10.7.11 Adam News & Info
Oct 8, 2011 3:30:11 GMT -5
Post by emmuzka on Oct 8, 2011 3:30:11 GMT -5
Warning: unpopular theory below.
That is a possibility. If that were the case, I know we tend to look at it from an Adam perspective and think that it is a betrayal of Adam. However, playing devil's advocate here, if Monte is very proud of the CV recordings and wants them to have a wide audience, would he not feel that Adam was not supporting HIM, and was betraying their friendship by opposing the release of work he is so proud of? Might Monte feel that Adam was being selfish and petty? Might he think that Adam got those session gigs because of Monte's reputation, that Monte was helping Adam get experience and exposure? That now that Adam's career has gone into the stratosphere, he has disdain for that earlier collaboration? It is no longer good enough to see the light of day? It might cut especially deeply if Adam did not want to collaborate with Monte on any new songs, or even ask him to be a session musician on the album.
Just sayin'. There are at least two sides to every story.
No matter what Monte's reasoning was, if he went behind Adam's back and released these songs, (that Adam didn't want out there) it would be a betrayal of trust.
Yep. What Cassie presented as a possible Monte's point of view, then.. so what? Would I forgive him for having anything to do with Malcolm? No, I wouldn't.
Should I have to take in consideration that Monte has mouths to feed, and Adam has (or had) the power to stop a release of material that is only 50% his, meaning that Monte can't profit at all of his 50%? No, I don't have to.
If it would be true that it was Monte who made it possible to commercially release material that Adam definitely didn't want to be released, which really has the potential to hurt the album sales of Adam's real stuff, then Adam should drop Monte. Just cut him off. He is a touring back-up band's guitarist. Adam isn't a band, he can replace anyone in the band whenever and I wouldn't shed a tear.