Mark wrote:the band didn't split and reform, they simply continued without Lou. I think there is a case for saying the final end of the Velvets was at the end of this phase
Well put, Mark, and this is what I was trying to say. It's all a matter of
evolution. The band
evolved to be in this state and that's why the end was when Moe and the boys flew back to the US while Doug went on to record
Squeeze. There is no continuity between the 1971 tours and that Doug Yule album, putting the breaking point between those two activities.
What's "muddying" this discussion is how we
feel about the VU and we all, of course, feel strongly about a certain "feel" and "attitude", a
spirituality if you like, that we nearly all agree left or was mortally wounded when Lou quit. But in all fairness, the band continued on and this must be considered in any true history of the Velvets, just like the Byrds continued on even when everybody except McGuinn had left, or Pink Floyd beyond Barrett or even Waters? (or Yes, or Genesis, &c.).
And the 1993 tour... I was glad I could witness it and I had a good time, but it wasn't a Velvets reunion. It was Lou Reed, John Cale, Sterling Morrison and Maureen appearing on the same stage.
Interesting to note, BTW, that
Willie Alexander himself did not consider the band to truly be the Velvets, he saw it as a ghost band (see short interview I did with him on the
Foggy Notion website, Articles section).
?
Which brings up the interesting comparison/question: is Gilmour Pink Floyd's Doug Yule?