| bohemianrhap84 25.08.2005 22:20 |
I can't understand why the U.S. is so blind to the fact that Queen was/is the greatest band of all time. Just because they did some "controversial" things like dress in drag for I Want To Break Free video, or released an album of all dance oriented material in Hot Space. And just because Freddie Mercury was gay. Being from the U.S. it makes me sick that Queen doesn't get their just due. I mean, off the top of my head I can think of at least 20 (actually way more) awesome Queen tracks that easily could top any music chart. I appreciate the countries who actually do realize that Queen rules. They're better than The Beatles, way better than The Rolling Stones (the magazine sucks too) and any other band who ever played. At least I get it. Thank God for that. |
| Erin 25.08.2005 22:40 |
You're into Nascar, wrestling...and you like Queen? Wonders never cease..;-) |
| PainPleasure 26.08.2005 00:01 |
The States where colonized by Puritans in the 1600s and they always believed that they were the chosen ones and that they were always right in everything. That is despotism and the US suck real hard. |
| Maz 26.08.2005 00:14 |
Um, the Puritans did not colonize the majority of the States. Their impact was limited quite a bit, much more than people realize. As for being the ''chosen ones,'' that's a myth. |
| boy of destiny 26.08.2005 00:20 |
Personally I don't really care that they don't get Queen. Music isn't a popularity contest. I like what I like and to me that's all matters. Oh, and I'm Canadian by the way, so I do blame the U.S. for never getting to see Queen live. |
| Ayreon 26.08.2005 03:01 |
In a country with a complete moron as president, whrere stadiums sell out with dumb monstertruck races, i am not surprised they don't get the finesse of Queen... |
| Penis - Vagina 26.08.2005 03:13 |
bohemianrhap84 wrote: Just because they did some "controversial" things like dress in drag for I Want To Break Free video, or released an album of all dance oriented material in Hot Space. At least I get it. Thank God for that.I'll reply to this later. Right now I'm in the middle of disco dancing to "Life is Real". It's so fast-paced I had to take a breather.. |
| deleted user 26.08.2005 03:15 |
Because America sucks and are stupid. |
| AmeriQueen 26.08.2005 04:09 |
My thoughts exactly. It's a weird but simply put state of affairs. The Brits have better culture and would seem so much smarter than Americans until they try cooking you a meal. It's weird as hell but the Brits are a culture who can rock your world and make you abandon American pride until you realize that the trade off is that these people with superior ears can't cook worth a shit. |
| Fenderek 26.08.2005 04:16 |
AmeriQueen wrote: My thoughts exactly. It's a weird but simply put state of affairs. The Brits have better culture and would seem so much smarter than Americans until they try cooking you a meal. It's weird as hell but the Brits are a culture who can rock your world and make you abandon American pride until you realize that the trade off is that these people with superior ears can't cook worth a shit.LMAO- and so truth!!!!!!!! I've been living here for 5 years (England) and the only food worth eating was either Indian or Chinesse restaurants... |
| deleted user 26.08.2005 06:47 |
I want to live in England! No fair, but no, I have to be a crappy American with no British acent. Damn. I hate America. |
| AmeriQueen 26.08.2005 08:17 |
England does have a phenomenal music culture On my first trip to England(years ago when I was 18) I remember asking my Brit friend who had never been to the USA if they had country music in England. He said no after first enquiring as to what country music actually was. I remember thinking to myself, "Wow, to be so ignorant to country music as to have never even heard it before. Those Brits, we sure could learn from them." Being from Texas, I had a special appreciation for that confused Brit. It's a good feeling, like traveling to a world where violence and hate are incomprehinsible ideas never heard of before. I'll bet if you played country music opposite and backwards, it would sound like Queen. Hmm... what sounds better, country music or my own screams?? Well, you can't have the first without the other following shortly after. |
| Penis - Vagina 26.08.2005 08:45 |
I'd love to experince the food and culture of Great Britain, especially the faggots. I hear they're quite tasty! |
| Sharron .G 26.08.2005 08:47 |
British music is better. And currently we do have a total fucking idiot for a president. However, the US must not be in total shambles, as this is still the country that more people are trying to get to then anywhere else. Some of the USA totally gets bands like Queen, the finess, the style..etc..etc There is another segment of the USA (The George "Dubb'ya" Bush's) that have nothing to do with/nor support any type of culture, or music..... Many of the cowboy types over here assume that most, if not all European men are homosexuals. Even if they live with a woman, or are married, its assumed by the hillbillies that most Euro men have had gay sex, loved it, and only get with women for child bearing purposes. I hear it all the time. I was in a music store during Christmas, The Darkness "a thing called love" was playing on the store stereo... this customer asked what that was.... the clerk handed it to him.... he said "where these guys from?" She said "The U.K." He said "Nah, I don't support any faggots" He assumed since the guys were from England, they must = gay. |
| Bobby_brown 26.08.2005 08:56 |
Ayreon wrote: In a country with a complete moron as president, whrere stadiums sell out with dumb monstertruck races, i am not surprised they don't get the finesse of Queen...Totally agree with that! They have a culture of their own, they like to be called the self made country and they influence others, not the oposite. Their loss really. But this doesn't happens in all America but in the more conservative states. Maybe when they are consciously prepared, then and only then, they will be able to find the beaty of Queen. In what concerns to arts they still have a great path to walk but they will never be as rich as Europe, because of their ego! Take care |
| smileexpert 26.08.2005 09:08 |
To: 'Boy of Destiny'...a fellow Canadian: >Quote: Music isn't a popularity contest. I agree you here in principal...but as far as the music INDUSTRY goes, I have to disagree. If it ISN'T a popularity contest, then explain the success of American and Canadian Idol? Are they judged on Musicality? REALLY? Or is this a popularity contest? Commedian Chris Rock summarized this best - in my view: "Paula Abdul judging a singing contest, is like Christopher Reeve judging a dance contest...it just ain't right..." And explain William Hung...is the success of this poor 'dropped on his head' baby a result of musicality, or popularity? The success of MANY musicians over the past number of years has been related to either a) their novelty/gag factor (William Hung) or b)how much sex and/or skin they can show or work into their music (not to mention how much help they get from producers, and how manufactured these artists can sound via digital technology) (Brittney Spears) - which makes up for their relative LACK of musical skill. These artists become popular, and sell Platinum albums because of one or both of these 2 factors making it the ULTIMATE popularity contest. In a fair world, I think musicality SHOULD outweigh popularity, or at best there should be a happy medium (i.e. a lot of people would buy an album because the artist is HONESTLY a GOOD MUSICIAN - rather than 'just being good looking' or feeding off their 15 minutes of fame) but (aside from Classical music, and a few rare popular music examples such as Queen) it doesn't work out like that. At least it hasn't lately, from what I can see... Ultimately this plays heavily into why the U.S. hasn't spent much time in promoting Queen and/or a possible full tour aside from (at present) 2 dates. My 2 cents...for what it's worth Andrew |
| Erin 26.08.2005 09:28 |
Jeffrey Todd wrote: I'd love to experince the food and culture of Great Britain, especially the faggots. I hear they're quite tasty!Faggots in a "rich sauce" are tasty..so I read, anyway. Btw..so excited..Sunday night is the tractor pull, then we are gonna go sit on the porch at night, drink some Buds, and watch the skeeters get fried in the bugzapper. You can't do THAT in the UK! |
| LIZAWITHAZ 26.08.2005 09:30 |
I am no fan of either Bush or Blair. But comparisons to the US and UK are ridiculous in my opinion because both countries are worlds apart. Especially musically and socially. Americans love fast everything, cars, food, LOL! The UK is a little more subdued when it comes to atmosphere, maybe we are used to waiting for what we wish as for the US they are the spoiled children who have everything but wanted it yesterday! LOL! I mean that in a joking fashion as I am older than most of the noticeboard posters here and have travelled extensively I can make a comparison like this. When I was in my 20s I came to the US for the very first time during the Vietnam era and back then it was an amazing country. I landed first in New York City where I was with a very large British tour group, I loved America's openness at that time, of course being a closeted gay man at the time I was terrified of the "Greenwich Village" area which was beginning to be the eventually mecca of gay culture in New York (now of course its Chelsea). My point is that nowadays that openness or freedom of expression is being stifled (I believe)by many in the US government who are extremely right wing (Mr. Bush Jr.'s lot). A shame because I would like to return as I have many wonderful friends there (and some former lovers) I would like to see but I would hate to deal with those tossers again. Well that's my feelings and take from that what you want. Cheers, David |
| mystic_rhythms 26.08.2005 11:24 |
I guess this should affect me the most, as I am an American, born and raised. I'm not going to argue, I'm going to agree. The US does suck when it comes to music. Think about this. Most of the greatest bands (and my faves) came from other countries. Queen, Rolling Stones, Beatles, The Clash, all those excellect rock bands came from England. And there's more where that came from lol The problem with the US is, well, we change way too much. From the way we dress to the way we talk, nothing stays the same for too long. One day something will be popular, the next day it will be considered "out of date". Same goes with music. People would rather call Queen fossils instead of calling them idols. People in the US would rather listen to the new Britney Spears album, or watch the newest Brad Pitt movie, or dig into a tabloid magazine and believe all the false crap they put in them. I loathe the American way. To take the title of a Queen song, "Is this the world we created?" |
| @ndy38 26.08.2005 11:49 |
Even better, come to Scotland! It rains, it rains more, and it's cold! And you get to eat great Scottish food like Pizza's, Curry's, Chinese Take Away's etc. Great Fun! |
| Lord Blackadder 26.08.2005 12:18 |
Ayreon wrote: In a country with a complete moron as president, whrere stadiums sell out with dumb monstertruck races, i am not surprised they don't get the finesse of Queen...I thought George Bush was their President? |
| Erin 26.08.2005 12:40 |
<font color=black>andylamb_38 wrote: Even better, come to Scotland! It rains, it rains more, and it's cold!I was there in January and froze my ass off. It wasn't the actual temp, it was the icy cold wind that gets ya..brrrrrr.. |
| PieterMC 26.08.2005 12:48 |
Feels good blowing up yer kilt though lass. |
| LIZAWITHAZ 26.08.2005 12:50 |
Pieter you gave such a picture in my dirty little head, honey! Now just STOP THAT! |
| *3*Playful as a pussycat 26.08.2005 12:50 |
LeroyBrown11 wrote: I want to live in England! No fair, but no, I have to be a crappy American with no British acent. Damn. I hate America.exactly how i feel...i am moving there, oh yes! *shifty eyes* but seriously, once i get out of High School, me and my friend are moving there...hopefully. |
| deleted user 26.08.2005 12:52 |
LeroyBrown11 wrote: Because America sucks and are stupid.Hello! I'm from the States! Am I stupid?! |
| Crazy LittleThing 26.08.2005 12:58 |
PieterMC wrote: Feels good blowing up yer kilt though lass.To do list for the Meadowlands tailgate party: Set up blocks of ice and strategically placed exhaust fans. |
| Erin 26.08.2005 13:03 |
Crazy LittleThing wrote:*LOL*!!PieterMC wrote: Feels good blowing up yer kilt though lass.To do list for the Meadowlands tailgate party: Set up blocks of ice and strategically placed exhaust fans. |
| Sharron .G 26.08.2005 14:23 |
All these UK men are just upset homosexuals, its ok. |
| AmeriQueen 26.08.2005 15:00 |
The problem with American culture as a whole is the widespread disease we know as marketing and advertising. We sell, sell, sell in America and it's not about offering the best product. It's about offering the most profitable product. You can't just be a good musician, you have to be cool, have an edge or be one of the beautiful people. Movie studios edit so many films again and again, not to make them better but to get a PG rating so that more people will see it. We recycle plots, themes and jokes over and over again because idiots keep laughing at them(how many fucking times must I see in a movie: a) someone run into a wall or get hit by some random object as a gag b) someone unwittingly eat or drink something that the audience saw get tainted, but they don't know. DURR!!!!). Clint Eastwood once said that marketing is a warped concept. Don't try and figure out what the audience likes and wants. Make a good film and your audience will come to you. It's so sad that on the movieguide website for Dallas, two 10 film lists are next to each other. One is the top ten highest grossing films, the other 10 are the critically acclaimed films. What's so freaking sad is that there is on average only 1 film at a time that would be on both lists. We focus so much of our art and culture around children. It makes one really hate kids at times. Leaving Queen out, what says it all in comparison are the two bands that seem to top the 2 countries. Leaving out Queen, the Beatles are England's prize and for the USA, probably the biggest is the Eagles. These perfectly represent their nation's musical culture as a whole. One band is inventive, creative, full of energy and has such a wide variety of sounds from album to album and song to song. The other is some lame ass, dry as dirt, all their shit sounds alike, overrated, wattered down band that focuses their music on soulfully singing meaningful lyrics. The Beatles had better lyrics, they just realized what everyone seems to have forgotten these days: Lyrics are lyrics but it is the instrumentation and sound that makes music. The Eagles have hits that seem like they wrote the musical part in half and hour. The Beatles(and especially Queen) seem like they spend weeks just recording one song. I'm rambling now. The bottom line is that as long as we keep buying the shit they sell us, it will never get better. Like the great Bill Hicks said 15 years ago, "Debbie Gibson had the number one best selling album in America this year. Now if that doesn't make your blood fucking curdle!" |
| teleman 26.08.2005 15:56 |
There is a rich cultural history in th U.S. American music like Jazz and Blues. British musicians often refer to American musicians as influences. Just because many Americans don't get Queen doesn't mean their culture is any less valid than European culture. There are things in American society and culture I don't like but I'm not going to trash them all. |
| dixie 26.08.2005 16:42 |
but what i dont get is that americans (some not all) seem to think that all british people are gay. yes we have our fair share but why do they think were all gay???? can somebody explain |
| teleman 26.08.2005 16:48 |
Who said Americans think all Brits are gay? |
| dixie 26.08.2005 17:03 |
i dont know them personally. but ive heard of some people who turn there nose up at us and just say (i dont like them there gay) quote when someone mentioned the darkness and someone said i dont support fags. well i assume (correct me if im wrong) that he hates them for being british |
| Mr.Jingles 26.08.2005 17:35 |
The 'I Want To Break Free' video is probably one of the worst music videos ever made. I mean, the 'Coronation Street' parody thing was actually funny, but the whole ballet part was fuckin' awful. It just ruined the tongue in cheek mood of the song itself. |
| PainPleasure 26.08.2005 17:37 |
Who cares anyway about the States? The world doesn't stop turning if the US doesn't like one thing. Queen has a great fan base in UK, Italy, Portugal, Germany, Brazil and the list goes on and on...and that's okay because these people are intellgent ones. By the way, it's true, British and Americans don't know how to cook a shit!!! Anyways, if it hadn't been an error of history, all of North America would be french speaking. It's because of the stupidity of the Frenchs who couldn't foresee the future (You and I, lol)and gave New France to the British and by doing so, they new it was the end of the British empire in N-A. Stupid move because we have to endure the Americans and their imperialism. I'm a french speaking canadian and it would have been better if the US would have been french. |
| brENsKi 26.08.2005 17:43 |
bohemianrhap84 wrote: I can't understand why the U.S. is so blind to the fact that Queen was/is the greatest band of all time. They're better than The Beatles, and any other band who ever played. At least I get it. Thank God for that.no they're not. record sales alone prove that. what you mean t say is that IN YOUR OPINION they are better...that's not the same thing tho'. ...and before you jump down my throat i am a huge queen fan, but i can at least be objective without having to wear queen-tinted galsses all the time:- the beatles taught queen everything they needed to know about song-writing and production...and all on 4 or 8 tracks of tape. queen got to fiddle about with 24 and 48 tracks - c'mon - any fool can see it's going to sound better... the beatles changed music - for ever!!! sgt pepper, rubber soul, revolver and abbey road are musical gems - listen to them with an open mind and then come back and say that the beatles weren't better ... |
| deleted user 26.08.2005 18:27 |
Sure, you can buy the plane tickets. Hahahaha! America's music is totally crap. While England has rock music look what we get, rap! No fair. Plus, its always cold in England, I hate the sun, I love tea, so I would probably like it there. Agree? |
| deleted user 26.08.2005 18:29 |
*39* wrote:I'm from America too sadly. You are one of the very few who have good taste in music.LeroyBrown11 wrote: Because America sucks and are stupid.Hello! I'm from the States! Am I stupid?! |
| rockyracoon 26.08.2005 19:12 |
AmeriQueen, that was a great, great post. You may have been a bit too harsh on the Eagles (I really like Hotel California), but your commentary was excellent. And BrenSki, I liked your input, too. I suspect the debate regarding Queen vs. Beatles will go on for a long time. From my perspective, the Beatles were fabulous. And while I have always been willing to acknowledge the talent of John Lennon and Paul McCartney, I have realized over the past 20 years or so that George Martin was the real genius behind the Beatles' music. John Lennon once said that the Beatles built on what Elvis Presley had started, and took it to another level. Interestingly, John Lennon said, "Before Elvis, there was nothing." Likewise, Queen built upon what the Beatles had developed. Queen did it all on their own, without the benefit of a George Martin. But Queen did have a significant advantage in technologies available, especially in multi-tracking, layering, digitizing, superior instrumentation, sound systems, etc. In effect, the complexities in Queen's music made the Beatles' music sound primitive. That's not a knock on the Beatles, as I'm sure the Beatles' music would have been significantly enhanced had they had the technologies available to Queen. But musically, both groups brought an abundance of creativity. It is my opinion, and nothing more than opinion, that Queen were by far the better musicians. And for the past 20 years, I have listened primarily to Queen, and rarely to the Beatles. But the Beatles were the pioneers. Queen then took it all to a much higher level. So back to the original question....Why Doesn't The U.S. Get It? Primarily because of all the reasons already presented on this board. Here's another reason....The music and arts programs available in most public school systems in the U.S. are pretty pathetic. Too much emphasis on math, science, computer science, and English. Very little emphasis on creativity and/or composition, and very little encouragement for self expression. The educators don't want to have to deal with non-conforming, creative thinking, artistic types who are perceived to be anti-establishment free spirits. In effect, it's the educators themselves who don't appreciate music and art, perhaps because they have been hired to improve average SAT and ACT scores. So as long as the scales are tilted so heavily against the arts, the vast majority of the U.S. will continue to be unable to recognize the beauty and greatness of Queen's music. |
| Smitty 26.08.2005 19:22 |
Funny hearing about the US from a European point of view. LOL! |
| Grantcdn 26.08.2005 21:13 |
To Brenski, I agree with Rocky Raccoon....the beatles were great, and great pioneers but listen to the songs side by side and Queen wrote better music...true they had more advanced equipment, and they had the beatles to build from, but each musician in Queen was a better musician than each beatle....lyrics I may give to John Lennon for the most part but lets face it Queen were no slouches in that area either....how songs were pieced together with Queen is truly mindblowing.... ....and why the US doesn't get it?? I think it's just a historical and cultural thing....look at Rolling Stone Magazine and Hollywood....The magazine likes bands that only play three chords (and Hates Queen) and everyone knows that all-to-familiar Hollywood ending ching ching.......now it's all about Beautiful Faces and dancing and who cares about the music....Europe appreciates the Arts more and music is an Art....Queen's music is some of the best art ever made........to sophisticated for the three chord Rolling Stone Magazine (and the band of the same name too who are loved in the US).....and not Hollywood looking enough for video.......and then there is Freddie......the US couldn't understand him....or let themselves get to like him enough......some was his arrogance....some was his misunderstood bisexuality.......and he didn't make friends with the media who really roasted him when they got the chance....I think they roast him more now since he can't sue them from the grave.... |
| Grantcdn 26.08.2005 21:43 |
and to add to my comments.....they don't get it now b/c part of the US culture is fast food....and music is treated the same way.....if it doesn't look pretty on video quickly or if it is more than the three chords or rap samples....its just too much time to invest in trying to understand it....just by looking at who is big now it's easy to see.... ...having said all that, the US really did get it from 1975 to 1981....maybe b/c it was cool then to get into songs that had substance....think of all those Classic Rock Bands then like Kansas and Boston and Queen and of course the psychadelic Beatles before.......Queen was the biggest band in the world in 1980....and honestly I think they blew it after Greatest Hits....because they let it get to their heads and think we can put out anything....and then they released Hot Space and then Freddie became a target since that often happens when you are on the Top of the World.....I guess the rest is history.... If you are a music lover though and love live performance Queen was certainly the BEST....and this tour with Paul Rodgers is fantastic proving yet again how great they were/are: Brian and Roger have still got it! KEEP ROCKIN' |
| Smitty 26.08.2005 22:34 |
Grantcdn wrote: ....and why the US doesn't get it?? I think it's just a historical and cultural thing....look at Rolling Stone Magazine and Hollywood....The magazine likes bands that only play three chords (and Hates Queen) and everyone knows that all-to-familiar Hollywood ending ching ching.......now it's all about Beautiful Faces and dancing and who cares about the music....Europe appreciates the Arts more and music is an Art....Queen's music is some of the best art ever made........to sophisticated for the three chord Rolling Stone Magazine (and the band of the same name too who are loved in the US).....and not Hollywood looking enough for video.......and then there is Freddie......the US couldn't understand him....or let themselves get to like him enough......some was his arrogance....some was his misunderstood bisexuality.......and he didn't make friends with the media who really roasted him when they got the chance....I think they roast him more now since he can't sue them from the grave....... ... LOL!!! MUAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Ah, Canadian, a border away, a world apart... Nah It's not really good to look at the US as 1 group because either way...you're wrong. That's all I have to say. I do hate american pop music though. Ha Ha. "Europe appreciates the Arts more and music is an Art." "I don't care who you are that's funny right there." |
| Shvili 26.08.2005 22:44 |
Let’s be reasonable now people. When speaking about culture and taste in relation to modern music, you should remember where it all started-USA. Rock’n Roll Was born in US, and many legendary Groups, including Queen, where inspired by American musicians and culture in general. The sort of “America bashing” that some of the posters demonstrated is a sine of ignorance and nothing more. |
| Smitty 26.08.2005 22:45 |
Shvili wrote: Let’s be reasonable now people. When speaking about culture and taste in relation to modern music, you should remember where it all started-USA. Rock’n Roll Was born in US, and many legendary Groups, including Queen, where inspired by American musicians and culture in general. The sort of “America bashing” that some of the posters demonstrated is a sine of ignorance and nothing more.THANK YOU!! |
| BricePerrin 26.08.2005 22:53 |
grantcdn wrote: and to add to my comments.....they don't get it now b/c part of the US culture is fast food....and music is treated the same way.....if it doesn't look pretty on video quickly or if it is more than the three chords or rap samples....its just too much time to invest in trying to understand it....just by looking at who is big now it's easy to see.... Couldn't agree more!!! I tell friends of mine that culture, especially music here in the U.S. is "crap in, crap out". It's like the old saying "if you tell someone they are stupid long enough, they begin to beileve it." Well, the U.S. consumer has been fed crap for so long, that they accept that as being normal, and eat up any crap that comes out...as long as it's what they are used to. God forbid the public get out of it's "comfort zone" for 10 minutes and try something new or diffrent. The cultural laziness of this country is a crime...imho. |
| Winter Land Man 26.08.2005 22:56 |
All my friends in the US have Queen CDs... ALL of them do. It is very popular here and influence many bands I know locally. |
| Maz 27.08.2005 02:09 |
PainPleasure wrote: Anyways, if it hadn't been an error of history, all of North America would be french speaking. It's because of the stupidity of the Frenchs who couldn't foresee the future (You and I, lol)and gave New France to the British and by doing so, they new it was the end of the British empire in N-A. Stupid move because we have to endure the Americans and their imperialism. I'm a french speaking canadian and it would have been better if the US would have been french.I mean, really, do you read your history off of a cereal box or something? |
| Erin 27.08.2005 10:58 |
Zeni wrote:Had it not been for the invasion of Captn' Crunch, we would all be vampires under the control of Count Chocula..PainPleasure wrote: Anyways, if it hadn't been an error of history, all of North America would be french speaking. It's because of the stupidity of the Frenchs who couldn't foresee the future (You and I, lol)and gave New France to the British and by doing so, they new it was the end of the British empire in N-A. Stupid move because we have to endure the Americans and their imperialism. I'm a french speaking canadian and it would have been better if the US would have been french.I mean, really, do you read your history off of a cereal box or something? Zeni- My sister swears to this day that she saw an "8 foot turkey." It was as tall as the top of her Dodge Ram pickup she says.. (That wouldn't be 8 ft., but nevermind..) |
| bohemianrhap84 27.08.2005 11:56 |
Yes Queen are better than the Beatles, brenski. I have an open mind about music. I like a lot of Beatles songs like "Let It Be", "Yesterday", "Love Me Do", and there's a lot of others too. However, I don't have any Beatles albums, because I don't think the music as a whole is that great. Where as with Queen, I have every single album and they're all fantastic (except Flash Gordon of course). Granted there are some Queen songs that aren't that great either. But as a whole there music tops the Beatles any day. |
| PainPleasure 27.08.2005 13:47 |
Erin wrote:Good one. I'm sorry, but I'm studying history in University. And for your information, if you don't know history, that's your problem, both of you. Before 1763, France was in possession of at least half of the North American which is the US nowadays. All the states that are near the Mississippi river were French territories. A frenchman sailed from the great lakes to the golf of Mexico during the 1600s and his name was Cavelier de la Salle. And I could go on and on. So, don't come here giving me lessons about history, especially the one about New France, which is my speciality!!! And to you know about the Lousiana purchase in 1803. Most Americans are aware about that sale and most of them also are aware that they're was a french presence in N-A before 1763, which is the Treaty of Paris. So go surf on the internet, read books and after maybe, and I say maybe, you can give me lessons.Zeni wrote:Had it not been for the invasion of Captn' Crunch, we would all be vampires under the control of Count Chocula.. Zeni- My sister swears to this day that she saw an "8 foot turkey." It was as tall as the top of her Dodge Ram pickup she says.. (That wouldn't be 8 ft., but nevermind..)PainPleasure wrote: Anyways, if it hadn't been an error of history, all of North America would be french speaking. It's because of the stupidity of the Frenchs who couldn't foresee the future (You and I, lol)and gave New France to the British and by doing so, they new it was the end of the British empire in N-A. Stupid move because we have to endure the Americans and their imperialism. I'm a french speaking canadian and it would have been better if the US would have been french.I mean, really, do you read your history off of a cereal box or something? |
| Maz 27.08.2005 14:22 |
This looks like fun.
PainPleasure wrote: Good one. I'm sorry, but I'm studying history in University. And for your information, if you don't know history, that's your problem, both of you.I can only hope I have enough training in American history to match wits. PainPleasure wrote: Before 1763, France was in possession of at least half of the North American which is the US nowadays. All the states that are near the Mississippi river were French territories.France was in possession of much of modern-day Canada and the Mississippi valley region. Saying they controlled half is nuts. The eastern seaboard was populated by the English, the Southwest was littered with Spanish missions and forts, and there is no way the French were ever going to conquer the Indians of the Plains. Save for Louisiana, St. Louis, and Canada, it's difficult to argue that France controlled half of the states. PainPleasure wrote: A frenchman sailed from the great lakes to the golf of Mexico during the 1600s and his name was Cavelier de la Salle. And I could go on and on.And a Spaniard was the first to reach Kansas almost a century before that. So what? PainPleasure wrote: So, don't come here giving me lessons about history, especially the one about New France, which is my speciality!!!But it does seem that you need to do a little more studying. PainPleasure wrote: And to you know about the Lousiana purchase in 1803. Most Americans are aware about that sale and most of them also are aware that they're was a french presence in N-A before 1763, which is the Treaty of Paris.The French lost all their land east of the Mississippi River with the Treaty of 1763, while the Spanish lost Florida. Years later, after the United States had been founded, it bought the Louisiana Purchase from Napolean. As I'm sure you are aware, Napolean had designs on establishing a French empire in North America, but lost too many troops to disease in Haiti that he was forced to sell off the land to fund his European wars. But that's not the issue. You said earlier that America was settled by Purtians, which is not the case. Yes, New England had a large Puritan population, but that was it. Explain how many of our Founding Fathers (George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, etc) were from the South and did not have a single Puritan bone in their body? And you said that it was an ''error in history'' that gave North America to England. Well, since you are a Francophile, I guess you have the right to call a military defeat an ''error.'' France lost the Seven-Years War and was forced to give up their claims. This was the reality of imperlialism in the eighteenth century, not an ''error.'' But I really doubt you have the patience to read all of that. You seem more content in trashing the US more than making an effort to study history. PainPleasure wrote: So go surf on the internet, read books and after maybe, and I say maybe, you can give me lessons.I can guarantee you that I have read more history books than you have, and have studied this a longer time than you. I welcome intelligent discussion on this, but so far, you haven't provided any. |
| Maz 27.08.2005 14:27 |
|
| Maz 27.08.2005 14:27 |
wrong button |
| rockyracoon 27.08.2005 15:14 |
zeni, you have made some well-researched, intelligent posts. Congratulations! Just out of curiosity, what is your background, education, age, etc? |
| deleted user 27.08.2005 15:19 |
LeroyBrown11 wrote:Why thank you. ^.^*39* wrote:I'm from America too sadly. You are one of the very few who have good taste in music.LeroyBrown11 wrote: Because America sucks and are stupid.Hello! I'm from the States! Am I stupid?! |
| Erin 27.08.2005 15:21 |
PainPleasure wrote: And for your information, if you don't know history, that's your problem, both of you.Err..I wuz jus makin' a cereal joke... I'm not gonna challenge anybody when it comes ta history. I gots my edjamacation in da S.C. school system..:-B |
| quicksilver mercury 27.08.2005 15:42 |
|
| Suigi 27.08.2005 16:01 |
scott__mercury wrote: Typical Canadian coward's wrong facts. canada was french and thats why there cowards. Put up the white surrender flags. America was found by Columbus and then the English settled. Americans went there own way and became the greatest nation ever on earth. Canadians like PainPleasure, grantcdn, boy of destiny, smileexpert and teleman all come on bashing Americans when they wish they were American. Wake up! There are American Queen fans posting here. You can't say we don't get it. So stop envius canadians bashing America all the time.OK, here's something for you to do, Scott. Look up "War of 1812" in Google. Tell me who won. ;) And keep in mind that Canada was FIRST lived in by Aboriginals. And that North America was FIRST "discovered" by Leif Eriksson in the year 1000. SUCK IT, COLUMBUS! You got beat by almost 500 years, and by a friggin' lost Viking! Getting back on topic (I'm sick and tired of debating about Canada-US relations. We're stuck with each other, hokai?) We Canadians share the American penchant for crap music, too. And I can honestly say that what passes for music nowadays is repetitive, stale, or just plain obnoxious. Who in their right mind is going to go see Hilary Duff or Britney Spears 30 - heck, even 15 - years from now? Or any of these rap artists? Maybe when Freddie's 60th birthday rolls around next year, we should try to get as many people into Queen as people. Y'know, pass along a few MP3s to your friends, blast an album from your car , stuff like that. |
| PainPleasure 27.08.2005 16:54 |
Ok, it seems that it's always fighting around here. So here I go:
Zeni wrote: This looks like fun.PainPleasure wrote: Good one. I'm sorry, but I'm studying history in University. And for your information, if you don't know history, that's your problem, both of you.I can only hope I have enough training in American history to match wits.PainPleasure wrote: Before 1763, France was in possession of at least half of the North American which is the US nowadays. All the states that are near the Mississippi river were French territories.Zeni wrote: France was in possession of much of modern-day Canada and the Mississippi valley region. Saying they controlled half is nuts. The eastern seaboard was populated by the English, the Southwest was littered with Spanish missions and forts, and there is no way the French were ever going to conquer the Indians of the Plains. Save for Louisiana, St. Louis, and Canada, it's difficult to argue that France controlled half of the states.The territories of the 13 colonies were a tiny stip that didn't go beyond the Alleghany mountains, if you know what they are. The territories of France were extended from the rocky mountains, as the French didn't explore what was beyond until around 1743 when La Vérendrye explored beyond it with is sons. So, French territories went from the Rocky Mountains in the west, thru the Alleghanys in the east, thru The Hudson Bay in the North and the Gulf of Mexico in the South.PainPleasure wrote: A frenchman sailed from the great lakes to the golf of Mexico during the 1600s and his name was Cavelier de la Salle. And I could go on and on.Zeni wrote: And a Spaniard was the first to reach Kansas almost a century before that. So what?Yeah, and did he take possession of the territories in the name of Spain?PainPleasure wrote: So, don't come here giving me lessons about history, especially the one about New France, which is my speciality!!!Zeni wrote: But it does seem that you need to do a little more studying.Sadly, I think the same can be said of you.PainPleasure wrote: And to you know about the Lousiana purchase in 1803. Most Americans are aware about that sale and most of them also are aware that they're was a french presence in N-A before 1763, which is the Treaty of Paris.Zeni wrote: The French lost all their land east of the Mississippi River with the Treaty of 1763, while the Spanish lost Florida. Years later, after the United States had been founded, it bought the Louisiana Purchase from Napolean. As I'm sure you are aware, Napolean had designs on establishing a French empire in North America, but lost too many troops to disease in Haiti that he was forced to sell off the land to fund his European wars.But that's not the issue. |
| PainPleasure 27.08.2005 16:56 |
scott__mercury wrote: Typical Canadian coward's wrong facts. canada was french and thats why there cowards. Put up the white surrender flags. America was found by Columbus and then the English settled. Americans went there own way and became the greatest nation ever on earth. Canadians like PainPleasure, grantcdn, boy of destiny, smileexpert and teleman all come on bashing Americans when they wish they were American. Wake up! There are American Queen fans posting here. You can't say we don't get it. So stop envius canadians bashing America all the time.And you little boy, do you have greater arguments? Worthless arguying with someone like you, leave it to the big ones. |
| Suigi 27.08.2005 17:08 |
GET BACK ON TOPIC! *wallops all involved parties with lacrosse mallet* |
| Maz 27.08.2005 17:23 |
I'll try to cut this down into a post that can be read.
PainPleasure wrote: The territories of the 13 colonies were a tiny stip that didn't go beyond the Alleghany mountains, if you know what they are.Which, most importanly, is where the majority of the European population happened to live. PainPleasure wrote: The territories of France were extended from the rocky mountains, as the French didn't explore what was beyond until around 1743 when La Vérendrye explored beyond it with is sons. So, French territories went from the Rocky Mountains in the west, thru the Alleghanys in the east, thru The Hudson Bay in the North and the Gulf of Mexico in the South.But what was the French presence in this land? A few fur trappers, perhaps. France could claim anything they wanted, but the fact of the matter is they controlled far less than you want to believe. Again, their permanent establishments were few and far between. PainPleasure wrote: Yeah, and did he take possession of the territories in the name of Spain?I'm not exactly sure what Coronado claimed during that trip, but the Spanish did claim much of the American Southwest. Again, what they claimed and what they controlled were two different things. If anyone can make a legitimate claim to owning half of North America, it was the Spanish. PainPleasure wrote: Event if the Puritans didn't settle most of the colonies, they were the most dominant ones, way of thinking, economy, religion, etc, so their philosophy was spreaded everywhere in the US, so this, why religion, even today is so important to the Americans.Just because you want to believe it does not make it true. Puritans did have an influence, but so did the Anglicans, Baptists, Presbyterians, and Methodists. Puritans abolished slavery, yet slavery dominated American politics until 1865. New York became the leading port in the US, and it was far removed from Puritan New England. More immigrants in the seventeenth century went to Virginia than Massachusettes. I could go on, but it seems evidence will not convince you. It's a copout to blame American values on Puritanism. If you seriously want to study the history of American religious values, then you have to look at the Great Awakenings of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. PainPleasure wrote: I think I have a lot more patience than you and my goal is not of bashing the US, if you can see it.I'm not the one who posted "That is despotism and the US suck real hard." Nor did I insult Canada or France in any way. I think I'm a pretty patient person, except when I see ignorance being flauted as education. PainPleasure wrote: Ok, so what makes you so sure of that just by seeing the wrong facts you're giving? So, in conclusion, I can see that your exposé is just about saying wrong things, just for the sake of having the last word? Or maybe, just to shut up a french speaking person, because like most of WASP people, you believe that everything that's not white and doesn't speak english is not valuable.Tell me, what's factually wrong there? Nothing. You are the one making claims that overstate your case. I'm not the one playing the race card, nor have I dragged Protestantism into the issue either. In fact, you're the one making the assumption that I am white and Protestant. You are restating nothing more than common myths about American history that have little to do with the reality of the situation. I don't want to shut you up, just to educate you. |
| Maz 27.08.2005 17:23 |
rockyracoon wrote: Just out of curiosity, what is your background, education, age, etc?Currently at work on a PhD in American History, of all things. |
| smileexpert 27.08.2005 21:56 |
I didn't slam Americans or their country...I simply put my own opinion out there as to WHY I think Music has become a popularity contest. I simply use a couple of American artists - tho the same could easily be said for some British and/or Canadian artists quite easily - to demonstrate my point. Case example for how music became a popularity contest in England...Victoria Beckham's solo record. Case example for how music became a popularity contest in Canada...Ryan Malcom's (our first Canadian Idol) solo record. There - ya happy now? I've made my case for other countries. i.e. this popularity contest notion is EVERYWHERE. Andrew ps...Canada is and forever will be the best country in the world...and we have the best beer and the best Hockey Team!! |
| teleman 27.08.2005 22:07 |
scott__mercury
Show me anywhere that I have done any bashing of the U.S. You won't find it.
On the other hand you have done nothing but take pot shots at Canada.
Personally I love the country I live in and think it would be nice for anyone to visit. It isn't perfect but it is my home and I look at all Canadians as being family.
smileexpert wrote: Case example for how music became a popularity contest in Canada...Ryan Malcom's (our first Canadian Idol) solo record.This is for my fellow canucks There was a bomb scare in Toronto.............. Somebody found Ryan Malcom's CD LOL |
| smileexpert 27.08.2005 22:10 |
And we still have the best beer and the best hockey team in the world!! :) |
| Suigi 27.08.2005 23:38 |
Hooray for Canadians! And Brits like us more. ^_^ |
| rove 27.08.2005 23:59 |
I am an Australian who thinks that the aussie culture is by far the best ( obviously ). but I lived in England and I must admit I love the culture there. Especially the music. I used to watch Music channels in England and hey would do a countdown of the hundred greatest songs ever voted by the public. While I wouldn't agree with everything on it i must say i was astounded to how much better the lists were than US lists I had seen, and they had Bo Rap number 1! British music is generally much better than anyone elses. even today while r 'n' b and Hip Hop is taking over the world britain is resisting, they are still providing good rock bands like the Darkness and Coldplay. We need more of them! The Brits love a good rock song. |
| rockyracoon 27.08.2005 23:59 |
Zeni, Thanks for responding. Your education is manifesting itself, whether you intended that or not. You know what you're talking about, and you write very well. Thanks for contributing to this board. Unfortunately, about a third of the people on this board can't write, can't spell, and make ridiculous mistakes of grammar or syntax. And altogether too many of them don't know what they're talking about. You, on the other hand, are a breath of fresh air. Rocky |
| Maz 28.08.2005 01:53 |
Thanks for the kind words, Rocky. |
| Grantcdn 28.08.2005 11:32 |
Hey Scott, I'm actually not bashing Americans...if anything it's the people at the top making the decision in record companies and magazines and radio stations to play crap all the time and not to play Queen enough and give Queen the respect they deserve.....It may so happen that those people making that decision may be Americans but even I'm not so sure about that....the problem is there is crap on the radio, and the world (in particular in the US because that is where the power and money is), is seeking prettier people, simpler music, and what ever it takes to make money faster.....I quite like Americans and have always liked Americans and enjoyed partying with them and I quite like all of North America some of my favourite states would include California, Florida, Maine, Arizona and Utah....am I envious?? not a chance, after all we do have better hockey and better beer.... I'd still take Canadian beer over McDonalds anyday....no offense intended... |
| Erin 28.08.2005 11:41 |
rockyracoon wrote: Unfortunately, about a third of the people on this board can't write, can't spell, and make ridiculous mistakes of grammar or syntax.I sure does hate dat. It be so tru. |
| queenfreddie1983 28.08.2005 12:57 |
from what i have seen in my offical queen book the usa will only have two show. i wish they would have more because i would like to see a queen show |
| SergeantPepperDG 28.08.2005 13:24 |
I was recently in Canada for a week with my family. What we found was that everyone is freakishly nice. Not "Stepford Wives" perfect nice, but just friendly, helpful nice. My mom described it as "devoid of assholes." Two examples: 1. When we went out for sushi and were seated outdoors, we found that the umbrella on our table, unlike the others, would not move to block out the sun. There were only 4 tables outside in the first place, and the only other table that had a functional umbrella was too small. A group of three people, who were sitting at a larger table, said that they had been expecting some more people, but they probably weren't going to show up, and they offered us their table! We were completely shocked. Nothing like this had ever happened to us in the U.S. 2. We were driving along one evening, when my sister had to go to a bathroom. My dad pulled over and double parked in front of an alley near an organic food store/cafe. While we were waiting for my sister, I noticed that we were blocking someone who was trying to get out of the alley. She probably hadn't been there more than 15 seconds. In the U.S., this woman probably would have started screaming at us and honking, but noooooo... she waited there patiently until we realized she was there. This is the scariest part, when we moved out of her way she smiled at us and waved at us as she drove off. Now in the U.S., if you're in a car and you're in someone's way for more than two seconds, all hell breaks loose. I also noticed that restaurant service was a lot slower than in the U.S. As our vacation went on, I realized that it wasn't actually SLOW, it was just a lot more relaxed. We're just so impatient here in the U.S. |
| Crazy LittleThing 28.08.2005 17:42 |
scott__mercury wrote: "Typical Canadian coward's wrong facts." |
| gem27 30.08.2005 11:08 |
i tell u why the US doesnt get Queen. because they are too much for them. i give a good example of the difference in the UK and the US the US are really stuck in the mud like the Janet Jackson Justin Timberlake showing a nipple thing, over here it would be a bit of fun in the US they went mad. anyone would think they machine gunned kittens on that stage or something. i mean what was all that about. Whats the fuss? if they cant handle that they cant handle Queen im sure |
| Suigi 30.08.2005 12:46 |
Crazy LittleThing wrote:scott__mercury wrote: "Typical Canadian coward's wrong facts." While I don't think that Queenzone is an appropriate place to discuss politics, I'd like to respectfully remind you, scott_mercury, that it was Canadian Embassy staff in Iran who granted sanctuary and safe passage to US Embassy staff who managed to avoid capture by the Iranian "students" who held US citizens captive for more than a year in Tehran, starting in November of 1979. At great personal risk, the Canadian embassy staff shielded the US personnel and got them safely out of Tehran on Canadian passports. Up until then, Canada had been considered a kind of "neutral" country. When it became known that they shielded the US Embassy personnel, they relinquished that. For us. I don't know about your personal experiences with Canadian citizens, but as a US citizen, I'll never forget what those Canadian Embassy staffers did for our Embassy staff, and I would think twice before calling any Canadian a coward. --CindyTack onto that the Canadian involvement in WWI and WWII. |
| Ms. Bea Haven 30.08.2005 13:21 |
Some of us U.S. dwellers DO get it. I got it a LONG time ago. And I still get it. As I said a couple of weeks ago in a very similar thread, the U.S. doesn't appreciate Queen the way the rest of the world does, and the bottom line reason for it was because Queen's music is too intelligent for the average American. Face it - the average U.S. newspaper is written on a sixth grade level, the most popular TV shows are reality shows, the most popular music is (c)rap or whatever marketing strategies they are using to target the teens to 25 year olds...I was born in the 60's and have been a Queen fan since I heard Killer Queen in '74 - I have no desire to listen to whatever's out now and will only be out for the next 5 minutes - it all sounds the same and it's terrible. There's no variety in the music of today. Queen kept and held my attention because they dabbled in all different kinds of musical styles - they weren't afraid to try to do something that didn't have a 'rock' lable on it - and that's why they kept my attention this long. I don't just listen to rock and roll - I like Latin Jazz/flamenco styles, Brazilian, Classical, I live for FUNK (and yes, Hot Space IS one of my favorite Queen albums - see - ALBUMS - I AM OLD), reggae, and yes, rock and roll - basically anything that isn't country or (c)rap and I'm happy. I GET IT PEOPLE AND I LIVE IN THE UNITED STATES. Hopping off my soapbox now.... |
| teleman 30.08.2005 13:45 |
Miss Bea Haven wrote: ... the U.S. doesn't appreciate Queen the way the rest of the world does, and the bottom line reason for it was because Queen's music is too intelligent for the average American ....I don't buy that for a moment. Average Americans are equal in intelligence to any average human being. These assumptions that American culture is inferior, that Americans are less intelligent etc. are offensive. Try to consider Queen's role in their lack of popularity in the U.S. after 1982. They stopped touring North America after 1982. They made little attempt to connect with their North American fans. Out of sight out of mind. There was a surge in Queen's popularity in the U.S. following the release of Wayne's World and following Freddie's death. People were aware of Queen again and their music had become available due to Hollywood Records. There are still some hardcore North American fans and there are new fans. Clearly some in the U.S. do get it. Wait and see how Queen + Paul Rodgers do in North America. They may do quite well but not if they ignore North America after the 2 shows in the autumn. |
| quicksilver mercury 30.08.2005 16:53 |
|
| av 30.08.2005 19:20 |
Well, the US is the richest colony in the world, and also the only country with complete freedom. Why else would we have millions of immigrants a year and mexicans jumping over the border eery day?????????/ U idiots.. |
| av 30.08.2005 19:26 |
Oh, and compared to the regalness af the great USA, Queen is miniscule. And you all are just too obsessed to realize that. Queen is awesome, but the US DEFINITELEY comes first. Queen is really just a dead gay guy and a bunch of old drug/sex addicts. They really aren't "too smart" for any country. |
| av 30.08.2005 19:27 |
QUEEN ISNT ROYALTY!!!!! |
| Suigi 30.08.2005 19:44 |
scott__mercury wrote:Ummm...how do you know that Canada isn't fighting terrorism?Suigi wrote: Tack onto that the Canadian involvement in WWI and WWII. The Battle Of Vimy Ridge? That was all Canadian.Canada are to afraid to fight terror and doesn't do anything but get America to protect you. Because we aren't involved in Iraq? Need I remind you about the LARGE Canadian involvement in Afghanistan right now. Yeah, that's right, Afghanistan. The FIRST place that was bombed. Speakin' of which, there were also the four Canadians that were killed in a training exercise. By Americans. Were they cowards? Or was the bomber pilot a fcukin' moron? And is it just me, or are wars on words not really winable? War On Drugs... War On Terrorism... War On Poverty... All seem to be losing battles... One more thing that just occured to me: who said the Americans are protecting us? We have our own military, thanks. Then again, countries that don't piss off other nations and militant groups don't need that much protection. |
| Suigi 30.08.2005 19:53 |
BUT allow me to say something IN the United States' favour, Scott. They aren't stupid. Not in the least. Just mis-prioritized. Turn on a sports radio show, and revel in the astounding retention of facts. If only other subjects in the world were as intriguing to the American psyche as sports, then we'd have some freakin' geniuses on our hands. And then we have the case that the MINORITY of people in the United States have said they don't favour Queen. Namely, the people you've spoken to, the staff of Rolling Stone, etc. All told, that can't be more than, what, 10,000 people tops? In a nation of over 300,000,000, that is a teensy minority. That's a lot of people who haven't had their opinion collected. Or who don't know about Queen. So, maybe some kinda "Queen Lives!" campaign is in order for next year (Freddie's 60 b-day, and the 15th anniversary of his death), to raise interest, and sell tix for the NA tour of Q+PR. |
| doremi 30.08.2005 20:21 |
There are alot of variables anbout why the USA didn't ''get it''. But first I want to say that I have been a fan of Queen since 1975, when I was 14 when I first heard and saw BoRhap, and I, myself, my friends and my Mom (RIP who turned me on to Queen) all pretty much knew from the get go that Freddie was Gay and never cared at all. We just loved the music. Maybe, and I want to rfeiterate, that MAYBE it is become I from what they term a blue state, Maryland, which is moderate and Queen played/toured here many times in the 70's and in the early 80's. However, in terms of why the US didn't get it? Again, a laundry list of variables. Not the best business/professional judgement and dicsions after they switched from Elektra...to and by both Capitol Records and Hollywood Records, Capitol Records payola scandal, Queen flopping with Hot Space, but not jumping right back on the horse and pushing The Works and AKOM right after their gazillion free PR to ride on from their show stealing performance at Live Aid, while the iron was still hot in the USA's minds...Queen losing relevance in the 1980's as they entered their 30's and didn't make the effort to overtake the upstart younger/newcomer music artists emerging on the mid to late 80's scene to keep attaining the NEW youth/teen markets while still mainstaining their original older fans, not doing press (not counting when Freddie got ill), not doing PR appearances, their different sense of humor, and of course the good old fashioned small narrow mindededness of bigoted/bible thumping/homophobes about Freddie being gay. BUT...there is something else I want to bring into this. While I am not a fan of Oasis big time, I do think they are great songwriters. And the reason Oasis flopped in the USA market was their infighting and brawling and dissing every music artists on earth except the Beatles. BUT..Oasis did make ONE mistake, one variable that Queen also made, that Oasis, now in their 30's, are only just realizing and working VERY hard to repair. Liam, has always hated doing press (like Freddie did), and Oasis has always hated doing good will PR in store appearances (which Queen also hated doing). Now...Liam is doing TONS of press, and in each interview, he openly admits and addresses that Oasis F**ked up in this area from the mid 90's til now. In one interview in Billboard Magazine...Liam also brings up a GOOD point that Queen failed to recognize or maybe did recognize, but refused to address. ...Which is as Liam says and admits, that the people and market of the USA...are an entirely different animal than that of the UK and Europe. He says that the people/market of the USA is a ''tender flower'' that needs alot of attention, good will PR, good will Interviews and press, good will in store appearances, all of which Oasis is only NOW doing. Last Friday, Liam even did an interview with 104.1, an indie teensy radio station here in Maryland, he was lovely and gracious. Who'd a figured, right? The DJ, Mathew Blades, after the interview also expressed how pleasantly surprised he was at Liam's being so open to do and in an in depth interview, and with a teensy, local, indie radio station. Oasis has also been doing a junket across the USA doing in store autograph signings and performing at places like Tower Records...and get this...Walmart! Yes, maybe it sucks that the USA market, mentality, people are so very, very different in this PR regard. But...whether you are, or are not a fan of... ...U2...or The Rolling Stones..want to know why they STILL are as relevant and big in the USA as the 20 something new bands, in the age of rap and hip hop? Why they can still sell out 30,000 to 50,000 seat stadiums at $200 a pop? Because U2, The Rolling Stones, Sir Paul McCartney (who is starting his sell out USA stadium tour in the USA 9/16/2005,) Coldplay, Oasis...do tons of PR and make themselves relevant to kids, teens, new USA audiences by doing in store appeara |
| deleted user 30.08.2005 21:09 |
PainPleasure wrote: The States where colonized by Puritans in the 1600s and they always believed that they were the chosen ones and that they were always right in everything. That is despotism and the US suck real hard.the us sucks? ok, if that kind of stuff is appropriate on here, then: Canada is the gayest country out there...every one who lives in canada has absolutely no taste in good music Canada are stupid just because of some stupid myth from god knows when that says they thought theyre the chosen ones, and even though i know its a myth, im going to stereotype them just because im some stupid stuck up jerk who feels like its appropriate to say that another country sucks just because its not the one i live in but im not going to really say that because im not a stupid stuck up jerk who feels like its appropriate to say that another country sucks just because its not the one i live in |
| Suigi 30.08.2005 21:51 |
Wow, sweden_man. Thanks for not insulting my country. ^_^ |
| deleted user 31.08.2005 17:31 |
why, your very welcome |
| deleted user 03.09.2005 06:56 |
I love every country exept America, espicially England. I'm American and I hate being one, there's nothing good about this country, take me away! |
| av 05.09.2005 13:52 |
Do you all not friggin know that America is the best, richest country in the world, like I said before. FYI If you hate America so much, STAY UR ASS OUT OF OUR COUNTRY!!!!!!! |