Styx Releases Exciting New Album Without Dennis DeYoung

Styx just released a new album called The Mission.  It's a concept album.  It's the brainchild of Tommy Shaw, who wrote the song that inspired the band to do this concept album about a mission to Mars.  Now, the "irony meter" will go off for the fans of Styx co-founder Dennis DeYoung.  Weren't Shaw and James Young tired of concept albums?  This was implied in that controversial episode of MTV's Behind The Music.

There is a bigger dilemma for Dennis DeYoung fans who have given The Mission a fair listen.  This album is good, and it's filled with moments that hearken back to the band's glory days of the 1970's.  While the album did hit the charts, it didn't go very far up and quickly fell.  DeYoung fans will point out that the missing ingredient that is needed to get the band back up on the charts, if it's even possible in 2017, is DeYoung's creative influence and guiding hand.

The divide still exists.  There are fans who insist that the band is better off without Dennis, and there are those who won't even give them a chance because Dennis isn't there.  Admittedly, the band did annoy DeYoung fans from the moment they began touring without him when they introduced keyboard virtuoso and Canadian pop star Lawrence Gowan nearly 20 years ago on a rotating keyboard.  That's really just the showmanship of Gowan, but some took it as the band being "in your face" about the whole situation.

For Gowan's part, he's been nothing but humble about the whole situation.  He's never claimed to be better than Dennis or that he's trying to fill his shoes.  He simply says he's there to allow the band to carry on and do what they do best.  It has to be frustrating at times to be asked the DeYoung question, but Gowan always handles the situation with class.  DeYoung recently discussed the possibility of reuniting for a final tour on his podcast.  While one might think a tour with Dennis and Lawrence would be doable and profitable, it's still unlikely.  Gowan commented in a recent interview that he doesn't blame DeYoung for wanting to be in this band, because it's a great band.

In reality, DeYoung is in a pretty good band these days as well.  DeYoung tours with a talented group of musicians that include lead guitarist Jimmy Leahy and singer/guitarist August Zadra.  Zadra played in a Styx tribute band and has been able to do versions of the Tommy Shaw Styx hits that are faithful to the original versions.  Even Leahy has been heard doing a nice version of Young's Miss America.  DeYoung sounds as good as ever at 70 years old, and some who have attended his concerts say he's doing a better version of Styx than the band currently touring with the name.

The question then becomes, why would he want to come back to that band 20 years later when he's making great music as it is?  He's working on a new album and did a live DVD a couple years ago.  He can tour on his own schedule, and he's already long dispelled the myth pushed by the VH1 show that he didn't want to tour or play rock music.

Styx was a group that rocked and also made it onto the pop stations.  They crossed over to new fans, largely because of DeYoung's guidance.  The optimism in the Styx lyrics in those days resonated with the fans.  Perhaps a reason fans want to see this reunion is because of how listening to the music of that band made them feel.  Then, they saw the very public divorce that ended up in court.  It's further compounded by the fact hat Styx has attempted to rewrite history and elevate certain albums into a status that the album never had, while ignoring obvious hits.  Of course, DeYoung fans aren't fond of hearing Gowan sing his songs anyway.  Is Pieces Of Eight the band's second best album?  Depends on who you ask, but you'll likely find more fans than not who would rank that album third or fourth in order of importance.

Then, you have Styx rerecording their classic songs without DeYoung.  They go out of their way to pretend he didn't exist.  At one time, the official web page credited the Panozzo brothers with founding the band.  John and Chuck Panozzo were the backbone of the group, but does anybody really believe the band would be here today had Dennis not gotten together with them to form the band?  They spent many years developing their sound before they even had a hit, and then it was a song penned by DeYoung.  The singles charts and record sales don't lie.  The reality is, the band wouldn't be here today if not for the band people supported in its heyday.

The reunion talk will continue, because the band meant a lot to the fans when they were growing up.  Styx was part of the sound track of our youth.  They were a band of good vibes, positivity and optimism.  To see the bad feelings that Young seems to bear towards DeYoung, and the fact that we will probably never see that reunion is disappointing to some.  Young said it best on that old VH1 show, since it really comes down to him.  A reunion will happen when they are playing hockey on the river Styx.

DeYoung's band still tours and rocks the house.  He still has that trademark sense of humor, his voice is still good and he still hits those notes.  He's committed to giving the fans all of the hits of Styx, which Zadra helps make possible.  A new album is in the works, and perhaps we'll get a glimpse of what a Styx album might sound like if Dennis were still in the band.

The band Styx still continues to rock the house.  They've remained committed to putting on a show that almost pretends that the band stopped making albums after The Grand Illusion and Pieces Of Eight.  Cornerstone, Paradise Theater and Kilroy Was Here almost don't exist at all in their set, all albums that feature some of DeYoung's best moments.  In fact, the band will dust off other people's songs and add them to their set list to present themselves in a way that a segment of their original fan base does not see them.  And, it's working for them.

The Mission sounds like it would fit in perfectly right after Pieces Of Eight.  It has that classic sound to it.  And, it had no Dennis DeYoung input at all.  In fact, it showcases his replacement quite well.  It's worth a listen, even if you are a staunch DeYoung supporter.  Fans will insist that with DeYoung they would still have a chance to top the charts again.  Maybe they would and maybe they wouldn't.  Maybe this album didn't stay on the charts, but maybe the way the industry has changed has something to do with it.  The bottom line is an album is good or bad on it's own merits, not how many sales it's had.  This album is good.

The debate about this band will continue, because Styx brought that sort of passion out of its fans.  Maybe they will reunite one day, and maybe they won't.  Right now, you have two bands touring and making good music.  There's nothing wrong with that.  It's good music.  Just go and enjoy the show.

How attached are you to all of your possessions?

How attached are you to all of your possessions?  This is a question I've been asking myself for a while now.  Two years ago next month, I lost my home of 30 years.  It was weighing heavy on my mind for weeks.  What would I do with my stuff?  Could I keep anything?  Things I collected for years that were special to me were in danger of being lost.

In my old home state of California, a place I hope to be able to go back to again one day soon, fires have devastated neighborhoods.  People had to leave with just the clothes on their back and await news on the fate of their homes.  Some were lucky, but others got the bad news.  The fire destroyed everything.

Many of us are sentimental about one thing or another.  You can replace clothing, TV's and things like that, but there are things you collect through the years that are not as easy to replace.  Photo albums and that sort of thing are irreplaceable.  There are store bought things that we purchased years ago.  They aren't easy to find anymore.  Most people have something important to them.

I had family invite me to stay with them temporarily while I tried to figure out what to do next.  In the midst of that was pressure from an uncle to get out.  I never would have been there if not for my aunt, and that made it more stressful on top of losing my home and still grieving over my father.  I was able to keep most of the possessions important to me.

The pressure to leave was so great that I had to jump at the first offer thrown my way, despite the fact that it was not something I would have opted for if I had time to choose.  It was a place to say in another state.  So, I packed some of my stuff and left.  The rest was stored in a room in a shop.  The problem was I had no way to go get it and no money to have it shipped to me.  I've since found out that they threw it out.  My brother picked through a few things for me, but the rest is gone.  Just like that.

I feel anger over this, but I'm also numb.  There's not a damn thing I can do about it, and I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that given my economic position, this is as good as life is going to be for me.  Possession of things and ownership is a man made thing.  I'm not speaking against that.  We obviously need the basics, shelter, food and clothing, but our money driven society has us collecting many things we probably don't even need.  We just think we do, perhaps due to the marketing drilled into our brains that it will somehow make our lives better.

Did I need all that I had left behind?  Probably not.  I lived without it for almost two years.  There were clothes among those boxes that I could use now as my things are wearing out. There are little things I collected that remind me of some moment in my life when I was happy.  However, they won't improve my life now.  I'm still saddened by yet another loss.  How attached to your stuff are you?  Could you willingly give it up?  We should remember we were born into this world naked and with nothing. The only thing we take with us when we die is our memories.

A Few Thoughts On The NFL Player Protests

There's been a discussion about free speech in this country lately.  Actually, there are always things that happen that spark the debate.  The latest is the NFL player protests during the National Anthem.

When this country was founded, the First Amendment dealt with free speech.  It was first and foremost on the minds of the founding fathers.  Why?  Before this country was founded, the government could have you jailed or killed for saying things they didn't agree with.  Just offering an opinion about the monarchy could get you killed.  The First Amendment isn't there to protect speech people agree with.  What would be the point?  If we all agree, what's the problem?

The current protest has many levels, because they are being used as part of a bigger agenda to divide this country and spark a race war.  Divide and conquer is the oldest trick in the book used to control the people.  When you are employed with a company that pays you for your services, you can get fired for conduct they feel is negative towards the company.  Companies will fire people for comments made on their personal Facebook pages on that person's free time.  To me, that's questionable.  If you are abiding by company's rules on their time, what you do on your own time should be off limits unless you are committing a crime.

The NFL has a code of conduct.  They are constantly fining players for wearing articles of clothing in games that are not allowed.  People are even fired for opinions expressed off of company time, which again I feel is questionable.  But when the players take the field, they are on company time.  That includes when the National Anthem is played.  If the NFL allows protests during that time, this means the league sanctions it.

The sad part of all of this is that we are still not having any discussion about what the protests are about.  It's about these player's concerns over police brutality towards minorities and the way minorities are treated in this country.  Some people feel there is no real problem and disagree with that message, so they won't even entertain the discussion.  There ought to be concern over police tactics and military weapons in the hands of the police that can and will be used against the people.  One day, the people may be forced to rise up in the event that the government goes too far.  It's a good bet that some of these people who complain about the NFL player protests won't be blindly patriotic then.

Unfortunately, the opposing view has decided to try and rebrand these protests as disrespecting the flag and country.  President Trump has helped frame that narrative, as if all of the players are saying to hell with our flag and country and not protesting to make a statement.   It's dishonest, and Trump is smart enough to know that.  It was another Republican, President Nixon, who branded anti war protesters the same way when they used the flag to make a political statement.  As the leader of the country, Trump is simply doing the same thing he accused Obama of, ignoring the concerns of voters who didn't vote for him.

We need to be very careful when we brand other people's free speech as bad and somehow unpatriotic.  We should not invalidate the concerns of the opposing view.  At some point, the shoe will be on the other foot, and it will be your opinion being misrepresented by those who don't agree with you.