1. How can the topic at hand be "janick's worth in Maiden" in a thread called "rate all 17 Maiden albums bad to worst". I'm sorry, but the topic is Maiden's music. Please don't try to reinvent it as a focussed discussion about Janick Gers. It is abundantly clear that it is not.
My guy, discussions evolve. Eventually we’ll come out of this and return to the thread’s intent, but the current mini-discussion pertains to Janick’s contributions to Maiden. That is what I’m saying, and you kind of have to bend over backwards to pull the alternate meaning out of my words (especially since you’re so much better at English than I am).
2. You need to do better: who gets to chose the narrowness or breadth of an argument?
Generally the people who agree to debate. The issue here is that Jer did not sign up to debate you. He spoke about how he’s not a fan of Janick, and you decided his opinion could be debated. But instead of debating the topic on hand (Janick’s worth in Maiden, which is already something that’s only gonna be subjective), you added in Steve to the mix (in the logical fallacy called whataboutism), for no reason other than to try to say “Gotcha!” and label Jer a hypocrite. But Jer never said anything about Steve and even responded to your fallacy by agreeing that Steve’s usage of recycling bothers him too. Gotcha?
In fact, people who try to spin and to narrative control try to exclude things from a debate. I was arguing against Jer's specific arguments by pointing out other relevant factors. It is not for you or for anyone else to tell me they are not relevant
Yeah it is if they do not apply to the actual debate.
for the record, these other relevant factors are:
- the recycling of musical and lyrical ideas by other Maiden members;
Not relevant. What another member does has no bearing on what Janick does. It’s possible to dislike all recycling and just pick it up more when Janick does it. It’s possible that Jer thinks that Janick does it poorly and the others do it well. It’s also possible that Jer just didn’t want to bring up other recycling because it has no bearing on what he thinks of Janick. We can bring it up in the discussion, sure, but when Jer is listing reasons he dislikes Janick, he’s not listing reasons he dislikes Steve, he’s listing reasons he dislikes Janick. He could’ve said something like, “And this bothers me with Steve too,” if he wanted, but it’s not necessary. And again, once you brought it up he even clarified that he dislikes it too. But it has nothing to do with Janick himself. Next.
- the fact that Janick joined a band 15 years into its existence and has a responsibility to write in a musical style he didn't help to invent;
Not relevant. As Jer already pointed out, by FOTD he’d already reused the “Son of a Gun” intro in “Wasting Love”. Clearly he can cannibalize his own material and add it into the Maiden canon. And that’s not even to speak of the other stuff he’s redone (both nabbing bits from other Maiden members and his own songs). I genuinely don’t even know what this has to do with your argument and the amount of brain realignment I’m trying to do to make it make sense hurts so, moving on.
- the massive difficulty of remaining novel in a band that hardly changes its style nearly 50 years into its existence)
I agree with you, but I also don’t think this is relevant. Just because something is hard doesn’t mean it’s impossible, nor that due to its hardness one has to like it. Not relevant.
....and others that you seem to think have no relevance, because you are trying to defend someone else's poorly expressed critical opinion.
Jer has been saying the same things since he joined in 2018, and probably also thought them long before. I don’t think these are poorly expressed, he’s very consistent about them.
4. I love Nicko and I agree he is doing great on the last tour. But good god man: Rod Smallwood, Andy Taylor and the team would certainly disagree with what you have just written: "It’s down to what you contribute musically, not whether or not you may bring down the band’s longevity." So you are honestly telling me that a "weak link in the chain" of the members of Maiden is not the one who may end up asking to retire first? But the one who writes songs that Jer doesn't like??????
Okay, I can kind of see how you got here (my wording may not have been very clear), but I’m still surprised a great English speaker like you interpreted it the way you did. Jer is arguing that Janick is Maiden’s weakest link in the songwriting and performance department. So why are we bringing up Nicko being the weakest link in the longevity department? The two are not the same and don’t try to argue that they are.
Interesting you think Dave is a "weak link". Not sure why, but hey ho.
His solos have become sloppy (especially live, although I thought he was better on
Senjutsu), and he contributes the least amount of songs aside from Nicko, but the latter is always on point with his drumming. Janick meanwhile brings killer songs and is fun to watch on stage, even though I think his solos are usually meh.
5. Don't you dare patronise me. I know full well what is involved in taking on an argument by pointing out the importance and relevance of other examples and counterarguments, and I disagree wholeheartedly that doing so lacks validity.
Your problem, not mine.
I have three degrees and almost certainly speak far better English than you, so you can stow that patronising attitude where the sun does not shine.
Another logical fallacy on your part, the appeal to accomplishment, where you point out your achievements in order to shield your arguments from criticism. Nicely done.
Also, speaking better English is subjective. I’d certainly love to hear your arguments for why.
Anyone who wants to use the word 'whataboutism' in a debate with me will have that words shoved back in their face.
You missed.
It is lazy and often betrays the fact that a person's arguments start to wither and fall away when properly contextualised.
Actually it just means that you don’t have any valid argument pro Janick aside from, “But Steve does it too!” Do you hear how silly that sounds?
And, for the record, I did take on Jer's poor arguments.
- He at one point grasped at straws by suggesting Janick's guitar noodling on Afraid... sounds like guitar noodling on Sing of the Cross. I pointed out that Janick didn't write either song!!!!
And he acknowledged that he had held some misconceptions about the Maiden songwriting approach.
- He also suggested (core to his argument) that "self plagiarism" was a problem for much of Janick's material. So I asked Jer if the earlier songs Janick wrote escaped that criticism, because you cannot start "self plagiarism" until you have at least written a decent body of material.
And Janick had written a decent body of material by 1990, with White Spirit, Bruce, Gillan, etc. And Jer rightly pointed out the similarity between “Son of a Gun” and “Wasting Love”, which you haven’t even seemed to acknowledge. Just because he hadn’t written a bunch with Maiden doesn’t mean he didn’t pull from his other work and adapt it to the Maiden style.
....Of course... you can go on trying to defend someone else's poorly thought out and poorly expressed opinion. Odd behaviour for you since, as you admit you don't even share that opinion in the first place!
I don’t share his opinion, but I do think it is a logical one. And your poor arguments kind of piss me off, so there’s that.
"Have fun", as you might say.
Or, in Helmuth Von Moltke Venacular English, “Boom to you too.”