Tell Me :
Talk
I only bring it up because of todays article in Rolling Stone that cites the book as a reason Jagger is on the fence about working with Richards.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-23 21:40 by James Kirk.
I agree with you 100 percent...People here assume far too much. Again, I only brought this up because of today's article on the current state of relations in the band. The article itself mentions a rift over the book.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-23 21:46 by James Kirk.
sigh: if there was an[other] article like that it was no doubt based on fan speculation on boards like this.
seriously: let's turn up the music the Stones have given us
and
with sssoul - pay attention, please. It's Ron Wood talks, not any fan from fan board
"Richards' nasty, gossip-packed 2010 memoir, Life, painted an unrelentingly negative portrait of Jagger and his contributions to the Stones – straining the duo's relationship. "I think there's a healing process waiting to take place," Wood says. "I think it's happening now as we speak, but it has to be resolved. Something has to be resolved there. They have to come to terms with going on a working basis, which Charlie and I will help make happen. Wish me luck."
[www.rollingstone.com]
and this is from Paul Sexton's Times interview with Mick from this september - I'm sure you know he's a reliable source
"As the slanging match extended to their respective friends and family, one of the greatest creative partnerships in the history of British rock music was reduced to a jibe about the dimensions of Sir Mick’s allegedly “tiny todger”
...Richards told me of his pride in overcoming their differences, it made them a “real band”, he insisted, but the damage was done. Still, Jagger, the gentleman rock star, would not be drawn. Those close to him disclosed that he was deeply upset by the book, but he kept his counsel, refused an offer from this paper to put across his side of the story, and continued working".
Can you imagine what a shame it was for Mick when he was offered to present his "side of the story"(I guess after that the ill-fated KR interview with Times wich kicked the serialisation of the book on the paper) )
I do not understand why it is so difficult to admit that Jagger may be upset that in his 70ies he became an object of ridicule and his contribution to the Stones has been reduced to "filling in the verses"
A) I wouldnt give a shit. I have self respect
Neither should you.
I dont cry for silly things like that,
C) and I can take a joke.
D) I could always write my own book
E) Personal problems with my friends dont interfere with my work, cause I´m a pro at what I do.
G) There was nothing fake about Keith´s book - cause even at times when he said something silly, he spoke from his heart - the probleam is that tourist fans have their own fantasies about The Stones - and they tend to forget that they too..are real human beings with real emotions.. in good and bad,,,
Now, let me post this again:
COME ON GUYS:
Does this topic really need the 500 threads it already has ?
What does people think they gain from talking about it over and over - We will never know what Jagger thinks about it, Some of Keith´s comments were stupid - but at least they were his honest feelings - I thought that was great, cause rockstars dont talk about their feelings in public that often, - and who gives a shit. They are both doing "Some Girls" press at the moment and talking about future plans - so the band hasnt broken up. Give it up already.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-23 23:57 by seitan.
There will be wars. And rumors of wars. And then, the tour shall begin!
Now that will piss him off
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
James Kirk
()
Date: November 23, 2011 21:35
Don't get me wrong I thought a lot of the book (not all of it) was full of cheap shots from Richards. I also think that Richards is believing his own press clippings these days and is happy being a caricature of himself. Which is funny because that is the very thing he claimed to hate about Jagger in the mid 80's.
That said was there really anything in the book that was that upsetting to Jagger? When you think about it we had heard pretty much all of this (including the tiny todger nonsense) in one form or another from Richards in the past.
I can't believe that Jagger is going to shut the Stones down based on Richards book. As a matter of fact I think Jagger comes out looking like the far bigger person because of the petty nature of Richards comments in the book.
There is no way in hell Jagger is going to turn his back on a potential billion dollar payday because Keith Richards said some fooli/ self aggrandizing things (that he said many times in the past) that hurt Jagger's feelings...I'm betting that Jagger is using this latest conversation through the worlds press as leverage to get whatever he wants of of Richards and that the Stones will roll in 2012 in whatever way Jagger says they will.
These guys are seriously lime two 70 children...Bottom line is get your credit cards ready. The Stones are coming next year in one form or another.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-23 21:40 by James Kirk.
That said was there really anything in the book that was that upsetting to Jagger? When you think about it we had heard pretty much all of this (including the tiny todger nonsense) in one form or another from Richards in the past.
I can't believe that Jagger is going to shut the Stones down based on Richards book. As a matter of fact I think Jagger comes out looking like the far bigger person because of the petty nature of Richards comments in the book.
There is no way in hell Jagger is going to turn his back on a potential billion dollar payday because Keith Richards said some fooli/ self aggrandizing things (that he said many times in the past) that hurt Jagger's feelings...I'm betting that Jagger is using this latest conversation through the worlds press as leverage to get whatever he wants of of Richards and that the Stones will roll in 2012 in whatever way Jagger says they will.
These guys are seriously lime two 70 children...Bottom line is get your credit cards ready. The Stones are coming next year in one form or another.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-23 21:40 by James Kirk.
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
Harm
()
Date: November 23, 2011 21:36
not again please
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
Justin
()
Date: November 23, 2011 21:37
Did you mean to post this in 2010?
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
James Kirk
()
Date: November 23, 2011 21:39
Quote
Justin
Did you mean to post this in 2010?
I only bring it up because of todays article in Rolling Stone that cites the book as a reason Jagger is on the fence about working with Richards.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-23 21:40 by James Kirk.
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
M4000D
()
Date: November 23, 2011 21:40
Jagger can't shut them down
Jagger is the unhappy one.
Jagger is the unhappy one.
Re: The Rolling Stones
Posted by:
with sssoul
()
Date: November 23, 2011 21:42
... you're mistaking what fans post on iorr for what the Stones actually think and feel.
that's a flawed approach, as too many threads in the past year have already demonstrated.
now turn up the Stones
that's a flawed approach, as too many threads in the past year have already demonstrated.
now turn up the Stones
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
duke richardson
()
Date: November 23, 2011 21:44
"i'm just sittin on a fence"
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
stonesrule
()
Date: November 23, 2011 21:45
with sssoul, couldn't agree more.
This infantile fantasizing about what is in other people's minds is getting rather tedious.
This infantile fantasizing about what is in other people's minds is getting rather tedious.
Re: The Rolling Stones
Posted by:
James Kirk
()
Date: November 23, 2011 21:46
Quote
with sssoul
... you're mistaking what fans post on iorr for what the Stones actually think and feel.
that's a flawed approach, as too many threads in the past year have already demonstrated.
now turn up the Stones
I agree with you 100 percent...People here assume far too much. Again, I only brought this up because of today's article on the current state of relations in the band. The article itself mentions a rift over the book.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-23 21:46 by James Kirk.
Re: The Rolling Stones
Posted by:
sweetcharmedlife
()
Date: November 23, 2011 21:55
It's all media and fan specualtion and we're really tired of hearing about it aftera year straight of this.Quote
James KirkQuote
with sssoul
... you're mistaking what fans post on iorr for what the Stones actually think and feel.
that's a flawed approach, as too many threads in the past year have already demonstrated.
now turn up the Stones
I agree with you 100 percent...People here assume far too much. Again, I only brought this up because of today's article on the current state of relations in the band. The article itself mentions a rift over the book.
Re: The Rolling Stones
Posted by:
with sssoul
()
Date: November 23, 2011 21:56
Quote
James Kirk
... I only brought this up because of today's article on the current state of relations in the band. The article itself mentions a rift over the book.
sigh: if there was an[other] article like that it was no doubt based on fan speculation on boards like this.
seriously: let's turn up the music the Stones have given us
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: November 23, 2011 22:02
I wouldn't have said this yesterday, but it appears from new comments from actual band members (as opposed to groundless speculation from us) that there indeed was a rift caused (or merely widened) by the book.
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: November 23, 2011 22:02
Well if Mick really wanted ta piss Keef off he'd take him on an African safari ...
ROCKMAN
ROCKMAN
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
Beast
()
Date: November 23, 2011 22:03
Quote
stonesrule
with sssoul, couldn't agree more.
This infantile fantasizing about what is in other people's minds is getting rather tedious.
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
Green Lady
()
Date: November 23, 2011 22:50
Quote
BeastQuote
stonesrule
with sssoul, couldn't agree more.
This infantile fantasizing about what is in other people's minds is getting rather tedious.
and
Re: The Rolling Stones
Posted by:
proudmary
()
Date: November 23, 2011 22:58
Quote
with sssoulQuote
James Kirk
... I only brought this up because of today's article on the current state of relations in the band. The article itself mentions a rift over the book.
sigh: if there was an[other] article like that it was no doubt based on fan speculation on boards like this.
seriously: let's turn up the music the Stones have given us
with sssoul - pay attention, please. It's Ron Wood talks, not any fan from fan board
"Richards' nasty, gossip-packed 2010 memoir, Life, painted an unrelentingly negative portrait of Jagger and his contributions to the Stones – straining the duo's relationship. "I think there's a healing process waiting to take place," Wood says. "I think it's happening now as we speak, but it has to be resolved. Something has to be resolved there. They have to come to terms with going on a working basis, which Charlie and I will help make happen. Wish me luck."
[www.rollingstone.com]
and this is from Paul Sexton's Times interview with Mick from this september - I'm sure you know he's a reliable source
"As the slanging match extended to their respective friends and family, one of the greatest creative partnerships in the history of British rock music was reduced to a jibe about the dimensions of Sir Mick’s allegedly “tiny todger”
...Richards told me of his pride in overcoming their differences, it made them a “real band”, he insisted, but the damage was done. Still, Jagger, the gentleman rock star, would not be drawn. Those close to him disclosed that he was deeply upset by the book, but he kept his counsel, refused an offer from this paper to put across his side of the story, and continued working".
Can you imagine what a shame it was for Mick when he was offered to present his "side of the story"(I guess after that the ill-fated KR interview with Times wich kicked the serialisation of the book on the paper) )
I do not understand why it is so difficult to admit that Jagger may be upset that in his 70ies he became an object of ridicule and his contribution to the Stones has been reduced to "filling in the verses"
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
open-g
()
Date: November 23, 2011 23:18
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: November 23, 2011 23:23
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
James Kirk
()
Date: November 23, 2011 23:29
This is Ronnie Wood saying this not fanboys on sites like this one.
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
seitan
()
Date: November 23, 2011 23:35
Does this topic really need the 500 threads it already has ?
What does people think they gain from talking about it over and over - We will never know what Jagger thinks about it, Some of Keith´s comments were stupid - but at least they were his honest feelings - I thought that was were great, cause rockstars dont talk about their feelings in public that often, - and who gives a shit. They are both doing "Some Girls" press at the moment and talking about future plans - so the band hasnt broken up. Give it up already.
What does people think they gain from talking about it over and over - We will never know what Jagger thinks about it, Some of Keith´s comments were stupid - but at least they were his honest feelings - I thought that was were great, cause rockstars dont talk about their feelings in public that often, - and who gives a shit. They are both doing "Some Girls" press at the moment and talking about future plans - so the band hasnt broken up. Give it up already.
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: November 23, 2011 23:38
Quote
seitan
Does this topic really need the 500 threads it already has ?
What does people think they gain from talking about it over and over - We will never know what Jagger thinks about it, Some of Keith´s comments were stupid - but at least they were his honest feelings - I thought that was were great, cause rockstars dont talk about their feelings in public that often, - and who gives a shit. They are both doing "Some Girls" press at the moment and talking about future plans - so the band hasnt broken up. Give it up already.
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
melillo
()
Date: November 23, 2011 23:46
how would you feel if your life long mate told the world you have a small D##K, would you wAnt to go work with that person for 2 years with a fake smile?
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
seitan
()
Date: November 23, 2011 23:56
Quote
melillo
how would you feel if your life long mate told the world you have a small D##K, would you wAnt to go work with that person for 2 years with a fake smile?
A) I wouldnt give a shit. I have self respect
Neither should you.
I dont cry for silly things like that,C) and I can take a joke.
D) I could always write my own book
E) Personal problems with my friends dont interfere with my work, cause I´m a pro at what I do.
G) There was nothing fake about Keith´s book - cause even at times when he said something silly, he spoke from his heart - the probleam is that tourist fans have their own fantasies about The Stones - and they tend to forget that they too..are real human beings with real emotions.. in good and bad,,,
Now, let me post this again:
COME ON GUYS:
Does this topic really need the 500 threads it already has ?
What does people think they gain from talking about it over and over - We will never know what Jagger thinks about it, Some of Keith´s comments were stupid - but at least they were his honest feelings - I thought that was great, cause rockstars dont talk about their feelings in public that often, - and who gives a shit. They are both doing "Some Girls" press at the moment and talking about future plans - so the band hasnt broken up. Give it up already.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-23 23:57 by seitan.
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
sweetcharmedlife
()
Date: November 23, 2011 23:59
We still don't caree. Turn up Some Brussels Girls Affair and just rock out!Quote
James Kirk
This is Ronnie Wood saying this not fanboys on sites like this one.
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: November 24, 2011 00:24
Quote
sweetcharmedlifeWe still don't caree. Turn up Some Brussels Girls Affair and just rock out!Quote
James Kirk
This is Ronnie Wood saying this not fanboys on sites like this one.
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
proudmary
()
Date: November 24, 2011 00:25
Does this topic really need the 500 threads it already has ?
If there are people who are interested to discuss the damage this book
caused to relationship between Mick and KR, and the Stones legacy in general - I see no reasons why not. You do not like this thread - go somewhere else.
Btw, there is one more side effect - this book finally divided Stones fans into two camps who fight with each other on every topic.
If there are people who are interested to discuss the damage this book
caused to relationship between Mick and KR, and the Stones legacy in general - I see no reasons why not. You do not like this thread - go somewhere else.
Btw, there is one more side effect - this book finally divided Stones fans into two camps who fight with each other on every topic.
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
bv
()
Date: November 24, 2011 00:33
Keith says he has seen Mick's ass on stage for 50 years. Mick has seen Keith's ass for 50 years because Keith face Charlie often. In fact they are ass to ass so no worries. See you on tour!
Well... to be serious... There is a financial crisis. In most of Europe, also many other places where the Stones normally tour. If you went to London school of economics then you know this means you need to think before you spend. I am pretty sure they look into options for next year. They = Michael Cohl and Mick. The rest of them just want to go out there and play, but crew need payments and venues may get bankrupt and the Euro might not exist next summer, so no wonder our LSE guy need some time to think...
Bjornulf
Well... to be serious... There is a financial crisis. In most of Europe, also many other places where the Stones normally tour. If you went to London school of economics then you know this means you need to think before you spend. I am pretty sure they look into options for next year. They = Michael Cohl and Mick. The rest of them just want to go out there and play, but crew need payments and venues may get bankrupt and the Euro might not exist next summer, so no wonder our LSE guy need some time to think...
Bjornulf
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
stonescrow
()
Date: November 24, 2011 01:23
Quote
James KirkQuote
Justin
Did you mean to post this in 2010?
I only bring it up because of todays article in Rolling Stone that cites the book as a reason Jagger is on the fence about working with Richards.
There will be wars. And rumors of wars. And then, the tour shall begin!
Re: Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book? They are two 70 year old children
Posted by:
Rolling Hansie
()
Date: November 24, 2011 01:30
Did Richards really piss Jagger off that much with his book?
No
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
No
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
Re: The Rolling Stones
Posted by:
Rolling Hansie
()
Date: November 24, 2011 01:34
Quote
proudmary
Jagger may be upset that in his 70ies he became an object of ridicule
Now that will piss him off-------------------
Keep On Rolling
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
a bigger nut , bakersfield , bjornkasm , buffalo7478 , deardoctor , dnewton99 , Doxa , frankotero , HouseBoyKnows , LSTNT , MadMetaphoricalMax , mick64 , MJAGGER123 , More Hot Rocks , Nellcote1971 , Rik , rogerriffin , StonyRoad , switchblade1975 , tiffanyblu , Tonstone , tonyc , tumblingdice , willprefecture , z
Guests:
1587
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10