[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by bretonbanquet

I don't want to address the less lucid points that have been made in this thread, but I think a lot of fans overlook the fact that Fleetwood Mac haven't been musically relevant for a very long time. In fact, the last time they were anything approaching dynamic, and produced music that didn't originate from the 70s and 80s, was for Time.

OMG. Okay, on a positive note, I agree with you that they have not been relevant since the 80s. But I have to totally disagree that Time was even remotely "dynamic," let alone "progressive." It was very middle-of-the-road, very generic and bland adult pop that would not have been out of place on a Wilson Phillips album.

After Rumours, the band's creativity disappeared.

Uh... wut? Seriously? Ever heard of Tusk? It is arguably the most musically progressive album ever produced by any artist. It really reset the bar for 70s arena rock albums and has an enduring legacy of bands inspired by the sound of this album - Wilco, Arcade Fire, Jayhawks, etc. And even lesser albums like Tango were novel (if not innovative) for their time. We all know how heavily this album continues to be sampled even to this day.

Whatever anyone thinks of Stevie and Christine, neither of them were ever musically progressive, not in the slightest. Lindsey was, and is, of course - but his creativity was hamstrung by being in Fleetwood Mac. Therein lies the popularity - people that are not musically adventurous like a band that isn't musically adventurous - it appeals to most people.

The beauty of a band like Fleetwood Mac is that, as a group of equal contributors, they force each other to bring out their best while weeding out their less desirable traits. This push/pull musical tension is what creates magic. We get the best of Lindsey without getting all of his tendency for self-indulgence. I don't think he is "hamstrung" as much as he is "refined" within the confines of FM.

For Behind the Mask, Lindsey was gone, and replaced by a couple of guys who were talented and musically very capable, but not terribly quirky or interesting. Therefore that album is the most tedious of all the band's output (imo)

Indeed, BTM was not their best album ever, but I would hardly call it "tedious." In fact, it is arguably one of their more diverse, interesting efforts. It's an olio of all sorts of morsels - pop, blues, rockabilly, folk, prog rock, etc. At the end of the day, you can't help but give them a B+ for effort considering that their primary creative voice had departed. Nobody contributed their best material to the album, but it seems that the voices of Christine and Stevie can make practically anything sparkle.

- at least Time was interesting. Then they went back and lived in the 70s for the next 15 years.

If you think BTM was "tedious," how on earth can you find Time "interesting?" There is nothing... nothing new, novel or fresh about Time. Don't get me wrong- I loved Christine's songs for the most part, but I do have to admit that the production/arrangements were pretty lackluster. Otherwise it's full of very bland California pop along with some soulless bluesy meanderings.

They basically felt, and were made to feel by the media and the fans, that they weren't allowed to experiment or take risks any more, and the Rumours stuff was all they were ever required to do.

I think the only album that was consciously moulded in homage of Rumours was Mirage. Otherwise, I have to disagree yet again. Although it is far from perfect the SYW album was perhaps the most far-reaching, ambitious album they've ever released, and Lindsey takes full credit or blame for this, depending on how you look at it. Other than the title track, I don't think there is a single song on that album that could have fit on Rumours.

And (here's where I get crucified) I think the rabid Stevie fanatics were at the very crux of that. Anything that isn't Stevie doing the same old stuff, just isn't Fleetwood Mac to them.

Well, I guess you are saying, in a roundabout way, that Stevie is the sole reason why Fleetwood Mac is/was successful?

So Mac ceased to be a proper band, and these words "brand" and "franchise" rear their ugly heads.

I believe it was Lindsey who first posited the term "brand" around the time of The Dance. Say what you will about "branding," but it is definitely important. Look at what a nightmare it was when the fake Fleetwood Mac was touring the U.S. in the early 70s? And how would you feel if Benny and Bjorn reunited "ABBA" with new girl singers? It's one thing if they started a new band with a new name, but coopting the ABBA name would just be beyond the pale.