Heartland

The song was called 'Amphetamine Logic'. Was agreeing to put just 'Logic' on the back of the cover, so that the likes of WH Smiths would stock it, a sell out?

im voting yes- only because i think everythings a sellout

If it was between artistic integrity and cold hard cash..... i think i can guess which way Eldritch would go.....

Paddy.

"Selling out" implies some initial artistic agenda which didn't involve reaching millions of people in the first place. The whole point of the band in 1980 was to let Gary hear his voice on the radio.

While I'm NOT saying that the Sisters have no artistic merit (god forbid!), I am saying that part of their reason d'etre has always been, since day one, to let alot of people hear the band's music, and they've never made any suggestion otherwise.

If not printing the word "Amphetamine" on the record cover means potentially reaching a lot people, it doesn't, to my mind, comprise the band's goal and vision. It fits in with the philosophy of the band perfectly.

So... no, they didn't sell out. It was a sensible move back in the days before people found out that putting the F word on the cover got you a lot of free press...

Abd that's about all I have to say about that

I think it has to be seen within the context of the time. It's hard to imagine in this day and age that you could make a valid argument that seeing the word amphetamine in print on a record sleeve would turn your average nine year old into a speed freak.

That said, within the moral majority in the UK and the US there is a definite refusal to face up to the so-called drugs problem. The War on Drugs was lost a long time ago. The only thing it has achieved in America is to double the prison population at the start of Clinton's first term in office from one million to its current figure of two million.

I remember Noel Gallagher being lambasted for stating in a radio interview that for many young people taking drugs was as normal as drinking a cup of tea. Yikes, heaven forbid you should speak unpalatable truths in public!
Don't tell the kids, but drugs can actually be a lot of fun. They can of course also be very destructive and ruin your life. Very much like abusive spouses, drunk drivers and lung cancer.

For the record, I neither condone or condemn the use of drugs. The one cardinal rule to remember, be it alcohol, tobacco, amphetamines or heroin, is that if you never start you never have to stop. Once you open the door to a particular it experience it is very hard to close it again.
But let's face it, anyone on this forum reading this post is going to do whatever they are going to do, after that it's going to largely be a question of personality and circumstance as to how they handle it.

Here endeth the lesson.

PS
I went for Option 3, nowt personal Thrash, the words were your own.

Well said Don, spot on m8!

Paddy.

Of course you realise we are both about to get a visit from the DS now!

Of course it wasnt a 'sell-out'
it was his first album, he knew it was make or break time - the success of the album would determine wether he'd have a career in music or a career flipping burgers

He didn't really have a lot of choice. It's easy for us to take the moral high-ground, but you guys don't know how you'd react if you were ever in a similar position.

Besides, all he did was slightly amend a song title; it's not like he changed his lyrics or anything. I don't give a sh*t, neither should you.

I think if he'd changed the lyrics or something, or made a less 'offensive' radio version - cf Eminem's Purple Hills / Purple Pills nonsense - then I'd say he was caving in unneccessarily, and being a wooss. I think taking it off the cover was fairly pragmatic, and it's the song that matters. And the meaning of the song is patently clear, of course. So I'm not bothered. Logic is also a good name for a song. I voted option 3 (again, nothing personal!)

Thanks for all your remarks. I think Option 3 would have got a lot more votes at the time. It was a very touchy subject then. Good to see the wounds have healed, or are being nursed elsewhere. At first glance, it looks like a blatant sell out, but I guess the real question is did Eldritch ever proclaim the high ideals some people expected of him? He certainly insisted that the WEA deal was for distribution purposes only and that they would have absolutely no control over the band's output. At the very least, this disagreement cast doubt on his choice of bed-fellows.

I don't think there is a case at all for objecting to the word Amphetamine. The hullabaloo over Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds was practically 20 years old. The Stones' Sister Morphine and Velvet Underground's Heroin were never subjected to such ridiculous censor, as far as I'm aware, so what was the problem?

I have no problem with anyone seeking commercial success, but does the end justify the means? Doesn't artistic integrity matter? Or are you just setting youself up to be knocked down? Paul Weller and his Porcelain Gods.

"Why don't you change your name to Irvine or Stanley Mansarek?"
Nuff said.

I'm afraid you're gonna have to explain that one.

Thrash Harry wrote:I'm afraid you're gonna have to explain that one.

It's from the film 'The Doors', Jim Morrison (Val Kilmer) questions Ray Manzarek's (Kyle MacLachlan's) artistic integrity.

Big Si wrote:

Thrash Harry wrote:I'm afraid you're gonna have to explain that one.

It's from the film 'The Doors', Jim Morrison (Val Kilmer) questions Ray Manzarek's (Kyle MacLachlan's) artistic integrity.

Thanks Si.
@Harry - Jim referring to the fact that Ed Sullivan wants the band to change the lyrics to "Light MY Fire" - "Girl, it couldn't get much 'better'"

To which Morrision (Kilmer) replies "how about "Bite my wire?"
Oh, we did laugh.

Steve303 wrote:

Big Si wrote:

Thrash Harry wrote:I'm afraid you're gonna have to explain that one.

It's from the film 'The Doors', Jim Morrison (Val Kilmer) questions Ray Manzarek's (Kyle MacLachlan's) artistic integrity.

Thanks Si.
@Harry - Jim referring to the fact that Ed Sullivan wants the band to change the lyrics to "Light MY Fire" - "Girl, it couldn't get much 'better'"

To which Morrision (Kilmer) replies "how about "Bite my wire?"
Oh, we did laugh.

I see. I think. So is that a Yes, No or Fnck Off then?

@Harry - it's a yes.

Life isn't black and white, it really is several shades of grey.

Sorry
Blast

Red Sunsets wrote:Life isn't black and white, it really is several shades of grey.

very true.

pikkrong wrote:

Red Sunsets wrote:Life isn't black and white, it really is several shades of grey.

very true.

Call it an early Christmas present:

Cheers Thrash, where can I buy some?

Innit great that most smilies have smooth heads?

Most good chemists, so I'm told. Nice new avatar. Finally come out of the closet then.

I have nothing against grey hair, a couple of years ago I even bleached my hair and dyed 'em grey

I voted no. "Selling out" would have been if they'd gone back and re-recorded the song with changed lyrics.

i'm sure this point has been made already, but i wanna look like i have summat to say:

selling out = compromising for profit
AE = exists soley to make profit
thus anything AE does that results in cash can't be selling out.

It's all about compromise these days d00m, there are no mavericks anymore.
I'm afraid, it's all Management Consultants and Facilitators round my way.

Pop Idol anyone?