Posts
Woodstock again?
You'd have thought that after the 30th anniversary event descended into fire, riot and claims of rape that nobody would be bothered about a doing a 40th anniversary Woodstock.
Michael Lang is keen to press on, though. He thinks the smell of acrid fires and sexual assaults has dissipated:
"I think it always hearkens back to the '69 event, somehow," he said. "When people think (of Woodstock) they don't think '99 or '94. They think (of) the '69 event. I think (1999) has its ramifications, but I don't think it did any real damage in that sense."
Yes. They might think of 1969 when they think of Woodstock. But when they think of ill-conceived anniversary revivals of Woodstock, it's always going to be 1999.
It's not going to go ahead unless it can find a sponsor, which perhaps is just intended to be some sort of humorous punchline to the original's much-proclaimed hippy ethos.
2 comments:
Even if we were to ignore the previous attempts at repeating the festival, I don't quite understand why anybody would. I mean obviously there's commercial value in Woodstock brand but isn't that value dependent on the event being exaggerated by its own mythology? (I've just contradicted myself, haven't I?)
I also love the artists he mentions as today's acts. Red Hot Chilli Peppers? Dave Matthews?!? Is that the best he can do? I mean bloody hell. What an exciting event for the kids!! Groovy! Then, of course, I looked up Michael Lang. He's now the Michael Lang Organization. What's that you ask? A live production and artist management company who have in the past dealt with Red Hot Chilli Peppers and Dave Matthews.
Just ignore me though, I just don't understand that it's all about peace and love and nothing to do with profit. You know, unlike it was when they originally came up with the idea for the festival.
Good luck trying to throw another woodstock festival. Rome New York is still investigating dead end cases involving rape. They lost a shitload of money because they had to overpay for the bands to even play this event and undercharged for the event itself. When Dave Matthews and the Chilli Peppers will demand a quarter mill to play for about 90 mins they will have to pay them too. And the under cards will all get atleast 50,000. Not to mention all the jerkoffs who will sneak in (30,000 estimated in 99) There is no way they can make money on this. and besides it will probably cost $350 a ticket and your more than likley gonna go home miserable from sleeping in dirt, urine, feces, and god knows what. Getting sunburnt and if your a female the risk of getting violated by some know it all party animal who goes to some college who can care less about the music but just to party and cause havoc just to prove that hes not a pussy. But seriously the very 1st woodstock was a magical once in a lifetime expeirience. They failed miserably with that financially. But look at all the great memories people had from that. And not to mention how the 69 was way different than it is now.
So to end this rant Woodstock was never a success financially. So just give it up and quit while your behind so much. And stop exploiting Rock n Roll you greedy fake rock n roll corporate mother fuckers. Just stop knocking rock n roll down even more pegs. Let its black eye heal
Post a Comment
As a general rule, posts will only be deleted if they reek of spam.