Alex Lifeson says Rush are "basically done"

Well, we are in agreement, then.

 

Watch Yes Enlist Geddy Lee for 'Roundabout' Rock Hall Performance

 

Alex and Geddy might convince Neil to tour again if they rearrange the songs so he won't have to play drums more strenuously than this.

 

Good point. It would have to be very clear that this was NOT a Rush related band...maybe they'd do covers of 60s tunes like they did on that EP.

 

There are a few Rush albums I haven't got my head around & Clockwork Angels is one of them. To me, despite it being a concept album, it lacks cohesion somehow. There's something lacking - never been able to pt my finger on what (always the way with Rush albums I don't like!) - but definitely something.

I'll keep plugging away. One day it might just click!

 

I'd partly counter that by saying that Peart's earlier books most definitely describe a drummer who loves his craft, though isn't a fan of touring. Clearly, he wasn't keen at all to go out on the R40 tour, which is understandable with a young daughter. I'm sure he did need to balance the books financially, as he describes his outgoings considerably exceeding his income towards the end of "Ghost Rider".

Yes, i'm sure his insistence on travelling the way he did will have contributed to his health problems considerably, and that is clear from the book, I agree.

I’m still okay with him being the one to make the retirement decision first.

 

Geddy's voice is shot for the older material, although I tended not to notice this live so much, but it's obvious on the recordings they've released after recent tours. I've seen them four times since Vapor Trails, and I have no problem with the band being over. I don't blame any of them for the breakup, and I'm happy for Neil.

 

Good call by a great band, I wouldn’t want to see them slip into parody like some others who didn’t know when to quit. These guys have done amazingly well to maintain top standards given the challenge of the vocals on much of their most popular material. Fair play to them, they have made many smart moves and this is another.

 

At least they have the integrity to end it when they feel they are spent as a band. Go out on a high note.

 

In Ghost Rider he pretty much says he is out of money and the best way to get money is play drums. I'm sure Neil only returned to make whatever number he needed and then called it a day. I think Neil was ready to cal it day after losing his family.

 

That's why Rush entering a "studio years" phase would have been quite welcome.
However, I'm not bummed out with the recent news.....like I might have been, back in the early nineties when they were still in peak form as musical craftsmen/songwriters.

 

Not much money to be made just selling cd's or mp3's or having your stuff streamed.
Internet killed the studio star.

 

I agree. But I think Clockwork Angels is only OK, though. Some may have a different opinion, but the last time I thought Ged's vocals were good enough as recorded was Snakes & Arrows Live.

 

Vinyl too....and they could charge a ton for it. Rush fans are loyal.

 

As George Harrison once said, "the fans gave their money and their screams, but the Beatles gave their nervous systems, which is a much harder thing to give." As sad as this makes me, Rush have given more of themselves than they needed to and leave those of us that love them with a wonderful catalog to enjoy forever. Happy retirement you guys!

 

I read that and wondered a) why he insisted on continuing to tour by motorcycle when it was infecting his feet and b) why they couldn't have postponed/rescheduled some dates so he could heal and perform in more comfort. He seemed both stubborn and something of a masochist.... he didn't even want to be touring at all, yet making things easier on himself would have been too much of a compromise.

 

Did he say WHY he was out of money? It strikes me as pretty unbelievable. I've never read of the band getting screwed over/ripped off by management, or made bad investments, or lived the rock n roll lifestyle (beyond beer and weed anyway).

Sure they have some expensive hobbies - Geddy's baseball memorabilia collection is EPIC! Neil is (or has been) quite fond of traveling (as a tourist that is, rather than being "on tour"). Alex is a pilot - and I'd be shocked if he didn't own his own plane(s).

Even given all that, what they've spent on their (at least somewhat) productive hobbies is probably only a fraction of what most rock stars spent just between their drug habits and divorces.

I suppose if he spent a massive amount on his wife's medical treatment before she died, that could explain it, but outside of that possibility, I don't buy he was "broke"

As far as him coming "out of retirement" after he lost his family just for the money - I have a hard time believing that as well. He spent several years healing from it, even getting remarried. Life goes on, the fog of depression eventually lifted (depression being notorious for taking all the joy out of life - even taking the enjoyment out of the things you'd previously loved doing (in his case playing drums).

He had just come off his first album/tour (Test For Echo) after "relearning" to play drums from scratch with a world renowned jazz drumming instructor Freddie Gruber, when he lost his family. So he obviously wasn't just doing it for the money in the 3 or 4 years prior to losing his family.

He seemed to still have something to prove (to himself) as a musician at the time he lost his family. I'd imagine that once he healed, that drive that the tragedy put on hold, returned to him.

Outside of his own valid medical reasons, there's also his daughter to take into consideration. He lost his first daughter and probably sees his new daughter as a second chance, and one he doesn't want to take for granted - especially having missed large portions of seeing his first daughter grow up in the years of the band's heaviest touring commitments.

I'm sure that second chance is worth far more than any amount of money to him.

Plus he's by now established himself as a legitimate author, so he has that love to compensate for the loss of his first love - music/drumming. He knew the day would come that he'd have to lay down his sticks - he even wrote about it in the lyrics of the song "Losing It" and he had said in interviews (decades ago) that once that inevitable day came, he intended to become an author of books - and so he has!

 

I don't see how it makes him come across like a spoiled rock star. He isn't the same person he was when he was young, he's gone through huge personal upheavals, and he has other interests he would like to pursue with his time left. He's always seemed very upfront about all of these things. I mean, he's also in his 60s playing Rush songs on drums.

 

I honestly think Neil just used the last few tours as an excuse just to ride his motorcycle. Hey it’s cool and a great hobby but he should have paced himself a bit more and not traveled between every city. He also should have alternated a bit also and bicycled a little bit to keep in better shape like he used to do in the 80’s.

 

In my opinion, if you've been paying attention to his lyrics over the years, his decision is not that surprising. He was never going to become the dancer or writer in "Losing It," for example, if he could avoid it. He's not going to watch his skills diminish any more than he has to.

Further, self-determination is a big theme in his songs. He wasn't going to surrender to the perpetual recording and touring machine. He has assumed control, not the Solar Federation.

 

Rush are not the Rolling Stones and it's not at all hard to believe that caring for his dying wife took away a lot of his money. And no one thinks that he was living in a cardboard box on the street, but it's pretty likely that he looked around a few years after his wife died and thought, "If I don't go back to work, I'll not have anything to live on in 10-20 years." That's reason enough to go back to work, and reason to put a real effort into your work and make sure that you can do it well and keep it active and interesting for yourself. There's no necessary conflict between "I have to return to drumming to make sure I can live and have a family and retire", and "I'm dedicated enough to my craft to hire a tutor and revolutionize my playing so it remains fresh and vital."

And I REALLY don't understand this attitude of doubt about what he says about his personal situation. That people even feel OK with calling it into question just astounds me.

 

When he lost his family and hopped on his motorcycle non stop for 2 years, I’m assuming you’re gonna blow through a serious amount of cash. That’s probably a big reason why he came back.

 

He doesn't go into specifics other than bad investments. If I recall right, the part in the book when he talks about it most is when he is staying at a Four Seasons in Mexico, he mentions that his accountant tells him he only has enough money to keep living like he is for 5 years or so, which he isn't happy about because he doesn't want to change his lifestyle. He also mentions because the band isn't doing anything, not much money is coming in. He talks a little about how he knows the guys would like him to come back but isn't sure he could do it. He talks about how he thinks he can get his chops back to level that he feels is acceptable, but he didn't really miss not playing and mentally he doesn't know if he wants to, but financially he needs to which gets him back to playing by himself for a while before he gets together with the band. He credits his new wife for getting his finances in order and getting him on the right track to have money. Personally my take from reading it is, this his second chance at a family and he is going to spend every minute he can with them. This is just my guess, but I think Neil is carrying a tremendous amount of guilt from being away so much from his first wife and daughter. Just speculation on my part.

 

That would be pretty odd, Wish the MB's would put out an actual new album. I love them and wish they did not reduce themself to a lounge act.

 

Well the poster I was replying to said "In Ghost Rider he pretty much says he is out of money"

Am I supposed to consider THAT - what amounts to nothing more than a third party "interpretation" of what he wrote - as if it were a direct Neil quote?

Especially given another interpretation I've seen in this thread gleaned from one of his books is that Neil is a "spoiled rock star"

How is my asking for more than "my own biased interpretation of what he says in his book is..." a bad thing?

Forgive me for having the "attitude" of preferring to see a direct quote of what Neil ACTUALLY wrote - rather than just someone's personally biased "opinion" regarding what he wrote.