<!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>
<DIV>Hi, Richard,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thanks for expounding a little more on your position. I do see more
clearly what you're saying. Which makes me think some of the problem
with this whole apparently beaten and dead horse argument stems from
the nature of the medium itself. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>A cyber-forum doesn't lend itself to a complete and instantaneous
understanding of points and counterpoints when hours and miles separate the
two. Sweeping statements or "sound 'bytes'" made by me, you, DN or
whoever, can easily be misunderstood when not followed by lengthy elaboration
and clarification (as AG intimated, we would all have carpel tunnel).
Clear intent can be hard to gather, especially in the absence of that
all-important component in communication--tone. Misunderstandings will
abound, and offense will easily be taken where, perhaps, none was
intended. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>If I have read YOU wrong, I do apologize. But I still take
issue with others seeming snap judgments that smack of intolerance and
imply that one is not really a fan or is a lesser fan or is a bad fan just
because said fan wants something other than is being offered from EC (i.e. more
rock, less pop, ad infinitum) or because said fan states
that Clapton is capable of better; (to wit, from the Terry Lawson
review, "the disappointingly anemic...sterile "Me and Mr. Johnson"
versus the "this is more like it...Clapton relighting the fire in his
belly--and fingers," "Sessions for Robert J." </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>"Sessions...." is a great example. Whatever the intent behind the
release, Clapton gave us better. Nathan even said it directly to the boss,
and I think most of us agree, "Some of this sounds better than it did on
the album."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Your friend in EC,</DIV>
<DIV>susan</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>