|
Post by eric on Feb 21, 2017 22:04:35 GMT
I agree that “The Baby” is a highlight of their show. Tony Hicks leads the way with a brilliant sitar/guitar introduction and then the band joins in to deliver a powerful performance.
|
|
|
Post by Stranger on Mar 18, 2017 13:32:03 GMT
There's a mix of insight and anti Clarke/Nash stuff on there today.
|
|
|
Post by JamesT on Mar 18, 2017 14:31:36 GMT
MakeHolliesGreatAgain?
|
|
|
Post by Stranger on Mar 18, 2017 15:05:48 GMT
Clarke Nash Sylvester Calvert Rickfors.
It can happen James!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2017 16:31:02 GMT
Interesting that Terry never appears to get 'worked up' about TH, who was supposedly the band leader and decision maker at the time of Terry's tenure.
Strange, don't you think?
|
|
|
Post by greengoddess on Mar 18, 2017 17:57:59 GMT
Perhaps he's just still smarting over the RRHOF incident and Tony wasn't there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2017 17:59:47 GMT
Interesting that Terry never appears to get 'worked up' about TH, who was supposedly the band leader and decision maker at the time of Terry's tenure. Strange, don't you think? No, because Tony wasn't there when Terry made a fool of himself at the R&RHoF.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2017 18:00:19 GMT
Perhaps he's just still smarting over the RRHOF incident and Tony wasn't there. Great minds! You beat me to this by seconds.
|
|
|
Post by Stranger on Mar 18, 2017 18:06:57 GMT
My interpretation is Terry didn't have a beef with anyone and was looking forward to meeting Allan at the RRHOF.
Allan & Graham snubbed Terry now he has a major issue with them which he isn't prepared to let go of.
Tony & Bobby probably didn't want to share a stage with Allan.
Graham probably didn't care.
|
|
|
Post by greengoddess on Mar 18, 2017 20:58:00 GMT
Whether or not Allan would have grabbed the mike away from Terry anyway I don't know, but Terry didn't help himself by turning up drunk on the stage wearing a football shirt. At least Bernie and Eric looked respectable and appeared to be sober.
|
|
|
Post by JamesT on Mar 19, 2017 8:52:19 GMT
Clarke Nash Sylvester Calvert Rickfors. It can happen James! Fake News!
|
|
|
Post by JamesT on Mar 19, 2017 8:55:18 GMT
It's amazing that after 7 years we're still talking about it (and TS is still Tweeting acrimoniously). All the points above are totally valid.
|
|
|
Post by greengoddess on Mar 19, 2017 9:12:23 GMT
One thing that puzzles me about the induction is why did only Allan and Graham perform the songs at the end? Someone must have planned it that way - who, I wonder? They couldn't have known that Terry would turn up in the state he did - or perhaps they did expect just that. And why were Bernie and Eric excluded too?
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Mar 19, 2017 9:45:11 GMT
I've often wondered that too. It seemed very much like the "Graham and Allan show" right from the off. I expect because Nash is a RRHOF regular and knows the score and also if he was taking a lead in it, he wouldn't include Terry on principal or Eric because of how he left the Hollies. As for Bernie, I do feel sorry for him because he's the fourth longest serving original Hollie and he ALWAYS gets overshadowed. Why wasn't he included in the LTAW DVD? It's not like he's got a habit of shouting his mouth off like Terry and Eric.
Despite this, Terry still lowered the tone by turning up in a football shirt and instead of just graciously accepting his award, used the opportunity to showboat with his jokes. You can see Nash and Clarke looking visibly irritated behind him. He then storms the stage and takes the microphone away to sing - but you can see how it takes Allan and Graham by surprise. Notice how he sneaks in from behind them. That's only what we saw on the TV too, who knows what went on behind the scenes. Terry has spent seven years since continuing to embarrass himself by shouting his mouth off on Twitter and even taking aim at fans of the Hollies for disagreeing with him. No wonder Tony and Bobby gave the whole event a wide berth! They're the only ones who came away unscathed! Sadly I think there's a lot of ill feelings towards each other behind the scenes, which is a shame. I wish they'd just get it all together, accept that they were one of the best bands in the world and make the most of having all their original members still with us while they can. If they went along with Graham's idea of a one off reunion concert, it would be the biggest thing ever. It would be huge. Irrespective of whether Allan could sing or not, there's nothing wrong with the rest of them!
|
|
|
Post by greengoddess on Mar 19, 2017 10:11:40 GMT
I totally agree, Cameron.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2017 10:21:33 GMT
I'm sure there would've been a full band performance (with or without Terry) if Tony and Bobby had turned up.
As for Bernie, I recall reading somewhere that he had other commitments on the day they wanted to film for LTAW.
|
|
|
Post by greengoddess on Mar 19, 2017 10:25:01 GMT
Surely LTAW was filmed over more than one day? My copy is out on loan at the moment but I do have a vague recollection of different clothing being worn in the interviews and I can't imagine them being vain enough to change their clothes mid filming.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2017 10:27:36 GMT
Surely LTAW was filmed over more than one day? My copy is out on loan at the moment but I do have a vague recollection of different clothing being worn in the interviews and I can't imagine them being vain enough to change their clothes mid filming. The day they wanted to film Bernie (presumably they were in his area), he was busy.
|
|
|
Post by Stranger on Mar 19, 2017 10:50:02 GMT
I think the gist of it is Allan and Graham went ahead and did their own thing excluding the others.
Tony and Bobby not being there... in a way it makes them unscathed in a way it makes them look worse.
|
|
|
Post by stuball on Mar 19, 2017 13:38:02 GMT
I think the gist of it is Allan and Graham went ahead and did their own thing excluding the others. Tony and Bobby not being there... in a way it makes them unscathed in a way it makes them look worse. We've been up and over, down and around this subject so many times, what is there to say without repeating ourselves? But I think Stranger, you've hit on the nub of it there. I keep going back to what Gee has alluded to several times in the past, and that is the fact The Hollies were run like a factory whose function was of course, to turn out product, i.e., records. In The Hollies Ltd., there was management and labour: management being Allan, Graham, Tony and Bobby. Labour being Haydock, Calvert and Sylvester. With that in mind, forget for a moment the frenzied RRHOF fiasco that night. Instead, let's look at the preplanned seating arrangement made days earlier in the sober light of day: The Hollies Executives (Graham and Allan) seated in the stockbroker dividend area, while 60 yards downwind at a safe distance, were placed the unwashed lunch-bucket crew (Haydock, Calvert and Sylvester). This Victorian-era snobbery, the haves and have-nots, the us and them, is what in hindsight really strikes me, especially when it is 'the group' which is being honoured, not 'Ricky & Dane'! I can see how this would particularly inflame Terry, since as a former frontline singer-songwriter and sometimes spokesman, it must have been galling to be told 'You'll be sat with the ex-bass players way over there'. Although it must be said Terry did himself no favours by dressing the way he did: nothing says working-class yob quite like blue jeans and a football jersey on a 60-something year-old man! Had Tony and Bobby attended, I believe they would have been placed next to Graham and Allan, as befitting their status as 'management'. But today, I bet they thank their lucky stars they stayed put in England.
|
|
|
Post by gee on Mar 19, 2017 17:44:43 GMT
There is very likely alot in that - and the group being run like a factory is probably why George Harrison felt they were 'souless sessionmen' in 1965 as he must have got the idea The Hollies were a very 'factory-like' concern - incorrectly in truth re the music but not re how the band was run with Ron Richards a very 'regimented' teacher like figure as well unlike George Martin hence Don Rathbone was quickly 'engineered out' early on (Pete Best likewise in The Beatles story) and by 1966 Eric Haydock, a founder member, duly got his p.45 when he began failing to report for work - tho' to be fair in each case the group's 'health' came first... I think too that on a more humane level Nash really wanted a proper 'night for Allan' in the USA feeling he had got all the mega stardom and his school friend had missed out - even when LCW was high in the USA chart in 1972 - so Nash must have felt he really wanted to do something to give Allan overdue recognition stateside BUT of course it was a night for THE HOLLIES not just Allan Clarke hence Terry rightly felt he was being snubbed and ignored - Eric & Bernie too but both are quieter guys never in the group's front line who were probably only too pleased to be remembered for induction Eric after his bitter legal and court room clashes with The Hollies Limited - and being dumped again after 'Holliedaze' in 1981 - was almost a 'prodigal son' coming back in from the cold in getting belated recognition for his service to the band after so many years Bernie had also been out of the public eye for many years - Clarke's warm handshake and their clear mutual delight at seeing each other again proved there was no ill feelings between them so Terry was the one really being short changed, tho' I think it was more due to Nash wanting something special for Clarkey and neither Hicks or Elliott being present to make it a 'proper' Hollies thing - ALL present were 'Ex-Hollies' members ! - as opposed to any intentional 'let's belittle, snub, and annoy Terry' deliberate ploy by Clarke and Nash... the idea certain members were seen as 'hired help' DOES come across however... on the plus side Terry WAS becoming only the fifth Liverpudlian to be inducted...after the fab four...thus boosting his own profile and had he been better dressed and at least acted more sober (assuming he was) and rather more dignified he would have come across so much better to the general viewing public - he looked and acted like a drunken gatecrasher... I don't have Twitter so what has Terry been saying this time ? - I do wonder here if the never ending 'rants' are either after he's had a drink or two...or maybe a case of trying to hold onto Nash and Clarke's coat tails via an ongoing public 'feud' thing (albeit a one sided feud only on Terry's part) in order to try to maintain a higher profile re his past 'links' to them etc...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 19, 2017 18:06:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Mar 19, 2017 19:00:56 GMT
The Hollies' business like management has gone on to give them the "Dave Clarke Five Syndrome". Because record companies can't make much money out of their products thanks to their licensing back deal, these bands are extremely low priority for record companies. After 1966, only "Hollies Greatest" featured on the EMI advertising inner sleeve and you can bet that's only because half of the songs on the album earned EMI a lot of money! "Butterfly" had a belated plug after it failed to sell, in early 1968 by being put on the back of their 45rpm single company sleeve - but on its own at the bottom. And that was that! Polydor were similarly disinterested later on. Because "Hollies LTD" own their product, they have to present it to the record company. That's why we don't get lavish reissues, remasters and box sets because it's all done at a cost to "Hollies LTD" and they have to foot the bill when these collectors items inevitably don't sell well. But because of this, like the DC5, they get forgotten. History doesn't remember them as the greatest bands of the 1960s because their music isn't pushed in consumer's faces. Since Pye records folded in the 1970's, the Kinks' early catalogue has been recycled, reissued and represented more times than I can count, which is no doubt why they are so popular today. At one point fairly recently, even Sainsburys were selling their 1960s studio albums on CD! Yet they sold next to nothing compared to the Hollies the first time around.
|
|
|
Post by stuball on Mar 20, 2017 16:20:42 GMT
I've often wondered that too. It seemed very much like the "Graham and Allan show" right from the off. I expect because Nash is a RRHOF regular and knows the score and also if he was taking a lead in it... I read a few years back that the only reason The Hollies received a nomination for induction into the RRHOF in the first place, was as a favour to Graham Nash. Recall that Graham was already in the Hall as a member of Crosby, Stills & Nash. But David and Stephen's former groups (The Byrds and The Buffalo Springfield) had received their inductions years before, almost as soon as they were eligible. Apparently they used to tease Nash in a good-natured way about his solitary induction compared to their doubles, but then later thought that if would be nice, if perhaps he also could have a second induction as a member of The Hollies. Word was put out to Hall Of Fame Head Honcho and close Nash pal Jann Wenner and presto, The Hollies were nominated. i don't know of course, if this is strictly true or not, but it does seem highly plausible to me. And if so, I can understand why Graham might want to share some of the spotlight with his old pal Allan Clarke.
|
|
|
Post by greengoddess on Mar 20, 2017 17:07:35 GMT
It certainly does seem plausible. The Hollies were well overdue for induction and that could easily explain how it eventually came about. I understand that Jann Wenner is a "difficult" character.
|
|