In dialogue with the Associated Press and in a dedicated letter to his followers, Bunbury openly discusses the private torment he carries while touring. This inner struggle has sometimes led him to signal his departure from the stage with farewells. A year earlier, the performer’s team staged a concert sequence that relied on an organic compound known as propylene glycol. The result was a perceived link between a persistent nighttime cough and a choking sensation described as a gritty, sandy feeling in the lungs, attributed by some to this substance. Bunbury himself referred to the product as toxic in his correspondence, highlighting the controversy surrounding its use on tour.
When propylene glycol is employed in a water-based floor system within specialized machinery, it generates a vapor that serves both a dramatic and functional purpose. This vapor enhances lighting design by creating visible beams that wrap around the artist, shaping the visual environment of the performance. Roger Puiggener, a veteran technician who has worked across many show formats, explained that artificial fog adds depth and volume to lighting. Without it, the audience would see only a pinpoint of light rather than the intended shapes and contours that trace the artist’s presence on stage.
To label a commercially approved fog fluid as toxic, as Bunbury has done, demands caution. Such a claim rests on a broad accusation that can easily become vague and sweeping. Propylene glycol has a long history of use in entertainment productions worldwide, as well as in everyday applications like air conditioning. It is important to consider individual responses, as some performers may experience heightened sensitivities, which could influence how a substance affects them personally. This aspect invites a broader discussion about safety thresholds and personalized risk factors in touring life.
The question arises: are there viable concert effects that do not rely on propylene glycol? Industry professionals, including illuminator technicians, indicate that alternate approaches exist. Puiggener references at least two artists who avoided blending the same fogging solution in certain performances: Van Morrison and the late Joe Cocker. When the artist of the famous “Gloria” appeared at Poble Espanyol in 1997, technical notes advised a cautious stance toward artificial fog, with a simple directive to minimize its use. The show proceeded successfully under a different lighting strategy, demonstrating that stage atmosphere can be achieved through thoughtful design choices beyond a single chemical option.
The ongoing discussion in this article invites readers to consider Bunbury’s motives and the timing of his public statements. At fifty-four, with a sustained and vibrant career, the singer’s decision to step back is framed by a history of pre-show blackout episodes that predated the current discourse. In his letter, he describes these experiences as traumatic, raising questions about how such episodes might influence his connection to the profession that defined much of his life. Whether the decision reflects a personal shift or a broader impact of touring demands remains a matter for Bunbury to disclose, should he choose to do so. The narrative, however, underscores that only the artist truly knows the full reasons behind his actions, and the possibility that some explanations may never be fully shared is a recurring theme in discussions about life on tour.