Musicans who found religion

[Diane D.]

>I'm willing to bet it is. I've known maybe a few hundred hundred fans over the years and dozens and dozens of them remain friends and acquaintances of mine to this day and it's only a very small percentage of them that have the same position on this as you do and that's before you even include the general rock audience who again, really don't care.

I'm not talking about Alice fans who obviously have made up their minds that they are fans. I'm not even talking in generalities about a rock audience who I agree can be collectively described as not caring. I'm talking about the pockets of potential fans, rocks fans, music fans, who like cool music (and I consider Alice cool music) but don't give Alice a chance for a variety of peripheral reasons having to do with marketing and image, of which one is golf. For these people who don't know or follow Alice they are heavily swayed by golf stories and other things that remove Alice from what I'd broadly call the "cool" category, unfairly in my opinion, but I can see there are barriers that are hard for them get past.

>How would he not "emphasize" playing golf? Should he play at night in the dark so that no - one can see what he is doing? Should he refused to be photographed on the golf course or refuse to take part in televised games just in case some Black Sabbath fan in Idaho is offended?

This is easy to answer. Have you seen the title of his autobiography? Nothing has to be hidden, but his choice to discuss it on and on and make it part of his public image is a choice that I think has done more harm than good.

>Maybe so, but you're the one struggling to accept that it's primarily an acting - part.

There's no struggle. I find his performance fascinating and I would hope that Alice, as an artist, would appreciate that. It hasn't always been just an acting part and I think there's some discomfort there in you and maybe Alice too.

>"Not as much as you seem to want there," is presumptuous: How the heck do you know what I "seem" to want?

>I read your posts.

Which is a presumptuous yet again. I've never delved in detail about this topic online.

>That's not even the point.

>You wrote: "name me any human being who has that right without repercussions." I just gave you the answer. Is the above really you're best response? Think carefully because you are forcing yourself into a corner which if you follow the logic all the way through boils down to: he shouldn't play golf and shouldn't write about his spiritual beliefs because of "repercussions". I already explained to you that he understands what they are - he understood then and he understands now but he's not going to tailor his entire life for the benefit of his career because if he did, people who think like you do would accuse him of pandering. That's "the point".

I never said he shouldn't play golf. All I'm saying is there are repercussions which you said he's considered and that's fine. I think it's done him more harm than good and that's a point of view that is legitimate.

>Well, for one thing, you don't know that for a fact. I don't think the guys in Anvil play golf, yet that doesn't seem to have helped their career. There are a lot of potential reasons why his career has not thrived to your satisfaction and golf is only one small element. It's a lazy and easy target.

Obviously I don't know it for a fact nor do you not having access to a parallel universe where he does things differently. People go through life every day making educated guesses and judgments and I have made mine and it is defensible.

>Totally irrelevant. Just because you accused me first doesn't make you right and me wrong. We're not in fifth grade. That's not a counterargument and my position still stands that you saw the issue in black and white terms.

>It's absolutely relevant. I accused you of it and you didn't address it. You still haven't. Why do you find it so hard to accept that he can do both (have a career and play golf) and why are you so sure that if he had never played golf, his career would have had a different trajectory? You still haven't explained that.

I have explained above.

>Again, hardly anyone cares as much as you seem to.

Or you also. I mentioned my view rather briefly in a post and you wanted to discuss it further.

>So not too much damage done, overall. Right?

I have enjoyed Alice's work pretty much his whole career if that's what you mean. As for "damage done" I'll refer to the points I've been making.

>I agree that most people don't care.

>Well, there's a contradiction. If that's the case, why do you assert his career would have gone better if golf (or his faith) had never come into the equation? You just ruined your whole argument.

Black and white again. I agree "most" people don't care like "most" people aren't vegetarians. But there are pockets of people that do care, a comparatively small percent of serious music fans who add up to thousands maybe millions of people worldwide. That makes a big difference.

>I agree. It is what it is and it isn't 1973 any more when this stuff really mattered.

I think it still matters today and I'm talking about the 30-something crowd and younger who weren't around in the 70s. Lots of these people love classic rock and great music from older eras. I'm amazed at how many young folks are into Led Zeppelin. I think they'd give Alice a chance if they heard more than Schools Out and a couple other songs on the radio (which Alice does't control) but also if they could get past some of the "peripherals" I mentioned including golf.

I think Alice's career and stature as an artist would be better served if his approach was a little different. You're saying he knows that and therefore his value system is different.

Hey, you should write your quotes in color. I know that you are talking to each other, but if you make your comments public, to all of us to read, make it colorful, it's more fun and easier to read.

[A_MichaelUK]

>Hey, you should write your quotes in color. I know that you are talking to each other, but if you make your comments public, to all of us to read, make it colorful, it's more fun and easier to read.

The ">" sign signifies the comments that I am responding to.

[GNDM]

Now Andy...don't you wish Alice projected his off-stage image in the manner country singer Randy Travis is currently doing? If you can get Alice to enter a convenience store naked and ask for some smokes - and then pass out naked in the street......I think Alice's persona would thrive - especially among harder-edged metal fans. Of course, seeing a 65 year old man's bare behind on the news, might not do that much for AC's career.

Be polite... You are talking about a Rock Legend, here. It's O.K. to have a sense of humour, butt... Are you jealous of his great look?

Well....having pretty close to a 65 year old butt myself....I can safely say that neither Alice nor I would relish having ours on public display. And I am fairly sure no "normal" one would want to see them.

[darkmenace]

>No, no and NO! You keep getting this the wrong way round. I willl repeat: it was intended to be about golf ONLY - it was the other biographical stuff that was "thrown in" but you make it sound like Alice loves golf so much they worked it into the book. If you started being a bit more rational, you could have used that to support your argument a bit more (although your conclusion would still be almost impossible to prove).

Smoke and fog. I'm not making it "sound like" anything but what it is and what you won't admit: that Alice's autobiography is partially a book about golf. How it got that way doesn't matter.

>In case you've forgotten, the book came out in 2007, several years after this whole thing becase such a troublesome issue for you, yet you seem to be saying that if the book hadn't come out or had a different title, things could be different. That is almost insane. By 2007, it no longer mattered.

When it came out was not the issue either. It's not the book alone anyway which simply stands as a prime example of emphasizing golf.

>That is an interesting (and rather lame) accusation considering I am often accused here of being too 'direct'.

Direct when you feel you're making a good point and dancing and dodging when you're mistaken.

>I gave you the example of Roger Daltrey but you didn't comment. How about Ted Nugent and television series about hunting? How about Chrissie Hynde and her very public activites surrounding animal rights? How about Prince who goes door - to - door as a Jehovah's Witness and proselytises? How about Brian Johnson and his book about cars? How about Ronnie Wood and second career as a respected artist whio actually has exhibitions in galleries? How about Bill Wyman and his book about archaeology? How about John Lydon and his television series about natural history?

For many of those people their interests "fit" their image and therefore enhance their stature like Wood, Wyman, and Lydon. Also in some cases their interests are social causes or artistic and intellectual endeavors which again promote the perception that they are in fact interesting and artistic people.

When it comes out that Alice Cooper, a performer with much mystique and danger associated with his name, loves to golf all the time, the effect is opposite.

Alice himself has criticized Ozzy for the very same thing by the way. He said that Ozzy's reality show kills the image that Ozzy is a mysterious and dark figure that lives in a castle somewhere. I wondered what Alice thought about all the photos circulating of him in a polo shirt on a golf course.

>It is pompous. You just elevated Alice to a higher level than other mere actors.

Actually yes, that was my intent. I think Alice's "act" has more depth because it fuses real internal conflict with stage acting.

>F. Lee Bailey?

>I see comedy is also not one of your few talents.

Humor is in fact one of my many talents!

?No, I got that part. The part you misunderstand is that you could take all those elements, add them together and they still wouldn't be the reasons for his career trajectory. As I said before, it's lazy. What you don't seem to understand is that were other, more important, reasons for the way Alice's career went in the seventies - it's just that you latched on to some easy targets without really thinking the whole thing through and now you're committed to defending your position.

Sorry to bother you with real life but sometimes there is more to an issue than just one thing.

>I think some back - peddalling is about to start.

I try to be open-minded, you should try it sometime.

>I believe damage has been done, that's been my point all along.

>Mine is that if you really think that, you're deluded. If we both look hard enough, I bet we can find examples of artists who followed your advice yet they have had careers which have been much less succesful than the career Alice has had. How do you explain that?

It's not deluded. Alice himself felt that he should deny it and his handlers are apprehensive currently, even suggesting to an interviewer that the topic shouldn't be raised. Do you consider Alice's management deluded?

>Are you being serious?! Being an artist is about the work itself and the creative talent that the artist brings to it. A career determines how long you can continue to be creative.

You just defined what leads a person to have artistic stature: the work itself and creative talent. Even when you don't realize it you're agreeing with me.

>In other words, it is the commercial success that allows the art to happen.

As usual there's more to it that your over generalizations. People create art, commercial success or not. Some people attain commercial success, some don't. And art doesn't just "happen," sometimes a great work is created and commercial success follows, not the other way around.

>How do you explain all the other artists that have existed that have had acclaim but no success?

Some artists are appreciated by large numbers of people and some by smaller numbers. I don't explain it; it's the way it is. I don't understand how the question relates to this discussion.

>he probably appeals to teeny boppers and you can get away with a lot with that group.

>Exactly. The art is seperate from the career. You just made my point.

NO, I'm not saying that! Great art usually means a longer and more respected career. Poor art usually means a shorter career that few people take seriously beyond entertainment value. Good work lasts longer, in Alice's case look at how they still plays his early 70s songs on the radio.

> Is this the comparison you want? Alice Cooper and Justin Bieber?

>What difference does it make? It is still two diiferent concepts: art versus a career.

I think it makes a huge difference. I believe Alice offers more substance, quality, and "art" than Justin Bieber (I think this is a safe assumption) and therefore he is more likely to be respected today and remembered in the future. These things all enhance his career.

[darkmenace]

>I think the point darkmenace was making is that this is also part of the 'problem' (as he sees it) and to be fair to him on that, it can be a far more contentious issue than whether or not Alice should be so open about playing golf which is so trivial in comparison (which is why it is odd that he is so fixated on it).

You're right, it is a more contentious issue, so I didn't delve into it. I think Alice does a nice job of not preaching or making religion an explicit part of his work.

One of the problems with golf is that it is in fact so trivial, that's why I think Alice should have just gone ahead and played without emphasizing it.

> as recoop points out how much is positive and how much negative is very difficult to ascertain,

>Exactly, but darkmenace seems to imply it can be proved with a pencil, a slide - rule and a piece of paper or something.

I agree it's difficult to ascertain and I come out on the side that's more negative. In no way would I say it could be proved.

[GNDM]

>Exactly, but darkmenace seems to imply it can be proved with a pencil, a slide - rule and a piece of paper or something.

I agree it's difficult to ascertain and I come out on the side that's more negative. In no way would I say it could be proved.

OK. Thus it is your opinion that it has been a negative. One could argue the exact opposite, that his openness about his golfing addiction has gained him new fans (via a non-musical path), cannot be proven either. Thus a stalemate. end of debate?*


*darkmenace....trust me that Andy will get in the last word. I suggest you make one final comment and move on to other things.

[A_MichaelUK]

>I'm not making it "sound like" anything but what it is and what you won't admit: that Alice's autobiography is partially a book about golf. How it got that way doesn't matter.

That is insane. How am I not ‘admitting’ that?! I was even involved (in a small way) in the preparation if it!

> It's not the book alone anyway which simply stands as a prime example of emphasizing golf.

Why did you raise the subject of it then?

>Direct when you feel you're making a good point and dancing and dodging when you're mistaken.

Give examples. On the one hand, you accuse me out of taking things out of context by isolating your statements and on the other, you accuse me of “dancing and dodging”.

>For many of those people their interests "fit" their image and therefore enhance their stature like Wood, Wyman, and Lydon.

Really? So you’re saying John Lydon the original nihilist punk is a an obvious candidate to host a nature series. Interesting. Besides, you just gave your game away - GNDM was right. You do seem to have a problem with the way Alice publicly conducts his personal life and I can only assume you’re attaching way too much importance (for you) to Alice’s “image”. This is more about you than it is about anything else.

>Also in some cases their interests are social causes or artistic and intellectual endeavors which again promote the perception that they are in fact interesting and artistic people.

As I just said and as GNDM said, that’s what this is all about. You don’t like golf. How horrible it must be to have your illusions shattered. Explain to me why you think golf has affected his “image” in a negative way, yet you seem to think his Christian philanthropy has not? You certainly haven’t mentioned that. Is it about what is or is not “cool” as you previously mentioned?

>When it comes out that Alice Cooper, a performer with much mystique and danger associated with his name, loves to golf all the time, the effect is opposite.

That is idiotic. At the expense of repeating my earlier rebuttals:
- you can’t prove that
- it mattered for about five minutes back in 1973
- Alice made it incredibly clear back in 1973, that the whole thing was primarily an image and so there was no “mystique” to maintain and
- it would have been impossible to maintain that “mystique”.

>Alice himself has criticized Ozzy for the very same thing by the way. He said that Ozzy's reality show kills the image that Ozzy is a mysterious and dark figure that lives in a castle somewhere.

Actually, he didn’t say exactly that. He basically said that being portrayed as a shuffling, bumbling idiot was not good.

>I wondered what Alice thought about all the photos circulating of him in a polo shirt on a golf course.

Next time he poses for one, you should ask him that. By the way, where is that grand strategy you have for resurrecting Alice’s career?

>Actually yes, that was my intent. I think Alice's "act" has more depth because it fuses real internal conflict with stage acting.

Step away from the keyboard. Step away from the keyboard.

>Humor is in fact one of my many talents!

Who says?

>Sorry to bother you with real life but sometimes there is more to an issue than just one thing.

I KNOW! I just told you that in the sentences you just quoted! You are the one who is fixated on golf.

>I try to be open-minded, you should try it sometime.

Present the evidence and I’ll be easily convinced.

>It's not deluded. Alice himself felt that he should deny it and his handlers are apprehensive currently, even suggesting to an interviewer that the topic shouldn't be raised. Do you consider Alice's management deluded?

I am going to type the next two sentences slowly, so that hopefully, you'll understand. If Alice does an interview to promote an album or tour, then it’s only right that the conversation should be limited to those subjects or at least to the subject of music. If the interview is part of a broader profile, then there can be fewer stipulations.

>You just defined what leads a person to have artistic stature: the work itself and creative talent. Even when you don't realize it you're agreeing with me.

Wrong again. I explained the contrast between creativity and a successful, commercial career, hence the Justin Bieber example.

>As usual there's more to it that your over generalizations. People create art, commercial success or not. Some people attain commercial success, some don't. And art doesn't just "happen," sometimes a great work is created and commercial success follows, not the other way around.

I never said anything different. Show me where I did.

>Some artists are appreciated by large numbers of people and some by smaller numbers. I don't explain it; it's the way it is. I don't understand how the question relates to this discussion.

It exactly “relates”. You seem to be very quick to “explain” what you perceive to be a decline in Alice’s career, yet when I ask you about other artists you say “I don’t explain it; it’s the way it is.” That is a quite brilliant refusal to answer the question.

>NO, I'm not saying that! Great art usually means a longer and more respected career. Poor art usually means a shorter career that few people take seriously beyond entertainment value. Good work lasts longer, in Alice's case look at how they still plays his early 70s songs on the radio.

I didn’t deny that. On that basis, what is the connection between golf and Alice's longevity as an artist then?

>I think it makes a huge difference. I believe Alice offers more substance, quality, and "art" than Justin Bieber (I think this is a safe assumption)

Not as far as Justin Bieber’s audience is concerned.

>therefore he is more likely to be respected today and remembered in the future. These things all enhance his career.

I think it is going to take a lot more than golf to affect Alice’s stature. When Alice makes an album called “Golf Is Great. I Love Playing Golf. I Play It All The Time Because I Love It So Much. I Love It So Much Here Is An Album Of Songs All About Golf.”, then you may have a point. Until then, you probably do not.

[A_MichaelUK]

>You're right, it is a more contentious issue, so I didn't delve into it.

In that case, you are either a coward or lazy or both because although the rules of this board do not allow the subject to be discussed, it can (I think it is fair to say) be discussed in the context of Alice’s career and since you claim to be so concerned about that, you could have discussed it and not just go for the easy and lazy (as I already said) option.

>I think Alice does a nice job of not preaching or making religion an explicit part of his work.

Maybe or maybe not. You could have actually used your time here more productively by discussing that here (in this thread which is directly about that) instead of your fixation with golf.

>One of the problems with golf is that it is in fact so trivial, that's why I think Alice should have just gone ahead and played without emphasizing it.

I would be ashamed to write a sentence like that which is so idiotic.

>I agree it's difficult to ascertain and I come out on the side that's more negative. In no way would I say it could be proved.

You certainly spent a lot of time trying to provide a strong case for it, though.

[A_MichaelUK]

>darkmenace....trust me that Andy will get in the last word. I suggest you make one final comment and move on to other things.

I don't deny that if neither side concedes, there is no resolution or agreement in the debate (and for the record, I don't keep making points with the intention of doing so until someone concedes). However, if someone responds to my post, then it's only fair that I should be allowed to respond (especially when rebutting is this easy).

[dadascot]

>darkmenace....trust me that Andy will get in the last word. I suggest you make one final comment and move on to other things.

I don't deny that if neither side concedes, there is no resolution or agreement in the debate (and for the record, I don't keep making points with the intention of doing so until someone concedes). However, if someone responds to my post, then it's only fair that I should be allowed to respond (especially when rebutting is this easy).

Aye right!!!

[Diane D.]

Now Andy...don't you wish Alice projected his off-stage image in the manner country singer Randy Travis is currently doing? If you can get Alice to enter a convenience store naked and ask for some smokes - and then pass out naked in the street......I think Alice's persona would thrive - especially among harder-edged metal fans. Of course, seeing a 65 year old man's bare behind on the news, might not do that much for AC's career.

Be polite... You are talking about a Rock Legend, here. It's O.K. to have a sense of humour, butt... Are you jealous of his great look?

Well....having pretty close to a 65 year old butt myself....I can safely say that neither Alice nor I would relish having ours on public display. And I am fairly sure no "normal" one would want to see them.

Well... If you are that age, you must have seen Alice in concert in the seventies, so you are very lucky to have seen that era.

[recoop]

I think having emerged from the horrors of addiction, Alice is probably just glad to get on with his life and spontaneously answer questions put to him whether on golf or anything else...protection of his rock image is likely imo to come pretty low on his pecking order when he could have lost his life.. To Alice, golf is very important and not trivial..in a way it can be a positive addiction taking the place of the negative one(i.e alcohol). Therapists working with alcohol addiction (I have been an alcohol counsellor) often look for positive replacement...golf uses up the hours without need for alcohol and requires great mental focus. Alice always said from early on his show was an act-he professed to liking Burt Bacharac and the Carpenters before he did so much publicity on Golf...Also he performed ballads, disco tracks and did various things which went against being a rock star from the mid seventies..madman, eccentric, confused..maybe..golf is only the tip of the iceberg..he is unique in the complexity(way beyond duality) he displays...

[darkmenace]

>That is insane. How am I not ‘admitting’ that?! I was even involved (in a small way) in the preparation if it!

You made a big deal about me calling it an autobiography earlier. This denial is part of your dancing routine.

>Why did you raise the subject of it then?

I mentioned it briefly and you decided it needed to be challenged.

>Give examples. On the one hand, you accuse me out of taking things out of context by isolating your statements and on the other, you accuse me of “dancing and dodging”.

You're multifaceted, you do both depending on which one suits you at the time.

>As I just said and as GNDM said, that’s what this is all about. You don’t like golf. How horrible it must be to have your illusions shattered. Explain to me why you think golf has affected his “image” in a negative way, yet you seem to think his Christian philanthropy has not? You certainly haven’t mentioned that. Is it about what is or is not “cool” as you previously mentioned?

Philanthropy as a rule enhances respect in the public eye. I've been explaining why golf has hurt his image and you choose to ignore it or disagree but I have made my points.

>When it comes out that Alice Cooper, a performer with much mystique and danger associated with his name, loves to golf all the time, the effect is negative.

>That is idiotic.

You have the option to not agree but the point is not idiotic. The only thing that's idiotic is your absolute denial to acknowledge that such a thing is possible.

>- you can’t prove that
That's right, it's called an opinion. Some opinions are more correct than others.

>- it mattered for about five minutes back in 1973
Now this is idiotic. Exactly which five minute interval? The fact is it must have mattered beyond 1973 when Alice was denying it in the 80s.

>- Alice made it incredibly clear back in 1973, that the whole thing was primarily an image and so there was no “mystique” to maintain and
- it would have been impossible to maintain that “mystique”.

Wrong. Mystique isn't just about hacking up baby dolls it's also about being viewed as a serious artist, a person with a creative edge. And I'm glad you said "primarily" instead of the usual black and white "it's all an act" party line.

>Alice himself has criticized Ozzy for the very same thing by the way. He said that Ozzy's reality show kills the image that Ozzy is a mysterious and dark figure that lives in a castle somewhere.

>Actually, he didn’t say exactly that. He basically said that being portrayed as a shuffling, bumbling idiot was not good.

Here's EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID in an article: "ALICE COOPER SAYS REALITY SHOW RUINED OZZY OSBOURNE'S CAREER."

"Most fans thought he lived in a big, dark castle with skeletons in the cellar," Cooper said. "When that show aired they knew he was just some guy who potters around his Beverly Hills mansion."

The article goes on with ALICE MAKING THE SAME POINTS I DO:

"Cooper said he felt that by allowing daily life in his house to be broadcast to the world, he destroyed the mystery that had previously surrounded him."

Substitute Alice and Golf and my exact point is made.

So you're wrong and you'll try to find a way to talk yourself out of it but now you'll ALSO have to say Alice is wrong.

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Alice_Coope ... e's_career

According to the article Alice said it "RUINS HIS CAREER" another link you didn't want to believe between a person's image and career.

At this point my advice is go argue with Alice.

>Actually yes, that was my intent. I think Alice's "act" has more depth because it fuses real internal conflict with stage acting.

>Step away from the keyboard. Step away from the keyboard.

Again, a non reply. The statement is solid and not seeing it is narrow minded.

>I am going to type the next two sentences slowly, so that hopefully, you'll understand. If Alice does an interview to promote an album or tour, then it’s only right that the conversation should be limited to those subjects or at least to the subject of music. If the interview is part of a broader profile, then there can be fewer stipulations.

More dodging. The interview in question talked about a lot of things. Alice said to the interviewer that "they" (handlers) don't like him talking about golf.

>I think it makes a huge difference. I believe Alice offers more substance, quality, and "art" than Justin Bieber (I think this is a safe assumption)

>Not as far as Justin Bieber’s audience is concerned.

So now you're saying there's no such thing as true quality or art, it depends on the audience. Now THAT'S floundering.

>I think it is going to take a lot more than golf to affect Alice’s stature. When Alice makes an album called “Golf Is Great. I Love Playing Golf. I Play It All The Time Because I Love It So Much. I Love It So Much Here Is An Album Of Songs All About Golf.”, then you may have a point. Until then, you probably do not.

"Probably" is the most realistic, diplomatic thing you've said so far.

My point is made and Alice agrees. Your actions can have an impact on your mystique, image, and career in a bad way. What he said about Ozzy also applies to him and for the same reasons.

[darkmenace]

>In that case, you are either a coward or lazy or both because although the rules of this board do not allow the subject to be discussed, it can (I think it is fair to say) be discussed in the context of Alice’s career and since you claim to be so concerned about that, you could have discussed it and not just go for the easy and lazy (as I already said) option.

I don't want to open another can of worms and one especially on a topic like religion. Call that cowardly, I don't care.

>Maybe or maybe not. You could have actually used your time here more productively by discussing that here (in this thread which is directly about that) instead of your fixation with golf.

Alice hasn't promoted religion like he promotes golf. His book is called GOLF MONSTER not CHRISTIAN MONSTER.

>One of the problems with golf is that it is in fact so trivial, that's why I think Alice should have just gone ahead and played without emphasizing it.

>I would be ashamed to write a sentence like that which is so idiotic.

You have plenty of sentences to be ashamed of like the one you just wrote. It's not a counter argument but simply an insult, a child's reply.

>You certainly spent a lot of time trying to provide a strong case for it, though.

A parlor game that means nothing in the grand scheme of things, but that's what discussion boards are for, discussing and debating topics of mutual interest.

[A_MichaelUK]

>protection of his rock image is likely imo to come pretty low on his pecking order when he could have lost his life..

Exactly. I remember being really annoyed back in 1983 or so when a journalist suggested Alice should take drugs so as to make more interesting albums.

>he professed to liking Burt Bacharac and the Carpenters before he did so much publicity on Golf...

Exactly, yet I don't see anyone blaming those for his so - called 'decline'.

[A_MichaelUK]

>You made a big deal about me calling it an autobiography earlier.

No, I didn’t. Show me where I did that. I wrote: “It was originally intended to be primarily about golf”

>This denial is part of your dancing routine.

What am I ‘denying’? That it was “an autobiography” or something?

>You're multifaceted, you do both depending on which one suits you at the time.

Give examples.

>Philanthropy as a rule enhances respect in the public eye. I've been explaining why golf has hurt his image and you choose to ignore it or disagree but I have made my points.

But you’re the one who is so concerned with his ‘dangerous’ and ‘evil’ image. If you cared that much about it, you would complain about his charity work as much as you do about golf. It is a major contradiction and the only way I can explain it that you seem to have a major personal problem with golf.

>When it comes out that Alice Cooper, a performer with much mystique and danger associated with his name, loves to golf all the time, the effect is negative.

You just made my point. If someone has “mystique and danger associated with his name”, how is that helped by doing charitable work? If Alice truly was ‘dangerous’, the work he does for charity would harm his image, just as you claim golf does. The truth is, it doesn’t and neither does golf.

>You have the option to not agree but the point is not idiotic. The only thing that's idiotic is your absolute denial to acknowledge that such a thing is possible.

You are back - pedalling again because in earlier posts, you were far more certain that was the case than it being merely “possible”.

>Now this is idiotic. Exactly which five minute interval?

It is a figure of speech as you know.

>The fact is it must have mattered beyond 1973 when Alice was denying it in the 80s.

He denied it for about a year in 1986 and 1987 and if you were stupid enough to believe him when he said that, then, again, that is a reflection on you and nothing else. I certainly didn’t believe him (especially as on one occasion I had take his clubs with me as part of my luggage) and I doubt any of the journalists he said that to believed him either. If you were gullible, that is your problem and besides, saying he had stopped playing did not exactly send “Constrictor” and “Raise Your Fist And Yell” to the top of the charts, so there goes your theory.

>Wrong. Mystique isn't just about hacking up baby dolls it's also about being viewed as a serious artist,

How much “mystique” does Elton John have? He is still taken very seriously.

>And I'm glad you said "primarily" instead of the usual black and white "it's all an act" party line.

I think I always have.

>Here's EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID in an article: "ALICE COOPER SAYS REALITY SHOW RUINED OZZY OSBOURNE'S CAREER."

I am more than happy to accept that source, except that neither you were I were there when he said that. I’ve read plenty of interviews where he is quoted as saying something he did not. How do you know he wasn’t mis - quoted? At least, when he made the comment I quoted, I was actually present (and unless I’m mistaken he said that on his radio show as well).

>The article goes on with ALICE MAKING THE SAME POINTS I DO:

Does that mean I have to agree with him just because that’s what he said?! Even if that’s what he said, he’s giving his opinion – he’s not stating it as a fact.

>Substitute Alice and Golf and my exact point is made.

How is being in a television show that is an enormous success all over the world the same as playing golf? The only person making the comparison is you - Alice certainly isn’t and since you seem to care what the press says so much, I don’t think they are either.

?So you're wrong and you'll try to find a way to talk yourself out of it but now you'll ALSO have to say Alice is wrong.

Yes, I think he is. Why is that so shocking? I don't agree with everything he says? Maybe you do. Has Ozzy Osbourne’s career been affected by the television show? I don’t see Ozzy getting any less ‘respect’ as an artist than he previously might have done.

>At this point my advice is go argue with Alice.

I don't need your permission but thanks anyway.

>The statement is solid and not seeing it is narrow minded.

Show me how.

>More dodging. The interview in question talked about a lot of things.

How do you know it was meant to?

>Alice said to the interviewer that "they" (handlers) don't like him talking about golf.

Because it’s less interesting than rock music is.

>So now you're saying there's no such thing as true quality or art, it depends on the audience. Now THAT'S floundering.

I read again what I wrote and I don’t see how you can come to that conclusion. Would you show me how?

>"Probably" is the most realistic, diplomatic thing you've said so far.

I was being sarcastic.

>My point is made and Alice agrees. Your actions can have an impact on your mystique, image, and career in a bad way.

For a very short time only - that’s the part you don’t seem to understand. You are ignoring all the other elements that have happened since that became an issue.

>What he said about Ozzy also applies to him and for the same reasons.

How about when Prince appeared on “The Muppet Show”? That was around the time he started to dismantle his own mystique. Did that affect his stature as an artist?

[A_MichaelUK]

>I don't want to open another can of worms

If it was in context and in relation to something like "The Last Temptation", it would be valid for you to so. The rules of this board aren’t intended to stop debates. They are intended to keep things ‘On - Topic’ and as related as possible to the thread.

>Alice hasn't promoted religion like he promotes golf. His book is called GOLF MONSTER not CHRISTIAN MONSTER.

At one point, I had a tiny fragment of respect for you as an opponent but you’ve now destroyed it. Briefly:
- there is plenty about his faith in the publication you cite.
- he has been very vocal about his faith since 1994 or so
- he formed a charitable foundation called the Solid Rock Foundation which is based on his faith
- he hosts an annual golf tournament that raises funds for the Solid Rock Foundation
- he hosts an annual variety show to raise funds for the Solid Rock Foundation
- Alice has received an honorary degree from a faith - based university
- He has opened a building to assist the Solid Rock Foundation in its work
- there is currently no Alice Cooper golf course
- there are plenty of spiritual references in his songs
- there are no golfing references in any of his songs
- his faith is mentioned in the media as much as golf is

Your attempt here at parsing is even worse than your previous attempts

>You have plenty of sentences to be ashamed of like the one you just wrote. It's not a counter argument but simply an insult, a child's reply.

So EXACTLY how could Alice have played golf without "emphasizing it"? I asked that before but you haven't answered. Should he wear a disquise or play in the dark?

>A parlor game that means nothing in the grand scheme of things, but that's what discussion boards are for, discussing and debating topics of mutual interest.

Try and pay more attention. In an earlier post, you wrote; "In no way would I say it could be proved." If that's the case and if it's also the case that this is just "A parlor game" (which it is, you're right), citing the article that you did in your earlier post and using that as some kind of proof is a contradiction.

[Diane D.]

Who are you, exactly Andy? You're not Alice's assistant, his name is Kyle, I think. You said that you did collaborate to the writing of the book ''Golf Monster''? Tell me.

[A_MichaelUK]

>Who are you, exactly Andy? You're not Alice's assistant,

That is correct.

> You said that you did collaborate to the writing of the book ''Golf Monster''? Tell me.

No, I didn't say that. I said I assisted with the preparation of it. My point was that I was familiar with the contents of it before it was published.

[darkmenace]

>But you’re the one who is so concerned with his ‘dangerous’ and ‘evil’ image. If you cared that much about it, you would complain about his charity work as much as you do about golf. It is a major contradiction and the only way I can explain it that you seem to have a major personal problem with golf.

No complaints at all about charity work. The EMPHASIS (read: EMPHASIS) on golf trivializes his image as a serious artist and diminishes his mystique just as Alice says Ozzy's reality show hurt his mystique and career. YES I WILL REPEAT THIS SO AS TO PROVE IT'S A LEGITIMATE POINT OF VIEW.

>You just made my point. If someone has “mystique and danger associated with his name”, how is that helped by doing charitable work? If Alice truly was ‘dangerous’, the work he does for charity would harm his image, just as you claim golf does. The truth is, it doesn’t and neither does golf.

Charitable work is respected period.

>You are back - pedalling again because in earlier posts, you were far more certain that was the case than it being merely “possible”.

It can't be proven. My theory is it has caused harm. It is Alice's theory that Ozzy's reality show caused harm.

>He denied it for about a year in 1986 and 1987 and if you were stupid enough to believe him when he said that, then, again, that is a reflection on you and nothing else.

Not only wasn't I "stupid" I saw through it. I saw that he wanted his comeback to not be derailed by the golf controversy. It mattered that much at the time.

>I certainly didn’t believe him (especially as on one occasion I had take his clubs with me as part of my luggage) and I doubt any of the journalists he said that to believed him either. If you were gullible, that is your problem and besides, saying he had stopped playing did not exactly send “Constrictor” and “Raise Your Fist And Yell” to the top of the charts, so there goes your theory.

Totally illogical conclusion. It's impossible to say what the impact was on the sales of those albums. More important: you keep missing my point which was simply that IT DID MATTER BEYOND 1973 and it mattered enough to Alice to deny it. This has nothing whatsoever to do with anyone being stupid or gullible and these personal attacks reveal a character flaw on your part and lame attempts to sidetrack the discussion.

>How much “mystique” does Elton John have? He is still taken very seriously.

I can't say and I don't understand why Elton John has been brought up.

>Here's EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID in an article: "ALICE COOPER SAYS REALITY SHOW RUINED OZZY OSBOURNE'S CAREER."

>I am more than happy to accept that source, except that neither you were I were there when he said that. I’ve read plenty of interviews where he is quoted as saying something he did not. How do you know he wasn’t mis - quoted? At least, when he made the comment I quoted, I was actually present (and unless I’m mistaken he said that on his radio show as well).

I see you skipped over something: Please acknowledge that your attempt to correct me on Alice's quote was incorrect, that you made an error, that my memory of the Alice quote was closer to the truth than yours.

>The article goes on with ALICE MAKING THE SAME POINTS I DO:

>Does that mean I have to agree with him just because that’s what he said?! Even if that’s what he said, he’s giving his opinion – he’s not stating it as a fact.

I am doing the same thing. I already said it can't be proved. You have constantly belittled my opinion and I'm pointing out that Alice Cooper himself, a performer who should know about these things, acknowledges that certain activities can hurt your mystique and career.

>Substitute Alice and Golf and my exact point is made.

>How is being in a television show that is an enormous success all over the world the same as playing golf? The only person making the comparison is you.

I don't know if I'm the only one but yes I'm making the comparison and I feel it is valid.

>So you're wrong and you'll try to find a way to talk yourself out of it but now you'll ALSO have to say Alice is wrong.

>Yes, I think he is.

I think Alice knows more about these things than you.

>Has Ozzy Osbourne’s career been affected by the television show? I don’t see Ozzy getting any less ‘respect’ as an artist than he previously might have done.

You better tell Alice, he thinks it has. I agree with Alice's logic over yours.

>The statement is solid and not seeing it is narrow minded.

>Show me how.

The statement was:
I think Alice's "act" has more depth because it fuses real internal conflict with stage acting.

Most actors audition for roles and receive them based on their acting skills. Alice "created" his role as an outgrowth of...what? That's an interesting question (you'll belittle that too, but it is). It had to stem in part from his own "dark" side. He himself has said he was a "sacrificial lamb" and the audience derived catharsis from his performance. He also said at some point in the commentary for the B$B dvd that his craziness and aggression was a "call for help." (I'll have to look this up, trying to remember and maybe you can verify). The character developed at least in part as a result of his dark side (internal conflict) and became solidified as a "character," a fascinating blend of personal and fiction.

That doesn't mean I thought he was the same way off stage, it means he's a great artist who brings a very interesting story to the table.

You totally belittled this point of view, maybe because I hadn't expanded upon it but you were very narrow and simple minded about an interesting topic.

>How do you know it was meant to?

I don't but this is more of the smoke and fogs I talked about. When you can't respond to an issue you to try divert attention away from the main point. You'd be a great politician if you aren't one already.

>Alice said to the interviewer that "they" (handlers) don't like him talking about golf.

>Because it’s less interesting than rock music is.

More vague denials. Yet again FOR THE SECOND TIME my point is made that the issue has mattered longer than 1973 to Alice and his team.

>So now you're saying there's no such thing as true quality or art, it depends on the audience. Now THAT'S floundering.

>I read again what I wrote and I don’t see how you can come to that conclusion. Would you show me how?

I said: "I believe Alice offers more substance, quality, and "art" than Justin Bieber (I think this is a safe assumption)." and you followed with "Not as far as Justin Bieber’s audience is concerned." You are saying that substance, quality, and "art" cannot be judged apart from an audience reaction. To you that means Mozart is also comparable in quality to Justin Bieber because his audience thinks so. If you didn't mean that what did you mean?

>I was being sarcastic.

Were you sneering also?

>My point is made and Alice agrees. Your actions can have an impact on your mystique, image, and career in a bad way.

>For a very short time only - that’s the part you don’t seem to understand. You are ignoring all the other elements that have happened since that became an issue.

And I've demonstrated that it has remained an issue for decades since.

>What he said about Ozzy also applies to him and for the same reasons.

>How about when Prince appeared on “The Muppet Show”? That was around the time he started to dismantle his own mystique. Did that affect his stature as an artist?

I don't know anything about Prince. Do you think it did?