<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=MailContainerBody
style="PADDING-LEFT: 10px; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; PADDING-TOP: 15px; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; TEXT-DECORATION: none; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none"
leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 acc_role="text" CanvasTabStop="true"
name="Compose message area"><!--[gte IE 5]><?xml:namespace prefix="v" /><?xml:namespace prefix="o" /><![endif]-->
<DIV><EM>>>"I see people on this list post nothing but negative
comments. Criticism is fine but it is nice when it is balanced with at
least some positive input too."<<</EM></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Apparently, a little criticism must<EM> not </EM>be fine when it is
interpreted as "nothing but negative comments," which, by the way, ARE "balanced
with at least some positive input, too."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>1226/1115,* 1230a/1117,** 1230b,*** </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><EM>>>"I also think it is unbelievably arrogant for people to
say EC "can do so much better."</EM><<</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>No. Arrogance would be stating "I" could do much better.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><EM>>>"what they really mean is "he could do more of what I
like."<<</EM></DIV>
<DIV><EM></EM> </DIV>
<DIV>Yes! And thanks for getting this point. We want more of
something we like. What a novel idea. Human beings wanting more
of what pleases them. Unless wishes, dreams, desires, longings and
preferences and expectations are now forbidden or seen as unpatriotic in
Slowhand Land; in that case, welcome to the <U>Stepford Slowhand
Digest</U>. Wanting more from EC: that certainly must mean that
<EM>everything else</EM> or the status quo must be <EM>unappreciated</EM>.
That's faulty logic, that's false assumption, and that's simply not true.
It’s not all black and white. Try and see a little more gray. (Think
of the feeling that 9 out of 10 of us on this list have for "Wonderful Tonight"
not being a selection of preference--and broaden it). </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>How nice the vigorous defense of EC, but really not necessary. No one
is bringing the rope. We really are on the same team.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>susan</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>*DeltaNick: (1226) "....<STRONG>nice to see him really play guitar on the
last tour</STRONG>...,"<STRONG> </STRONG>"I hope he does something not only
expected, but something unexpectedly worthwhile..."no "Wonderful Tonight"...but
something much more upbeat and passionate...." (in the studio) "while it’s
decent music, <STRONG>Clapton is capable of great music</STRONG>."<STRONG>
</STRONG>(1115)<STRONG> </STRONG>"<STRONG>Eric Clapton's my favorite
artist</STRONG>.<STRONG> </STRONG>That being said, I am not his publicist, nor
am I into dispensing propaganda or hype."<BR><BR>**Susan: (1230a)
<STRONG>"...EC has a long resume of greatness. He will forever be my
favorite. I enjoy him so much</STRONG>, I paid out the nose to sit at his
feet...."<BR>(1117) "<STRONG>I'll gladly take my EC just as he is</STRONG>, but
not without occasional criticisms and longings--and that does not diminish my
"fanhood."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>***Apurva: (1230b) "I don't want another Reptile, I don't know what I want
actually, <STRONG>I'll <BR>just be happy that Eric is 59 recording and enjoying
playing</STRONG>."<STRONG> </STRONG>"I do wish he ripped it <BR>up more and got
out of his comfort zone...."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML>