http://z1.invisionfree.com/forums/thefall/...showtopic=24061

Mr Smith indirectly requests we stop ruminating on the past & trivialities.
He wants us (participants in the FoF) to focus on the Fall, Here, Now & the future.
Is this reasonable?

Being a slavishly obedient type, I have just given all my Fall records bar Imperial Wax Solvent to a charity shop. I shall refrain from buying all forthcoming Fall re-issues and live albums.

I do what I'm told; it's my way of coping.

Right then, let's focus on The Fall, now. What is there to focus on, please?

I have no problems NOT posting about Brix, but I think we need another Scanlon- was-genius thread, at least until we get an in-depth interview with the man.

Yes, to the extent I see fit, and I think that’s all he’s really asking us – not to provoke & wallow endlessly in gratuitous look-back discussions at the expense of the present lineup, and to give today's Fall their due. I’ve no problem with that, and it doesn’t mean no discussion of the past 32 years - focusing on the present to me means just that, giving it due consideration rather than dwelling excessively on what went before at its expense.

One thing I'd be only too happy to see the back of (which I think may lie partly behind this and the 2006 episode) is posts on the attractiveness of Eleni and MES’s old flames – they’re entitled to a bit more respect, and I think most blokes in his position would feel rightly pissed off about it too.

Agree with your point re Eleni & Brix. I don't think there's too much wallowing in the past, particularly when there's new product to discuss but there's not much of that around at the moment. :(

Absolutely. I think his timing hasn't helped much here. :D

That's the problem, isn't it? Also, what can you say about the current line-up? I don't mean they're dull, what I mean is: they're an ongoing thing and it's easier to talk about an era once you can get a proper perspective on it.... I think. :unsure:

That's basically how I feel. I'm going to resist posting anything gratuitous about Brix (specifically her and MES' old flames, because I think that's his main beef with the forum, what with Eleni reading it sometimes -- it's more respect for her than MES, well both :wacko: ) or the past in general.

I'll just post about the stuff I pretty much did before. There's a certain amount of power that this forum has -- MES creates something, we all natter about it (the lyrics, for example) and we may be completely misreading him or his intentions and doing him a disservice. Likewise whenever threads get into private matters; rumour is spread and it may not even be true.
So I do think you have to take a little responsibility for what we post here when it reflects on the gruppe.

Hmmmm....or maybe not... :wacko:

Agree again - I suppose I'm really criticising myself more than anybody else. Maybe he's worried we'll still be awash in Hotel Bloedel polls when the new product's out, which isn't likely. I suppose I'm promising to be just a bit less of an LBB. :lol:

I definitely agree there. In the absence of anything else I think (and MES's request suggests as much to me) that we're informally a bit more "official" than we give ourselves credit for, and we should bear it in mind without stifling our legitimate opinions.

I don't think you can -
treat your musicians poorly
sack them at will,
abandon them overseas,
abandon them on stage,
interfere with their instruments,
keep making them play Pharmacist and White Lightning ad infinitum,
have a separate dressing room,
keep saying "I don't like musicians, me" or similar
not rehearse or do sound-checks with them
etc
without it having some kind of poor effect on your fans' attitude towards them.

The bloke's double standards are starting to annoy me.

We all know what he's like though, surely it goes with the Fall territory. I agree that White Lightning is an atrocious way to treat anybody, but surely those poor downtrodden bandmates need us all the more.

of course i will comply.

duh.

They could always say no.




Or maybe not. :lol:

But they are so anonymous - we've had 15 years of "Now who are these youngsters on stage with MES?". They seem to be chosen for anonymity. I think they need sympathy not respect.

Interfering with their playing is as insulting as it gets.

yeh, those poor young souls who get to play with the legendary fall.

soooo sorry 4 them.

In general, I would say no, but agree with Mr Marshall who partially agreed with OD.

I think by now, any prospective band-mates know what they're letting themselves in for.

With the upmost respect to Mark, his wife, the band, ex wife, ex band mates, new album, recent albums, old albums, gigs past, present and future... I will continue to post what I like as I'm sure (like 99%) of forumites we don't mean any offence with the waffle we come out with.... and 98.5% of stuff I read is positive towards 100% of the output.

but what do you think of Dragnet??

it seems more like it's them new fans that like to obsess about past eras of The Fall more than the ones who are in it for the long haul

he's a fucking squirrel murderer for fuxache

Snap
and as we cant dwell onthe past Ive burnt 'Renegade'

you really know how to hurt a guy :lol:

No, I much prefer his requests to stop going on about the past from when Marc Riley was in the band tbh

NO.

I hate being directed or told what i can/not do.

I love MES but he can fuck himself over this tawdry shit.

I'm still not convinced he said it - it was related by a second party, after all. It does seem in keeping with his usual "look back bores" schpiel, but even so...

Nah, it's true. Daren doesn't strike me as a wind-up or someone who'd get it mangled. And it is in character.

I like The Fall. Contemporary and past. This forum can reference both those. I don't care what ' Daren' or 'Ted Chippington' think.

If so, this has left me - as they say on Oprah - conflicted. "And people tend to let you down..." indeed. What does MES expect people to post about on a Fall forum, but The Fall - past, present and future? It does strike me - judging by the piss-takes on here - that it was a massive own goal. And I say that as a professional homosexualist who knows nothing about the footyball or what an "own goal" actually is, but I understand it is a bad thing. Very bad indeed! I've said it before so I'll say it again - Mark, if you're reading this, can you not see that when we come on here and post, every post is an act of love? Jeez! And if you really did say that to Daren, it felt like a real sock in the jaw. Can you not understand that there are some people who fucking worship you and indeed everything you've ever done? Yes? No? That passed on message really fucking hurt. I am going to have a nap now and try to calm down. Thank you. And I love you Mark - no-one has given me so much pleasure in my life. That's why I come on here. Me. Nap. Now. Bye. :wub:

Never!

Frankly, I need a nap after reading that.

I think he does understand that, but he wants the rest of the current lineup to get more love too. As others have pointed out, there's just not really enough going on at the moment for people to express their love of them. So I think it may have been done from the best motives, it's just a bit of an overreaction, and bad timing. We shouldn't overreact because of it.

So you're not the guy to explain to me what offside means, I suppose. :confused:

A footyball player is in an offside position if he is in his opponents' half of the footyball field and is nearer to his footyball opponents' goal line than the ball, and fewer than two of his footyball opponents (which might include the footyball goalkeeper) are in front of him. A footyball player at equal distance from the footyball goal line as the second to last opponent is not in an offside position.
In 2005 The International Footyball Association Board agreed a new decision in Law 11 that being "nearer to an opponent's goal line" meant that "any part of his head, body or feet is nearer to his opponents' goal line than both the ball and the second last opponent. The arms are not included in this definition." This is taken to mean that any part of the attacking footyball player named in this Decision 2 has....

Jesus wept! This goes on for days. Does this fucking matter? Does it?

:wacko:

Yes.

Please continue.

Of course it does


:confused:

If he's just carrying the ball nonchalantly toward the goal is it ok then? :confused:

I can't see why not. But no - someone had to make it more complicated, didn't they? Is it any wonder I gave up a potential high-flying career playing the footyball for Bristol Rovers and decided to take up crochet?