To the editors:
I am responding to the article written by Bill Wyman in the May 15 issue of the Reader ["Freddie's Dead, That's All They Said"]. You know, it's a good thing that the majority of the readers know that Bill Wyman is full of shit. If they (the readers) didn't, they might think that he is a snotty asshole.
It is amazing that a man who embraces as much hate as does Mr. Wyman is still read. Usually his columns contain at least one grain of truth or insight. (Now and days that is a rarity.) However this article (this term used VERY lightly) is a condescending diatribe which brings absolutely no new insight to any of the addressed problems.
Sure, if Mr. Wyman doesn't like it (the concert, Queen, the group, or the musicians), that's no big deal. However, if he has no pithy insight to add to the debate, why doesn't he just shut up?
Oh yeah, on one final note. Who cares what the musicians look like? I thought that was the purpose of music, to break down walls and boundaries so that we wouldn't have to look at the outer facade. Who gives a shit if the lead singer of Metallica has facial hair? And who cares if Brian May has a "dopey Louis XIV hairstyle?" If that is musical criticism, I'd much rather read Greg Kot's column, or even, god forbid, make my own judgments.
I would normally sign, but I was so pissed at this moronic pile of bile that I will just initial.
PS: I happen to enjoy Queen's music, so stick that in your word processor and BITE ME, BILL!