Talk:The Pros and Cons of Hitch Hiking

Pink Floyd Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pink Floyd, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pink Floyd on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pink FloydWikipedia:WikiProject Pink FloydTemplate:WikiProject Pink FloydPink Floyd articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was a past project collaboration.

To-do list:

Fair use

Add fair use rationale to all images and sound samples (all except images already labeled free use).
Re-size large images around to 300 pixels (all "fair use" images), other than album covers (already done).

Articles

Expand all articles to at least Start class. Some song stubs can't be expanded and should be redirected to the relevant album article. Use the "Interstellar Overdrive" article as an example when editing a song stub.
Expand all of the Floyd's studio album articles to at least GA status.
See COTM for monthly collabs.

Project building

Add WikiProject Pink Floyd banner {{WPFloyd}} to all appropriate Talk pages.
Personally invite quality editors working on Pink Floyd articles to join the project.

If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list.

This article does not yet have a related to do list. If you can think of any ways to improve the article, why not create one?

Progressive Rock Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Progressive Rock, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Progressive rock on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Progressive RockWikipedia:WikiProject Progressive RockTemplate:WikiProject Progressive RockProgressive rock articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Albums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

http://ultimateclassicrock.com/roger-waters-pros-and-cons-of-hitch-hiking/

Linzi Drew on covers.[edit]

I don't suppose anyone knows who the model on the (uncensored) cover is, do they? She gave me many happy hours of viewing in my adolescence. She still stands up to repeated viewing.... --bodnotbod 20:35, Jun 29, 2004 (UTC)

If anyone does know her,please do inform us here.--asydwaters 16:12, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I believe that the model on the album cover is Linzi Drew (http://www.rogerwatersonline.com/prosandcons.html), I am not sure how reliable this source is... however, I have yet to find any conflicting opinions on other webpages. Ben. 24 January 2006.

I've added the story and the idea behind the creation of REG;the dog styled version of Mr.Roger Waters.--asydwaters 16:12, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently it seems the model on the cover is Linzi Drew.But I have come across another source to cross confirm this.Anyone knows about her?--asydwaters 06:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"The model on the front cover is Linzi Drew, who soon found a black bar across her bottom on the American release." - http://www.rogerwatersonline.com/prosandcons.html

"The front cover picture of model Linzi Drew hitch-hiking naked was condemned by many feminist groups. It was considered sexist with some claiming it even advertised rape. Many posters advertising the album were ripped down and destroyed by protesters. A censored cover even appeared on Japanese albums and reissue American albums. The censoring takes the form of a black box over the model's bottom." - http://www.rogerwaters.org/prosdisco.html

-- Beardo 18:40, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re the above : Many people in the world lead sad, pathetic lives and allow themselves to get worked up over any and everything. Won't you help? Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.138.235.243 (talk) 17:11, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User Friginator modified the current article on August 27, 2010; stating "All editions distributed by Columbia Records censored Drew's buttocks with a black box. The censored version remains the only version available in regions such as the United States where the record is distributed by Columbia." Friginator's edit is inaccurate. I was working at a record store in Oklahoma when Columbia Records released the album with the nude model uncensored. The albums were on the shelf for probably less than a week before being recalled by Columbia Records. I purchased the album with the uncensored cover, which I still own. The fact that I possess a Columbia Records labeled copy of album, with the nude buttocks of Miss Drew, means that "All editions by Columbia Records" were not censored as cited in the article. Ccwman21 (talk) 03:43, 24 October 2010 (UTC)Ccwman21[reply]

Critics / sales[edit]

So what did the critics think of it - like, hate , indifferent ?

If it only went gold 11 years later, it can't have sold very well, did it ?

-- Beardo 09:30, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do recall reading that it was the least commercially successful of Waters' solo efforts, but I couldn't back this up at present. For example, it may be worth noting that after Roger's "comeback" tour after his 1990's hiatus, resulting in the 2CD "In The Flesh" live album, only the lone track Every Strangers Eyes was performed from Pros And Cons. This was despite a track listing comprising some two dozen songs!

As for critical response, from what I have read it has been very varied, some in high appraisal of the lyrical concepts and distinctive sound. Many, however, derided what was perceived as a great weakness in musical accompaniment, claiming a lack of musical strength throughout the album. Cynically speaking, it probably depended on whose boat the reviewer sat; Gilmour's Floyd or Roger Waters. Plenty of the reviewers who originally condemned The Final Cut went on to deal with Pros And Cons in a similar fashion.

86.135.168.36 09:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just listen to the full album , and if possible listen it as a loop, you'll notice that the whole album feels like a one single story ;segues and the Eric Clapton's guitar parts for the dream sequences blend all the song in to that few moments of dawn between 4:00 am to 5:?? am. Critics are a farce,they lauded a certain Ms. Kavya's novel which turned to be was plagiarised heavily from another female author's book.Such is the knowledge of the critics ,sarcasm intended. Sales figures don't matter,if the album made you think about love,relationship and what matters most to us is the love we have for each other and every human being,then I think the album has served its purpose.--asydwaters 14:28, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copyright violation ?[edit]

A large part seems to come from http://www.rogerwaters.org/Pros.html - which I would think is copyright. -- Beardo 18:33, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its because the site is "REG-Roger Waters International Fanclub's Homepage"abd it does contain lots of stuff thats been analyzed and written by experts.--asydwaters 06:44, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - but surely its copyright ? -- Beardo 14:02, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Scarfe[edit]

Did Gerald Scarfe work on this album, or just the Wall ? -- Beardo 18:48, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald was given a free run of this album and he created caricatures of all the artists;notably Reg-the dog;which was given this name after Roger remarked that the dog looked like him.--asydwaters 06:41, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Genre[edit]

Could you really call this progressive rock? Wouldn't it fit in better with the categorization of art rock?--Fish34 22:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure that progressive quite fits the bill personally, yet neither really would art... Would the ideal not be conceptual rock which would be indicative of what Waters' work is in essence? Progressive would seem to suggest epic track lengths, and while Pros and Cons could be considered (certainly best listened to as) one long track, progressive seems a little misleading. I'd argue for conceptual, any other consensus? 86.135.171.89 21:14, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Progressive rock is a very wide genre. I don't think it would be wrong to call this album progressive. Art-rock and conceptual rock could be considered progressive as well. The definition of progressive rock is very open. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.109.110.149 (talk) 00:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't call it progressive rock by any stretch of the imagination, no more so than anything by Roger Waters or Pink Floyd pre The Final Cut. Musically, it's far too simple and strikes me more of a nod to the musicals. "Cabaret" being a good example. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whistlekiller (talk • contribs) 19:14, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Harvest[edit]

The latest change has removed mention of it being on Harvest in the UK. Was it ? -- Beardo 21:43, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Times?[edit]

Why are the times different in the body of the article and the track listing? Is that how the booklet is? Paxfeline 09:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The times are times of Day. The story begins (first song) at 4:30 AM. You'll notice the second song is 4:33 AM, which is 3 minutes later, and the first song was 3 minutes, 12 seconds long. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.168.177.2 (talk) 05:51, August 23, 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 19:53, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In The Flesh[edit]

It's interesting to note that a good deal of the theme from The Wall's "In The Flesh" makes an appearance through 4.50am (Go Fishing) to 4.58am (Dunroamin, Duncarin, Dunlivin). Do you suppose that this is a deliberate crossover or whether, as they were written at around the same time whether this theme was pulled from TPACOH for The Wall? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whistlekiller (talk • contribs) 19:10, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have read in interviews w/ Waters (and Bob Ezrin as well) that the melody appeared on PACOHH first, and was lifted to be used in The Wall (In The Flesh, particularly). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.226.78.94 (talk) 15:07, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clapton on Tour[edit]

The site does not mention who played the main guitar parts on the American Tour. Clapton only played the first leg. Anyone? Joe Hoskinson —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.249.163.130 (talk) 03:28, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Name[edit]

Hitch Hiking doesn't exist; Moreover, look at this. I suggest to move it to The Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking TGilmour (talk) 10:33, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Correct or not, that is how it is spelled on the cover of the CD MrMarmite (talk) 06:22, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]