youre back!

Wow, I didn't realize anyone noticed...

Thanks, Stumbleine!

yourmom3000 link=topic=1195.msg17893#msg17893 date=1173405247]
They sure did a number in Zero! No pun indended.


That pun was SO intended...

I liked it

My 5 cents:

Billy and Jimmy were/are the heart and drive of the band - both musically and emotionally. Billy is so strong-willed, and Jimmy is so loyal (to Billy, I think), that if Billy says it's the pumpkins (which he does), and Jimmy's by his side (which, again, he is), then it's the pumpkins. Regardless of whether James is involved or not.

But, in saying that, James was something in the band - way more than just a guitarist. He gave them something which they would definitely be lacking, if it turns out he's not involved anymore. It's not so much his songs (I do love some of them), 'cause he can still write songs outside of the pumpkins, but he does (did) contribute to the feel of the band a lot. Way more so than D'arcy - take her or leave her, as far as I'm concerned.

BUT, look at it this way: could Jimmy and Billy be the smashing pumpkins? Yes. Could James and Billy be the smashing pumpkins? I'm thinking no...

What do people think?

(maybe this wasn't such a good post on a James appreciation thread...)

Whats his solo album meant to be like?

marydoesnotforget link=topic=1195.msg18069#msg18069 date=1174038187]
My 5 cents:

Billy and Jimmy were/are the heart and drive of the band - both musically and emotionally. Billy is so strong-willed, and Jimmy is so loyal (to Billy, I think), that if Billy says it's the pumpkins (which he does), and Jimmy's by his side (which, again, he is), then it's the pumpkins. Regardless of whether James is involved or not.

But, in saying that, James was something in the band - way more than just a guitarist. He gave them something which they would definitely be lacking, if it turns out he's not involved anymore. It's not so much his songs (I do love some of them), 'cause he can still write songs outside of the pumpkins, but he does (did) contribute to the feel of the band a lot. Way more so than D'arcy - take her or leave her, as far as I'm concerned.

BUT, look at it this way: could Jimmy and Billy be the smashing pumpkins? Yes. Could James and Billy be the smashing pumpkins? I'm thinking no...

What do people think?

(maybe this wasn't such a good post on a James appreciation thread...)


Could Jimmy and Billy be the Smashing pumpkins??? Uhh...they werent when they were Zwan. On the other hand the Smashing Pumpkins existed before Jimmy (with James and Billy performing with a drum machine) and while Jimmy was dealing with drugs...(UMMM ADORE???) So it looks like the Smashing Pumpkins have existed in the past without Jimmy...let's see how they do without James.

Maybe Mary has forgotten but there has NEVER been a Smashing Pumpkins without James. The same cannot be said for Jimmy and billy was the one who decided they didn't need him. I believe he was replaced with a drum machine and some studio drummers? Sorry but your theory doesn't make any sense if you look at the history of the band.

Believe link=topic=1195.msg18077#msg18077 date=1174050681]

Could Jimmy and Billy be the Smashing pumpkins??? Uhh...they werent when they were Zwan. On the other hand the Smashing Pumpkins existed before Jimmy (with James and Billy performing with a drum machine) and while Jimmy was dealing with drugs...(UMMM ADORE???) So it looks like the Smashing Pumpkins have existed in the past without Jimmy...let's see how they do without James.

Maybe Mary has forgotten but there has NEVER been a Smashing Pumpkins without James. The same cannot be said for Jimmy and billy was the one who decided they didn't need him. I believe he was replaced with a drum machine and some studio drummers? Sorry but your theory doesn't make any sense if you look at the history of the band.


No, Billy and Jimmy weren't the pumpkins when they were Zwan because they didn't think of themselves as the pumpkins - it's all in the mind and intention.

As for the Pumpkins existing before Jimmy - with a drum machine - that's a pretty poor argument. Yeah, they played, what, one show at the Avalon? Jimmy was playing with them within a few months. This stage was obviously the birth of the band - yes James was an official Pumpkin shortly before Jimmy, but...so? So was D'arcy...does this make her contribution more important than Jimmy's? This is just how bands form and grow. It would have been impossible for them all to meet and decide to be in a band on The Same Day. So, the fact that James was a pumpkin a few months before Jimmy is irrelevant.

Yes, the pumpkins existed for a few years without Jimmy while he was dealing with drugs - and even recorded an album without him. But Jimmy's absence on the album is very noticeable. Even Billy has said on numerous occasions how hard it was without him. I don't think this was a bad thing, because, as Billy has said, even though the band had been talking about going in a different direction for a while, the lack of Jimmy forced them into a new space, and forced Billy to really develop his song writing ability, because he couldn't rely on Jimmy's drums to give the songs power. Besides the musical impact, in Billy's and Jimmy's hearts, he was still a pumpkin. Jimmy has said that he never really joined another band, because he knew one day he'd be back, and Billy has said he never really hired a proper replacement, for the same reason. Also, Billy said once that Jimmy was with him in spirit during the making of Adore. So obviously, in these two's minds, Jimmy was still 'in the band' the whole time, even though he wasn't recording/playing with them.

...

i like james 8)

stumbleine link=topic=1195.msg18084#msg18084 date=1174083806]
...

i like james 8)


I like James too, I'm just saying's all...

To be honest, I still think it's pretty likely he'll be in the band. I'd bet money on it, even. A small amount, but still...

I (sadly... ) don't think James will be in the band for this tour, but I think he'll eventually re-join.

marydoesnotforget link=topic=1195.msg18083#msg18083 date=1174079945]
Believe link=topic=1195.msg18077#msg18077 date=1174050681]

Could Jimmy and Billy be the Smashing pumpkins??? Uhh...they werent when they were Zwan. On the other hand the Smashing Pumpkins existed before Jimmy (with James and Billy performing with a drum machine) and while Jimmy was dealing with drugs...(UMMM ADORE???) So it looks like the Smashing Pumpkins have existed in the past without Jimmy...let's see how they do without James.

Maybe Mary has forgotten but there has NEVER been a Smashing Pumpkins without James. The same cannot be said for Jimmy and billy was the one who decided they didn't need him. I believe he was replaced with a drum machine and some studio drummers? Sorry but your theory doesn't make any sense if you look at the history of the band.


No, Billy and Jimmy weren't the pumpkins when they were Zwan because they didn't think of themselves as the pumpkins - it's all in the mind and intention.

As for the Pumpkins existing before Jimmy - with a drum machine - that's a pretty poor argument. Yeah, they played, what, one show at the Avalon? Jimmy was playing with them within a few months. This stage was obviously the birth of the band - yes James was an official Pumpkin shortly before Jimmy, but...so? So was D'arcy...does this make her contribution more important than Jimmy's? This is just how bands form and grow. It would have been impossible for them all to meet and decide to be in a band on The Same Day. So, the fact that James was a pumpkin a few months before Jimmy is irrelevant.

Yes, the pumpkins existed for a few years without Jimmy while he was dealing with drugs - and even recorded an album without him. But Jimmy's absence on the album is very noticeable. Even Billy has said on numerous occasions how hard it was without him. I don't think this was a bad thing, because, as Billy has said, even though the band had been talking about going in a different direction for a while, the lack of Jimmy forced them into a new space, and forced Billy to really develop his song writing ability, because he couldn't rely on Jimmy's drums to give the songs power. Besides the musical impact, in Billy's and Jimmy's hearts, he was still a pumpkin. Jimmy has said that he never really joined another band, because he knew one day he'd be back, and Billy has said he never really hired a proper replacement, for the same reason. Also, Billy said once that Jimmy was with him in spirit during the making of Adore. So obviously, in these two's minds, Jimmy was still 'in the band' the whole time, even though he wasn't recording/playing with them.





U must be joking now...your argument is that Jimmy was involved in Adore...IN SPIRIT! Ok i can see now I must be dealing with a Jimmy fanatic...I will relent in this case due to your inability to decipher rational from irrational.

I will leave you with this history lesson though: James and Billy started the band together. He did not join a few months before Jimmy...James and Billy met through a mutual friend - played together a few times then stopped hanging out. Later on down the line James called Billy out of the blue and said he would like to get together and play again..thus the band was born. In the beginning James sang in the band almost as much as Billy. Point is if there was no James there would have been no band for Jimmy to join.

I think Jimmy is one of the best drummers in the world but the fact is SP had 4 members and SP has made great music without him.

No, my argument wasn't that Jimmy was on Adore in spirit - those were Billy's words. I was using the fact that billy said that as an example of his and Jimmy's feelings: Billy sees Jimmy as integral to the band; and Jimmy is committed to the band.

Thanks for the history lesson, I already know the history of the band, and I maintain my view that is doesn't really matter that much - all four of them were in the band from very early days; they struggled together, made it big together, toured the world together, self-destructed together, etc.

What I'm saying is, I don't think it really matters who was around before who...that is irrelevant when we're talking about who has/had the biggest impact on the sound of the band.

By the way, I don't want to give the impression that I don't like James, and don't think he was vital in the sound/success of the pumpkins...

Gotta love that dry personality of his.

i love the way he accidentally jumbles his words up in interviews.

The Smashing Pumpkins on Musique Plus Part 2 - Funniest James moment ever.

(Well, maybe not ever. James says a lot of funny things. JJJ interview - "Oh I'm sorry. I had no idea you were a fellow...collector". Ahahaha)

I wish the guy would talk more. We don't know too much about him.

One of the most awkward James moments was in a Pumpkins interview at MuchMusic back in '98 when they were promoting Adore. It was about a 1 or 2 hour special called "Intimate and Interactive" and it was shown live. As usual, it was Billy talking the most, but every so often, James would come in and say the most random things and the whole place would go silent for a few seconds. I remember something where Billy was talking about the importance of D'arcy and James to the band. He was going on about how D'arcy is probably the strongest and James the most sensitive, then James buds in with "No, I'm not." At that point, Billy just stops talking, glances over at James with an awkward amusement, while James just keeps his head down with no follow-up. The interview is filled with moments like these. In replays, they had to cut out a lot of these instances.