Waters may be long gone, but Pink Floyd lives on
by Mike McInnis

Is 'Pink Floyd 1987' really 'Pink Floyd'? Of course not.

In order to explain why, we have to go back in time a bit and look at the history of Pink Floyd.

In the beginning Syd Barrett was the genius behind Pink Floyd, and there is no arguing that in the beginning of 1967 he was one of the, if not the greatest, geniuses in English music. However in July 1967 Syd had his nervous breakdown and after that Roger Waters had to take over the leadership of Pink Floyd, valiantly trying to keep the band intact. The situation with Syd went from bad to worse and in February 1968 the band decided to go on without Syd.

From that moment on Roger Waters would go on to (co)write most of the bands songs and to provide the band's artistic direction. And with a few exceptions anything performed live by the band after that period was (co)written by Waters ,the exceptions being "Astronomy Domine," "Fat Old Sun," "The Narrow Way," "Sysyphus," "Childhood's End," "Speak To Me," "The Great Gig In The Sky," and "Any Colour You Like." The latter being the only song in the whole Floydian history (at least until the La Carrera Panamericana soundtrack) written by "the other 3."

Also, during both Barrett's and Waters' periods, the Floyd hardly ever relied on outside help for their songwriting (Ron Geesin gets rightfully credited for his work on "Atom Heart Mother,", and Bob Ezrin gets a credit on "The Trial", and did have a big editorial influence on the story line of The Wall, and likely should have received more credit than he got).

That's less than a handful of outside writing credits on 13 albums (not counting compilation albums) .

If you compare this with the post-Waters releases: 1987's A Momentary Lapse of Reason entire A-side (5 tracks) as well as "Yet Another Movie" is co-written by outside members. 1994's The Division Bell is (with the exception of the two instrumentals and "Coming Back To Life") co-written by outsiders.

When Waters left, Pink Floyd lost their musical, lyrical and artistic leader.

Pink Floyd 1987 is a totally different band.

When Waters left Pink Floyd, the band consisted of Dave Gilmour and Nick Mason.

When Dave Gilmour started work on a new album in 1986 he started work on what could become a solo album, or what could become a Pink Floyd album.

The final result (Lapse of Reason) features Dave Gilmour on guitar, and a host of session musicians on all other instruments. Nick Mason provided financial backing, and played some of the drums, but most of the drumming was done by hired hands.

The keyboard parts were mostly done by Jon Carin and Dave Gilmour. Rick Wright was put on the payroll as a (well-paid) session musicians but in order to give the band more credibility he was featured together with Dave and Nick in the promotional material.

So, obviously, since this wasn't even a band, it is not really Pink Floyd.

Several concerts were recorded in 1987 to be used for a live release (the Atlanta concerts) but these were later not used, because the contribution of Nick and Rick was minimal.

Things improved and the Delicate Sound of Thunder was released. A quick check at the writing credits shows that nine out of the fifteen tracks were (co)written by Roger Waters, and since Rick Wright at that time was still a (well paid) session musician, Waters probably earned more money (in royalties) on Delicate Sound of Thunder than Rick Wright.

Finally then, in 1993 Rick Wright rejoined Pink Floyd, and work began on the next Pink Floyd album. This album should have been a return to form, based on jams between the three Floyd members and bass player Guy Pratt.

The result, The Division Bell, clearly shows that this didn't work out. Of the first six tracks, three could easily have appeared on a Dave Gilmour solo album and the other three wouldn't have been out of place on Rick Wright's Wet Dream solo album. And neither of those sounds very much like Pink Floyd (at least not like the Pink Floyd from 196X - 1983).

The album's saving grace is the (truly excellent) guitar solo at the end of "High Hopes," but to get there one has to sit through three of the worst songs ever released under the Pink Floyd name ("Take It Back," "Coming Back To Life" and "Lost For Words.")

If you've ever seen the Disney movie version of Alice in Wonderland, you know that it's an excellent cartoon. If you've also read the book, then you know that while the cartoon is good, it doesn't come remotely close to the book.

It's the same with Pink Floyd and Pink Floyd 1987.

Gerhard den Hollander is a regular contributor and long time Floyd fan. All the above is in his own opinion.

Is Pink Floyd without Roger Waters really 'Pink Floyd'? Of course it is. In the simplest terms, Roger Waters officially left Pink Floyd of his own accord in mid-1985, leaving Nick Mason and David Gilmour as the two remaining members. Waters was the simply the most recent member of the original quartet to leave the group.

(It is interesting to consider that although Syd Barrett and Rick Wright, having been forced out unwillingly, might have had some grounds to complain about the band's continuing without them, Waters left voluntarily, without any kind of agreement that the band would remain inactive.)

But the remainder of the band apparently was not interested in retirement, so they chose to keep going. The band had not broken up, or gone on an official hiatus. It was, presumably, taking an indefinite break between projects--as it has been doing for the past 7 years or so.

I won't pretend that Waters' contributions to the group and its success weren't important. Gilmour and Wright had long since stopped offering lyrics, and it is undeniable that Waters did the lion's share of the songwriting from about 1974 onward. During this time the band had grown from an experimental group playing to cult audiences to one of the world's dominant rock acts, and had done so largely on the strength of Waters' songwriting and vision and leadership.

But that's not to say that the others' input was negligible. Gilmour and Wright were every bit as important to the ensemble's musical direction as Waters' was. They helped create the sound that was so recognizable. All four worked together to produce the records that defined their sound, and that made them stars.

Few fans, even the rabid Waters-worshipers (for whom the Great Rog can do no wrong) will deny this. But what they will do is point to the recorded evidence that has emerged since the split. While Waters' Amused to Death approaches the thematic and lyrical sophistication of Dark Side of the Moon or Wish You Were Here, the post-Waters Pink Floyd's recorded output lacks focus and enduring greatness.

I say comparing A Momentary Lapse of Reason or The Division Bell to Dark Side of the Moon or The Wall is like comparing, if you'll forgive the expression, apples and oranges. The remaining Floyds were no longer young men hungry for commercial success and a wider audience. (This is largely what "High Hopes", perhaps the post-Waters Floyd's greatest recording, is all about.) They were, as Mason put it, approaching "dignified middle age", and were not really interested in being counterculture darlings. Instead, they were interested in making rock which would appeal to middle aged Englishmen, which is precisely what they did.

Some of their efforts were dismal failures. Most fans, even the rabid Gilmour devotees, have at least one or two songs on the two post-Waters studio albums that they cannot really stand, whether it be "Dogs of War" or "Lost for Words". Even though I like both A Momentary Lapse of Reason and The Division Bell, I admit that I don't listen to either all that frequently anymore.

But, in fairness, I don't listen to The Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking or Radio KAOS that much either. Neither of these albums compares favorably with the classic Floyd albums. Pros and Cons suffers from underdevelopment, and KAOS suffers from its Phil Collins-esque mid-1980s pop production values.

The last thing I want to get into is poking fun at one side or the other. Frankly, both camps have given observers a lot to laugh at, whether it is substandard writing, substandard production, bad haircuts, funny clothes, embarassing mudslinging, and image problems. It is easy for the pro-Waters crowd to look upon A Momentary Lapse of Reason as a contrived attempt to sound like classic Pink Floyd (which it is--who says that a band can't sound like itself?), but it is just as easy for the pro-Gilmour crowd to accuse Waters of the same tactics. It is easy for the pro-Waters crowd to accuse Gilmour of trying to cash in on the Floyd's history and back catalogue, but it is just as easy to accuse Waters of the same.

Neither side has been significantly more productive than the other. Since the official split, 'Pink Floyd' has recorded two studio albums and a film soundtrack, toured twice, and released two live albums and two concerts films (not counting the live Wall release). Meanwhile, 'Roger Waters' has recorded two studio albums and a film soundtrack, toured three times, and released one live album, with a concert film coming out any minute now.

Furthermore, both camps have continued to make records which hint at the glory of the past, but which ultimately fail to completely achieve that glory on their own. Both rely heavily on material that is 20 to 30 years old in their live shows. And both record and tour so infuriatingly infrequently that any movement in either camp is big news among fans, worthy of genuine excitement.

So why create divisions between fans? We all have favorite albums and favorite periods, and we never will (and never should) agree completely on which is best. Can't we admit that neither side has a monopoly on the talent, creativity, and true virtue? Can't we all just get along?

Mike McInnis is a staff writer for Spare Bricks.