advertisement


Dark Side Of The Moon 50th Anniversary

Whatever their political perspectives it looks like a classic battle of egos, they just can't leave it alone. Sad that at their stage of life they can't just agree to differ.
 
myles said:
When it comes to launching insults - true or not - she's no more than his wife in this instance. Waters has nothing to do with 'post-Waters' PF or Division Bell. She is not a stakeholder in the Gilmour-Waters war of attrition.

Now if Waters comments on her songwriting on Division Bell or anything else she has contributed to then all bets are off.
Click to expand...

Even if you accept that as true, which I don’t, I still think she has an absolute right to express any opinion she may have, just as I can, just as anyone else can. If you want to rail at someone that should be David Gilmour as he endorsed and amplified her viewpoint. A viewpoint that is in fairness far from controversial. Huge numbers of us agree with what she said and the way she said it. FWIW I respect Waters for having a generally pacifist anti-war stance, but beyond that he ends up defending brutal dictators. That is never a good look.
 
ERm...back to DSOM, I have the 20th anniversary version...Catalog Number: TOCP-7776.

Where does that fit in with the heirarchy of versions ?
 
RW does whinge that Polly gets to publicise her non-PF stuff on the PF website whereas RW solo work is not mentioned at all. In fairness we dont know if he asked them to do so, but suspect he doent bother because he knows the answer. His pro-Palestine views against the excesses of a very right-wing Israeli government I have sympathy with and his generic anti-war stance, but agree that there is a fine line between pacifism and appeasement when it comes to taking the side of Putin's Russian imperialism and offering American imperialism as an excuse for this, which is where his statements are. His carping about the PF name being used on that charity single to raise aid funds for Ukraine seem very small-minded and bitter, and I wouldnt mind betting this is what rankles most with DG & PS
 
Tony L said:
Even if you accept that as true, which I don’t, I still think she has an absolute right to express any opinion she may have, just as I can, just as anyone else can. If you want to rail at someone that should be David Gilmour as he endorsed and amplified her viewpoint. A viewpoint that is in fairness far from controversial. Huge numbers of us agree with what she said and the way she said it. FWIW I respect Waters for having a generally pacifist anti-war stance, but beyond that he ends up defending brutal dictators. That is never a good look.
Click to expand...
You may notice that in my original post I railed at both silly old buggers - she's just a silly old bugger for getting involved.
 
Tony L said:
That he’d speak to a vile far-right rag like the Telegraph speaks volumes. Waters’ is a very confused leftism, kind of a worst of all worlds capitalist tankie.

PS I view the Telegraph as a very deliberate choice. Waters is so high profile he can unquestionably choose his platform. His is not a marginalised viewpoint, if he wanted an hour on the BBC, C4 or Sky News he could get it. For some reason he chose to platform himself via a Tory tax-exile propaganda organ.
Click to expand...

It’s not exactly a sympathetic interview, fwiw.
 
Engels said:
RW does whinge that Polly gets to publicise her non-PF stuff on the PF website whereas RW solo work is not mentioned at all. In fairness we dont know if he asked them to do so, but suspect he doent bother because he knows the answer. His pro-Palestine views against the excesses of a very right-wing Israeli government I have sympathy with and his generic anti-war stance, but agree that there is a fine line between pacifism and appeasement when it comes to taking the side of Putin's Russian imperialism and offering American imperialism as an excuse for this, which is where his statements are. His carping about the PF name being used on that charity single to raise aid funds for Ukraine seem very small-minded and bitter, and I wouldnt mind betting this is what rankles most with DG & PS
Click to expand...

He position is anti-Jewish, not pro-Palestinian.
 
Tw99 said:
It’s not exactly a sympathetic interview, fwiw.
Click to expand...

In which case I’m even more puzzled by his choice of platform. He is one of the wealthiest and highest profile rock stars on the planet. He can define his own terms however he likes. No one would refuse to interview or platform Waters as he is guaranteed traffic no matter what he says. I’m amazed he chose a paywalled publication too. Had he gone with the Guardian or even the Daily bloody Mail everyone could read whatever he wanted to say. As it is he’s speaking to a very elderly, very small and exclusively Tory demographic. I don’t get it. What is the game here?
 
essgee said:
Also a big interview in today's Daily Telegraph. But no comment on it from me.
Click to expand...

...he begins the interview by complaining about something another journalist once said about him ... “Basically what he says,” Waters sighs, giving up, “is that I stick to whatever it is that I believe, and my side of any argument, in spite of the evidence.”
Well, can he give an example of a time he’s changed his mind due to the evidence?
“Yes, an article I wrote about three months ago calling Vladimir Putin a gangster… That may have been unfair.” He explains that he’s become a keen listener to The Duran, a podcast spin-off from a website that has published blogs linked to the anti-Nato hacking group Ghostwriter, and uses the Russian Empire’s two-headed eagle as a logo. After hearing their take on Russia, Waters now has more respect for Putin.

Doh!

Interview also says he's pro fox hunting and he shoots cormorants. So I've revised my opinion. He's a grade A tool.
 
Released March 1, 1973. Happy birthday!

Love it or hate it, it's hard to deny the impact. Wikipedia says "One in every fourteen people in the US under the age of 50 is estimated to own, or to have owned, a copy." Somehow I'm both surprised it's that high, and surprised it's that low.

I'll be spinning it later.
 
A true classic. Happy 50th DSOM.
First time I listened to it was in 1975 on my parents’ hi-fi.
Impressed me a lot back then! It sounded odd, and of course aged 10 I didn’t get the lyrics…
My only version is a French 1978 pressing. I bought it back then and never felt I had to buy another one!
 
Apparently some fans are triggered by [checks notes]
A rainbow.

Fm8_YG1WYAMdFHn.jpg


https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/pink-floyd-fans-triggered-wok-rainbow-1234664971/
 
Listening now, still love it and listen to it regularly..
Wow, 50 years....
 
I’ve merged the two threads as the first one has my lovely affiliated link in the opening post to buy the ridiculously expensive box set.

PS <subliminal messaging>
Everyone please click the link and buy the ridiculously expensive box
</subliminal messaging>
 
Never realized before that there's a sample of an instrumental Ticket to Ride in the background of the final words - wonder if any money ever changed hands for that!!??

Box set....sorry Tony....no chance!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top