Saint John wrote:Don wrote:I'll sum that up briefly.
Neal was asked about the three bands being in Europe and Neal mentioned how they had been there the last two years. How he planned for the band to be an international band but someone who won't be named didn't want to tour overseas. The interviewer repeats the "Won't be named part" and Mick sort of comes in right than about Lou and how they had great run together but things came ot a head and it was time to move on. Neal is given space to segway to bring things back into a positive light but he talks about learning how the music is the most important thing and no one in the band is irreplacable.
You can say I'm over analyzing this but to me it's clear, he just can't bring himself because of his personal feelings to mention Perry or at least, like Jon is capable of, giving him some props for helping Journey break through in the late 70s/80s.
It's like playing a game with him. If he is shooting from the hip than at least say Steve Perry's name is the target. To act childish and refer to him as he who won't be named should be left to us idiot fans to do, not a professional like him.
All good points, but I wonder if he can mention Steve Perry's name (because it's a somewhat negative slant). And, if he can, he's just pointing out how fucking ridiculous that someone fought to have that silly clause implemented in the first place. But, yeah, arguably, he would be better served to just mention that they never toured there before because they "couldn't all agree to do so" or some equally generic answer. But we need fodder, man, so be careful what you wish for!
When Fro is being Fro, it brings life to this place, definitely.
