leonardcohenforum.com

I just want to make a few comments on this topic. First, to belong to this Forum is an honor and a pleasure. To be able to interact with so many people who love and enjoy Leonard's really fabulous music, poetry and books is great. I am sorry to see so much disagreement on what a 'fan' is, however.

I became a fan in 2010 and had never heard his music before. I was so happy to discover him and yes, it really did change my life for the better. I saw Leonard in Las Vegas and did not care how much it cost me (the cost was very high) but I knew that I was seeing someone who had spent his whole life making many, many people happy and creating sublime music. So many people will not get this chance I am afraid when they themselves discover him in the future. I am honored to have spent a few hours in his presence.

I am also happy to see new members join the Forum. This keeps it alive and who knows what they will contribute to it.

love to all
Marie

I guess I'm missing where that discussion [or debate ?] is taking place here... but, anyway, I agree with BOTH Marie's now .
This is a lovely posting, Marie, and I know how much you mean it .

Isn't this a fan?:

Hi Cheshire gal,

The problem with this dicussion is that it has taken place over a number of threads, and different people have picked up on various fragments of it. In answer to your question "fan or follower?", I would say neither. The terms "fans" (fanatics) and "followers" imply mindless masses who idolise someone or something (a pop star or football team) and tend to follow the herd rather than think for themselves. The term fan was widely used in the Sixties when, for instance, screaming fans would throw jelly babies at John Lennon when he was singing "Help". The Beatles and singers like Scott Walker got sick of fandom as their work got more serious, and the term was much less widely used when artists like Leonard appeared on the scene. Such artists had "appreciation societies" rather than fan clubs. As I said here the other day, the important thing is the inner connection that a person makes with an artists work - this applies to long term "devotees" and newcomers alike, No one should be graded with terms like "genuine fan". I knew that I had found my world the first time that I heard "Sisters of Mercy", even though I was only seventeen, at the time.

It is a reality of life however that artists of real depth and quality tend to have smaller cult followings while more superficial artists tend to appeal to the masses. There is often a problem when a serious artist makes the transition from cult to mainstream. Fortunately, Leonard has been cult for most of his career. He hasn't let fame go to his head and has remained true to his art and his path of personal development. However, many artists who make the transition become ripe for exploitation and a number of undesirables jump on the bandwagon. Furthermore, the artists work often lessens in quality as commercial pressures set in. Such artists then develop overblown egos, turn to addictions, and get shot down by the press and the public (this theme has been explored in works such as the Who's "Tommy" and David Bowie's "Ziggy Stardust" ). The process is similar to what happens when a religion moves from its inner (esoteric teaching) to an outer (exoteric) teaching. Fundamentalism takes over, and the masses follow blindly. So remember you are neither fans or followers. You are all individuals...altogether now "we are all individuals"!

P.S. seadove - you are completely right - a fan is what you see in the picture that you posted above.

Marie - I meant to say that it's always good to see new members here. As you say, it brings new life, plus it also makes older members feel useful if they can answer questions or share memories.

I thinks there's ambivalence about Leonard doing large scale-scale concerts because only a percentage will see him properly at these events. Though, ironically I do know people who like going to a show just because it's a big event and are not so concerned with seeing the artist close-up.

The people I would sooner not see at concerts are the ones who turn-up just because it's "the thing to do" or because they've come on some sort of corporate package. At Dylan a few years ago, I experienced a group of guys dancing in a circle with their arms round each other whilst yelling and hollering! Also, when Dylan sang "Girl From the North Country" without his band, the person next to me used the quieter moment to get their mobile out and start a conversation. At an Eagles concert I went to at O2, there were a whole row of people drinking, chatting and joking behind me. Thus treating the concert merely as the backdrop to a night out. Ah well...

Ahh...... the voice of reason speaks again.

Well said, John. I discovered Leonard back in 1968 when I was 14 years old and I was hooked. I used to look at the Forum when it first started up, but I'm not really a "joiner", so although I did set up a password, etc. I never contributed. I subsequently forgot my username and password (suppose it's still lurking there somewhere) and yes, I only rejoined in 2009 after having been to two of the 2008 concerts. I'm glad I did, and am now more than happy to be a "joiner"...... but I don't like the class system here.

I just love Leonard Cohen, and am happy to have the opportunity to meet and talk to people of like mind.

Now I'm late for work!

Joy

For those who did not understand my initial comments on this topic. I had been reading comments made by members complaining about the high ticket prices. I agree they are high but wanted to say that seeing a Leonard Cohen Concert was well worth the cost. It was a wonderful experience for me.

As for the 'Word Police' who just cannot face the fact that they are indeed 'fans'. The Dictionary definititon of the word states that a 'fan' is an ardent, devotee, enthusiast, supporter of some 'person' or 'activity'. A 'Follower' is an enthusiast or supporter also. I think the word 'fan' is viewed here as a 'dirty word', but Leonard himself stated that there are no 'dirty words'. Perhaps they would prefer to be thought of as 'cultists'. Has a more 'artsy.' ring to it.

A friend of mine has just pointed out that "fan" could mean fantasist (along with the usual, fanatic). I thought that was quite a pertinent observation! Clearly there are different takes on the word, but I still think it suggests someone who is more concerned with outer superficialities than the artist's creative work. Each to their own on this, I guess...

What's a fantasist, John? I guee I could look it up, right lol?

I've always liked the word appreciator, even though I know it goes deeper than that.
Ah semantics .