RJ80
True Classic
So, on a business trip recently, I find myself in Las Vegas with an evening free. Turns out, The Who are playing at Caesar's Palace. Tickets are pricey: about $100 for the upper balcony area where I am and about $500 for the floor. I should note that all areas have seats -- there is no "standing only" section.
I'm in my mid-late 30s, but like many my age, grew up listening to much of the music my parents listened to. As such, "classic" rock -- rock music from the '50s-'70s -- is something that I identify with at least as much as music that was contemporary in my youth, being the '80s through '00s. I've seen many of these acts live multiple times, including Bob Dylan, Bonnie Rait, Jackson Browne, The Monkees, Steve Winwood, Tom Petty, The Guess Who, Three Dog Night, and several others.
In the last few years, I've noticed that many of these acts play in venues that mostly have assigned seats and no general standing area. That said, during this particular concert, most of the people with expensive seats in the lower area were standing. In the balcony, not so much. About five songs in, I decide to stand as well and a few songs later, the guy behind me asks me to sit down. He's in his '60s maybe and I replied, "I'm sorry -- this is a rock concert and I'd like to stand." He complains again and I continued standing. Not many others were standing in my particular area, but some were (maybe 5-10%). That was the end of the "confrontation."
Here's my view: This is a rock show. It's The Who. Pete's up on stage doing windmills, Roger is throwing his microphone around by the cord, it's loud and rocking music for 95% of the show. Behind Blue Eyes was the softest song they played for the two-hour set. Did the people in this crowd (mostly those in the boomer generation) sit down when they heard these groups live back in the '60s? What would this guy have said in '65 if someone twice his age asked him to sit down at a Who show?
I have a great relationship with my parents and, generally, folks of the same generation. I respect my elders and appreciate the stories and wisdom they have to share. But I can't help but feel like I have every right to experience a rock and roll show the same way they did in-period, especially when plenty of people are doing just that in the same venue (although, perhaps not in the same section in large numbers). Was I wrong? Should I have sat down? I can't help but feel Roger and Pete would have agreed with me. It just felt wrong to me to sit emotionless in my seat like many others in my section while Pete's jumping, cursing and doing windmills on his Fender Stratocaster. Not that I was one of those obnoxious concert goers playing air guitar and singing along to every song, I was just standing there, gently bopping to the music.
Meanwhile, the same folks who complained were using flash photography (prohibited), singing, and conversing loudly through the entire act -- the guy next to me finally asked them to not use their flash any longer as it illuminated right over his head (they complied).
I'm in my mid-late 30s, but like many my age, grew up listening to much of the music my parents listened to. As such, "classic" rock -- rock music from the '50s-'70s -- is something that I identify with at least as much as music that was contemporary in my youth, being the '80s through '00s. I've seen many of these acts live multiple times, including Bob Dylan, Bonnie Rait, Jackson Browne, The Monkees, Steve Winwood, Tom Petty, The Guess Who, Three Dog Night, and several others.
In the last few years, I've noticed that many of these acts play in venues that mostly have assigned seats and no general standing area. That said, during this particular concert, most of the people with expensive seats in the lower area were standing. In the balcony, not so much. About five songs in, I decide to stand as well and a few songs later, the guy behind me asks me to sit down. He's in his '60s maybe and I replied, "I'm sorry -- this is a rock concert and I'd like to stand." He complains again and I continued standing. Not many others were standing in my particular area, but some were (maybe 5-10%). That was the end of the "confrontation."
Here's my view: This is a rock show. It's The Who. Pete's up on stage doing windmills, Roger is throwing his microphone around by the cord, it's loud and rocking music for 95% of the show. Behind Blue Eyes was the softest song they played for the two-hour set. Did the people in this crowd (mostly those in the boomer generation) sit down when they heard these groups live back in the '60s? What would this guy have said in '65 if someone twice his age asked him to sit down at a Who show?
I have a great relationship with my parents and, generally, folks of the same generation. I respect my elders and appreciate the stories and wisdom they have to share. But I can't help but feel like I have every right to experience a rock and roll show the same way they did in-period, especially when plenty of people are doing just that in the same venue (although, perhaps not in the same section in large numbers). Was I wrong? Should I have sat down? I can't help but feel Roger and Pete would have agreed with me. It just felt wrong to me to sit emotionless in my seat like many others in my section while Pete's jumping, cursing and doing windmills on his Fender Stratocaster. Not that I was one of those obnoxious concert goers playing air guitar and singing along to every song, I was just standing there, gently bopping to the music.
Meanwhile, the same folks who complained were using flash photography (prohibited), singing, and conversing loudly through the entire act -- the guy next to me finally asked them to not use their flash any longer as it illuminated right over his head (they complied).
Last edited:
