of ourselves. So why do the bush flies annoy YOU so much? You still get to see the show you came to see (they don't jump the stage or anything). Clearly, Alan isn't THAT bothered by them, otherwise, he'd be firmer about avoiding/discouraging such behavior, so it can't just be indignation on his behalf. They don't do any harm to YOU personally, yet you spend so much time and so much mental energy on discussing your disgust with them. It doesn't make very much sense. I find loud, unruly drunks MUCH more annoying at shows (and so do a lot of people), yet they barely get mentioned her at all in comparison.

Not accusing you of anything, you understand. But it's something to think about. Although I suspect you already HAVE thought about it.

PS - Of course, I heard the restraining order rumors about you. I know very well they are false. But I was one of the girls in the Foundation Room in AC, and I know all of the others who were there too. NONE of us behave like "bush flies." We got into the FR because we got lucky one night. If you didn't mean to, as you would put it, "shit all over us," then quite a bit of the stuff splashed on our shoes anyway. (And if you're about to use that "I didn't mean YOU, whyever would you think I did" response that you used on Shantymanfan, come off it - you're smart enough to know verbal bullets from verbal buckshot and I'm smart enough to know a maintainer of plausible deniability when I see one.) So you did, even if it was unintentional, insult a whole bunch of people for no good reason. Some of whom (me, for one) were people who were just about to conclude that you really were a victim of a vicious rumor who didn't deserve such treatment.

I don't expect you to publish this (but feel free to, if you come up with a response you think is publish-worthy). I just wanted to let you know this. You seem like a fairly intelligent person, you're a good photo/videographer, and I think you'd have a lot less pointless personal conflicts in the fandom (which only make people more likely to believe unflattering rumors about you) if you sorted out your own angers and issues before posting diatribes. That's all.

[lynda]

Hello, Monica. Well, since I had my say, it seemed fair enough to go ahead and let you have yours. Not so much in regard to my having (or not having, as the case may be) a "publish-worthy" response though, since, as I already said above, there's not really much sense in saying things yet again that I've already said numerous times before. And I did kind of imply to someone else that Fan Wars/Band Ownership Battles are growing tiresome and it is far past time for opting out of them.

I did find your "I don't like you or how what you write makes me feel about myself and my own behaviour so I'll choose to believe vicious lies about you as a response to that dislike and discomfort" scenario rather interesting, though, I must admit. Enlightening. Thanks for clarifying that one.

But instead of going on at my usual length about such matters, I think I'll let you just have your say and try to leave at that, with only a few exceptions, the most important one first of all: If I were ever to wake up in the morning and see Buddy Fish across the bed from me, well, I'd certainly hope to God that would be one hell of a bad dream, even if not quite as bad as being Buddy Fish and waking up to see the woman (not "girl"...I don't see too many "girls" around these parts...nor "boys" either, for that matter) I know waking up across the bed from me. If you had a clue who either of these people are (neither of whom is connected at all to GBS, by the way), I think you'd probably feel much the same. So, yeah, I'm quite certain. You'd be certain too, I think, though I suppose I could be wrong about that.

And I did notice that what you got out of the story of the Woman Who Bought The Foolish Hat - a story whose intended tone is more one of bemused contempt, rather than the "vitriol" you found in it - appears to be centred on that all-too-familiar notion of envy. Again, enlightening.

That's about it, Monica. That, and the simple fact that I have mever been impressed by people who feel entitled to blatantly use others to get what they want from them, regardless of the context of such blatant using. Add in the more fundamental fact that I genuinely do feel appalled and repelled by those who I genuinely do believe cause either momentary or lasting damage in their attempts to blatantly use people who matter to me.

There's not much I can do to help you understand that concept if you don't know what it's like to feel that way yourself about those you care about. If you do understand the concept and it's merely an issue of your thinking no harm is being done by fandom behaviour, then that's simply a matter of disagreement. We disagree, not all that unusual of an outcome between fairly intelligent people.

I don't like the unruly drunks at shows either; I get pretty sick of them too. But, for the most part, they only "hurt" me (usually no more than bother, but occasionally actually physically hurt too) and not anyone I care about (I have been known to get darn upset at them when they wind up crashing into kids, though), and since I go into shows knowing full well the drunks will be there and choose to put myself in that line of fire anyway, there seems little point in bitching about the results of my own choices, especially since such bitching would change absolutely nothing at all.

But a few people who happen to care about me do tend to get very pissed and bitch to high heaven when I come out of a show battered, bruised and soaked in beer...because it genuinely bothers them when someone they care about winds up with (momentary or lasting) damage done to them by some rude and selfish asshole. How's that for a novel concept?

I will agree with you completely on one point, Monica: I would most certainly have fewer "pointless personal conflicts in the fandom" if I stopped paying quite so much attention to how some elements of the fandom behave. And just because I actually stopped paying attention out of sheer boredom over those behaviours - or, much better, because of a deliberate decision to focus energy and attenion only on that which does merit such energy and attention - it would still mean that those made uncomfortable by having such attention focused on their behaviours would no longer need to feel that way, regardless of intent or reason. A positive outcome all around.

I'm not so sure such a change in focus would have much if any impact at all on those who are "more likely to believe unflattering rumours," but it would - it will - certainly make for a far more pleasant experience for myself, probably also for those who must listen to me go on. Others have certainly set the example by learning to find ways to focus more on the good parts/people of it all and not let the bad parts/people take up very much of their attention (hence the bush fly analogy), so I should be able to do it too.

Thanks for the time and effort you put into the comment, Monica. I hope you wound up feeling like you had a chance to say what you felt you needed to say.

[Stephen]

I'll note the irony that comes from posters saying they don't want to be talked about who can't seem to stop talking about themselves.

The cruise managers have their customers by the short hairs because the customers are super motivated not to admit the main point of the cruise is access. It's like being the tailor for the naked emperor. Nice work if you can get it.

[lynda]

Just once in my life, I would like to be as pithy as you just were. Probably much less chance of that ever happening than of my ceasing to pay attention to fandom behaviours, so I should stick to the area where I have the better chance for success, I suppose.

Still, it would be so cool to be pithy, just once. Thanks for showing me how it's done. Maybe someday.

Still waiting for those tulips to bloom.

[lynda]

Sigh. There are times when the compulsion to be honest kind of sucks. But so be it.

Monica, it seemed as if you were rather honest with me, and after a bit of thought, I don't think I was quite as honest with you in turn as you deserved for me to be, and maybe not with Martha either.

While watching CSI just now, of all silly things, I was thinking about how people watch such shows because there is a certain fascination with that which is also somewhat horrible, all of which goes back to some extent to what Martha was asking about and what I tried to answer. I was also thinking at the same time about that mess of a cruise that The Rock Boat is likely to be this year, with the most determined of the Hanson fans on board very likely to wind up ripping to shreds the comforting pretense about what the real purpose of such a cruise is for many of those who are also onboard.

That's when the thought crossed my mind: If I had unlimited time and money and could bear being on a cruise, I'd like to go on that one to see how it all shakes out; I'd kind of like to go on all of those cruises and compare the differences and seek out the similarities of behaviours. There is such a fascinating story to be found in all of that, horrible though that story might very well be.

The (somewhat embarrassing) truth is, fan behaviour in general fascinates me, and it often also horrifies me. Has from the start, both reactions. What appeared to be going on between GBS and their fans at the first show of theirs I saw struck me, and stuck with me, from the outset.

The subgroup of fandom that has most horrifed/fascinated me - that group of otherwise-decent, seemingly innocuous, and ostensibly normal adults who are capable of becoming solipsistically abusive and sometimes downright sociopathic over the acquisition of something as fundamentally trivial as a meaningless and fleeting bit of attention from some stranger who makes his or her living upon a stage, as well as how that meaningless and fleeting bit of attention has the power to trigger in a select few an overpowering (sometimes temporary and other times apparently permanent) addiction for more of the same - is a group whose response/reaction I still can't quite understand, even after having witnessed it taking place hundreds of times.

Or perhaps it is more a matter of finding it damnably difficult to accept/face up to the premise upon which such a response/reaction is ultimately founded. Rough terrain for a stubborn optimist.

So at least some part of why I have focused where I have so often focused has been because of that horrified fascination and struggle to understand/accept. I tend not to look at the people who are alright when what I'm trying to figure out is why the other people are considerably less alright. And if you honestly have no idea what I'm talking about when it comes to fans reacting in these ways, that's probably something to be thankful for.

While that horrified fascination might be all well and good for the genuinely disinterested observer out for nothing more than to discover and understand the most interesting story, perhaps even to re-tell that story, it gets so much more complicated when you care about some of those caught up in that horribly fascinating plotline. I could go on The Rock Boat as that disinterested observer; that's just not possible to do at GBS shows - at the latter, it becomes instead a matter of how those who do not appear to be particularly alright are potentially impacting the people who are cared about, and that's when "not understanding" is transformed into "being appalled". As a general rule, not much of any pragmatic use ever seems to come from being appalled; few people on this planet waste more time and energy being ineffectually appalled than do we stubborn optimists.

But when the horrified fascination begins to interfere with the caring, when it is serving no constructive purpose whatsoever to anyone at all, doing no good and resulting in no new understanding or awareness and is even getting in the way of what I prefer to write about, that means it's time, past time, to adjust focus and get back to what does matter - which, to me, is the caring. There are people who are worth so much more than even the most (horribly) fascinating story. There are people who make for an infinitely more (wonderfully) fascinating story.

There's also the excellent point that Martha brought up: This is indeed a subgroup of fans, and some disservice is definitely done to those fans who do not react/respond this way when a disproportionate focus winds up on those who do. Life may indeed not be fair, but no need to go too far out of the way to make it even more so.

And, again honestly, I am truly sick of paying attention to it anyway. Life really is too short for that. It's just taking me my usual clumsy, stubborn, stumbling time to get from "here" to "there". The bush-fly analogy is helpful in making my way along that path; but at the end of the day, it is up to each individual to decide whether their own actions are right or wrong, something about which to be proud or not - each person measuring themselves in their own eyes and by their own standards. As well as forming opinions - informed or misinformed, objective or subjective, correct or mistaken, fair or unfair, honest or dishonest - about those around them.

And if the shoe truly comes nowhere near fitting your particular foot, chances are quite good that the shoe salesman intended it for someone else other than you in the first place.

All of which I should have included in the earlier comment, and I apologise for not doing so.

Still not pithy, sorry to say.