Sentimentallity or reuniting

["Steve Evans" <midnightrambler63@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Group,

Strangley enough this subject has brought me out of complete lurkdom. I just 
wanted to say something in BB Page's defence. There are some good examples 
of bands that moved on after deaths or just departures. I don't think it 
would have been any different with Zeppelin if that was what they all 
wanted. If they had continued right away after a year of mourning, these 
conversations about why they did it would not exist, instead we would be 
debating why they picked so and so and how Bonzo would have sounded on the 
new albums. Not as a comparison of talent mind you, but two other band come 
to mind right away. The Rolling Stones lost one of their founding memebers 
in Brian Jones. If they had hung it up in '69, I think most would agree that 
some really cool albums with Mick Taylor would not exist, not to mention 
some great bootlegs form the '69 tour and '72 tour. Now personally I like 
the Mick Taylor years more that the Jones years, but who cares about that. 
If they had quit then, they would have still been a classic, but they 
managed to entertain for some time more(should have quit by '80 IMO). 
Another example is Deep Purple, those who are fans of this band know the 
different line ups and the pluses(sp?) and minuses there of. What I am 
saying is that these bands wanted to go on and keep playing their music and 
making music together. That is the key to me. For whatever reason(read Plant 
IMO), our boys did not have the same drive to keep it going. Perfectly 
understandable, you see it all the time with rock star egos. They always 
think the part is better that the whole. That's their right and if it's not 
the same for them so be it. This many years later, however I have to agree 
with Page when he said it's probably just too late.

Back to the Boot Cave,

Steve E.
Georgia