This current Stranglers is still The Stranglers.

[theraven1979]

"Anyone who describes themselves as the “original voice and songwriter of The Stranglers” really doesn’t grab the essence of what Mk 1 was about."

I think the point is that the promotion seems to imply that Hugh was the ONLY original voice and ONLY songwriter for MKI Stranglers - which was not case.

It doesn't say that. You're reading something that doesn't exist.


Jim

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

[StanInBlack]

How about Jeopardy instead Stan?

“to antagonize (others) online by deliberately posting inflammatory, irrelevant, or offensive comments or other disruptive content”

"What is Trolling?", of course. Which is exactly what you're doing right now by continually insisting on posting "disruptive content" that has absolutely nothing to do with Hugh Cornwell, The Stranglers or the topic title (which therefore checks the "irrelevant" tick box also) and could be potentially considered "offensive" if the target in question (me) takes offence. Which fortunately, I don't, because I see this discussion for what it is - which is someone had an opinion, had it challenged and then didn't like it and had a sulk. Film at 11.

Now, if you want to pursue this line of conversation further feel free to PM either myself or Jim.

[StanInBlack]

"Anyone who describes themselves as the “original voice and songwriter of The Stranglers” really doesn’t grab the essence of what Mk 1 was about."

I think the point is that the promotion seems to imply that Hugh was the ONLY original voice and ONLY songwriter for MKI Stranglers - which was not case.

It doesn't say that. You're reading something that doesn't exist.

Indeed. Although, when all's said and done, Hugh undoubtedly sang the vast majority of MKI songs.

[alaninblack]

"Anyone who describes themselves as the “original voice and songwriter of The Stranglers” really doesn’t grab the essence of what Mk 1 was about."

I think the point is that the promotion seems to imply that Hugh was the ONLY original voice and ONLY songwriter for MKI Stranglers - which was not case.

It doesn't say that. You're reading something that doesn't exist.

Jim

I would disagree. I think the promotion in question is quite clearly trying to imply that HAC was "the original voice and songwriter of the Stranglers" - when it should say "ONE of the original voices and songwriterS of the Stranglers"

Not that the average punter gives a shit. Its only ppl like us that nick pick over these minor issues in life.

[theraven1979]

"Anyone who describes themselves as the “original voice and songwriter of The Stranglers” really doesn’t grab the essence of what Mk 1 was about."

I think the point is that the promotion seems to imply that Hugh was the ONLY original voice and ONLY songwriter for MKI Stranglers - which was not case.

It doesn't say that. You're reading something that doesn't exist.

Jim

I would disagree. I think the promotion in question is quite clearly trying to imply that HAC was "the original voice and songwriter of the Stranglers" - when it should say "ONE of the original voices and songwriterS of the Stranglers"

Not that the average punter gives a shit. Its only ppl like us that nick pick over these minor issues in life.

I don't think it is at all. If it was id imagine there would be implications and he would have to remove it from the poster.

As an aside how would you feel if he started calling his band "The Stranglers"?

Jim

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

[jonimac]

It’s hardly Gilmour Waters

Does this new HC band concept have a keyboard player?

[theraven1979]

It’s hardly Gilmour Waters

Does this new HC band concept have a keyboard player?

If you like

Jim

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

[jonimac]

Excellent.
See you at the Cheese And Grain, Frome.

[alaninblack]

As an aside how would you feel if he started calling his band "The Stranglers"?
Jim

If there can "be only one" that calls themselves the Stranglers, then I personally have no issue with "Hugh and Co" or "JJ and Friends" calling themselves "The Stranglers" - both have as much right to do so. But in both cases, is it "The Stranglers" ? It is not MKI for sure.

You could say that JJ has more right as he did not leave expecting the others to stop, and from what I read, JJ even "coined" the name "The Stranglers".

I did mention before a "What If " scenario, that JJ, Jet and Dave called it a day, then Hugh took control of the brand name "The Stranglers" and hit the road and recording studio again using that brand name. If that happened, I think there would be less of this type of discussion as it always seems to be that the main lead singer and front man can continue with a brand name, but the other musicians in the group can not, or they are far less credible if they do.

[Greatkudu]

Moon River, moon River, moon River.Lt Kudu a one song table.

[jetblacksdad]

Your style of posting doesn’t lend itself to debates Stan

Quite! It comes from a bombastic stance that seems unable to discuss without getting over excited.

I have this mental image of Stan sitting in a room with wipe clean Hugh Cornwell pictures waiting for someone to say something he disagrees with. And then...............

[theraven1979]

Wow! How long did that take you do do?

Jim

Your style of posting doesn’t lend itself to debates Stan

Quite! It comes from a bombastic stance that seems unable to discuss without getting over excited.

I have this mental image of Stan sitting in a room with wipe clean Hugh Cornwell pictures waiting for someone to say something he disagrees with. And then...............