Quote
slewan
it's completely boring (maybe except for the very beginning).
Am I the only one or is there anybody else sharing my point of view?

Quote
slewan
it's completely boring (maybe except for the very beginning).
Am I the only one or is there anybody else sharing my point of view?

Quote
Koen
Please put all your comments here: [www.iorr.org]

Quote
swiss

Quote
Koen
Please put all your comments here: [www.iorr.org]

Koen [and, really, BV]

The combined thread on Keith's book is too unwieldy. I am dying to discuss various aspects of it (not anything as broad as "Dis book stinx and dat's the truth" ) but actually getting into analysis of specific parts of it, particular stories, Keith's perspective and point of view, his voice, literary style, how it's being received. But each one of these (and others) could be its own thread. There are too many tangled themes in that now-bloated 10-page hybridized thread. So I just don't even post about it--I'm concerned if I do post a thread of something substantive and specific, the thread will be deleted or maybe I'll get banned for not doing things the proper way.

So, I'd like to propose two things: (1) that we be "allowed" to post about discrete aspects of LIFE and (2) posters---please SEARCH and/or browse a bit before starting new threads AND maybe refrain from starting new kinda empty threads like "This book rots."

swiss (now returning to It's a Wonderful Life and waiting for Santa to arrive )

Quote
neptune

Quote
swiss

Quote
Koen
Please put all your comments here: [www.iorr.org]

Koen [and, really, BV]

The combined thread on Keith's book is too unwieldy. I am dying to discuss various aspects of it (not anything as broad as "Dis book stinx and dat's the truth" ) but actually getting into analysis of specific parts of it, particular stories, Keith's perspective and point of view, his voice, literary style, how it's being received. But each one of these (and others) could be its own thread. There are too many tangled themes in that now-bloated 10-page hybridized thread. So I just don't even post about it--I'm concerned if I do post a thread of something substantive and specific, the thread will be deleted or maybe I'll get banned for not doing things the proper way.

So, I'd like to propose two things: (1) that we be "allowed" to post about discrete aspects of LIFE and (2) posters---please SEARCH and/or browse a bit before starting new threads AND maybe refrain from starting new kinda empty threads like "This book rots."

swiss (now returning to It's a Wonderful Life and waiting for Santa to arrive )

So much for your request. Every little comment about LIFE gets swallowed up by this huge thread and made irrelevant.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Edward Twining
I agree with the review from the Globe and Mail wholeheartedly.
Keith comes across as extremely honest (and not in the least superficial). His recounting of his early years are a marvellous read also, because they haven't previously been so well documented. There are very few biographies which are as well written and as unbiased as his. There are many observations that Keith makes who's views i share, and it addresses many lingering questions i have had concerning a number of the Stones' decisions across the decades. Keith certainly displays no signs of jealousy towards Mick or Brian within his critique of them. He's just trying to tell the story as he sees it. There seems no underlying motive, despite his reference to Jagger's more intimate parts.

Honesty? I guess if one truely believes own bullshit one is honest, in a way, I liked the early Darford days but since that - as the story of The Stones actually starts - I find myself feeling uncomfortable, a bit embarrassed and, most of all, bored. Almost feels like witnessing Keith Richards performing in the last tours. Repeating the same old thing and just getting worse. The same all stories, myths, one-liners repetaed, and now with a hindsight - read: no lack of anchronisms!

Well as far as "trying to tell the story as he sees", well... to me eyes Keith is horribly a prisoner of his own myth. I honestly wanted a bit of more mature, reflective approach. But seemingly having lived in a bubble all of his adult life, surrounded by people who secure his ass and baby (and adore) him, he appears as a kind of "Michael Jackson of rock".

Well, I'm about half way through but I have lost the interest to really read the book any further. Just got the MICK HAS A SMALL DICK DOES EVyRYONE NOW HEAR IT part, and reading it in the context makes is even more idiotic, small-minded and juvenile than in tabloids. Suits very well to the tone of the book. That's "honesty"? I'm not really fond of hearing how "unbearable" Mick gets nor the truth behind snorting dad's ashes. It is so hard to realize that one's own hero just... sucks.

Like Keith Richards once said to Pete Townshead that "Shut the fvck up, and play the guitar", I wish the very same for Keith. (Even I'm not sure if I really want to hear it..)

- Doxa

Quote
chelskeith
Cant believe I'm 300 pages in and still havent gotten to Patti, its all anita and the Ushi story just came in...

Quote
harlem shuffle
maybee he are Jesus?

Quote
jethroborsje
I love the biography. I am just wondering if most people read it in English or in their native tongue? I am from the Netherlands but I am reading the English version, because I think some things might be lost in the translation to Dutch.

Quote
tatters
No mention by Keith of his huge 1960s solo hit.

Hey, ninety-seven to three
It's good to have you back again, oh
Hey, ninety-seven to three
Her lovin' is the medicine that saaaved me
Oh, I love my baby

Quote
tatters

Quote
tatters
No mention by Keith of his huge 1960s solo hit.

Hey, ninety-seven to three
It's good to have you back again, oh
Hey, ninety-seven to three
Her lovin' is the medicine that saaaved me
Oh, I love my baby

If anyone "gets" this, let me know. I thought it was very clever.

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
tatters

Quote
tatters
No mention by Keith of his huge 1960s solo hit.

Hey, ninety-seven to three
It's good to have you back again, oh
Hey, ninety-seven to three
Her lovin' is the medicine that saaaved me
Oh, I love my baby

If anyone "gets" this, let me know. I thought it was very clever.

Evidently not.

Quote
neptune
My biggest problem with the book is Keith's inability and/or unwillingness to really get into what happened in the studio (ie. who played what, ideas for arrangements, etc.), especially in regards to their 1960's material.

Quote
tatters

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
tatters

Quote
tatters
No mention by Keith of his huge 1960s solo hit.

Hey, ninety-seven to three
It's good to have you back again, oh
Hey, ninety-seven to three
Her lovin' is the medicine that saaaved me
Oh, I love my baby

If anyone "gets" this, let me know. I thought it was very clever.

Evidently not.

Evidently not clever, or evidently no one gets it? YOU get it, don't you?

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
tatters

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
tatters

Quote
tatters
No mention by Keith of his huge 1960s solo hit.

Hey, ninety-seven to three
It's good to have you back again, oh
Hey, ninety-seven to three
Her lovin' is the medicine that saaaved me
Oh, I love my baby

If anyone "gets" this, let me know. I thought it was very clever.

Evidently not.

Evidently not clever, or evidently no one gets it? YOU get it, don't you?

Well if no one gets it than I guess it's not that clever. So no I don't get it.

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
tatters

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
tatters

Quote
tatters
No mention by Keith of his huge 1960s solo hit.

Hey, ninety-seven to three
It's good to have you back again, oh
Hey, ninety-seven to three
Her lovin' is the medicine that saaaved me
Oh, I love my baby

If anyone "gets" this, let me know. I thought it was very clever.

Evidently not.

Evidently not clever, or evidently no one gets it? YOU get it, don't you?

Well if no one gets it than I guess it's not that clever. So no I don't get it.

i have no clue either -- much too clever for me

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
tatters

Quote
sweetcharmedlife

Quote
tatters

Quote
tatters
No mention by Keith of his huge 1960s solo hit.

Hey, ninety-seven to three
It's good to have you back again, oh
Hey, ninety-seven to three
Her lovin' is the medicine that saaaved me
Oh, I love my baby

If anyone "gets" this, let me know. I thought it was very clever.

Evidently not.

Evidently not clever, or evidently no one gets it? YOU get it, don't you?

Well if no one gets it than I guess it's not that clever. So no I don't get it.

i have no clue either -- much too clever for me

wait, isn't there some comment by keith in the book on mixing dope - and then he wrote lyrics to that effect, i.e. on the ratio? ... still not sure why this would be considered 'clever'.