Tell Me :
Talk
That sounds over doesn't it. No more "challenging" Mick. When something is over one generally uses that term.
I was shocked when I was told the story for that very reason, it seemed so spiteful really and Keith is probably my favorite (after Brian ironically) and he's so "balls out" with his opinions I couldn't believe he'd be so duplicitous to someone he's known for 60 years and been friends with for 50 (give or take the rocky times). But the person who told me had no reason to skew the opinion one way or another so I have to take it as accurate.
The only dish I have is NOT confirmed but I'll give you a three word hint. Olympics, opening, closing? Nothing on a tour either way though I suspect for a variety of reasons it wouldn't be a full blown tour just some select shows. I will pass on more as I hear it (as long as it's not hush-hush as although I'm not contractually bound I consider it a matter of "honor" not to dish the very secretive stuff).
Peace.
Not in the context I read it, no. It seemed to me like the interviewer was hoping for him to bite, but he chose to be diplomatic.
Sounds like he cant win. If he'd made some quotable insult like 'Super Dog Shit', everyone would be saying it was 'over' and yet when he's uncharacteristically gracious about a Mick side-project, it can't be taken at face value.
I know from my friends that Mick at least does or did want to mark the 50th anniversary in some way and also to tie it in with the Olympics as they are in London and the interest generated is enormous, even for an Olympics. So the speculation here on that part is not off base at all.
And Max'sKansasCity, from my understanding, if what I was told was accurate it absolutely was the betrayal that is the issue, not "todger" comments. I just have no clue what Keith and people who advise him were thinking handling it that way, like Mick wasn't going to hear what was really in the books?
I only recently read the book and I feel like Keith had scores to settle, particularly with Mick and Brian. And for all of their faults, he would NOT be where he is without either of them. I had a HUGE amount of respect for Keith and for me personally it's been very tainted by this book, despite it being a fairly entertaining read.
Interesting you would be so down on a book you admit you have not read...I don't know, what's the objective of any book like this? The author gets to tell the story his way, after all the countless books (good and bad) we have seen. Actually, as a book of this type - the rock 'n roll memoir - it's pretty damn good. I think, as so often happens, it may have revealed more about the author than what he intended, in this case his insecurity and need to feel tough and macho. At least there's lots of music in the book, which is more than you can say about others of its kind (Clapton's and Ronnie's come to mind). I think it gives lots of insights into where the music inside Keith comes from.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-07-11 03:19 by 71Tele.
Uh, if you had been paying attention, you might have noticed that this book seems to have caused internal problems for my favorite band. I am "so down" on ANYTHING that causes a lot of internal problems for my favorite band...... BUT... THAT WAS NOT THE FOCUS/POINT OF MY POST...
The point/focus of my post was (IF) they deceived Mick, imuho that is far worse than anything that was actually said in the stupid book.... why not just give Mick the real book?? Why give him a sanitized version, when soon enough he will see the real book, whathefk is up with that?
As far as I am concerned>>>fk that book.... BUT... if you love that book, wanna buy 10 copies and give them away.... go for it... if anyone else wants to buy it or read it or throw it, I could not care less (just dont burn it, because I do not support burning books)
GDAMNED TELL ALL BOOKS!!!!
No good HAS EVER come from a TELL ALL BOOK, I dont care about the gossip, it is only about the music. period.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-07-11 03:51 by Max'sKansasCity.
Um, ok, no need to get hostile. usually when people have such strong reactions to books they haven't read, or films they haven't seen, their opinions can be considered subject to question. The dissension in the band (as well as the inactivity) was already there before this book. I'm not sure it qualifies as a "tell all" book, but then again, you haven't read it so no point discussing with you.
OK, then...
Considering the money Keith has earned from songwriting royalties, particularly in the early-mid 1970s when he was out of it on heroin, it's pretty clear it's been about the money for him for a long, long time.
Life is a good read, it's interesting, and there are some really funny passages. But it's the history of Keith as Keith wants it known. Going by Life only he created any decent guitar playing in the Stones. It was all down to him. You have to take it with a monstrous grain of salt. Still worth reading though.
Hi Lilith,
I didnt see your post when I was here earlier, got off on a tangent .. .. but thank you for the reply... Please let us know if/when you hear more info....
btw-I still wonder what a marmie cat is, serious question, you said you met one at Jim's grave, and I wonder what that meant, I asked you a couple of pages back, but it got buried.
Lets hope the boys can patch things up,
cuz they sure do know how to write good songs.
Marianne Faithfull doesn't agree with you
Having put out two biographies, Ms. Faithfull said she "loved" reading Mr. Richards's "Life." "It's not all accurate," she said, raising an eyebrow. "He made up a lot. He went for the myth." She said she's not surprised by the fallout the book reportedly caused between the famously feuding Rolling Stones guitarist and frontman, considering Mr. Richards went for the rock 'n' roll jugular. "You know the bit I mean, I'm not going to repeat it," she said-presumably referring to Mr. Richards's below-the-belt swipe at Mr. Jagger. "I didn't think that was very nice."
Marianne Faithfull on Her Colorful Life
[online.wsj.com]
They were NEVER going to tour in 2011. It would have diminished the impact of any '50th anniversary tour' that would have been scheduled to start in 2012.
"from my understanding, if what I was told was accurate it absolutely was the betrayal that is the issue, not "todger" comments"
The betrayal being that Mick was first given a sanitised version of Life to read and then blindsided ??? Have I understood this right ?
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
DragonSky
()
Date: July 10, 2011 19:11
Quote
GazzaQuote
GetYerAngie
Has Keith made a public statement about Super Heavy? I haven't seen the usual remarks like dogshit in the doorway - has he got cold feet?
he has....he said he 'wished him luck' with it (or words to that effect)
That sounds over doesn't it. No more "challenging" Mick. When something is over one generally uses that term.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
Bliss
()
Date: July 10, 2011 19:35
Mistake here...I wanted to say +1 to the poster who thinks Life is a passive-aggressive way of Keith ending the band due to diminished playing ability. Very insightful..
+1
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-07-11 09:35 by Bliss.
Quote
DragonSkyQuote
proudmary
There are two options
1. Richards wanted to end the relationship once and for all and put an end to the Stones
2. Richards suffers from dementia
2 is obvious! 1 seems reasonable and possibly more accurate than anything else.
+1
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-07-11 09:35 by Bliss.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: July 10, 2011 22:57
I just spent a couple of weeks with "Life" (audio version) in my car. I had read the book when it came out. My feelings are that it's pure Keith: sweet, honest, charming, funny; but also boastful, insufferable, and full of crap. In short, it is no different than what Keith has presented to the world since the "Keith Richards" character was created sometime in the 1970s. I cannot see why Mick Jagger (or anyone else for that matter) would be surprised or particularly bothered to the point where it would effect planned Stones activity (if any). But if what Lilith says is true, and Mick was given a sanitized version to read, maybe I can see it causing ill will. But it's hard for me to believe they would do that knowing the full book would come out and Mick would see that he was duped. What would be the point of that?
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
Harm
()
Date: July 10, 2011 23:35
Most people already forgot the whole story except us, some 500 fans. So, let's tour
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: July 10, 2011 23:39
Forget about touring, do something creative instead.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
LillithFlair
()
Date: July 10, 2011 23:40
Quote
71Tele
I just spent a couple of weeks with "Life" (audio version) in my car. I had read the book when it came out. My feelings are that it's pure Keith: sweet, honest, charming, funny; but also boastful, insufferable, and full of crap. In short, it is no different than what Keith has presented to the world since the "Keith Richards" character was created sometime in the 1970s. I cannot see why Mick Jagger (or anyone else for that matter) would be surprised or particularly bothered to the point where it would effect planned Stones activity (if any). But if what Lilith says is true, and Mick was given a sanitized version to read, maybe I can see it causing ill will. But it's hard for me to believe they would do that knowing the full book would come out and Mick would see that he was duped. What would be the point of that?
I was shocked when I was told the story for that very reason, it seemed so spiteful really and Keith is probably my favorite (after Brian ironically) and he's so "balls out" with his opinions I couldn't believe he'd be so duplicitous to someone he's known for 60 years and been friends with for 50 (give or take the rocky times). But the person who told me had no reason to skew the opinion one way or another so I have to take it as accurate.
The only dish I have is NOT confirmed but I'll give you a three word hint. Olympics, opening, closing? Nothing on a tour either way though I suspect for a variety of reasons it wouldn't be a full blown tour just some select shows. I will pass on more as I hear it (as long as it's not hush-hush as although I'm not contractually bound I consider it a matter of "honor" not to dish the very secretive stuff).
Peace.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
rebelrebel
()
Date: July 11, 2011 00:16
Yeah, I think the Olympics opening or closing is a possibility as it would appeal to their egos. They would only have to do one song - Start Me Up surely? - and Blondie could be safely placed behind a curtain to take Keith's part. It would also mean the 50th anniversary was marked in some way without the ardor of a tour. Or even a full two hour show. On the other hand I wonder if they're half as bothered about marking the 50th as us. Either way, I can't see another tour happening because I don't believe Keith is up to it. His poor playing can only be covered so much and it was obvious enough on ABB. Sure, it's speculation but I'd guess he's a complete busted flush by now. Aside from playing live we'll certainly get an expanded Some Girls and again that will be entirely to Jagger's credit with Keith hardly contributing. I think the chance of new stuff is zero.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
mickschix
()
Date: July 11, 2011 01:05
I don't really see the Olympics thing happening because Mick hated the whole Super Bowl thing so much, this is even worse as far as details, exposure, chances for things to go woefully WRONG in front of MILLIONS....and I believe what Lilithflair has said because right from the start I couldn't believe Mick would be OK with the trash Keith put out there in LIFE! It's just TOO BIG AN INSULT! And I also happen to believe it's not true, rather Keith needed, for some insanely cruel reason, to write the most offensive and outrageous LIE that he could come up with and see how it would go down. The end of the Stones, I believe, is the answer. And I have friends who tell me just the opposite so there you go!
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: July 11, 2011 01:30
Quote
DragonSkyQuote
GazzaQuote
GetYerAngie
Has Keith made a public statement about Super Heavy? I haven't seen the usual remarks like dogshit in the doorway - has he got cold feet?
he has....he said he 'wished him luck' with it (or words to that effect)
That sounds over doesn't it. No more "challenging" Mick. When something is over one generally uses that term.
Not in the context I read it, no. It seemed to me like the interviewer was hoping for him to bite, but he chose to be diplomatic.
Sounds like he cant win. If he'd made some quotable insult like 'Super Dog Shit', everyone would be saying it was 'over' and yet when he's uncharacteristically gracious about a Mick side-project, it can't be taken at face value.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: July 11, 2011 01:50
This fkg book.... I knew no good would come from it, except maybe add a few pennies to Kieth's bank account, but honestly, does he really need a few new towels, dishes... other car?
As I posted before it came out, I wondered WHY? ...what was the objective of this book? We all already know all the stories and myths (we all own 100+ books about our band) why make another book of it? and why now?
I said I had not interest in reading, and I have not... why would I?
And now..... All the hulabaloo... and rumors... and conjecture... and tiny todger comments... etc etc etc... I knew no fkg good could come from this fkg book....
AND.... the latest rumor.... if it is true that Jagger was given a "sanitized" version of it, that is total BS.... THAT IS DECPETION and I very much understand Mick being pissed off about it.
Why would they deceive Mick when the real deal would come out soon and he would know it? Why would they give him a copy that was not real? What is the point of that? If I wasMick, I would nt care about the details, I would care that they deceived me....... IF THIS IS TRUE, IT IS BS.
Who knows how much money was made off this piece of dog crap by Keith, but it cant be much more then a drop in the bucket of cash his bank account.... AND if deceived his friend and business partner... fk that.... fk everything about that book. /rant
As I posted before it came out, I wondered WHY? ...what was the objective of this book? We all already know all the stories and myths (we all own 100+ books about our band) why make another book of it? and why now?
I said I had not interest in reading, and I have not... why would I?
And now..... All the hulabaloo... and rumors... and conjecture... and tiny todger comments... etc etc etc... I knew no fkg good could come from this fkg book....
AND.... the latest rumor.... if it is true that Jagger was given a "sanitized" version of it, that is total BS.... THAT IS DECPETION and I very much understand Mick being pissed off about it.
Why would they deceive Mick when the real deal would come out soon and he would know it? Why would they give him a copy that was not real? What is the point of that? If I wasMick, I would nt care about the details, I would care that they deceived me....... IF THIS IS TRUE, IT IS BS.
Who knows how much money was made off this piece of dog crap by Keith, but it cant be much more then a drop in the bucket of cash his bank account.... AND if deceived his friend and business partner... fk that.... fk everything about that book. /rant
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
LillithFlair
()
Date: July 11, 2011 03:15
Quote
rebelrebel
Yeah, I think the Olympics opening or closing is a possibility as it would appeal to their egos. They would only have to do one song - Start Me Up surely? - and Blondie could be safely placed behind a curtain to take Keith's part. It would also mean the 50th anniversary was marked in some way without the ardor of a tour. Or even a full two hour show. On the other hand I wonder if they're half as bothered about marking the 50th as us. Either way, I can't see another tour happening because I don't believe Keith is up to it. His poor playing can only be covered so much and it was obvious enough on ABB. Sure, it's speculation but I'd guess he's a complete busted flush by now. Aside from playing live we'll certainly get an expanded Some Girls and again that will be entirely to Jagger's credit with Keith hardly contributing. I think the chance of new stuff is zero.
I know from my friends that Mick at least does or did want to mark the 50th anniversary in some way and also to tie it in with the Olympics as they are in London and the interest generated is enormous, even for an Olympics. So the speculation here on that part is not off base at all.
And Max'sKansasCity, from my understanding, if what I was told was accurate it absolutely was the betrayal that is the issue, not "todger" comments. I just have no clue what Keith and people who advise him were thinking handling it that way, like Mick wasn't going to hear what was really in the books?
I only recently read the book and I feel like Keith had scores to settle, particularly with Mick and Brian. And for all of their faults, he would NOT be where he is without either of them. I had a HUGE amount of respect for Keith and for me personally it's been very tainted by this book, despite it being a fairly entertaining read.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: July 11, 2011 03:17
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
This fkg book.... I knew no good would come from it, except maybe add a few pennies to Kieth's bank account, but honestly, does he really need a few new towels, dishes... other car?
As I posted before it came out, I wondered WHY? ...what was the objective of this book? We all already know all the stories and myths (we all own 100+ books about our band) why make another book of it? and why now?
I said I had not interest in reading, and I have not... why would I?
And now..... All the hulabaloo... and rumors... and conjecture... and tiny todger comments... etc etc etc... I knew no fkg good could come from this fkg book....
AND.... the latest rumor.... if it is true that Jagger was given a "sanitized" version of it, that is total BS.... THAT IS DECPETION and I very much understand Mick being pissed off about it.
Why would they deceive Mick when the real deal would come out soon and he would know it? Why would they give him a copy that was not real? What is the point of that? If I wasMick, I would nt care about the details, I would care that they deceived me....... IF THIS IS TRUE, IT IS BS.
Who knows how much money was made off this piece of dog crap by Keith, but it cant be much more then a drop in the bucket of cash his bank account.... AND if deceived his friend and business partner... fk that.... fk everything about that book. /rant
Interesting you would be so down on a book you admit you have not read...I don't know, what's the objective of any book like this? The author gets to tell the story his way, after all the countless books (good and bad) we have seen. Actually, as a book of this type - the rock 'n roll memoir - it's pretty damn good. I think, as so often happens, it may have revealed more about the author than what he intended, in this case his insecurity and need to feel tough and macho. At least there's lots of music in the book, which is more than you can say about others of its kind (Clapton's and Ronnie's come to mind). I think it gives lots of insights into where the music inside Keith comes from.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-07-11 03:19 by 71Tele.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
NICOS
()
Date: July 11, 2011 03:22
Thanks LillithFlair..........I think I should start read it then..............as it is already for 5 months in my bookcase
__________________________
__________________________
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: July 11, 2011 03:45
Quote
71TeleQuote
Max'sKansasCity
This fkg book.... I knew no good would come from it, except maybe add a few pennies to Kieth's bank account, but honestly, does he really need a few new towels, dishes... other car?
As I posted before it came out, I wondered WHY? ...what was the objective of this book? We all already know all the stories and myths (we all own 100+ books about our band) why make another book of it? and why now?
I said I had not interest in reading, and I have not... why would I?
And now..... All the hulabaloo... and rumors... and conjecture... and tiny todger comments... etc etc etc... I knew no fkg good could come from this fkg book....
AND.... the latest rumor.... if it is true that Jagger was given a "sanitized" version of it, that is total BS.... THAT IS DECPETION and I very much understand Mick being pissed off about it.
Why would they deceive Mick when the real deal would come out soon and he would know it? Why would they give him a copy that was not real? What is the point of that? If I wasMick, I would nt care about the details, I would care that they deceived me....... IF THIS IS TRUE, IT IS BS.
Who knows how much money was made off this piece of dog crap by Keith, but it cant be much more then a drop in the bucket of cash his bank account.... AND if deceived his friend and business partner... fk that.... fk everything about that book. /rant
Interesting you would be so down on a book you admit you have not read...I don't know, what's the objective of any book like this? The author gets to tell the story his way, after all the countless books (good and bad) we have seen. Actually, as a book of this type - the rock 'n roll memoir - it's pretty damn good. I think, as so often happens, it may have revealed more about the author than what he intended, in this case his insecurity and need to feel tough and macho. At least there's lots of music in the book, which is more than you can say about others of its kind (Clapton's and Ronnie's come to mind). I think it gives lots of insights into where the music inside Keith comes from.
Uh, if you had been paying attention, you might have noticed that this book seems to have caused internal problems for my favorite band. I am "so down" on ANYTHING that causes a lot of internal problems for my favorite band...... BUT... THAT WAS NOT THE FOCUS/POINT OF MY POST...
The point/focus of my post was (IF) they deceived Mick, imuho that is far worse than anything that was actually said in the stupid book.... why not just give Mick the real book?? Why give him a sanitized version, when soon enough he will see the real book, whathefk is up with that?
As far as I am concerned>>>fk that book.... BUT... if you love that book, wanna buy 10 copies and give them away.... go for it... if anyone else wants to buy it or read it or throw it, I could not care less (just dont burn it, because I do not support burning books)
GDAMNED TELL ALL BOOKS!!!!
No good HAS EVER come from a TELL ALL BOOK, I dont care about the gossip, it is only about the music. period.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-07-11 03:51 by Max'sKansasCity.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: July 11, 2011 03:56
Quote
Max'sKansasCityQuote
71TeleQuote
Max'sKansasCity
This fkg book.... I knew no good would come from it, except maybe add a few pennies to Kieth's bank account, but honestly, does he really need a few new towels, dishes... other car?
As I posted before it came out, I wondered WHY? ...what was the objective of this book? We all already know all the stories and myths (we all own 100+ books about our band) why make another book of it? and why now?
I said I had not interest in reading, and I have not... why would I?
And now..... All the hulabaloo... and rumors... and conjecture... and tiny todger comments... etc etc etc... I knew no fkg good could come from this fkg book....
AND.... the latest rumor.... if it is true that Jagger was given a "sanitized" version of it, that is total BS.... THAT IS DECPETION and I very much understand Mick being pissed off about it.
Why would they deceive Mick when the real deal would come out soon and he would know it? Why would they give him a copy that was not real? What is the point of that? If I wasMick, I would nt care about the details, I would care that they deceived me....... IF THIS IS TRUE, IT IS BS.
Who knows how much money was made off this piece of dog crap by Keith, but it cant be much more then a drop in the bucket of cash his bank account.... AND if deceived his friend and business partner... fk that.... fk everything about that book. /rant
Interesting you would be so down on a book you admit you have not read...I don't know, what's the objective of any book like this? The author gets to tell the story his way, after all the countless books (good and bad) we have seen. Actually, as a book of this type - the rock 'n roll memoir - it's pretty damn good. I think, as so often happens, it may have revealed more about the author than what he intended, in this case his insecurity and need to feel tough and macho. At least there's lots of music in the book, which is more than you can say about others of its kind (Clapton's and Ronnie's come to mind). I think it gives lots of insights into where the music inside Keith comes from.
Uh, if you had been paying attention, you might have noticed that this book seems to have caused internal problems for my favorite band. I am "so down" on ANYTHING that causes a lot of internal problems for my favorite band...... BUT... THAT WAS NOT THE FOCUS/POINT OF MY POST...
The point/focus of my post was (IF) they deceived Mick, imuho that is far worse than anything that was actually said in the stupid book.... why not just give Mick the real book?? Why give him a sanitized version, when soon enough he will see the real book, whathefk is up with that?
As far as I am concerned>>>fk that book.... BUT... if you love that book, wanna buy 10 copies and give them away.... go for it... if anyone else wants to buy it or read it or throw it, I could not care less (just dont burn it, because I do not support burning books)
GDAMNED TELL ALL BOOKS!!!!
No good HAS EVER come from a TELL ALL BOOK, I dont care about the gossip, it is only about the music. period.
Um, ok, no need to get hostile. usually when people have such strong reactions to books they haven't read, or films they haven't seen, their opinions can be considered subject to question. The dissension in the band (as well as the inactivity) was already there before this book. I'm not sure it qualifies as a "tell all" book, but then again, you haven't read it so no point discussing with you.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: July 11, 2011 04:09
I was not trying to be hostile and I was not really talking about the book, although I do wish this book did not exist, I have refrained from most conversations about this book, but in light of this information about Mick possibly being given a sanitized version, that is what I was talking about.... and I clarified that, not being hostile, just stating point.
but the moral is....
On IORR it is probably best to keep one's posts to less than 3/4 of a sentance
but the moral is....
On IORR it is probably best to keep one's posts to less than 3/4 of a sentance
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: July 11, 2011 04:18
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
I was not trying to be hostile and I was not really talking about the book, although I do wish this book did not exist, I have refrained from most conversations about this book, but in light of this information about Mick possibly being given a sanitized version, that is what I was talking about.... and I clarified that, not being hostile, just stating point.
but the moral is....
On IORR it is probably best to keep one's posts to less than 3/4 of a sentance
OK, then...
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
angee
()
Date: July 11, 2011 06:01
May I ask, what is the evidence that Mick was given a sanitized or edited form of the book?
Or perhaps the book was not finished yet and so he didn't read the last pages where Keith
talked most about Mick?
(Sorry if I missed this part.)
Or perhaps the book was not finished yet and so he didn't read the last pages where Keith
talked most about Mick?
(Sorry if I missed this part.)
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
Rip This
()
Date: July 11, 2011 06:01
.....its a good book. It captures his defiance throughout. There are difficult moments...but that's life. I think he has to be surprised with some of the reaction he's gotten. Nonetheless it's his story and he tells it his way. I thought it was compelling.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
Swedgen72
()
Date: July 11, 2011 08:25
Quote
Rip This
...no doubt Mick didn't like it or appreciate it. He took a swipe at Keith in the NY Sunday Times cover story earlier this year basically insinuating Keith did it for the money which goes directly to Keith's image/credibility since he has always professed loudly that it wasn't about the money...
Considering the money Keith has earned from songwriting royalties, particularly in the early-mid 1970s when he was out of it on heroin, it's pretty clear it's been about the money for him for a long, long time.
Life is a good read, it's interesting, and there are some really funny passages. But it's the history of Keith as Keith wants it known. Going by Life only he created any decent guitar playing in the Stones. It was all down to him. You have to take it with a monstrous grain of salt. Still worth reading though.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
little queenie
()
Date: July 11, 2011 08:37
Quote
marcovandereijkQuote
NICOS
"Life" seems like it may have been the code-violation of the ages - the book all magicians hate - the one that spoils all of the illusions.
That's may be the reason that "Live" is still in my book shelfQuote
SwayStones
May be that's why I have read only a few pages of Life because I had that feeling too.
or 4 of us...i own it. keith stares up at me but i haven't read it. i definitely think (and heard) that it might be behind why they're not on tour this year. i am still hopeful for 2012
Hey, that makes three of us. I could not bring myself to reading it, too afraid to have my
naive vision of the band blown away. So far I chose not to be informed in too much detail.
I want to believe in the image of the band I've been building up in the last 30 years.
Maybe that means I've finally found a religion...
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
Max'sKansasCity
()
Date: July 11, 2011 09:33
Quote
LillithFlairQuote
rebelrebel
Yeah, I think the Olympics opening or closing is a possibility as it would appeal to their egos. They would only have to do one song - Start Me Up surely? - and Blondie could be safely placed behind a curtain to take Keith's part. It would also mean the 50th anniversary was marked in some way without the ardor of a tour. Or even a full two hour show. On the other hand I wonder if they're half as bothered about marking the 50th as us. Either way, I can't see another tour happening because I don't believe Keith is up to it. His poor playing can only be covered so much and it was obvious enough on ABB. Sure, it's speculation but I'd guess he's a complete busted flush by now. Aside from playing live we'll certainly get an expanded Some Girls and again that will be entirely to Jagger's credit with Keith hardly contributing. I think the chance of new stuff is zero.
I know from my friends that Mick at least does or did want to mark the 50th anniversary in some way and also to tie it in with the Olympics as they are in London and the interest generated is enormous, even for an Olympics. So the speculation here on that part is not off base at all.
And Max'sKansasCity, from my understanding, if what I was told was accurate it absolutely was the betrayal that is the issue, not "todger" comments. I just have no clue what Keith and people who advise him were thinking handling it that way, like Mick wasn't going to hear what was really in the books?
I only recently read the book and I feel like Keith had scores to settle, particularly with Mick and Brian. And for all of their faults, he would NOT be where he is without either of them. I had a HUGE amount of respect for Keith and for me personally it's been very tainted by this book, despite it being a fairly entertaining read.
Hi Lilith,
I didnt see your post when I was here earlier, got off on a tangent .. .. but thank you for the reply... Please let us know if/when you hear more info....
btw-I still wonder what a marmie cat is, serious question, you said you met one at Jim's grave, and I wonder what that meant, I asked you a couple of pages back, but it got buried.
Lets hope the boys can patch things up,
cuz they sure do know how to write good songs.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
proudmary
()
Date: July 11, 2011 11:41
Quote
71Tele
I just spent a couple of weeks with "Life" (audio version) in my car. I had read the book when it came out. My feelings are that it's pure Keith: sweet, honest, charming, funny; but also boastful, insufferable, and full of crap. In short, it is no different than what Keith has presented to the world since the "Keith Richards" character was created sometime in the 1970s. I cannot see why Mick Jagger (or anyone else for that matter) would be surprised or particularly bothered to the point where it would effect planned Stones activity (if any).
Marianne Faithfull doesn't agree with you
Having put out two biographies, Ms. Faithfull said she "loved" reading Mr. Richards's "Life." "It's not all accurate," she said, raising an eyebrow. "He made up a lot. He went for the myth." She said she's not surprised by the fallout the book reportedly caused between the famously feuding Rolling Stones guitarist and frontman, considering Mr. Richards went for the rock 'n' roll jugular. "You know the bit I mean, I'm not going to repeat it," she said-presumably referring to Mr. Richards's below-the-belt swipe at Mr. Jagger. "I didn't think that was very nice."
Marianne Faithfull on Her Colorful Life
[online.wsj.com]
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
Bliss
()
Date: July 11, 2011 12:25
Confused...'it's about the betrayal, not about the todger comment'? Isn't that the betrayal?
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: July 11, 2011 13:05
Considering the fact that Sir Michael hasn't visited Keith's dressing room in the past 20 years I don't think this book makes any difference. There has been a rift between the two since decades.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
mickschix
()
Date: July 11, 2011 14:13
Bliss, the betrayal IS that comment about the " tiny todger". And lots of other nasty comments but that was the major betrayal.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: July 11, 2011 15:08
Quote
little queenie
or 4 of us...i own it. keith stares up at me but i haven't read it. i definitely think (and heard) that it might be behind why they're not on tour this year. i am still hopeful for 2012
They were NEVER going to tour in 2011. It would have diminished the impact of any '50th anniversary tour' that would have been scheduled to start in 2012.
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
Bliss
()
Date: July 11, 2011 16:43
Quote
mickschix
Bliss, the betrayal IS that comment about the " tiny todger". And lots of other nasty comments but that was the major betrayal.
"from my understanding, if what I was told was accurate it absolutely was the betrayal that is the issue, not "todger" comments"
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
EddieByword
()
Date: July 11, 2011 17:16
Quote
BlissQuote
mickschix
Bliss, the betrayal IS that comment about the " tiny todger". And lots of other nasty comments but that was the major betrayal.
"from my understanding, if what I was told was accurate it absolutely was the betrayal that is the issue, not "todger" comments"
The betrayal being that Mick was first given a sanitised version of Life to read and then blindsided ??? Have I understood this right ?
Re: Could "Life" have been the Death of the Stones?
Posted by:
Bliss
()
Date: July 11, 2011 18:41
Right you are, Eddie B.
The question is, why did Keith bother giving Mick a look at any version of the manuscript? To do so and then include things that made a laughing stock of Mick (and which he could not refute), really seems to twist the knife.
The question is, why did Keith bother giving Mick a look at any version of the manuscript? To do so and then include things that made a laughing stock of Mick (and which he could not refute), really seems to twist the knife.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
a bigger nut , Amarant , Andrea82 , armin944 , Bjorn , django , Fletchesus , illyad1960 , johnnythunders , Knellz , MelBelli , MJAGGER123 , sotob , Stonesfan2146 , StonyRoad , TooTight
Guests:
2015
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10