The Show Must Go On: Should Iconic Band Members Be Replaced? (Queen, Thin Lizzy Feature)
Monday, 06 February 2012
Written by Heather McDaid
With the speculation rife that Sonisphere will host Queen this summer with American Idol’s Adam Lambert at the hilt, it has raised the age old debate of: should you replace a band member in an iconic band? It’s an age old problem; bands can’t avoid arguments, people passing away or simple artistic differences, but there will never be one definite answer.
Queen are the prominent example. How can anyone really replace Freddie Mercury? It’s a simple answer: they can’t. At least Adam Lambert – a huge fan of Queen in the first place – can openly acknowledge that he will not replace such a legend and merely wants to pay tribute to him. He recently said, “The intention is to pay tribute to Freddie and the band by singing some fucking great songs. It’s to keep the music alive for the fans and give it an energy that Freddie would have been proud of. After the EMAs, I heard faint little slithers of backlash from people saying: ‘You can’t replace Freddie Mercury.’ But I already knew that. There’s no intention in my mind of replacing Freddie. That’s impossible. The way I’m choosing to view it is that it’s a great honour and one I’m in no way going to shirk.”
So are the band right to do it? Personally, yes. How many people have been raised on Queen and never had the opportunity to see them? Few would be naive enough to think it would be anywhere near the experience of seeing the band with Freddie, but on the contrary the feeling of seeing so many iconic numbers live would justify it. Why Queen are right do proceed is that they have found the right person. Whether stern metal-heads in Knebworth – should the headline rumour be true – agree or not that the American Idol alum should be on their turf or not is to be seen.
While, as said, no one can replace Freddie Mercury, the band have found someone able to embody a lot of his qualities and also feel humbled by the opportunity. Adam Lambert has a fantastic vocal range and is often compared to Freddie in various aspects, he has a great stage presence and will undoubtedly do everything in his power to pay testament to the man rather than take his place. This – to many – is a good set up; to others the idea seems nothing more than a tribute band.
The band are not alone in this issue. Thin Lizzy lost their frontman in 1986; over 25 years later and the band are still touring the world. The main problem is that many still hold the view of ‘Phil Lynott was Thin Lizzy’ – so what do the band do? With numerous reunions and countless line-up changes over the years, the one key decision the band have so far upheld is not to release new music. Much like the Queen scenario, touring without the iconic frontman leaves the comparison to their past glory, or scathing comments of being a tribute band, but it would be naive to write someone off so easily.
Fast forward to 2012 and the band finally feel ready to go forward to Thin Lizzy 2.0, but retain their roots as they progress. While the band absolutely slay classic Lizzy tracks in a live setting, they’re all very aware that the band name has a lot of history riding on it. With trepidation, the band have began admitting that they are considering making new music this year but are refusing to go into the process all guns blazing. The current line-up openly admit that this seems like they finally fit and are interested to see where they can go musically, but at no point to they intend to depart from the classic Thin Lizzy.
Why this is likely to be successful – should their music prove to be as good as they feel it can be – is that they are not trying to rewrite history, but begin a new chapter while honouring the past. Much like finding the right representative for someone as legendary as Freddie Mercury, the band have given enough time and consideration to find the line-up they feel is strong enough to continue without dishonouring Phil Lynott’s time with the band. It seems that the key to success in moving forward is a string of considered decisions and, more importantly, time.
It’s not surprising in the slightest that a band deciding to continue following the death of a member is a decision not taken lightly and one that should be handled appropriately. But, what happens when a member just ups and leaves?
The Misfits logo is iconic, probably the most identifiable icon in alternative culture. The story has been pretty well told over the years but – long story short – following Danzig forming new bands, then a string of legal battles with his fellow bandmates, Jerry Only and Doyle Wolfgang von Frankenstein (how we wish that was his real name) won the legal rights to the band name. But the band were already horror-punk, sub-culture icons; so which band would be better: The Danzig Misfits or the Only Misfits?
This one’s certainly up for debate. As always, there will be the old school supporters, the ‘you’ll never be the same without Danzig’ type folk. Then again, there are those who feel the band may be a little different without him, but they’re still just as good if not better. The main ‘flaw’, if you will, is that Jerry Only stands alone in the midst of various line-up changes and while the Misfits are far from dead, their new album didn’t exactly set the music world on fire. Having fought so heartily for the right to the band name, it seems that the debate over old school verses the new breed will never truly be settled. Perhaps a new album that does turn the music world on its head will settle the debate, but... we’ll have to see.
Of course, the polar opposite to the frontman leaving is the frontman appearing to drive the rest of his band away and continue regardless. Guns N’ Roses, anyone? While no one from the outside may know the true story, it would appear that Axl Rose was definitely quite a character and remains so to this day. The previous members from the iconic era all spent years working in new bands and solo pursuits for over a decade while Axl worked on the new Guns N’ Roses album. While taking your time can often be beneficial for bands, Axl appeared to be taking the... mick.
The Guns N’ Roses name is iconic. Axl Rose is iconic. That’s how it is. Many can openly admit they just want to see Guns N’ Roses to say they've seen Guns N’ Roses. I can openly admit that I want to see them as a fan of who they were, not really where they are just now. Knowing the iconic line-up will likely never perform together again, a miniature goal is to see them all separately. It was satisfying enough on Slash’s tour to see him perform the band’s hits alongside Myles Kennedy of Alter Bridge, so why would you need to bother with the “real deal”? Myles’ vocals far surpass Axl’s right now and, frankly, at least he has the good grace to arrive on time.
So, it turns out being the frontman isn’t the most important factor in maintaining a band. Death throws many into the realm of the iconic and it takes a certain approach to handle it delicately and find the suitable balance to continue. Competing with alternate versions of the band or other members’ new projects is also problematic if handled badly. Is there a perfect formula? Probably not, although I’m sure many would have a fair crack at developing one.
While not all bands continue, people can go on to be even more successful. Dave Grohl was huge with Nirvana; it’s assumable if they had tried to continue without Kurt he wouldn’t be where he is today, not by a long shot. As for all the bands facing the dilemmas of continuing, now definitely seems Queen’s time to dominate. They will find no one better than Adam Lambert to take on the challenge and fully understand the role he has to take on. They’re handling the situation well and the prospect of a full tour does seem exciting.
Sometimes it just seems that the name is all that will last the test of time in the end; how long it lasts and whether it is for the right or wrong really depends on the string of decisions made throughout its lifespan.
NOTE FROM THE EDITOR
We don't run any advertising! Our editorial content is solely funded by lovely people like yourself using Stereoboard's listings when buying tickets for live events. To keep supporting us, next time you're looking for concert, festival, sport or theatre tickets, please search for "Stereoboard". It costs you nothing, you may find a better price than the usual outlets, and save yourself from waiting in an endless queue on Friday mornings as we list ALL available sellers!
The band are not alone in this issue. Thin Lizzy lost their frontman in 1986; over 25 years later and the band are still touring the world. The main problem is that many still hold the view of ‘Phil Lynott was Thin Lizzy’ – so what do the band do? With numerous reunions and countless line-up changes over the years, the one key decision the band have so far upheld is not to release new music. Much like the Queen scenario, touring without the iconic frontman leaves the comparison to their past glory, or scathing comments of being a tribute band, but it would be naive to write someone off so easily. 
