For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
JuanTCB
I finished it on Thursday night and am gearing up for another go-round today.
Quote
kleermaker
Any new insights, except that Keith was a (com)poser, and totally on drugs and lonely from '70 until '80?
Quote
AmsterdamnedQuote
kleermaker
Any new insights, except that Keith was a (com)poser, and totally on drugs and lonely from '70 until '80?
Booze 40 % + and coke until 2006 & smoking like a chimney.
Cheers.
Quote
kleermaker
Any new insights, except that Keith was a (com)poser, and totally on drugs and lonely from '70 until '80?
Quote
DoxaQuote
kleermaker
Any new insights, except that Keith was a (com)poser, and totally on drugs and lonely from '70 until '80?
One point that might especially interest you. Keith claims that when Taylor joined, Keith started to write songs that had Taylor's abilities already taken under concern. He knew what Taylor could and would do for them. That is to say that Taylor extending the Stones soundscale went according to Keith's master plan. (Funny rhetorical feature of the book: when someone else - only Jagger is mentioned - brings an idea or a song, it is Keith's job to develop it further - and finally, all credition - as far as true greatness go - should be addressed to Keith or the "band" which of course is totally under Keith''s supervision("Sympathy For the Devil", "Brown Sugar", "Miss You".) When Keith brings a song or a riff or sketch, the rest just do what Keith supposes or expects them to do - all the greatness is in the original idea...)
One another thing. Keith speaks very fondly of his and Taylor's co-work with guitar. Not much is discussed but enough. As I interpret his words, he was so inspired and fascinated of the five-string open tuning possibilities at time, that having a wonderful player as Taylor in the band - Keith even admits that as a guitarist Taylor was already there where he is was just travelling on - wasn't any threat for him (or his ego). He seemingly loved the task of taking care of the rhythm or chord section, and freewillingly gave the lead and solos duties to Taylor. 1969 tour was a chance to take the new innovation to tour (and Keith tells how Ike Turned forced him to teach it to him, and how the next Ike & Tina Turner album was made totally acccording to Keith's teachings, from Open G. True or not, I don't know). EXILE was like a final study what can be really worked out of the open tuning possibilities.
No mention of any "ancient art of weaving" is mentioned in those pages when golden era - Keith also agrees with the title - from BEGGARS to EXILE is discussed - and this the era Keith gives his most detailed musical analysis and is most proud of.
- Doxa
Quote
Amsterdamned
0
Quote
DoxaQuote
kleermaker
Any new insights, except that Keith was a (com)poser, and totally on drugs and lonely from '70 until '80?
One point that might especially interest you. Keith claims that when Taylor joined, Keith started to write songs that had Taylor's abilities already taken under concern. He knew what Taylor could and would do for them. That is to say that Taylor extending the Stones soundscale went according to Keith's master plan. (Funny rhetorical feature of the book: when someone else - only Jagger is mentioned - brings an idea or a song, it is Keith's job to develop it further - and finally, all credition - as far as true greatness go - should be addressed to Keith or the "band" which of course is totally under Keith''s supervision("Sympathy For the Devil", "Brown Sugar", "Miss You".) When Keith brings a song or a riff or sketch, the rest just do what Keith supposes or expects them to do - all the greatness is in the original idea...)
- Doxa
Quote
Rolling HansieQuote
Amsterdamned
0
Now who can argue with that ?
Proost
Quote
AmsterdamnedQuote
Rolling HansieQuote
Amsterdamned
0
Now who can argue with that ?
Proost
Well said; I didn't want to spoil this topic on Iraq, think twice...
Quote
kleermakerQuote
AmsterdamnedQuote
kleermaker
Any new insights, except that Keith was a (com)poser, and totally on drugs and lonely from '70 until '80?
Booze 40 % + and coke until 2006 & smoking like a chimney.
Cheers.
Well, that saves me a read.
Quote
Edward Twining
Read the book, kleermaker. You are likely to wonder what all the fuss is about !
Quote
neptune
According to an excerpt from Life, Keith asserts that Ian Stewart started the Rolling Stones, handpicked the members, forged the whole thing, and came up with the original vision for the band. Well, another one bites the dust for poor ole' Brian Jones. Brian being written out of the band's history once again? I guess in a couple years time, we'll be arguing whether Brian was ever a member of the Rolling Stones- maybe it was Ronnie in a blond wig?
Quote
neptune
According to an excerpt from Life, Keith asserts that Ian Stewart started the Rolling Stones, handpicked the members, forged the whole thing, and came up with the original vision for the band. Well, another one bites the dust for poor ole' Brian Jones. Brian being written out of the band's history once again? I guess in a couple years time, we'll be arguing whether Brian was ever a member of the Rolling Stones- maybe it was Ronnie in a blond wig?
Quote
GazzaQuote
neptune
According to an excerpt from Life, Keith asserts that Ian Stewart started the Rolling Stones, handpicked the members, forged the whole thing, and came up with the original vision for the band. Well, another one bites the dust for poor ole' Brian Jones. Brian being written out of the band's history once again? I guess in a couple years time, we'll be arguing whether Brian was ever a member of the Rolling Stones- maybe it was Ronnie in a blond wig?
Thats not quite what he said. He confirms that Stu was the first to answer Brian's ad (which effectively acknowledges that Brian formed the band) but that it was Stu who then effectively organised things, helped by the experience he'd already gained and the contacts he'd built up on the local music scene.
What Keith could do though is correct the revisionist (and now officially sanctioned) bollocks that he and Mick formed the band. Even the Stones' facebook page suggests that they did.
Quote
courtfieldroad
Quote Keith: The Rolling Stones was Brian's baby.
Stu was important, too, but then so were they all. Keith also said in the '71 Rolling Stone interview it was Brian who kept everyone together. I agree that it's only been since Stu's death that Keith's wanted to credit Stu in this way, I just see it as his way of honoring a good guy who got a raw deal, it just so happens he's doing it at Brian's expense.
Quote
GazzaQuote
neptune
According to an excerpt from Life, Keith asserts that Ian Stewart started the Rolling Stones, handpicked the members, forged the whole thing, and came up with the original vision for the band. Well, another one bites the dust for poor ole' Brian Jones. Brian being written out of the band's history once again? I guess in a couple years time, we'll be arguing whether Brian was ever a member of the Rolling Stones- maybe it was Ronnie in a blond wig?
Thats not quite what he said. He confirms that Stu was the first to answer Brian's ad (which effectively acknowledges that Brian formed the band) but that it was Stu who then effectively organised things, helped by the experience he'd already gained and the contacts he'd built up on the local music scene.
What Keith could do though is correct the revisionist (and now officially sanctioned) bollocks that he and Mick formed the band. Even the Stones' facebook page suggests that they did.