OK Matt..you and Ana have stirred the pot on this one. Obviously, other people (most people) know more than I do about how this whole thing works. There's a lot of hooha over what INXS should do to carry on without Michael and arguments over whether tributes/projects about/for/including Michael's music should be considered trading on his name, exploitation..blah blah blah. I can see both sides of it. INXS worked for 20 years to establish themselves and then Michael died. I can understand them not wanting to give that up.They have something more to say and want to continue playing music. I also want Michael's music to continue to be honored and heard. I've already voiced my concerns on any exploitation of him. Now, it's been brought up that INXS can't legally have another singer be a full member of the band unless they want to change their name and stop playing any songs that Michael wrote. A big part of Michael's legacy is his work with INXS. How can one exist without the other? What's the difference between a member quitting and a member dying? How does that change the dynamics? I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings in INXS. I figure this is a more appropriate place to have this debate. Those guys are just trying to get on with the business of living.
Michael's legacy and how do you separate that from INXS?
(8 posts) (6 voices)-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
I can surely see both sides too really, although I know may seem against the band since Michael died. Yes, they lost their singer unexpectedly, and they want to continue, and deserve to do so. But for me personally, I've been disappointed with their decisions. At this point though, I'd love to see them come up with new music. Although I didn't buy it, there were a couple songs on Switch I liked. But they scrapped the songs with Jon Stevens, and had much of Switch pre-written for Rockstar with other writers. It seems to me, they can't do it anymore without Michael, unless you are happy listening to a retro band, doing the same old songs. And I guess there is nothing wrong with that! :)
Posted 1 year ago # -
Oh and I forgot to mention the name change thing. I think if they had orginally called themselves, INXS w/TTD, JB ,JS,JD , or whoever would have set better with me . :)
Posted 1 year ago # -
Heather, I'm always open to listen to other people's point of view on this topic. You are entitled to your opinion, which I think is really great that we can do this here.
So that being said, here's my two cents, for what it's worth!
I agree with what you said, but I also agree with what Cathy said. I was a fan of INXS since I was 6 yrs old. I absolutely LOVED these guys! Michael Hutchence was my first rock star crush. LOL
Believe me, I do understand that there are other members in the group besides Michael that are very, very talented.
It took me sometime to really have this register that Michael was really gone. Honestly though, I don't think it will ever register fully for me.
In 2000-2002 when they were doing their tour, I was really hesitant to go. I just couldn't see them without Michael. It was just going to be too weird for me. However, I did go. I'm glad that I did, I will say that much. I felt like I finally got the closure that I needed.
As time went on though, the decisions the guys have made, I just don't agree with what so ever. I understand that they still want to perform and all, I get that. I just don't understand why they didn't keep Jon Stevens. Jon wanted to put out new music, which I think would have been really great. He really did a brilliant job on the tour, so it would have been great to see him sing with INXS on album.
Well, we all know how that turned out. Then INXS did the Rock Star thing. That had me livid. I just couldn't understand how they could go on national TV and do that type of thing. I did not watch one single episode. I was bitter. Yes, I'll admit.
Now, I honestly don't know what to think. I did like a song on "Switch" but not enough to go out and buy the CD. That was the hardest thing for me, because I have EVERYTHING on INXS.
So, I don't know. I want them to come out with new material, I really do. I don't want to be confused anymore, but I just don't know what to think of them. I agree with Cathy in what she said about their decisions. I don't agree with them either, but like I said, that's my opinion also and I thank you for letting me say my piece.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I get what everyone is saying. I didn't agree with the Rock Star thing. Probably because I couldn't see Michael going for it. I have to keep reminding myself that Michael punched his own ticket and put the band in a position of needing to do something. I don't hold Michael responsible for what happened to him. I think it was a chemical reaction in his brain. As a social worker, I've seen that kind of thing many times. Some have been lucky to live through it and some haven't. Michael is just someone I will not get over. Can't do it. I've given up trying. I didn't buy Switch. I didn't go to see them on tour with JD because I wasn't ready. I think I can do it now. It took me a year to be able to even look at JD. I guess I've just had time to see the other side of this whole thing. Should the rest of INXS be punished because Michael killed himself? The answer is no. Sometimes I think it would be better and maybe more dignified to follow in the footsteps of Joy Division who went onto become New Order after their singer Ian killed himself. All of these knocks against JD and 'no one can replace Michael' statements have got to hurt the band. Like only Michael mattered. I think it would hurt me. I'll miss Michael until I die. But, I also figure I'm an INXSary for life. 27 years. Hell, let's face it. I didn't think I'd listen to INXS music again (especially Suicide Blonde) after Michael died. But, I did and I have. Even SB. Although, it's 'Soup and Salad Bar' to me now :) I just couldn't stand the idea of this band breaking up and maybe Michael's music never being performed again because he's not here to do it himself. However it's gotta happen...it's gotta continue. Losing Michael AND his music would be too much. The biggest travesty of all.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Thats a good point about Joy Division / New Order. That really is the bands whole problem with moving on....the name.
INXS will forever be associates with MH. Not just because practically all of their songs were written by MH and AF. But the majority of people around the world if you say the words INXS, they automatically think of Michael Hutchence.
If INXS changed the name to something else they could have any singer they want join the band, there would be no comparisons to MH or anything. It would be a new band.
They think they need their brand name to sell albums/tours, but really the INXS name is what has held them back for the past 13 years.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I just can't separate INXS and Michael Hutchence. They are completely intertwined in my mind. And for myself, I'd like to keep it that way. However, I really feel for the guys. They are five very talented men who love making music. I've always thought they should carry on but under a different name.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I believe that the surviving members of INXS should do what they feel is best, and I think Michael would agree. Without Michael, it's not and it never will be the same again. To me, INXS was stronger with Michael than they are without him. But, having said that, I think the surviving members must do what feels right to them. Michael must never be forgotten, but INXS has the right to go on or not go on without him, or to change their name or their style of music, or whatever. So, let them be.
Posted 11 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
