reaction formation and its effect on Live's career Options

[Existentialist]

One of the hallmarks of Freud's psychoanalytic theory is the existence of defense mechanisms, behaviors which arise in order to alleviate or prevent anxiety. A common defense mechanism is reaction formation, which involves behaving exactly opposite to the way you would like to when it becomes clear that behaving that way is not appropriate for the situation. The classic example is a closet child molester who goes on to lead a crusade against child molesters.

On to Live. It's hard to believe they were at the top of the music industry just twelve years ago. Millions of albums sold annually, huge arena tours and plastered all over MTV. Yet, after two commercially unfriendly releases in SS and TDTH, their popularity had severely diminished just a few years after their peak, almost falling off the radar by the turn of the century. Before that happened, Live was so unbelievably passionate about their music that it was awesome to listen to and see in concert.

How quickly that all changed. As soon as it became clear that their passionate music was just not selling like it used to, and their shows were not met with as much enthusiasm, Live began to change dramatically. It was near the end of the TDTH tour that Ed began to really play up how he's a cool, sexy yet intellectual rocker. We got the Eminem rap breakdown in the middle of I Alone, we got Dennis Rodman on stage with the band, we got V, with lyrics throughout that were borderline mocking how serious they had been in the past. In other words, it was the destruction of the old Live and the birth of the new "we don't like to be so serious, just like to have fun" Live that has persisted to this day.

I call it classic reaction formation. They started behaving like they weren't as serious about it anymore to avoid the anxiety of facing the fact that they were losing fans for other reasons, mainly just that their genre died. What's your take on this? Is Live's carefree nature and seemingly non existent shame just a very well constructed defense mechanism against their loss of fame?

[HiItsNino]

Live's genre never died because they really never had one to begin with. They aren't "grunge", just good hard rock. I don't think Lives (lack of) recent success is in anyway causing the band to react differently, I have a different theory.

I've been with Live since the beginning - first seeing them in like 92 at some club in Ybor City (Tampa). Ed's always been a little too cockey, but its necessary to wear your ego on your sleave when your a performer. In the Live hay-days it seems like their strength was that no one understood what they were about. MJ was the CD that brought a lot of wonder about this band and everyone seemed to think there was something there, but couldn't figure it out. When TC came out people either thought they were a skinhead band or clean cut students who decided to ditch college, then SS made people think they were poets with electric guitars. The Fraudian slip here is in that people like confusion. Trying to figure out what a band, or a CD of any substance, is all about is half the attraction of it. During TDTH people put it all together and some fans started taking them way way way too seriously, while others started to view them as sappy, too religious, or too redundant. Personally, I love BOP and SFBM but they don't generate the buzz of a band that is trying to get to the top. I feel like they are making music more for themselves and the fans than for the masses. Too me, it sounds like they are more confortable with their sound, not in some state of hollywood denial.