<DIV>Susan,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thanks for your message. What I (and other Slowhanders who have emailed me privately in agreement) get tired of is CERTAIN people who post mostly negative comments. Many of us are so happy to have EC alive and producing the variety of music he does.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>We get tired of heavy-handed comments which come across as statements of fact and that it seems that nothing that EC has done since the 60s is ever good enough.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I cannot think of another artist who has been around since the 60s or even 70s who has given us the variety EC has. Stones? No. The Who? No. Dylan? Not to the same extent. U2? Not nearly as varied. Springsteen? Not quite the same extent. Beatles / McCartney? No.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Criticism? Fine. I don't like some of the drunken 70s performances. I don't play Willie & the Hand Jive. Neither do I rush home to listen to Mother's Lament from Disraeli Gears. I would love to hear Pretty Girl instead of Wonderful Tonight sometimes.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>We all have our individual preferences obviously. Fine, if someone wants to hear more Beano or more Live Yardbirds or more Cream (guess what? We are getting some, although I predict it will get panned by some members of this list no matter how much many of us like it), that is absolutely fine. I'm not using faulty logic - it just gets tiring to read the MOSTLY negative posts from CERTAIN people.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As for my use of the word "arrogant" in relation to EC being capable of "much better", I stand by my point. Can you or anyone else say that EC's Beano or Cream playing is "better" than his ability to play the very complex RJ songs?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Some of us on the list just feel EC can never please some people any more. And when we write well thought-out posts giving counter arguments, instead of engaging in polite discussion, we get "Some people will never get it" or "Folks need to grow up".</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Sincerely,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Richard</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><XMETA content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<STYLE></STYLE>
<XMETA name="GENERATOR" content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400"><XBODY 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" name="Compose message area" CanvasTabStop="true" acc_role="text" topMargin="0" leftMargin="0"><!--[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><p>
<hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. <a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=29917/*http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250">Learn more.</a>