| mickyparise 21.02.2011 21:11 |
Roger Taylor thinks Queen were so popular because they made “intelligent” music. The legendary British rock band – which comprised Freddie Mercury, Brian May, John Deacon and Roger – celebrates its 40th anniversary this year, with the group’s entire back catalogue being re-released to mark the occasion. Roger still finds it hard to comprehend how huge Queen became, and is proud of all the group achieved. “What was always thrilling to me was when people really loved the records,” he explained. “There’s a basic truth there — you shouldn’t be ashamed to reach a lot of people. What could be better than reaching a lot of people while retaining some intelligence?” Queen kept working on material right up until Freddie’s death of an AIDS related illness in 1991. The group are renowned for wearing outrageous clothes, and have often been ridiculed by those who thought their music wasn’t hip enough. It’s not something which worries Brian or Roger, who have both got used to hearing people’s opinions of their work. “Respect is a funny thing,” Brian told Culture magazine. “If you look for it, you’ll forever be disappointed. It’s true [we’ve had little]. But we get everything, from complete, overwhelming love to total, outright derision. I don’t take any of it on board, really. It would ruin you if you believed it. You’d go nuts. I care what people say, but both extremes are dangerous.” Roger explained: “Oh God, we’ve always got stick for everything. People say, ‘You’re mistreating the legacy’, and I think, well, thanks for your concern, but it’s my f**king legacy.” link |
| Dan C. 21.02.2011 21:36 |
“Oh God, we’ve always got stick for everything. People say, ‘You’re mistreating the legacy’, and I think, well, thanks for your concern, but it’s my f**king legacy.” ----- Fuck yeah. |
| GratefulFan 21.02.2011 23:53 |
That Roger statement is thought provoking isn't it, because it's true and it's not. It's not just his legacy, first of all, and secondly I think you can make an argument that there are elements of art and culture and history that are owned by nobody and everybody. We can't control the catalogue and the business decisions, but to say we have no stake isn't quite right either. |
| master marathon runner 22.02.2011 06:12 |
GratefulFan wrote: That Roger statement is thought provoking isn't it, because it's true and it's not. It's not just his legacy, first of all, and secondly I think you can make an argument that there are elements of art and culture and history that are owned by nobody and everybody. We can't control the catalogue and the business decisions, but to say we have no stake isn't quite right either. . Yeah your'e right mate, when Queen do the wrong thing commercially, i always feel that the dedicated, 40 years a fan, types are part of the legacy and as such are dissapointed profoundly. Master Marathon Runner |
| splicksplack 22.02.2011 08:21 |
That's always been my point. While we can not tell them what to do, you'd think that, sometimes, they would put out what the original fans want rather than tedious re-re-re-releases all the bloody time. They're not struggling musicians. They have enough money (as Fred said about 20 years ago!). So why not? Even if they release the good stuff alongside the re-releases. It's hardly going to break the bank. And yes it is Roger's "fuckin' legacy" and if he wants to make a twat of himself, it is indeed up to him. But it would be nice, after all these years, if he thought a bit about what the original fans want. The people that blessed him with the ability to have his "couldn't give a shit" attitude in the first place. I love the Queen albums and the memories of all 14 gigs that I went to in the 70s and 80s. Unfortunately Roger and Brian are now completey different people to who they were then and, no matter what anyone says, Queen no longer exists except as a glorious memory. |
| mike hunt 22.02.2011 09:01 |
Yes, the members of Queen arn't what they once were, but who really is?.....Who would have thought in 1975 or 1980 that ozzy would become the joke that he became later on in life?... |
| lifetimefanofqueen 22.02.2011 13:22 |
Dan C. wrote: “Oh God, we’ve always got stick for everything. People say, ‘You’re mistreating the legacy’, and I think, well, thanks for your concern, but it’s my f**king legacy.” ----- Fuck yeah. ====================================================== double fuck yeah |
| Donna13 22.02.2011 13:59 |
The ego and taste of each performer and artist cannot be understood, probably. And maybe creating something precludes you from becoming obsessed with it or even truly appreciating it. Can you imagine a person saying, "Oh, my gosh, I just wrote a song that is so good, I can't get it out of my head. It is my favorite song ever, and I think it is the best song I've ever heard and I can't believe I am this talented. God bless me!" They might be thinking instead, "Oh, I hope they don't think this song is too similar to such and such, and I hope they didn't catch that little mistake I made in my solo. It's a pretty good song, I think. I'm proud of it but it is probably not the best thing I've written. On to the next." |
| beautifulsoup 22.02.2011 22:01 |
lifetimefanofqueen wrote: Dan C. wrote: “Oh God, we’ve always got stick for everything. People say, ‘You’re mistreating the legacy’, and I think, well, thanks for your concern, but it’s my f**king legacy.” ----- Fuck yeah. ====================================================== double fuck yeah ============================================ And I'll raise you one fuck yeah. |
| splicksplack 23.02.2011 04:47 |
beautifulsoup wrote: lifetimefanofqueen wrote: Dan C. wrote: “Oh God, we’ve always got stick for everything. People say, ‘You’re mistreating the legacy’, and I think, well, thanks for your concern, but it’s my f**king legacy.” ----- Fuck yeah. ====================================================== double fuck yeah ============================================ And I'll raise you one fuck yeah. Well, fucks and double fucks notwithstanding, it ISN'T just his (or the band's) legacy. If it wasn't for the fans buying the bloody records and attending the concerts there would be no bloody Queen in the first place. They would have been astrnomers, dentists, graphic artists and whatever it is you do with an electronics degree. We joined in with their "Queen" idea and payed the bloody money to make it work. We are all part of Queen and the shite way Roger, Brian and Jim control things is a sham and a disgrace. Queen fans are an integral part of the Queen legacy. They wouldn't have made it without us. |
| WhiteQueen16 23.02.2011 14:48 |
I think they are working with what they have and i think their efforts have been worth it. They have been making music for so long and i look at it as a gift. Being a young Queen fan, some might say i have no idea what im talking about but i know this, Brian and Roger are keeping Queen alive the best they can and are still giving young people like myself a taste of who they are now as a duo. i understand a lot of fans bash them and insult what they do, but personally i believe they are still as great as they were almost 40 years ago. i may not have lived it, but i have heard it. Thank you, Brian and Roger for continuing what you love for the young fans. Thank you! |
| Shaving Foamasi 24.02.2011 06:59 |
To all those people who are criticising Roger, can I ask, do you really think that he had a different attitude when you liked what he did in the 70's/80's? I doubt it. Brian quoted in Q Magazine, I think, said that they got slated by "the fans" when they released Queen II, saying that they had sold out and they weren't proper Queen anymore. Yet later on, all people would ask him is why they couldn't make another album just like Queen II! If you listen to the people who claim to be your "true" fans, you'll just go mad... Just because you choose to buy the records and choose to go to concerts, doesn't mean you have any stake in the band whatsoever, whatever you may think. Did any of the band had a gun at your head forcing you to buy the records, after all....? |
| qrock 24.02.2011 07:15 |
Queen's music was quite intelligent (particulary the music in the 1970s). But their music is not as intelligent as Yes, Pink Floyd and Rush. Queen II, the most intelligent album Queen created was something like their poorest selling. Intelligent does not always mean success. |
| Sheer Brass Neck 24.02.2011 22:35 |
Queen's legacy is my legacy as a fan of 36 years, some people's as a fan from day 1, and some people who just found the band. Roger can fuck up the legacy, be it his or mine or someone else's. But for fuck sakes, quit complaining and bitching about critical respect (hello Brain May!!!!) when YOUR actions prove that the most important thing to you by far is sales! Madonna is a sales artist, The Beatles are artists who sold a lot of records. Queen could be in The Beatles (and Led Zeppelins') category for respect and acclaim, but chose to go "we sold a shit load of records through compilations and licensing" and forfeited the critical respect that comes with it. If nobody knows about White Queen or Long away or Nevermore, don't blame the press. Blame the people (hello Brain, Roger and Jim Beach!!!!) who won't be happy until everyone on earth has heard and bought the 5 most popular Queen songs while ignoring the 2nd or 3rd best catalogue in rock history. In terms of intelligence, Queen were Albert Einstein or Steven Hawking in the 70s. In the 80s they were geniuses like Simon Cowell is a genius today. Not quite the same thing. |
| Sheer Brass Neck 24.02.2011 22:35 |
|
| Shaving Foamasi 25.02.2011 03:31 |
When Roger says Queen music was intelligent - I don't think he's saying they tried to make an artistic statement in the same way that the prog bands did. Rather, I think he's intimating that they created proper music throughout their career rather than pap fodder. They were certainly savvy enough not to simply churn out Bohemian Rhapsody copies 100 times once it became a monster hit in 1975... |
| Matias Merçeauroix 27.02.2011 01:30 |
BRILLIANT music, I'd say but QUEEN did NOT. Freddie did. Brian, sometimes. Roger... definitely not. And Deacon never wrote a song in his life, Freddie wrote the songs and signed them as Deacon's (?). |
| mike hunt 27.02.2011 04:26 |
Funky Horsie wrote: BRILLIANT music, I'd say but QUEEN did NOT. Freddie did. Brian, sometimes. Roger... definitely not. And Deacon never wrote a song in his life, Freddie wrote the songs and signed them as Deacon's (?). Go back to school little boy.....it's past you're bed time. |
| Matias Merçeauroix 27.02.2011 15:23 |
Oh my, what a clever reply. I'm all out of words, I can't compete with such a brillant guy like you. You win, dude. I'm so happy for you, can I be your friend? |