Talk:Bright Eyes (band)/Archive 1

The name "Bright Eyes"

'The name "Bright Eyes" came from a film Oberst was watching, where the male protagonist affectionately used the term to describe the female protagonist.' Would be better as 'The name "Bright Eyes" came from the film X, where the male protagonist affectionately used the term to describe the female protagonist.' 81.156.49.248 18:57, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Does anyone know if this is/is not from F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby? In chapter one, Nick (the narrator) describes Daisy (his cousin) as having a face that was "sad and lovely with bright things in it, bright eyes and a bright passionate mouth..." There have been at least two film adaptations of this, so that would account for the reference currently on the page. Tunnie 18:35, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

The name "Bright Eyes" comes from a Shirley Temple film. The article for that movie is here.TheGhostChild 21:26, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Merging Conor Oberst with Bright Eyes

In favor. I think this should be done. The main article should be called Conor Oberst, with a large section on 'Bright Eyes.' It is important to note that although Conor tours and records with many other artists, he is in his own an independant artist. Bright Eyes is a pen name of sorts of which he uses to call his music. darkestshining

Well, in all fairness, there already is an article called Conor Oberst. I was thinking that should be the more comprehensive piece and having this one focus mainly the accomplishments of Bright Eyes as its own entity. Most people who wish to learn about Bright Eyes on Wikipedia won't want to be immediately bombarded by a rundown of every CO project that isn't Bright Eyes. Sadly, that's the current state of this article, but I was hoping to change that real soon.

However, I can see how it would be beneficial to merge the articles, so I'm not opposed to it. Go ahead and apply the merge template and we'll see what developes. Elvrum 20:50, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Opposed. I'm in opposition to a merge. the Conor Oberst article is about the personhood of Conor Oberst. The Bright Eyes article, though it is lacking, is specifically about his musical endeavours with Bright Eyes. Keep it seperate, in my opinion.TheGhostChild 17:33, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

In favor. As Conor Oberst practically is Bright Eyes, I'm for the merge. --Gika 18:24, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Opposed. I'm against it. The article Conor Oberst Should be a summery of his life, giving overviews of the different bands he's in. Bright Eyes should be a indepth artical about The band.Dlime16 19:56, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Somebody took the liberty of merging the articles before we could even reach a 2:1 vote, much less consensus. Therefore, I'm unmerging until we can get this sorted out. Please don't merge it back until then. EDIT: oh and I added each person's position in bold to the left of their reply. Elvrum 23:02, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Opposed. Bright Eyes is Conor Oberst, MIKE MOGIS (this guy deserves more credit), and friends. -a regular. 15:25 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I totally agree with the statement about Mike Mogis. Mike has contribute to at least 90% of all Bright Eyes recordings (although I would estimate even more than that) and has played on every tour, including the Bright Eyes/Jimmy James/Matt Ward tour. I don't think he has never not been a member of Bright Eyes. Elvrum 23:51, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

thank you! high-five. i believe mike mogis started right after he heard "water." and since then... well, he's been a member of almost every band incestuously linked to omaha. -the regular again. 00:29 28 March 2006 (UTC)

In favor. Wrong. I will find countless interviews and articles alike that prove 'Bright Eyes' is the pen name he uses to work with his music. He himself cannot be bright eyes because he can't be the songs he makes, but he writes his own songs and gets his friends {AND MIKE MOGIS, OMG} to play with him. a lot of i'm wide awake it's morning was solo work [ie>LUA] so anyone who is opposed, suck it.

One song does not make up "a lot" of an album. Anyways, by all means, if you can find countless interviews, or at least one or two, that back up what you're saying, please do so. I've actually come across an interview where Conor says that the reason the line up changes so often is because everybody he gets to play with him has projects of their own, which is a pretty reasonable explanation. Elvrum 19:24, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Oppose Def. keep seperate. Cvene64 15:33, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

'Oppose' While Conor Oberst may be the primary composer of Bright Eyes, he is not the entire band. -Jordan27 17:59, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Strong OpposeMac Domhnaill

Oppose Bright Eyes is NOT Conor's band alone. As stated above, Mike has been part of the band from the just about the beginning. Bright Eyes is not a "traditional", four-peice band (Beatles, Rolling Stones, et al.), as most of the members are fluid, but it's not like Conor plays all of the instruments or tells the other musicians in the band what to play. Bright Eyes is a band-just a slightly different type than most people are used to. I am opposed to the suggested merger. jopari

Oppose It is a band, and he is a person. Bright Eyes is not merely Oberst's stage name. Rufusgriffin 20:44, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Strong Oppose Oberst has denied in interviews that it is just his name. It is a band, albeit with a changeable line-up; Oberst is a person with other projects. A merge would be wrong. Trebor 21:23, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Oppose But I think we have to make sure that the pages for Oberst and Bright Eyes do not have a lot of overlapping material. --Andland 01:21, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

bullshit.

Do we have a weak consensus on keeping the articles separate but trying to tidy them up a bit? Would people object to the merge tag being removed? Trebor 19:33, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Discography

The discography section needs to be edited. Every release is currently listed as an 'album', though some are EPs and CDSs, and some aren't labelled as either but are clearly not full-length albums.... Could someone familiar with the releases organise these into appropriate subsections? Lachatdelarue (talk) 21:32, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

I've started this cleaning up by dividing the albums from the not-quite-albums. I'll probably continue improving it, but in terms of general readability it's greatly improved. Cometboy 18:03, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Corrected the stupid photo alignment problem. Cometboy 22:57, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

I put up the "cleanup" notice. Maybe someone could work on arranging it chronologically and more professionally...I'm going to find some decent pictures and delete the current ones soon.

Shamrox 08:05, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I started re-writing this thing from the bottom up. Anyone else feel free to join in or make edits...

Shamrox 10:42, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I've been working on the discography for a couple weeks now and it's looking pretty good. Today I just added a list of original compilation appearences. I also organized everything with wikitables, which might be overkill. If anybody thinks the discography is unnecessarily detailed, please let me know and I can trim it down a little bit. My own problem with the tables is that their a little inconsistent with each other, but it's a work in progress. Also, if anybody has anything to add to the discography but is unconfortable with the table, just dump the information anywhere and I'll sqeeze it in there myself. Elvrum 19:56, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Conor started Team Love in 2004, not 2005. darkestshining

What are we going to do with this article, guys?

I'm planning on contributing heavily to this article in the recent future, but I have no idea what direction you guys are trying to take it. At first glance (and second) it seems more like a Conor Oberst article than a Bright Eyes article, which is fair enough I suppose. But if Bright Eyes IS Conor Oberst, then I why not merge this article with Conor Oberst? Seeing as I doubt anybody wants that any more than I do, I suggest we keep this article focused specifically on the history or Bright Eyes in particular, and copy and paste related information in their own articles. I believe that Bright Eyes is one of the most important bands of this decade, and it shame that this article is such a mess. No offense, but Gwen Stefani has a better article. With some direction, I believe we can make this a featured article in no time. So who's with me? Elvrum 02:12, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

i think its been agreed that the articles should be merged. now if only we werent so lazy... Urukagina

The merge tag has only been up for a day or two; we should give it at least a week. Besides, I'm not fully convinced it should be merged right away, not until I see some more information about Bright Eyes and less about pre-pubescent Conor. :) Elvrum 00:05, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Bright Eyes live

Should we mention at all that Oberst gets so drunk by the end of most concerts that he forgets words stumbles around etc? Obviously we would have to find an official source, but just about anyone thats been to a concert of his (within the last year for sure) can verify :)

If you would really like to include it, you could probably check out some concert reviews for a source. Problem is, musicians getting drunk and acting stupid on stage is not exactly unique and most reviewers probably wouldn't think to mention it. Elvrum 19:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

If Oberst hates Texas he should not play shows there.

"Protest" section?

I've just beefed up the Clear Channel stuff a little, and wondered whether there might be an argument for seperating out things that could broadly be termed as "protest" activities, which would include Clear Channel, MoveOn.org tour, "When The President Talks To God", etc. That "Recent Years" section is just starting to look a little cluttered. --Wastekiller 02:29, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

That's not a bad idea. All this article is so far is a mini-biography without much information about the music, critical reactions, etc. It needs more sections and "Activism" or the like wouldn't be a bad start. Elvrum 03:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)