BOC: Meltzer and BOC in Boston stuff

[John A. Swartz]

Just following up on a few things.  BTW, Meltzer's article pissed me
off, true - but, if people feel differently than me on it, that's cool
by me - I didn't mean to imply that anyone's reactions here pissed me
off as well.

Now, on to a few replies...

> OK, now the question is what about Meltzer's lyrics after 1973? I
> wouldn't say he was gone in the darkness and never to appear again
> until recently.
>
> Death Valley Nights, Dr. Music, Lips In The Hills, Burnin' For You and
> Veins. Latter three are Buck & Meltzer cooperation.

Well, I can't speak for anyone here, but I suspect that BOC did have
plenty of contact with Meltzer after '73, but not in the same capacity
as folks like Pearlman and Krugman.  My guess is that he made lots of
his lyrics available to the band (or perhaps at least certain
individuals that he was on good turns with - probably Albert).  The fact
that Meltzer and Buck appear in the credits of the same song doesn't
necessarily mean that the two collaborated together on anything.  Buck
probably put music to Meltzer's lyrics, without a lot of discussion
between the two of them.  That's my theory anyway.  Again, I'd defer to
someone such as Albert to provide further insight into Meltzer's
relationship with either BOC the band or individual members.

Curious though - if Buck did have little to do with Meltzer after the
early 70s, I would wonder why the guy would want to have his music put
to Meltzer's lyrics.

But, the quote of Meltzer "dissappearing" was made by Buck's wife...


> I haven't seen you this emotional over a subject in a long time Mr. Swartz.

Yeah, maybe it's just because I got to see them live again last week,
and I don't want anyone pissing on my good time...

> Now can you explain the "equipment snafu part of your review?  I'm really
> confused.

Not fully, but it was in reference to a comment made by Joe Coughlin,
who was helping out the Johnny Black Trio (opening act).  Apparently
there was some mis-communication with BOC's road crew and the opening
bands and basically they had moved some of their equipment off to the
side of the stage, and were then told by BOC's road crew that BOC would
not perform unless/until all of their equipment was removed.  Joe and
members of the Johnny Black Trio (big BOC fans, and largely responsible
for BOC getting booked at the Middle East) either missed part of the
show, or lost their places on the floor because they had to move
equipment, and then get re-admitted to the club.  I can't speak for
anyone as to how this all came about, but there understandably were some
upset BOC fans.


>
> Well, it's obvious you were upset by the Richard Meltzer piece, and
> obviously I respect your feelings - but, maybe because I'm just a horrible
> person, I don't share them, and indeed can barely understand them.  It's
> curious to me that given Meltzer's historical importance to BOC - according
> to the story, he's the guy that put the dots on the O! - you're immediately
> prepared to diss him.  Is it through a sense that he's "broken ranks"; "let
> the side down"?  It's uncharacteristic of you to insult someone, let alone
> without explaining why.

You aren't a horrible person and I was out-of-character with my remarks.
 I stand by 'em, but part of the reason for the confusion may have been
that I posted my review of the Boston show on several BOC forums -
several others had already had ongoing discussions over the Meltzer
article.  I realized afterward that there had been no previous
discussion on BOC-L about this article (in fact most of BOC-L probably
didn't know about it), so my initial "Meltzer is a Dick" comment must
have been surprising.  Guess I just thought everyone who didn't know
what I was referring to would assume that "Dick" was slang for
"Richard"...  :-)


> First off, it clearly wasn't a gig review.

My interpretation was, and still is, that it WAS a gig review.  Of
course, I don't know exactly what kind of magazine "Rocket" is...

> Me, I found it scurrilous,
> and scurrilous makes me laugh.  Like I said, maybe I'm horrible.


Fine by me.  I would have to say that despite my strong reactions to it,
I did find it informative -- it certainly provided another glimpse that
BOC would never be confused with the Partridge Family... ;-)

As I have said, you can call me a fanboy - I've been called a
boot-licker here in the past.  But, that's who I am.  When I wrote the
FAQ, I took effort to try and touch upon stuff in BOC's past which is
not exactly "warm and fuzzy", but I also tried to do it in a way that
wouldn't present anyone in the band in a bad light.  Yeah, it might have
been more interesting to try and get the "dirt" on some things (let me
say that another former associate of BOC offered to help me out in this
area), but I didn't think that a fan-based document should have a lot of
allegations between two sides.


>
> As for these "allegations", like Allen in rehab - certainly plausible, but
> I've no idea whether it's true, or simply his own jaundiced interpretation
> of reports of Allen's illness.  Could be either, and I certainly wouldn't
> take his word for it, given his clearly expressed rancour towards Allen.

Yep.  But, I first of all don't find it appropriate to allege it if it
isn't true for one -- and even if it is, I don't find it appropriate for
Allen to be "outed" by someone such as Meltzer.  If the band had made
such an announcement that Allen was taking time off for rehab, then I
think it would have been fair game for someone to report it.  But, his
unsubstantiated allegation is at best tabloid journalism, and slander at worst.

> I do think you're pushing it when you object to his ridicule of the guy in
> the crowd, though!

Well, it was just more stupidity from him - but just because he saw some
guy and somehow made the mental leap that the guy must live with his
mother and maybe an aunt, I don't think it warranted commentary in what
I still assume was his review of a BOC show.

> And then, of course, the Roeser wedding incident.  I'm reading between the
> lines a bit here, but I think that maybe he really did have trouble
> understanding how offensive he'd been.  I'm sure Meltzer's behaved far worse
> many times, and each time it's been no big deal; in the annals of
> rock'n'roll excess, it's really very low on the scale.  But what's revealing
> is that Don's private life wasn't the time or the place for rock'n'roll
> excess.

Yeah, no one will ever confuse my life with Meltzer's, or probably
anyone who's lived the "rock n roll lifestyle".  If it had been my
wedding, Meltzer would have gotten his ass kicked -- that's not bragging
on my part - I'm sure it wouldn't have been me kicking his ass (I would
have had lots of friends and relatives knocking eachother out of the way
to get to him).


As always, this is IMHO, or at times IMNSHO.  Again, I took no offense
to those of you that didn't think as I did when reading Meltzer's article.


John