Yes Niek, you're right that I could've done it much better. If he ever writes back to me, I'll try to be less offensive.
Cheers
PS: Btw, this is the first time in months (or maybe years) that a thread started off by me has such feedback! (although many of the replies are from me...)
Thread
Posts in chronological order
You should open a topic saying "Pee pee" on November 24th. I'm sure you can get a big topic out of that :D
Brian does not open emails, his assistant does, and forwards on to Brian any she may think he would be interested in. I know because Brian has responded to a few of mine in the past. Each time I got an email saying that my letter will be sent to Brian, and that I may or may not get a reply.
This letter above will not be forwarder I am sure.
This letter above will not be forwarder I am sure.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]coops wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Brian does not open emails, his assistant does, and forwards on to Brian any she may think he would be interested in. I know because Brian has responded to a few of mine in the past. Each time I got an email saying that my letter will be sent to Brian, and that I may or may not get a reply.
This letter above will not be forwarder I am sure. [/QUOTE]
Brian has replied to me for 4 times and I have never received anything like "your letter will be sent to Brian"...
This letter above will not be forwarder I am sure. [/QUOTE]
Brian has replied to me for 4 times and I have never received anything like "your letter will be sent to Brian"...
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sebastian wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Perhaps Dr Wig "thinks he's contributing to his view of a better world" through that needless series of insults towards journalists. If so, I'm also hoping I may "contribute to my view of a better world" by telling him that he's being hypocritical in the way he's doing so.[/QUOTE]
Calling him "Dr. Wig" while taking him to task for insulting journalists is completely hypocritical and makes you look as bad as you say he looks. "He who seeks equity must have clean hands." Yours are not.
[QUOTE]Does he want to prove them wrong? Then he can do what he does best: music, or lyrics, or astronomy books... he's very skilful at many things so he may concentrate on that instead of slamming the press.[/QUOTE]
This assumes he's incapable of doing two things at the same time.
[QUOTE]Journalists are people too, and just as many musicias are pants, but some are excellent, many reporters are pillocks, but some are dedicated professionals who deserve respect as well.[/QUOTE]
Journalists are people too. So are serial killers. The fact that one is a person "too" does not entitle them to respect for their actions. Journalists, particularly those writing for the British tablod press, are generally detestable and he's more than entitled to paint them with a fairly broad brush. The "good" "professional" journalists are writing about important matters and not what a 60 year old rock musician writes on his website or what his hair looks like. That entitles no one to respect for their "professionalism". There is no less important field of journalism than so-called "entertainment journalism", which is more aptly called "infotainment". The guys who write the obituary column and the want ads do far more important work than the music reviewer.
[QUOTE] So my mail was "just my 2 pence" ;)[/QUOTE]
Yes, well we all like attention. My "two pence" says your posting that e-mail was merely the product of ego and frustration, and so in that regard is no better than the "ranting" of "Dr. Wig". You're the pot and he's the kettle. I'm glad you've become acquainted.
And moreover, who cares what you think about anything? I don't and I'm fairly confident Brian May doesn't either. And neither of you care what I think. Its all sound and fury signifying nothing.
Perhaps Dr Wig "thinks he's contributing to his view of a better world" through that needless series of insults towards journalists. If so, I'm also hoping I may "contribute to my view of a better world" by telling him that he's being hypocritical in the way he's doing so.[/QUOTE]
Calling him "Dr. Wig" while taking him to task for insulting journalists is completely hypocritical and makes you look as bad as you say he looks. "He who seeks equity must have clean hands." Yours are not.
[QUOTE]Does he want to prove them wrong? Then he can do what he does best: music, or lyrics, or astronomy books... he's very skilful at many things so he may concentrate on that instead of slamming the press.[/QUOTE]
This assumes he's incapable of doing two things at the same time.
[QUOTE]Journalists are people too, and just as many musicias are pants, but some are excellent, many reporters are pillocks, but some are dedicated professionals who deserve respect as well.[/QUOTE]
Journalists are people too. So are serial killers. The fact that one is a person "too" does not entitle them to respect for their actions. Journalists, particularly those writing for the British tablod press, are generally detestable and he's more than entitled to paint them with a fairly broad brush. The "good" "professional" journalists are writing about important matters and not what a 60 year old rock musician writes on his website or what his hair looks like. That entitles no one to respect for their "professionalism". There is no less important field of journalism than so-called "entertainment journalism", which is more aptly called "infotainment". The guys who write the obituary column and the want ads do far more important work than the music reviewer.
[QUOTE] So my mail was "just my 2 pence" ;)[/QUOTE]
Yes, well we all like attention. My "two pence" says your posting that e-mail was merely the product of ego and frustration, and so in that regard is no better than the "ranting" of "Dr. Wig". You're the pot and he's the kettle. I'm glad you've become acquainted.
And moreover, who cares what you think about anything? I don't and I'm fairly confident Brian May doesn't either. And neither of you care what I think. Its all sound and fury signifying nothing.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sebastian wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Journalists are people too, and just as many musicias are pants, but some are excellent, many reporters are pillocks, but some are dedicated professionals who deserve respect as well.
[/QUOTE]
Respected journalists are not in the critic sections. They are not respected because they write critics. They are respected for their work in the political and social field.
Now, the people that Brian don´t like are the ones that spend their time going to concerts, musicals, listen to CD´s - all of this freely - and then moan about everything.
And in the majority, they are being nasty, and their goal is simply to put down people.
Why are you at this board?- Why are you a Queen fan?- Don´t forget that the respectfull journalists (as you call them) never liked Queen. They used to call their work CRAP, but still you probably bought all their albums and videos.
Why?- Well, because you like them, and you know that most of the bad criticism they received were not fair.
This goes to the musical too. A fan doesn´t go to the musical more than once if he/she doesn´t like it. It´s expensive and people don´t work like this. Of course, if i go there it´s because i´m a fan, but if i don´t like it then i don´t go the second time.
And by the way, when the show is rubbish there´s no way- NO WAY - you can put a crowd in a standing ovation- every damn night!
The audience reaction at the end of the show is more accurate that any critic someone does.
Do you agree with what was written about Mika?- This guy is having full support from people around the world for the last 6 months in his MySpace. Since the first time i heard him sing "Grace Kelly" i thought that he is an amazing talent. And then comes one guy that happens to write critics to a journal and writes a crap like that?!! No way. In today´s society we can´t let this type of things happen too often.
I don´t have nothing against critics journalists because i don´t read them. I don´t care about what they have to say, and i pitty the people who need to read critics to make up their minds about buying a CD or going to a musical, theatre or cinema. Why do we need critics anyway?
There will allways be people who like and people who don´t, but the funny thing is that in the Broadway there are critics so important that a bad review at the premiere will have the consequence of the show doesn´t even start. It shuts down after the premiere, and every work that was donne by people is simply irrelevant. That´s a shame!
In this last year Brian complained about miscuotings and lies over the press, and we are here to say brian shouldn´t speak up against this?
I mean, you say something to a respected reporter and the next day you see a different story on the paper, and yoy think it´s right?
To say that the musicall is filled up with Queen jingles, do you think it´s right?
As i said i don´t care about critics, and i don´t call it "work", because it isn´t work, it´s something else, but not work.
It´s the way they express their opinions, and it has nothing to do with the fact that they like it or not, it´s about being mean. This, i think we shouldn´t tolerate from anyone- at least i know i don´t tolerate this type of behaviour from anyone.
And if Brian does the same for him, and for others then... God bless him!
Take care
Journalists are people too, and just as many musicias are pants, but some are excellent, many reporters are pillocks, but some are dedicated professionals who deserve respect as well.
[/QUOTE]
Respected journalists are not in the critic sections. They are not respected because they write critics. They are respected for their work in the political and social field.
Now, the people that Brian don´t like are the ones that spend their time going to concerts, musicals, listen to CD´s - all of this freely - and then moan about everything.
And in the majority, they are being nasty, and their goal is simply to put down people.
Why are you at this board?- Why are you a Queen fan?- Don´t forget that the respectfull journalists (as you call them) never liked Queen. They used to call their work CRAP, but still you probably bought all their albums and videos.
Why?- Well, because you like them, and you know that most of the bad criticism they received were not fair.
This goes to the musical too. A fan doesn´t go to the musical more than once if he/she doesn´t like it. It´s expensive and people don´t work like this. Of course, if i go there it´s because i´m a fan, but if i don´t like it then i don´t go the second time.
And by the way, when the show is rubbish there´s no way- NO WAY - you can put a crowd in a standing ovation- every damn night!
The audience reaction at the end of the show is more accurate that any critic someone does.
Do you agree with what was written about Mika?- This guy is having full support from people around the world for the last 6 months in his MySpace. Since the first time i heard him sing "Grace Kelly" i thought that he is an amazing talent. And then comes one guy that happens to write critics to a journal and writes a crap like that?!! No way. In today´s society we can´t let this type of things happen too often.
I don´t have nothing against critics journalists because i don´t read them. I don´t care about what they have to say, and i pitty the people who need to read critics to make up their minds about buying a CD or going to a musical, theatre or cinema. Why do we need critics anyway?
There will allways be people who like and people who don´t, but the funny thing is that in the Broadway there are critics so important that a bad review at the premiere will have the consequence of the show doesn´t even start. It shuts down after the premiere, and every work that was donne by people is simply irrelevant. That´s a shame!
In this last year Brian complained about miscuotings and lies over the press, and we are here to say brian shouldn´t speak up against this?
I mean, you say something to a respected reporter and the next day you see a different story on the paper, and yoy think it´s right?
To say that the musicall is filled up with Queen jingles, do you think it´s right?
As i said i don´t care about critics, and i don´t call it "work", because it isn´t work, it´s something else, but not work.
It´s the way they express their opinions, and it has nothing to do with the fact that they like it or not, it´s about being mean. This, i think we shouldn´t tolerate from anyone- at least i know i don´t tolerate this type of behaviour from anyone.
And if Brian does the same for him, and for others then... God bless him!
Take care
[Brian has replied to me for 4 times and I have never received anything like "your letter will be sent to Brian"
Thats coz your special
Thats coz your special
Mr Faron Hyte, I agree to disagree.
Bobby_brown, Brian could have defended the musical or Mika with the appropriate argumnents, such as pointing out the marvellous cast or the brilliant instrumentalists or the standing ovations ... but to defend them by insulting those who criticise, and by using the "success" card ... I would expect that from one of those sad reporters, not from him.
And btw, I think being a (n honest) critic can be considered a job. Of course many do it just to be nasty, etc ... but I'm not talking about them. Generalising is just as unfair as writing about his rants or his hair.
Bobby_brown, Brian could have defended the musical or Mika with the appropriate argumnents, such as pointing out the marvellous cast or the brilliant instrumentalists or the standing ovations ... but to defend them by insulting those who criticise, and by using the "success" card ... I would expect that from one of those sad reporters, not from him.
And btw, I think being a (n honest) critic can be considered a job. Of course many do it just to be nasty, etc ... but I'm not talking about them. Generalising is just as unfair as writing about his rants or his hair.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]coops wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Thats coz your special[/QUOTE]
I'm afraid "thats coz" you wrote to the wrong e-mail...
Thats coz your special[/QUOTE]
I'm afraid "thats coz" you wrote to the wrong e-mail...
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sebastian wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
And btw, I think being a (n honest) critic can be considered a job. Of course many do it just to be nasty, etc ... but I'm not talking about them. Generalising is just as unfair as writing about his rants or his hair.[/QUOTE]
And Brian isn´t talking about the good ones too!
It´s OK not to like Queen and Brian has to live with it, but in most cases a bad review comes with the kind sarcasm that it´s beyound the goal of the criticism.
The same ones who say no one can match Freddie are the ones who say Freddie is shit. This is Hypocrisy at it´s best.
When you write a review about the musical saying that it is full of Queen Jingles, this is suposed to be mean. And it´s desrespectfull to a lifetime work from the boys. Queen never wrote jingles, they could only write songs the best way they could. To call a Queen song a Jingle is at least very desrespectfull.
There are critics who are in the business for a lifetime, and their reviews can go like this:
"The song isn´t catchy"
"It´s a basic, very predictable melody"
"the chorus doesn´t work"
"they don´t understand a thing about music", etc.
Now, have they ever write anything to start with?
Do they know how hard it is to make an album?
I agree with Brian here. Let them creat something and see the public reaction, because if they can say that a thing is not well donne, then it´s because they know how to do it- they have the secret to do it- but in the end they don´t create a thing, i think that most critics (and the real nasty ones) are:
FRUSTRATED MUSICIANS WHO NEVER GOT THEIR CHANCE AND DON´T WANT OTHERS TO SUCCEED WHERE THEY COULDN´T!!
Take care
And btw, I think being a (n honest) critic can be considered a job. Of course many do it just to be nasty, etc ... but I'm not talking about them. Generalising is just as unfair as writing about his rants or his hair.[/QUOTE]
And Brian isn´t talking about the good ones too!
It´s OK not to like Queen and Brian has to live with it, but in most cases a bad review comes with the kind sarcasm that it´s beyound the goal of the criticism.
The same ones who say no one can match Freddie are the ones who say Freddie is shit. This is Hypocrisy at it´s best.
When you write a review about the musical saying that it is full of Queen Jingles, this is suposed to be mean. And it´s desrespectfull to a lifetime work from the boys. Queen never wrote jingles, they could only write songs the best way they could. To call a Queen song a Jingle is at least very desrespectfull.
There are critics who are in the business for a lifetime, and their reviews can go like this:
"The song isn´t catchy"
"It´s a basic, very predictable melody"
"the chorus doesn´t work"
"they don´t understand a thing about music", etc.
Now, have they ever write anything to start with?
Do they know how hard it is to make an album?
I agree with Brian here. Let them creat something and see the public reaction, because if they can say that a thing is not well donne, then it´s because they know how to do it- they have the secret to do it- but in the end they don´t create a thing, i think that most critics (and the real nasty ones) are:
FRUSTRATED MUSICIANS WHO NEVER GOT THEIR CHANCE AND DON´T WANT OTHERS TO SUCCEED WHERE THEY COULDN´T!!
Take care
According to that, Brian's a frustrated journalist.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sebastian wrote: [/QUOTENAME]According to that, Brian's a frustrated journalist.[/QUOTE]
Any doubt? ; ))
The difference here is that Brian is reacting to them.
A musician mission is to create music, the critic´s mission is to review someone´s else work.
What´s the point of this? If they know how to make it, then let them prove it!
Instead of the critics reviews, why don´t they let the public write them the reviews. The ones who paid the tickets and the CD´s will have something to say (and more real too).
Take care
Any doubt? ; ))
The difference here is that Brian is reacting to them.
A musician mission is to create music, the critic´s mission is to review someone´s else work.
What´s the point of this? If they know how to make it, then let them prove it!
Instead of the critics reviews, why don´t they let the public write them the reviews. The ones who paid the tickets and the CD´s will have something to say (and more real too).
Take care
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Bobby_brown wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
bad review comes with the kind sarcasm that it´s beyound the goal of the criticism.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, it's show business. You can accept these rules or not, if you accept them - don't cry then. Brian plays in that game with these rules, Brian says that PR was Freddie's all-time hero (we all understand that Fred could love his voice etc., but calling him as his all-time favourite and we all understand that he must to say that - to calm down some of anti-QPR critics...), Brian plays on all openings of the musical - no matter if he enjoys that or not - because it's one of those ways to get more attention (of the hated press, by the way) to that musical, Brian can't say this, Brian has to say that etc. etc. etc., he has to follow the rules if he wants to be the show-businessman.
He's a part of the big show business game, he's not the underground musician who works on its own independent recording label. Look at John, Bobby, man is happy with his family, he doesn't give interviews, he doesn't talk with press - and he has no any problems with them. And press doesn't follow him (except very few and rare cases) - but hey man, he wrote Another One Bites The Dust and I Want To Break Free, he's THAT guy who played on bass in Queen for over 20 years. He's quit the show business, Brian doesn't want to quit it - therefore you have to accept all those Rolling Stone magazines, all those absent Grammies, all those critics. Bad, dirty business with strange and cruel rules.
bad review comes with the kind sarcasm that it´s beyound the goal of the criticism.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, it's show business. You can accept these rules or not, if you accept them - don't cry then. Brian plays in that game with these rules, Brian says that PR was Freddie's all-time hero (we all understand that Fred could love his voice etc., but calling him as his all-time favourite and we all understand that he must to say that - to calm down some of anti-QPR critics...), Brian plays on all openings of the musical - no matter if he enjoys that or not - because it's one of those ways to get more attention (of the hated press, by the way) to that musical, Brian can't say this, Brian has to say that etc. etc. etc., he has to follow the rules if he wants to be the show-businessman.
He's a part of the big show business game, he's not the underground musician who works on its own independent recording label. Look at John, Bobby, man is happy with his family, he doesn't give interviews, he doesn't talk with press - and he has no any problems with them. And press doesn't follow him (except very few and rare cases) - but hey man, he wrote Another One Bites The Dust and I Want To Break Free, he's THAT guy who played on bass in Queen for over 20 years. He's quit the show business, Brian doesn't want to quit it - therefore you have to accept all those Rolling Stone magazines, all those absent Grammies, all those critics. Bad, dirty business with strange and cruel rules.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Serry... wrote: [/QUOTENAME Bad, dirty business with strange and cruel rules. [/QUOTE]
The business isn´t bad and dirty. Some people have made it that way. And i totally agree that the business need to be clean from this rudeness.
Take care
The business isn´t bad and dirty. Some people have made it that way. And i totally agree that the business need to be clean from this rudeness.
Take care
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sebastian wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I post it here in case he doesn't reply. Or if he does, you saw it first on Queenzone (that looks like a commercial, doesn't it?).
--------
12th February 2007
Hi Brian
You've showed a nice example of double standards, haven't you? You can't resist slamming journalists you don't even know, yet complain if they say something bad about the musical or any of your mates or your hair or whatever.
So you say 'We Will Rock You' is great because it's successful ... yeah, sure ... you know Queen is a brand name, and a very good one (like Coca-Cola), and everything under its label will sell well.
It's interesting that now you're comparing success with quality. According to that, 'Queen II' is total pants, 'Hips Don't Lie' is a better song than 'Innuendo', and Vanilla Ice's album 'To The Extreme' is much much much better than 'A Night At The Opera' ... come on!
The musical is selling well because your loyal fans would pay to see you and Roger belching. I don't mean that the musical's bad or that nobody likes it in its own way, but to pretend that its longevity is entirely due to its "depth" is ridiculous.
I like some of your comments on the soapbox, like the beautiful obituaries you wrote for Maurice Gibb, Michael Kamen and Syd Barrett ... they all show you're a very good writer and a nice bloke all in all. And I agree with your comments on ecology and against smoking, but whenever anyone touches your musical you become as narrow-minded as the "wankers" you offend (or even more).
Dr May, if only people who write musicals can criticise musicals, then you should belt up about the press until the day you own a bloody newspaper. Being a music critic is NOT that easy, and it's not as simple as being a frustrated musician. I agree that there are many idiots out there, but some are actually people whose work must be respected, just as much as yours is.
And 'We Will Rock You' is conquering the world, you say? Sure, that's because it's had to be closed in several places after just some months ... face it, Dr May, not everybody HAS to love your product. And if you try to re-write history, then you're being just as unfair as those "nasty, grubby, spotty, unusually ignorant 15 year old creep" people.
So you think you can stone them ... quite funny, because sadly you're setting yourself up and looking like a sad whiney grumpy ol' tart. Why don't you use your superb creativity and your enviable vocabulary to write some poetic lyrics like 'White Queen' or 'All Dead' instead of insulting people you DON'T know and cowardly hiding behind stereotyped offences ... "spotty" ... "15 year old"? that's just as lame as attacking somebody because of being black or skint...
Cheers Bri
Seb
PS: The word 'blog' exists from 1994, which is long before you started ranting on the soapbox. If you accuse the press of getting facts wrong, you ought to practise what you preach...
PS': How can you expect people not to make jokes about your mop-top, if you call them names in the first place?
PS'': You're about to turn 60 in some months... don't you think it's time to grow up?[/QUOTE]
Buddy, are you the journalist who is offended? Brian has a reason to be offended. I don't think you do.
--------
12th February 2007
Hi Brian
You've showed a nice example of double standards, haven't you? You can't resist slamming journalists you don't even know, yet complain if they say something bad about the musical or any of your mates or your hair or whatever.
So you say 'We Will Rock You' is great because it's successful ... yeah, sure ... you know Queen is a brand name, and a very good one (like Coca-Cola), and everything under its label will sell well.
It's interesting that now you're comparing success with quality. According to that, 'Queen II' is total pants, 'Hips Don't Lie' is a better song than 'Innuendo', and Vanilla Ice's album 'To The Extreme' is much much much better than 'A Night At The Opera' ... come on!
The musical is selling well because your loyal fans would pay to see you and Roger belching. I don't mean that the musical's bad or that nobody likes it in its own way, but to pretend that its longevity is entirely due to its "depth" is ridiculous.
I like some of your comments on the soapbox, like the beautiful obituaries you wrote for Maurice Gibb, Michael Kamen and Syd Barrett ... they all show you're a very good writer and a nice bloke all in all. And I agree with your comments on ecology and against smoking, but whenever anyone touches your musical you become as narrow-minded as the "wankers" you offend (or even more).
Dr May, if only people who write musicals can criticise musicals, then you should belt up about the press until the day you own a bloody newspaper. Being a music critic is NOT that easy, and it's not as simple as being a frustrated musician. I agree that there are many idiots out there, but some are actually people whose work must be respected, just as much as yours is.
And 'We Will Rock You' is conquering the world, you say? Sure, that's because it's had to be closed in several places after just some months ... face it, Dr May, not everybody HAS to love your product. And if you try to re-write history, then you're being just as unfair as those "nasty, grubby, spotty, unusually ignorant 15 year old creep" people.
So you think you can stone them ... quite funny, because sadly you're setting yourself up and looking like a sad whiney grumpy ol' tart. Why don't you use your superb creativity and your enviable vocabulary to write some poetic lyrics like 'White Queen' or 'All Dead' instead of insulting people you DON'T know and cowardly hiding behind stereotyped offences ... "spotty" ... "15 year old"? that's just as lame as attacking somebody because of being black or skint...
Cheers Bri
Seb
PS: The word 'blog' exists from 1994, which is long before you started ranting on the soapbox. If you accuse the press of getting facts wrong, you ought to practise what you preach...
PS': How can you expect people not to make jokes about your mop-top, if you call them names in the first place?
PS'': You're about to turn 60 in some months... don't you think it's time to grow up?[/QUOTE]
Buddy, are you the journalist who is offended? Brian has a reason to be offended. I don't think you do.