You are correct, of course, not to place Steely Dan -- the almighty Gods of Pop Awesomeness -- in the same category of suckitude as the Eagles.
But you know, I did think about Fleetwood Mac and wondered why I don't hold them in the same disdain. To some extent I do when it comes to bloated productions like
Tusk, for which there is no excuse. But if you start with the '72 music, when the Eagles started, those pre-Buckingham/Nicks albums have less suck because the songwriting was on the whole more honest and earthy. IMO, of course. I'm sure FM would have loved those big hits, but I just couldn't imagine them pandering to the folk-rock crowd like that.
Plus, I freely admit I'm an Anglophile in my tastes in popular music and the Brits (sure, Welch was an American but they plucked out of
Paris fer gawdsakes) just have a more compelling take on pop music to my ear. And Christine MacVie... *grrrowwwlll*.
As for the post-Welch era, as I said they went off the rails with
Tusk (though I think they righted themselves on
Mirage.) But on those other albums there was a really interesting tug of war going on in the songwriting with all of the love/hate crap so boldly on display like an open cut. The Eagles just never had that kind of edge IMO. Or the balls to air their dirty laundry (no pun intended).
Plus I hate Don Henley's voice. Did I mention that already?
Bookmarks