Dumb comment I made and I was over emotional when I made it, but I still think it's reductive for the public to cancel a band over something that was intended to be private and internally handled when the people involved have reached an agreement we aren't privy to My frustration is genuine and I do sometimes feel there is a lack of understanding re: the capacity for self-improvement
I can't speak for anyone else but I'm certainly not saying anything other than it's completely valid for people to feel that, just because Evan has (seemingly) reached an understanding with the survivor of his coercion and the parties (appear to have) found a way to move forward with their lives, doesn't mean he gets to go back to his band and have things go back to the way they were before the allegations came out. You can appreciate him for (seeming to) actually taking the steps to mediate the issue and comply with the survivor's wishes (and I do appreciate that he's done way more than 95% of the other accused abusers we've seen) while also believing that he doesn't necessarily get to have his "popular touring frontman" privileges back. A lot of people feel like he lost those, and that loss is part of his accountability and rehabilitation process. And if people feel differently, that's their prerogative. But reducing those other people in the way you did isn't right. I'm glad you recognize that.
I think both sides are right to feel however they want on this. So I guess I agree with Anthony. This feels weird
this is where I'm at. I think it's important to recognize the way things (seemingly from the article) have since been handled between Evan and the survivor and how it appears to have been carried out on their terms. But reconciling with and reintegration into the community is also a big step in the restorative justice process and for some people on here (myself included) and twitter, including some bands, just aren't ready yet. I think the announcing of the album release already kinda undercuts that process, but I also acknowledge posts pointing out that we don't know whose decision that was and honestly I don't have a better suggestion for when would be a preferable release date, just that it seems kind of at odds with a rehabilitation/reconciliation effort that we haven't really seen before in the music scene (as far as I know).
I have a question. Are there many examples of anyone going through the process like Evan has? Or is this fairly new ground?
I haven't had a chance to sit down and read the full article yet, but I've read through the responses here and wonder if it would make a difference if they shelved Skylight altogether and released a different album in 2019. Or if they released Skylight in 2019 instead of tomorrow. Do people have a problem with them releasing this particular album, the timing of it, some combination of those two things, or them ever releasing music again?
timing of it pretty much like if they're just dumping it on the internet it doesn't even need to come out on a friday ffs
I don’t see what difference it makes, not like dropping it at the same time as the article would’ve been the best call and just waiting a day to coincide with the release day of every other album doesn’t strike me as wrong. If anything it’ll get more money donated to the charities. But I know you have a problem with that whole thing as is so
whenever a band who's done crappy stuff drops a record, you're always gonna get so many fans who are purely stoked on a new record; that's always gonna happen.a t least by tying in the release with this whole article about what evan's been up to for the last year, you're forcing the audience to engage with whatever evan did; you can't read this article and say like "oh nice we're getting a new record and that's all I got from this!". I mean, you can, but people like that were gonna be excited on the release even if they dropped this record last year, like they planned. I feel like if they released this statement, waiting a month (or 2, or 3, or 6) it'll be like "Great! this is all in the past now, and this record is 100% divorced from whatever happened years ago". by announcing the release in the article, you're making a statement that this art is permanently tied to what evan did, and fans have to confront that, because it's put in front of them that way. at least that's how I see it? I don't think there is an ideal way for someone coming back from restorative justice to release music, so might as well own up to your mistake, and tie your music (at least this release) to the reason why you had to take a year off in the first place.
You would think that, then I saw this title on the Pinegrove subreddit: "Skylight on Friday!!!!!!! (+ A bit more info on whats been happening)"
you're gonna see that one way or another though. people are still stoked on front porch step whenever he releases a record, for example. the only way to avoid that is to have these guys never release music again, and i don't think that's a just penalty.
That's entirely possible. In that case, I'd shrug my shoulders because I figure we were probably never meant to hear this album anyway. They should have scrapped it months ago in my opinion, and if they were going to release something at all, I'd want it to be completely rewritten after this all went down.
I really don’t understand the concept of people saying this album should have been trashed and they should have started over. Genuinely, what’s the difference?
I'd be annoyed with them for the second time in less than a year after cancelling their European tour (with support from Phoebe Bridgers)
The album was written before his rehabilitation. You can't separate this album from the details of its release. Might as well just have started something new with the gained insight of what he went through.
Was it written at the same time as the abuse was taking place though? To me, that would be the more important part. Also, the creation of art does not exist in a vacuum, so who is to say that an idea that emerges on the next post-rehabilitation album didn't stem from 3-4 years prior.