Brian was certainly a gentleman to many of us at the Hollywood Walk of Fame presentation in 2002.
And yet.....................at the premier of the WWRY musical in Las Vegas the following year, there were 25 very lucky participants who won a chance to a 'meet and greet', hosted by Jacky, at the Paris Hotel.
How exciting! What a joy! The chance of a lifetime for many!!
Neither one showed up for the 4PM gathering. Most likely they were too hung over.
We were lucky, having met them twice. The vast majority spent hundreds to fly out there, booked a room, blah blah blah... and got screwed. As we did. At least we had some memories for the good, ....they did not. They spent hours at the bar, cancelling their plans, hoping to see them pass through, with no luck. No alternate time was set up.
bigV · Member since
I'm still a bit pissed off that in Budapest in 2005 he hid from the fans in the Four Seasons hotel (okay, he was tired because he'd flown to London and back the night before) and in Vienna in 2008 he and the band flew out right after the show so I couldn't meet him both times.
I really want to meet the man. He's my hero.
V.
GratefulFan · Member since
I can completely see where artists aren't up to the fan thing after each and every show. Meeting and mingling with large numbers of strangers who feel connected to you in some way has to be draining and daunting if you're not in the mood. It's something that if done poorly or half heartedly can easily backfire. And all these years later, it's not really owed. Brian does put time into his soapbox and such and answers correspondence regularly which is well more than most. So I'm inclined to cut him quite a bit of slack.
To the initial post: the videos linked are two examples of scores out there that show Brian at or near his best. At his best he's generous, articulate, perceptibly intelligent, effective, gracious, warm and just generally inspiring. His ability to stand out this way in the league of rock stars is one of the rewards of being a Queen fan - not only to we get incredibly substantial music, but a notably substantial human being as well. It's something we can be really proud about.
That said, few of us are consistent in every moment or every facet of our lives so I'd argue against the videos somehow laying waste to the idea that Brian can and does sometimes operate from a place of rather significant ego. In overseeing his animal rights manifesto for example, he's about as far from a gentleman as one can get. He's actually frequently stunningly intolerant, verbally abusive, illogical and seemingly operating with an ego about the size of a truck. So he's got it in him, no question.
YannickJoker · Member since
ThomasQuinn wrote: Hate to nitpick, but in case anyone wants to google the band in question: they're called Van Velzen. Without the 't'.
===
I already said it, but hey. And it's VanVelzen.
The Real Wizard · Member since
GratefulFan wrote:
In overseeing his animal rights manifesto for example, he's about as far from a gentleman as one can get. He's actually frequently stunningly intolerant, verbally abusive, illogical and seemingly operating with an ego about the size of a truck.
====================
Why should he be tolerant of people who spread propaganda to bring back the hunt to kill harmless animals?
YourValentine · Member since
It's not just intolerant, Bob - it's the abuse Brian is hurling at people who do not agree with him. In such cases he is as far from being a gentleman as he possibly can. My personal experience with Brian is very positive - a nice, gentle, friendly person but when he gets all wound up about the badgers and foxes he crosses all lines of decent discussion or argument. I would not want to become the target of his wrath :-)
GratefulFan · Member since
Sir GH wrote:
Why should he be tolerant of people who spread propaganda to bring back the hunt to kill harmless animals? =====================
Propaganda irony alert. Plus what YV said.
Thistle · Member since
When it comes to the wildlife situation, Brian is right to be so passionate and vociferous in his approach. Those who disagree with his sentiments on such a matter are heartless and cruel individuals who deserve a good boot up the anus. And why shouldn't he use his celebrity status to bring the issues to the attention of the masses? I wouldn't call it egotistical. I totally and wholeheartedly agree with Brian on such matters, and can be such a little fucker about it as well. And I don't have an ego the size of a truck. Good on him. Go Dr. May!!!
GratefulFan · Member since
Thistleboy 1980 wrote: When it comes to the wildlife situation, Brian is right to be so passionate and vociferous in his approach. Those who disagree with his sentiments on such a matter are heartless and cruel individuals who deserve a good boot up the anus. And why shouldn't he use his celebrity status to bring the issues to the attention of the masses? I wouldn't call it egotistical. I totally and wholeheartedly agree with Brian on such matters, and can be such a little fucker about it as well. And I don't have an ego the size of a truck. Good on him. Go Dr. May!!! ========================
Having noted over time how sensitive you are to injustice and baseless and gratuitous cruelty to others here on QZ, I can't quite believe you've actually closely followed the entire campaign and all it's faces and all Brian's words and come up with this stance. Have you read all of it, or are you just basing your thoughts on a general sense that Brian is strongly committed to humane and fair treatment for animals?
john bodega · Member since
Brian says some stupid things - in my estimation, he does this only as often as any regular schmuck who is getting caught up in their own feelings. His rants are startlingly ordinary, but coming from a rock star people seem to think they're completely unacceptable.
True enough, when he really gets carried away, he crosses the line - like those times that he's used his qualification as a means to belittle other people (even though his qualification is in an entirely different field). But, I see 'normal' people do crazy shit like that on a regular basis, because we are (mostly) emotional beings, and these things happen. I won't drag Brian over the coals for having similar flaws to the rest of us, nor would I defend him. He's just a guy - if you're uncomfortable with seeing your 'heroes' as such, then just listen to the music and pretend it came out of a hole in the ground or something.
mike hunt · Member since
From what I seen and heard from From Brian May is that he's a good guy. Usually has something positive to say about his peers, bandmates, ect. Of course he has flaws and isn't perfect......Most highly successful people have big ego's.. Freddie had bigger flaws in his personality than Brian, so before you all get on brian about every word he say's Just think of some of the other rock stars and people in general with their bigger flaws, and bigger Ego's.
GratefulFan · Member since
Zebonka12 wrote: Brian says some stupid things - in my estimation, he does this only as often as any regular schmuck who is getting caught up in their own feelings. His rants are startlingly ordinary, but coming from a rock star people seem to think they're completely unacceptable.
True enough, when he really gets carried away, he crosses the line - like those times that he's used his qualification as a means to belittle other people (even though his qualification is in an entirely different field). But, I see 'normal' people do crazy shit like that on a regular basis, because we are (mostly) emotional beings, and these things happen. I won't drag Brian over the coals for having similar flaws to the rest of us, nor would I defend him. He's just a guy - if you're uncomfortable with seeing your 'heroes' as such, then just listen to the music and pretend it came out of a hole in the ground or something. ============================
Again, I'd want to know if you had read all of it, or almost all of it, consistently. It's genuinely hard for me to believe that anybody who has thinks of the stuff he says and does as mostly typical or normal. It has little to do with the fact that he's a rock star, and a lot to do with the fact that in that role he's the moral and intellectual head of a group actively trying to impact public policy through various outlets. It's not just some guy jawing about stuff - he's accountable just like other organizations and people in that position are. And he's almost terrorist level intolerant in an intellectual sense. Really. It kind of blows my mind, and at it's frequent worst I don't think it's even remotely ordinary. He couldn't even keep a Facebook page together because of the weird, dogmatic, fractious, paranoid and intellectually violent tone that was set right at the top. Who can't keep a Facebook page together in 2010? Brian May on foxes and badgers, that's who.
Thistle · Member since
GratefulFan wrote: Thistleboy 1980 wrote: When it comes to the wildlife situation, Brian is right to be so passionate and vociferous in his approach. Those who disagree with his sentiments on such a matter are heartless and cruel individuals who deserve a good boot up the anus. And why shouldn't he use his celebrity status to bring the issues to the attention of the masses? I wouldn't call it egotistical. I totally and wholeheartedly agree with Brian on such matters, and can be such a little fucker about it as well. And I don't have an ego the size of a truck. Good on him. Go Dr. May!!! ========================
Having noted over time how sensitive you are to injustice and baseless and gratuitous cruelty to others here on QZ, I can't quite believe you've actually closely followed the entire campaign and all it's faces and all Brian's words and come up with this stance. Have you read all of it, or are you just basing your thoughts on a general sense that Brian is strongly committed to humane and fair treatment for animals? =============================================================================================
Hey GFF, the first part of your assessment is correct, I haven't followed every single line of the campaign, it just isn't possible time-wise for me to do that. In fact, I wouldn't obsessively follow every word every time the good Dr decided to climb upon his soapbox. But I wouldn't say that my stance is based purely on a generalisation. I personally don't think he is being egotistical, but let's just say for the moment he IS trying to boos his own ego - as long as it is for the good of the animals in the long-run, who cares? Whether or not you perceive Brian's rants as a positive or not, the thing is he is still getting us to talk - and think about - the issue. And hopefully be pro-active about it too. I can't help but see that as a positive, and think he has every right to say what he feels is right.
GratefulFan · Member since
Thistleboy 1980 wrote:
Hey GFF, the first part of your assessment is correct, I haven't followed every single line of the campaign, it just isn't possible time-wise for me to do that. In fact, I wouldn't obsessively follow every word every time the good Dr decided to climb upon his soapbox. But I wouldn't say that my stance is based purely on a generalisation. I personally don't think he is being egotistical, but let's just say for the moment he IS trying to boos his own ego - as long as it is for the good of the animals in the long-run, who cares? Whether or not you perceive Brian's rants as a positive or not, the thing is he is still getting us to talk - and think about - the issue. And hopefully be pro-active about it too. I can't help but see that as a positive, and think he has every right to say what he feels is right. ========================================
I'm a bit worried that I'm sounding like if you or anybody else hasn't pored over every word then you don't have much of an opinion worth worrying about. Not at all. I just wholeheartedly believe that a post by post and article by article reading of all or most of the material from the beginning is objectively inconsistent with any kind of assessment that Brian has been particularly positive, reasonable, 'typical' or fair. You and anybody else are of course free to make broad statements of agreement with him, but it's worth being aware that you may be implicitly agreeing with a scorched earth policy that treats people pretty brutally. That hasn't been something I've seen you be indifferent to before, so that was the source of my question about how closely you had read and followed.
The ego comes not in using his celebrity to attract attention to the cause - that's a potentially great thing - it's in his utter inability or unwillingness to see anything at all outside his incredibly narrow viewpoint, and his tendency to abuse people who do. Abuse is qualitatively different than firm and committed disagreement.
In the end I actually don't think he's getting us to to talk much about the issue. His approach is way too polarizing, and the talk here has been 95% about him, and 5% about the issue. He has very few people involved at his Save Me site despite his huge personal popularity and significant public profile. I'm assuming that most people simply don't want to associate themselves with his approach. When he first raised the campaign I was very, very keen to start thinking more seriously about moral issues surrounding hunting and farming and such that I hadn't really considered in any real depth before. I saw it as an invitation or a challenge from someone I admired deeply. I was in. And shortly thereafter I was just kind of stunned, and then even more stunned, and it's evolved into me seriously wanting to personally eat a cow a month just in general resistance to his tactics. So while he may be inspiring the more casual observer, he's also polarizing a lot of people on both sides and making them dig in and plug their ears, and causing others like me to just wander away unchanged despite a desire to be a moral person on these issues. A terrible waste for a smart man who wants to make a difference and who is SO gifted at classy, effective and gentle but committed communication in other parts of his life.
