Midnight Oil

Subject: Re: 10 Years?
From: "Adrian" <hooperadrianr@yahoo.com>
Date: 1/12/2012, 7:05 am
To: powderworks@yahoogroups.com.au



Yeah I thought that was odd considering the insights he provided Dodson in the B&B book.  Some of the comments an anecdotes from both Giffo and Bear are among the most interesting in that book I thought.  It was great to finally hear from them.

As for Giffo v Bones, I'm very much with Bazza's assessment.  My personal opinion is that the Bones' period of the band is the least interesting, the least vital and essentially marks the beginning of a very long, slow decline.  I know that won't be popular and many will rile at the suggestion.  But at the same time I think its pretty hard to counter that Peter Gifford was the bass player during the most interesting, cutting edge, musically exciting and critically lauded period of the band's existence.  

Bones had "licks"?  Yeah, I don't think so.  Bones was recruited for his voice more so than bass playing abilities.  To quote Moginie (albeit out of context) "a medium sized band working within its limitations".  To capitalize on the post-D&D international success they steered the band in a more commercial, radio friendly direction and Bones was a deliberate attempt to temper the somewhat limited appeal of Pete's singing style to a wider audience.  Just listen how Bones' and Rob's voices feature far more prominently from BSM onwards.  They couldn't have done that with Giffo.

Wih the 30th anniversary of 10-1 I've been flogging it a bit and its great to be reminded what a brilliant album it is.  The bass playing of Mr Gifford in particular should be singled out for special mention.  I'm sure Bones is a wonderful bloke, but for me, Giffo has always been where its at.

Adrian

--- In powderworks@yahoogroups.com.au, "dingus_mcgee" <dingus_mcgee@...> wrote:

well possibly the response i received from his office is not accurate then. it wasnt a "no comment" reply, but "Peter does not like to talk about his time in the band anymore".  as for my comment about getting on stage, it was in reference to why he left the band in the first place.  as for the political views, i dunno, but your way off with your assessment of Bones.

--- In powderworks@yahoogroups.com.au, "Bazza" <bazzaa@> wrote:


Waht absolute bollocks, on several counts. 

Peter Gifford has had *no* problems talking about the band at any point and he's also had no problems playing with them whenever they visited Byron in the past.

Peter Gifford *is* a critic of the Gillard Labor government, but last time I checked, he's entitled to his opinions as much as anyone else is. I seriously doubt Peter Garrett is so thin-skinned to allow this to be a problem (in fact he may agree on some level, as many of us Labor old-timers do).

The other point? Bones is and was always a poor substitute for the best bassist the Oils ever had. As someone else mentioned, Bear would be a preferable option by quite a good deal. That, however, is roaming into the realms of fantasy.


--- In powderworks@yahoogroups.com.au, "dingus_mcgee" <dingus_mcgee@> wrote:

well for whatever reason, they didnt get Bear when Giffo left so i doubt he'd in play this time around.  Giffo wont even talk about his time with the band, much less get back up on stage.  that leaves Bones as the only viable option.

i dont pine for Andrew or Peter to step back in on bass.  Bones has got the chops for their licks, but who's got the chops for his?