Really interesting discussion. Thought the posts by Hoopsie were two of the best things I've ever read here. Never seen anything before from them but great insights into relationships. We're all guilty of jumping to conclusions about who or what people are based on things we have no knowledge about. I went off on miraclesteinway on one of his/her first posts on this form about Adam Lambert, as it read like an Adam Lambert apologist post, and he/she is extremely knowledgeable and has added great info on multiple topics.
John Deacon? Who knows the truth, we can speculate 'til the cows come home. One thing that I believe is his comments on the Robbie Williams stuff were spot on and prescient. There has been nothing since Freddie's death that has made a positive mark on their legacy, IMHO. They're really a nostalgia act now whose job it is to their music alive, and maybe having been part of creating the legend of Queen was the real thing and enough for John Deacon. If so, god love him.
Martin Packer · Member since
I respect John's decision to retire. Equally I respect Roger's and Brian's NOT to retire. (And personally I don't relish the (hopefully distant) prospect of retirement - and not just for the income loss.)
Each to their own.
Denniss87 · Member since
Mr Deacon,
Wehen You read this: you're a Great man and an Idol as musican... and Human!!! Thanks for all These great Moments and greatings from Germany !!!
Denniss87 · Member since
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Kontrapunkt wrote:[/b]
What do you mean about this picture? http://images6.fanpop.com/image/photos/32200000/John-and-Brian-john-deacon-32296550-554-347.jpg
[/QUOTE]
Thought the posts by Hoopsie were two of the best things I've ever read here. Never seen anything before from them but great insights into relationships.[/QUOTE]
^ this.
Zamidoo · Member since
John was/is obviously very different to Brian and Roger. Being talented and popular didn't make him cut out for stardom. I think that what Freddie brought to the band was integral to John's tolerance levels for being in what for him was basically an uncomfortable situation. Strangely, he and Freddie remind me of each other in many ways in interviews and off-stage footage. There was a real divide between the off-stage and on-stage personas (you would never believe that the stammering, softly-spoken Freddie you see in some interviews is the same god-like performer you see on stage, and to a greater extent this is also true of John). He was famous for 'drying up' in interviews, drank like a fish on tour (not unusual, I know, but could also have been a coping mechanism), and whatever Freddie brought to the group dynamic was obviously integral to John's ability to be 'John Deacon of Queen', especially as he got older.
For a shy, introverted person, every time they go out to perform (and 'performance' can include interviews, public appearances, not just what happens on stage), they have to go through a 'transformation'. For people who are not like this (and despite being different off-stage, I don't think that this was true of Freddie, for example - he was a shy-ish extrovert who became a flamboyant extrovert in public), it's very hard to understand how this transformation process can take its toll on a person. Without Freddie, I believe that the process was no longer possible for John. I can't say why, because I don't know in exactly which ways they interacted, especially on tour. It might have just been his being there. When he died, it must have been like an iron curtain crashing to the ground for John. He lost a friend and the loss of that friend also meant he could no longer be/did not want to be 'John Deacon of Queen'. That's what I think. This must have been extremely depressing on one level, but luckily he was not only 'John Deacon of Queen', but also just 'John Deacon', who he still is. But that man doesn't perform or make public appearances. That's all. Just accept it.
hobbit in Rhye · Member since
Interesting point (above me) and I agree with that.
The transformation of an artist is something complicated and beautiful (just like a worm turns into a butterfly);
I don't think it's easy to analyse things behind the curtain.
I also don't believe any press/rumors about their relationship.
Honestly even my mom doesn't know who I love and who I hate. How can people tell?
Of couse speculating is fun as hell :D
And if I have to speculate... I'd say that things seem not as bad between them as rumours make it. People said there was no interaction between Brian and John in Queen's events, but I have seen plenty of amiable interactions between the two. The photos above are just some of it. I can make a list if you want.
Sebastian · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]hobbit-in-Rhye wrote:[/b]
I can make a list if you want.[/QUOTE]
Yes, please! That's interesting indeed.
Nobody of us can or will ever know for sure, but from what can be gathered, it can be safely said that Roger was the only one who would be socially close to all the other three. Other than that, according to what Freddie's entourage have claimed, Fred didn't socialise with Brian or John (which doesn't mean he didn't love them or respect them) and there's little to hint at Brian and John being friends outside the office.
Obviously, according to what John himself wrote on a Fan Club mag in 1996, they were all close to each other... but that can be interpreted more in a personal sense (they liked each other enough not to be 'frienemies') and professionally than actually picturing John doing a sleepover at Dr Bri's and giving each other matching BFF brazelets.
hobbit in Rhye · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Sebastian wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]hobbit-in-Rhye wrote:[/b]
I can make a list if you want.[/QUOTE]
Yes, please! That's interesting indeed.
[/QUOTE]
I'm 53% sure you were being sarcastic :lol
I'm not the master of statistics here. But I'm still gladly obliged. I'll make a new thread, because I don't want to shove my beloved Bri into page 7 of a John thread.
You're right about Bri and John don't socialise much with each other, but I believe Bri doesn't socialise with anybody in the band, simply because he was busy stargazing.
His mentality is more of a scientist than of an entertainer. The way he control and experiment on his Old Lady mirrors the way an engineer pokes his machines.
He hang out with lots of guitarist but it's like a kind of seminar / alumni.
Heck, he even did the stargazing at the house of Tony Iommi.
On the other hand, Roger... I think he can socialise with anybody he doesn't hate. The man is fun itself.
flodog · Member since
I think there's far too much speculation here. John loved touring...far more than being in the studio...he loved being on stage as part of Queen ...who wouldn't? He was very professional in his approach but once the party was in full swing he liked a few drinks and to enjoy himself. Back home he had his own life , wife kids and all that that entails. On earlier tours he took them with him but later on they joined him for short mid tour breaks when possible. Nobody wants to spend all their free time with work colleagues....regardless of how well they get on and esp. when they've lived and worked together for months on end . Queen ended when Freddie died end of story !
miraclesteinway · Member since
that particular incarnation of Queen ended when Freddie died, but it seems that the people who sold out 67 arenas over the world (some of whom are as die hard Queen fans as anyone on this forum) disagree that Queen have ended altogether - me included.
flodog · Member since
While no one can deny that q+al has been a fantastic success, it isn't Queen.
There are many tribute bands doing the rounds some of whom are tremendous and do a great job of recreating Queen live.
Everyone still loves the music and for fans like me, the chance of seeing Brian and Roger on stage playing all the old hits is unmissable , but it isn't Queen.
Queen was four very talented guys, one is dead and one has retired, the music was created between them and without all four of them it can never be Queen.
Visit any art gallery and you will see students reproducing celebrated works of art ...it doesn't make them Monet or Picasso ...the talent is in the creation of something new and wonderful .
If ever Brian, Roger and Adam ever come up with some amazing new music ....then it will be the three of them .....not Queen!
Apocalipsis_Darko · Member since
In the 80's the relationship between John and Brian was very bad, said by Mack.
Look A kind of magic, the producers of John's songs, and Brian's songs.
miraclesteinway · Member since
OK so Q+AL isn't Queen, but then I don't get the impression that even Brian and Roger are pretending they are Queen. In the tour programme they even devote a picture feature to 'Classic Queen', in the Montreal concert. I think they are just happy that they are a highly successful touring band (who are rumoured to be making an album.... we'll see....)
But you're right Flodog, it's good to look at these things with fresh eyes and say, this isn't that, but it's still something worthwhile and good. The students reproducing great works of art is actually a nice analogy - because reproducing someone else's great work is an excellent way to carve your own identity (if you're a clever artist). That's sort of what Adam Lambert is doing just now. He's a student of Queen, if you like (all four of them really!), and he has been given the opportunity to hone his stage craft by fronting the most important band in rock music - yes one of them has retired, and for all intents and purposes Adam Lambert has replaced the one who has died - but think about how many young artists would actually kill for that opportunity? If I was a singer I probably would!
