the eagles piss me off

NBC was showing a concert from the Eagles farewell tour tonight. It was like a train wreck: I was horrified but couldn't avert my eyes. This horrendous bit of programming, which was surely dredging the depths of the typically aweful summer season begged one simple question. Why?

Why do the Eagles need to embarass themselves by putting their sorry asses out on national television? It can't be for the music; the Eagles have done nothing for music in their careers. Even at their peak, they were little more than a goofy guilty pleasure. My brother claims the Eagles contributed more to the genre of punk than any actual punk band because their sheer lack of originality inspired such hatred in punks.

Is it for the money? I hope, and don't think so. These guys have plenty of cash. Sure, Joe Walsh spent all his money on parties in the 1980s, but the long ago troubles of a single occasional member hardly justify almost continuous "farewell" touring. They have plenty of money; they don't need to go on the road anymore. Furthermore, why do they keep writing new songs that set records for terribleness if all they need to do is go on tour? Why stick with custom? Just admit you are covering yourself from your not so great zenith instead of writing new material to promote on tour.

No, I think the reason the do it goes back to sheltered rock-star syndrome. It's so easy to surround yourself with adoring fans when you get to be an old, washed up rock band that they actually believe they are doing the world a service by recording new garbage and touring to trump it up. Where do I get this idea? I look at these fans and make a few observations.

The first observation is that the people in the audience are the most middle-aged, middle-class, white and middle-America group of people I have ever seen. These people like the Eagles because they are the antithesis of what music should be about: the Eagles will never challenge your way of thought. The Eagles will always write a song about nothing. Neil Young and Bruce Springsteen will hammer America with "Rockin' in the Free World" or "Born in the USA." The Who gave us "My Generation," and at least Led Zeppelin had a weird satanic obsession. Te one constant is that and Eagles song will never mean anything real. It may or may not have a catchy tune, riff or line. But you can always count on the Eagles to eliminate the edge.

The second observation is that these people think that the Eagles rock. Never mind that the Eagles have exactly one song that comes even remotely close to anything that could be broadly defined as rocking. They're getting up and stamping to shit like "Heartache Tonight" or "Already Gone." These are the blandest songs from a band that has built itself on the concept of being mundane. It's pathetic. The Eagles are soft rock, they're against the whole concept of rocking. And yet here's a bunch of white morons who think the Eagles are hard core.

Never mind that every single fill and solo has been meticulously scripted to eliminate the improvisational joy that's supposed to differentiate live music from it's tamer studio cousin. Never mind that every move on stage, including the posturing to the crowd, is painfully obvious in how choreographed it is. These people think the 55 year old Eagles still rock. Do they still play Hotel California, arguably a rock and roll song? Yes. Does this mean they still rock hard? I don't think recovered alcoholics can rock, but even if they could Joe Walsh doesn't. And Don Henley never did. And none of the other Eagles either.

The worst part of this whole thing is that really bad bands like the Eagles end up soiling the reputation of an entire fertile period of music. The Who, Neil Young, The Doors, Cream and the Rolling Stones were innovative and technically proficient. Most importantly, they ROCKED. And they end up lumped with the Eagles, REO Speedwagon and Styx under the ridiculous label "classic rock" despite the fact that they share nothing more than space on one or two horrible radio stations in every market nationwide.

I'm not defending the touring habits of Eric Clapton, Neil Young and the Who, none of whom have done anything of note since 1991, but it's absolutely preposterous to lump them in in any way with abomination I saw this evening on NBC.