Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Question...

1 view
Skip to first unread message

samiam

unread,
Dec 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM12/31/98
to
Question for ya:
Suppose Steve dumps Blaze and Janick for two new guys.
Should they go on playing under the name "Iron Maiden"? I
mean, he has every right to, but should he basically start
over, with the new guys (and Nicko and Dave)? I thought
about it for awhile and my answer would be (as much as it
hurts me to say) to retire "Iron Maiden" and let it go with
what dignity it has left rather than to go on as is, or with
new band members only to decline in popularity even more.
My reasoning behind this is that maybe it will bring back
the spark, desire, drive, etc. that they once had. On one
hand they've been through a bazillion line changes anyways
so what's a couple more? But I kind of feel like the bands
name/recognition is the only thing saving keeping them
alive.

-samiam

Peter R. Cook

unread,
Jan 1, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/1/99
to

Steve IS Iron Maiden. If Steve is in da band, it will
always be Iron Maiden.

-Peter

-Wilkku-

unread,
Jan 1, 1999, 3:00:00 AM1/1/99
to
samiam wrote:

> Question for ya:
> Suppose Steve dumps Blaze and Janick for two new guys.

I don't think he fires Janick! What do you guys like this Doug White
guy? I've been listening latest Rainbow album with Doug on vocals. It's
hard to think him singing Aces High or The Trooper, but he is a good
singer and I don't complain if Steve replaces Blaze with him.

--
-Wilkku-

villemat...@kolumbus.fi
ICQ = 12216778
NP: IM - Maiden England
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Is it better to rule in Hell, than it is to serve in Heaven?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bill Tsamis

0 new messages