THE SOAPBOX

One Guy's Opinion

by Tom Lounges, Publisher



    When drummer John Bonham died, the remaining members of his band had the class to retire the group's name and to carry on in their careers without milking the proud banner that was reflective of the creative output of the
four individuals who were Led Zeppelin.

    Sadly, that is not the train of thought most bands adopt. Instead, there seems to be no reverence for the past and for past accomplishments.

    This editorial will find me spouting off about how I think bands sans important original members should feel an obligation to their public, to move ahead in their careers under a new or altered name.  This rambling thought is not so much relevant to the fact that I am a music journalist, as it is that I am a music fan.

    As a fan, I absolutely HATE shelling out money for tickets and/or spending my time attending a concert, only to discover that one or more of the primary members who contributed to the music that originally made me a fan of that group, is no longer in the line-up.

    I certainly felt that way when I went to see Survivor at the Lake County Fairgrounds a few years back at a multi-band event dubbed as "Star Fest."   Instead of Frankie Sullivan, Jim Peterik, anf Dave Bickler, I and the audience were   forced to endure Jimi Jamison (who had been the group's second generation vocalist for a short time) and a pick up band.

    My pitch here is simply that bands should and need to adopt an "honesty in advertising" approach to marketing themselves.  I believe that fans should get what they pay for...  

  The scenario for change and foreclosure in a musical group need not always be so drastic as to concern having a member die, as was the case with Led Zeppelin. 

   I believe that if a key member of a group -- someone whose presence has without a doubt helped to define and indentify that group -- departs the line up for whatever reason, I think in most cases, the remaining or surviving
members (whichever the case may be) should carry on as a new entity with a new name.

    Rather than simply walk away from a situation gone awry, leaving a once successful band's name intact, too often some of the members of a band that has tasted success choose to bilk their fans.  

   Rather than move on to a new project or under a new name, they instead choose to milk the trademark name for the sake of ticket and/or album sales. In doing so, they usually only serve to strip their once proud band name of any dignity it had and in the end, they ultimately tarnish the band's reputation, leaving a sour taste in the mouths (and ears) of their once loyal fans.

    Jeez...  How many touring versions are out there of the Coasters, the Drifters, the Shirelles, et al.? 

     These names should bear honor and reflect upon the achievements of vocal groups who helped to pioneer a musical genre and embody an era.  Instead, in today's whore-filled world of music and entertainment, these once heralded names from the past now reflect only a shameful Vegas-style side show.

    The fans and the legacy are left to suffer for the greed factor of those who continue to beat the proverbial "dead horse."   The dignity of the music so many of these groups created has been whored out by "artists" who in most
cases are far, far  removed the original line up. 

    Let's see, there may be a second cousin (by marriage) to the original lead vocalist or some other "connection" that is considered relevant in some twisted "six degrees of Kevin Bacon" fashion.

   As is often the case, the people who pass themselves off as being a member of a group's present day line-up,  are often too young to have even been alive when "their  group" landed it's original hits on the radio.

   As a music fan, this kind of thing really pisses me off.  Those groups, who I sat by the radio listening to as a child, who's 45 rpms I collected and who I held near and dear, have degenerated into glorified cover bands -- no better than a tribute band -- only they just happen to have bought the legal rights to the name. 

    Sorry, I know it's a common business practice today, but to me, when you "buy" something for the sheer sake of exploitation, that's whoring.

    What started me on this tirade was the recent concert by "STYX" that came and went from the Star Plaza Theatre in Merrillville, Indiana with little fanfare.  I heard many negative comments coming from  people who attended not
realizing that the Styx they were paying money to see in no where close to the Styx that recorded all those great songs.

   That's not say they are a bad band, on the contrary, there is an incredible amount of talent in the current line up of the band now calling themselves Styx. I would even go so far as to say that one would be hard pressed to find more talented musicians in any one touring rock ensemble today.

     But are they Styx?  Not hardly.

   Tragically, two individuals who were a major part in making the group one of the most successful recording/touring acts of their generation, are now using the band's venerable name to sell a line up that to any real fan, is simply NOT Styx.

     Legions of other Chicagoland fans...make that global fans...of Styx who I have encountered on the internet in various music chats, likewise feel that this group is a sham.   The collective thought is that their continued use of the name Styx (regardless of legal ownership rights) will forever tarnish the proud name of an accomplished and much loved hometown group with its fans.

     Here's a fast history lessons folks.  Styx was founded in the Sixties by a crazed South Side Beatles fan named Dennis DeYoung and a pair of rhythmic brothers bearing the name of Panozzo, John and Chuck, respectively.  The group started out jamming in the DeYoung family's Roseland garage shortly after the Fab Four debuted on "The Ed Sullivan Show" and turned the world of pop music upside down.

     The trio next added guitarist John Curulewski and eventually invited a second guitarist by the name of James (J.Y.) Young on board.   The only member from those formative days in the current incarnation of the band is Young.

      Losing the Panozzo brothers to death (John) and retirement (Chuck) was hard enough for the band's fans to take, but to see Styx carry on without the presence and input of Dennis DeYoung is heartbreaking.   Styx without DeYoung is very much like the Beach Boys without the genius of Brian Wilson. 

    With the departure of Brian Wilson, the band who once forged the international surf sound of the Sixties, simply became a novelty act who served as a nostalgic vehicle for aging rockers who wanted to relive their days of having "fun, fun, fun."

    Styx seems destined to become the same sort of sad entertainment commodity if it continues on the path it is taking.  While it may earn a decent paycheck for Young and Tommy Shaw (who is a 'second generation' member who replaced Curulewski), it will do nothing but whittle away the legacy of the group's brilliant past work.

     To their credit, the Beach Boys, had always tried to include the ailing Brian Wilson in the band's various projects and tours, as his health allowed.

    Styx on the other hand, has intentionally turned it's back on it's founder, DeYoung, who was seriously ill and has now recovered.  Looking at the situation, it seems that Young and Shaw decided the time was right to kick DeYoung while he was down.  In an action akin to that a military coup, the two wrested the power and control Styx that DeYoung once held.  

    To this end, one needs only watch the catty barbs they toss out at him in the Styx episode of VH-1's now airing,  "Behind The Music."

     I know there are always two sides to every story and that sometimes, creative and loving relationships must eventually come to an end, amicably or otherwise.  But when that happens, all of the parties involved should do as
Led Zeppelin did in the face of John Bonham's death.  They should move on with their respective lives. 

    By all means, continue on with new creative partners, but in doing so, please wave a new banner so that the fans will know the score.

     The abundance of talent within the new line-up now backing James Young and Tommy Shaw in this faux Styx project is considerable, but again I ask - "Is it Styx?"      

     Not to this fan.   Nor to most fans who know anything at all about the band and it's history.  If proof beyond the scathing commentaries that can be found on some of the Styx/DeYoung related web sites is needed, look at the
pathetic ticket sales in comparison to the last DeYoung/Panozzo era tour of just a few years ago.

    That incarnation of Styx sold out consecutive nights at the enormous Rosemont Horizon (now the Allstate Arena) while just last month, the "new" Styx failed to sell out the Star Plaza Theatre, a mid-size venue with 3,400 seats.  The two venues are in the same geographical market, a mere 45 minutes apart. 

    Add to that, how Dennis DeYoung's solo show last winter at the Rosemont Theatre (roughly the same size as the Star Plaza) sold out it's $75 seats in record time with enough demand remaining, that a second DeYoung concert was added at the venue's next open weekend date, one month later.  Again, it sold out.

    DeYoung was and always will be the heart and soul of Styx.  He was the founder, the primary songwriter, the producer of every record and the voice that took the group up the charts to multi-platinum sales.   Again I ask, can there be a group called Styx without Dennis DeYoung?   A final time, I say - "No!"

     As a lifelong fan of Styx who has many wonderful memories of their music and of personal experiences with the band and its various members, I feel that I speak for many Styx fans around the world, when I borrow the lyrics from one of Tommy Shaw's own (Damn Yankees) songs  as I implore this faux band --  "Don't you tread, don't you tread on me!"

     This has been one guy's opinion!   You got one?  Feel free to share it...



Email Tom Lounges at:  tom@midwestbeat.com