Henley Says Eagles Reunion Possible with Glenn Frey's Son

[sodascouts]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see anyone attacking Don Henley in this thread. I think everyone is pretty much in agreement that his words were taken out of context and misrepresented.

[travlnman2]

I concur. I think what he means is like a one off sort of thing.

I would like to see Henley,Joe,Timothy and Bernie do some sort of Rossington Collins Band type of thing.

[sodascouts]

As I said earlier, I wouldn't mind a one-off. I just wouldn't like Don, Joe, and Tim making music / touring together under the moniker "Eagles." However, to be clear, I also believe:

- They can do whatever they want.
- It doesn't make them bad people if they do it.
- Fans who would go see them in such a configuration are not wrong to do so.

But... I wouldn't like it. It's possible to understand all of the above and still not like the idea.

Here's the thing: the idea of an Eagles without Glenn hurts my heart. I wouldn't be able to enjoy it. It would feel wrong to me. Please don't interpret my negative emotional response to the idea as a lack of respect for Don Henley.

I suspect that Don himself would understand my feelings. I suspect that Don might even share them.

[WalshFan88]

As I said earlier, I wouldn't mind a one-off. I just wouldn't like Don, Joe, and Tim making music / touring together under the moniker "Eagles." However, to be clear:

- Of course they can do what they want.
- It doesn't make them bad people if they do it.
- Fans who would go see them in such a configuration are not wrong to do so.

But... I wouldn't like it. It's possible to understand all of the above and still not like the idea.

Here's the thing: the idea of an Eagles without Glenn hurts my heart. I wouldn't be able to enjoy it. Please don't interpret my negative emotional response to the idea as a lack of respect for Don Henley.

I suspect that Don himself would understand my feelings. I suspect that Don might even share them.

My feelings exactly, Soda. A one off I would encourage, anything else and I'm not interested as long as they are under that name. To forego GF's songs or have someone singing them in his place (other than a one off tribute), wouldn't work for me.

But I must say, it isn't so much a morals thing to me.

[Witchy Woman]

I have no interest in seeing them together under The Eagles moniker without Glenn. I have no problem with those who would go see them. I just don't like the idea, and I don't think they do, either. Maybe somewhere down the line we may see Joe or Tim join Don on one of his solo tour dates, or maybe a get together for a charitable organization. I have no doubt we will see them collaborating in one way or another, but not on tour as The Eagles.

[Annoying Twit]

I don't understand this 'disrespect' business & that I am apparently supposed to support everything Henley, Walsh & Schmit do without question. I never had the slightest intention of being 'disrepectful' to any of them. If people have this impression, then I apologise. I have already said where I think the 'disrespect' is.

It would help if you responded to people's thoughts and discussions as they are. Nobody, that I have seen, has suggested anything resembling expecting others to support everything Henley, Walsh, and Schmit do without question. The discussions that I've seen don't resemble this characterisation at all.

Sometimes you can't go back again.

Nobody, that I have noticed, is suggesting that we can 'go back again'. Even in the most extreme case that the remaining Eagles work again under the banner 'Eagles', it will be a very different band from what it was before. That won't be going back, it'll be moving to a different place. I'm not saying this because I believe that Eagles will play again, or should. At this point, I'm just trying to clarify what people such as myself are saying, because it seems to come back at us in a highly exaggerated form.

If we're to discuss the topic, we need to understand what each of us are saying. At present this isn't happening.

[StephUK]

Thanks for clarifying, but as a fan of Frey since 1979 & as a fan of the Eagles since 1976 I do believe I have a right to object to any combination of the suriviving members calling themselves 'Eagles'. The heart of the band is gone. Regardless of the others' talents, in my opinion anything else would be a shell of what the band used to be. I suppose my use of the word 'wrong' implied that I was indeed sitting in judgment. I'm not. If they do this let them. But I don't have to approve of it.

Glenn was the frontman, sang half the songs & was the bandleader. He also was a major part of the harmonies they were so well known for. Take that away & you have what Henley once called 'his backing band'. You want to go & see Henley, Walsh, Schmit & Smith & Crago with that huge gap in the middle? Fine. If you think that's 'Eagles' your definition is more flexible than mine.

I agree with you Freypower, and I also have been an Eagles fan since 1976.
I hope that Don, Joe & Timothy will continue playing solo shows, as they always have. Personally I'd rather hear Don sing an Eagle's song during his solo show (with Stewart, Scott, Will & Michael in his backing band!) than see Don, Joe & Timothy touring as the Eagles.

NB. This is my opinion. If you disagree with me, that's okay; discuss if you wish, but don't verbally attack me for having an opinion you don't share.

[WKMB55]

It is not possible to "go back". I do believe that a great deal of the healing process for Don, Joe and Timothy, Glenn's family and friends, and the fans is not to "stand still" but to move forward. I don't believe that anyone is suggesting that we forget about Glenn Frey. I think that we all respect Glenn's many contributions to music and the Eagles and at the same time we can still appreciate any individual concerts or collaborations of the remaining band members. Everyone has to choose what works best for them.

[Freypower]

It would help if you responded to people's thoughts and discussions as they are. Nobody, that I have seen, has suggested anything resembling expecting others to support everything Henley, Walsh, and Schmit do without question. The discussions that I've seen don't resemble this characterisation at all.



Nobody, that I have noticed, is suggesting that we can 'go back again'. Even in the most extreme case that the remaining Eagles work again under the banner 'Eagles', it will be a very different band from what it was before. That won't be going back, it'll be moving to a different place. I'm not saying this because I believe that Eagles will play again, or should. At this point, I'm just trying to clarify what people such as myself are saying, because it seems to come back at us in a highly exaggerated form.

If we're to discuss the topic, we need to understand what each of us are saying. At present this isn't happening.

MaryCalifornia:

The reason I continue to step in and why this topic won't die is because it is not OK to question the guys' motivation if they wish to continue to perform. It's disrespectful and it is not your place. Why does anyone do anything? Maybe their motivation would be financial, maybe creative, maybe social - doesn't matter. These types of statements go one step too far. It goes from mourning the loss of Glenn to actively disrespecting the surviving members, for no good reason.

L101:

The amount of disrespect shown towards anyone who is not a 100% Glenn fan is maddening - we are all entitled to post our thoughts on this, whether everyone agrees with them or not.

I interpreted MC's statement to mean that no matter what H, W & S decide, the fans MUST support it. Saying 'it is not OK to question their motivation' what is that if not a direction to stop questioning it, even though that is not what I did. All I did was disapprove of them attempting to continue under the name Eagles. (NB: I said it would be 'pointless' & that I was 'totally against it'. I never used the word 'wrong'). For this I am accused of 'disrespect' towards the other members when I have stated clearly that this was never my intention. I said over & over again that they could do what they liked but I didn't have to approve of it. But apparently not even that is now allowed. As for 'we are all entitled to post our thoughts' I appear to be completely at odds with the majority.

As for your own comments about them 'moving to a different place' I won't address them just as I didn't wish to address your previous post about a possible album (which I had of course 'dismissed out of hand'). Whatever reasons or explanations I have had are just being brushed aside. You didn't even attempt to look at it from my viewpoint, which at least MC did. I'm not prepared to have everything I post be picked apart & told how wrong it is now. If people thought I did that to them, fair enough. I didn't mean to. But there is a limit.

Now I am being told that I have exaggerated everything others have said. This is in addition to my 'moral judgments' of course. If that is all that is going to be said to me then I see no point in posting further. It works both ways. You haven't understood anything I have said either. I conceded defeat yeaterday. Can you now just leave it. Or rather, as I tried to say yesterday, continue the discussion, and I will stay out of it.

[Glennsallnighter]

I agree with you Freypower, and I also have been an Eagles fan since 1976.
I hope that Don, Joe & Timothy will continue playing solo shows, as they always have. Personally I'd rather hear Don sing an Eagle's song during his solo show (with Stewart, Scott, Will & Michael in his backing band!) than see Don, Joe & Timothy touring as the Eagles.

NB. This is my opinion. If you disagree with me, that's okay; discuss if you wish, but don't verbally attack me for having an opinion you don't share.

That is my opinion too Steph. I don't think I could go to a show done by the other guys but without Glenn unless it was a one off tribute. I think it would be too hard to do for them too