Tell Me :
Talk
I don´t think the painting is the important part here. What´s important was that the blues guys they admired so much, was there when they came - helping out carrying gear, talking, sharing stuff etc. The "painting" could originally very well be some kind of a metaphore for this.
Just my two cents.
I've alwasy thought that it is Keith metaphorical way to speak about the fact that the blues was out of fashion in black circles in America when The Stones got there. Because his records were not selling, Muddy was painting the ceiling. I think the story of ALO locking Mick and Keith to kitchen is a similar way to tell metaphorically a story with a certain moral in it. Jagger has always laughed to that story, and I think it is really harmless, if we understand its metaphorical nature. Keith talks a lot with this rhetorical manner, and mostly his stories are rather entertaining, clever nad even accurate in catching the point.
Anyway, the problems started when people started to take the stories literally. In the case of Muddy, it was actually Muddy's relativies and friends from a black community who were offended by it: Muddy the proud man would never do such a thing (there were also other implicit problems in it from afroAmerican point of view a naive kid and a pop star from England couldn't probably grasp).
But the problem nowadays is that Keith himself claims it to be literally true - and that's the part I really don't know what to think of. Rockman's misreading of Buddy Guy's book gave us one way out of the dilemma, but now we are back where we started.
My interpretation still is that it is origanally an artefact of Keith's wit imagination, but the story started to live its own life, and now he needs to defend it in order to save his face. It could be also very well that he honestly can't remember any more the actual event - or the lack of it - but just the story he has repeated so many times ever since. So might even believe in it by himself.
That's best I can do. Now stone me.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-07-07 15:14 by Doxa.
Interesting. Who in Muddy´s family took offense?
I really don´t think the story started to live its own life. Not many took this literally - and if they did, so what? Keith is no saint, I learned that when I was a kid already.
What a very, very good post. I read most of the thread; and as always love Doxa's posts, even if I do/don't agree with the view. usually brilliant. And then justin offered another superb counter post. But HM's clip IMO lays it down.
A young impressionable kid - his first time in USA - that alone will adorn everything you see.
I agree with that point with one exception - why make a metaphor sound 'literal'? That's the problem, compounded with Keith adding layer upon layer of "truth" to it. It's too specific. If that was Keith's way of saying 'their not doing well' because the music had fallen out of place in society why didn't he just say that? He had no trouble inventing something that never happened when everyone around Keith never saw Muddy painting the ceiling? The truth is always easier to tell. It can provide good fodder here though: Keith saw Muddy painting the ceiling and grabbed him so Mick's jacket wouldn't go in the canal. Etc.
The 'locked in the kitchen' was an obvious 'get the boys together to come up with something' kind of story. I've never known a kitchen to have a door on it that could be locked.
LOL!
Would never throw stones at you Doxa, the best you can do is usually much better than many on this board can do, including me!
The point is that there is the fashionable old sport of attacking Mick on every opportunity. Why was it necessary to bring this story and open a Pandora's box? But there are people who really enjoy from this mental pic - Charlie punches Jagger in the face. Like in this nice exchange on Yahoo.com
Thewhatnow? • Boston, United States •
I respect this guy a whole lot. My favorite drummer. AND he punched Mick Jagger in the face (wish I saw that) when Mick was being a drunken douche one night.
Jim
I'd buy a ticket to see that!
So this is Charlie's main achievement in the life! I think he is very happy about it
Yes, Keith is Keith, and he tells his tall stories not only because he is a harmless pathological liar, but because he has agenda behind it. Live with it.
well...constant Keith bashing for nothing seems to be the fashionable old sport this season...sigh
If I missed your point, I'm pretty sure everyone else did too. Fine with me too but I'm all ears if you really want understanding here. What was your point? peace
Actually it´s very simple and I´m sure those who paid attention to this thread and especially to the last pages didn´t miss my point.
Pretty sure you got it now.
Doxa - I concur with all of your thoughts on this matter
Happens to me all the time ... makes life kinda fun
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
Bestest way of making a strong point with the subtle charm we've come to expect from the rock of man.
Come on Doxa, we know Keith is full of shite a lot of the time, but we also know he has a unique way of capturing special things with a sentence or a riff.
You know that I know and I kow that you know... Stoned!
I got the book rahtcheer, if you need anything more, RM!
~"Love is Strong"~
he's stuck in the past, man! hung up on some clown from the sixties, man!
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: July 7, 2012 14:51
Quote
Green Lady
A question I've never got an answer to from anyone here: if Keith simply invented the Muddy Waters story, what was his motive? I don't think it's a flat-out lie because I can't see any reason for him to tell such a lie.
I'm inclined to agree with the theory that perhaps he mistook someone else for Muddy, and by the time he found out that it wasn't, he'd invested so much significance into the incident (and told it so often to so many people) that it had become part of his personal mythology. Yes, maybe he should drop it now, but I bet he doesn't. Frankly my dears, I don't give a damn. Keith is Keith, and he tells tall stories. Live with it.
Anyway, I'm not a fan of the fashionable new sport of attacking Keith whenever he is mentioned. It was nice to see him drop in to watch Charlie at the Iridium, and I do really hope that whatever his issues are, he will be able to join his band at least one more time.
I don´t think the painting is the important part here. What´s important was that the blues guys they admired so much, was there when they came - helping out carrying gear, talking, sharing stuff etc. The "painting" could originally very well be some kind of a metaphore for this.
Just my two cents.
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: July 7, 2012 15:09
Quote
Green Lady
A question I've never got an answer to from anyone here: if Keith simply invented the Muddy Waters story, what was his motive? I don't think it's a flat-out lie because I can't see any reason for him to tell such a lie.
I've alwasy thought that it is Keith metaphorical way to speak about the fact that the blues was out of fashion in black circles in America when The Stones got there. Because his records were not selling, Muddy was painting the ceiling. I think the story of ALO locking Mick and Keith to kitchen is a similar way to tell metaphorically a story with a certain moral in it. Jagger has always laughed to that story, and I think it is really harmless, if we understand its metaphorical nature. Keith talks a lot with this rhetorical manner, and mostly his stories are rather entertaining, clever nad even accurate in catching the point.
Anyway, the problems started when people started to take the stories literally. In the case of Muddy, it was actually Muddy's relativies and friends from a black community who were offended by it: Muddy the proud man would never do such a thing (there were also other implicit problems in it from afroAmerican point of view a naive kid and a pop star from England couldn't probably grasp).
But the problem nowadays is that Keith himself claims it to be literally true - and that's the part I really don't know what to think of. Rockman's misreading of Buddy Guy's book gave us one way out of the dilemma, but now we are back where we started.
My interpretation still is that it is origanally an artefact of Keith's wit imagination, but the story started to live its own life, and now he needs to defend it in order to save his face. It could be also very well that he honestly can't remember any more the actual event - or the lack of it - but just the story he has repeated so many times ever since. So might even believe in it by himself.
That's best I can do. Now stone me.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-07-07 15:14 by Doxa.
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: July 7, 2012 15:28
Quote
DoxaQuote
Green Lady
A question I've never got an answer to from anyone here: if Keith simply invented the Muddy Waters story, what was his motive? I don't think it's a flat-out lie because I can't see any reason for him to tell such a lie.
I've alwasy thought that it is Keith metaphorical way to speak about the fact that the blues was out of fashion in black circles in America when The Stones got there. Because his records were not selling, Muddy was painting the ceiling. I think the story of ALO locking Mick and Keith to kitchen is a similar way to tell metaphorically a story with a certain moral in it. Jagger has always laughed to that story, and I think it is really harmless, if we understand its metaphorical nature. Keith talks a lot with this rhetorical manner, and mostly his stories are rather entertaining, clever nad even accurate in catching the point.
Anyway, the problems started when people started to take the stories literally. In the case of Muddy, it was actually Muddy's relativies and friends from a black community who were offended by it: Muddy the proud man would never do such a thing (there were also other implicit problems in it from afroAmerican point of view a naive kid and a pop star from England couldn't probably grasp).
But the problem nowadays is that Keith himself claims it to be literally true - and that's the part I really don't know what to think of. Rockman's misreading of Buddy Guy's book gave us one way out of the dilemma, but now we are back where we started.
My interpretation still is that it is origanally an artefact of Keith's wit imagination, but the story started to live its own life, and now he needs to defend it in order to save his face. It could be also very well that he honestly can't remember any more the actual event - or the lack of it - but just the story he has repeated so many times ever since. So might even believe in it by himself.
That's best I can do. Now stone me.
- Doxa
Interesting. Who in Muddy´s family took offense?
I really don´t think the story started to live its own life. Not many took this literally - and if they did, so what? Keith is no saint, I learned that when I was a kid already.
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith with a Life sideline
Posted by:
Palace Revolution 2000
()
Date: July 7, 2012 15:29
Quote
His Majesty
Try to tell the story of your 60 plus years life with total accuracy after spending most of it in the whirlwind of fame, ten or so years of it as a junkie and also make it interesting and something people will want to read and keep reading.
Life is not the book I wanted Keith to write, but I must say, it is an essential book for any fan of The Rolling Stones. Keith has had so many experiences it is quite understandible that things will be a bit foggy and merged, little tales often told, but maybe exaggerated for the press etc years ago kind of, perhaps, became some of his memories.
The book is good as an impressionsitic piece, we get a great feel for post war Britain, we get a great ring side seat as American Rock and Roll crosses the atlantic as experienced by an astounded english kid, we get good insight in to the emerging British R&B/blues boom...
We get great feel and insight in to the birth of The Rolling Stones(a story, I must add, that seems never to have been told exactly the same way twice.) We get the naive idealism, the rush of fame, the fruits of success and the problems and personal conflicts that come with being in such a succseful band. We get realisation of lost friendships, personal heartbreaks and triumphs.
Life gives us a lot and I for one am glad to have it, the insight, the unique view point, the true and tall stories.
Life is just another piece of an ongoing story...
Doxa, read it more and perhaps you'll begin to appreciate it more. It's different to when it first came out now because parts of it have already been some what acknowledged by Keith as being a mistake, that he went too far... that makes it more interesting in the ongoing story of their lives.
What a very, very good post. I read most of the thread; and as always love Doxa's posts, even if I do/don't agree with the view. usually brilliant. And then justin offered another superb counter post. But HM's clip IMO lays it down.
A young impressionable kid - his first time in USA - that alone will adorn everything you see.
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: July 7, 2012 16:01
Quote
DoxaQuote
Green Lady
A question I've never got an answer to from anyone here: if Keith simply invented the Muddy Waters story, what was his motive? I don't think it's a flat-out lie because I can't see any reason for him to tell such a lie.
I've alwasy thought that it is Keith metaphorical way to speak about the fact that the blues was out of fashion in black circles in America when The Stones got there. Because his records were not selling, Muddy was painting the ceiling. I think the story of ALO locking Mick and Keith to kitchen is a similar way to tell metaphorically a story with a certain moral in it. Jagger has always laughed to that story, and I think it is really harmless, if we understand its metaphorical nature. Keith talks a lot with this rhetorical manner, and mostly his stories are rather entertaining, clever nad even accurate in catching the point.
Anyway, the problems started when people started to take the stories literally. In the case of Muddy, it was actually Muddy's relativies and friends from a black community who were offended by it: Muddy the proud man would never do such a thing (there were also other implicit problems in it from afroAmerican point of view a naive kid and a pop star from England couldn't probably grasp).
But the problem nowadays is that Keith himself claims it to be literally true - and that's the part I really don't know what to think of. Rockman's misreading of Buddy Guy's book gave us one way out of the dilemma, but now we are back where we started.
My interpretation still is that it is origanally an artefact of Keith's wit imagination, but the story started to live its own life, and now he needs to defend it in order to save his face. It could be also very well that he honestly can't remember any more the actual event - or the lack of it - but just the story he has repeated so many times ever since. So might even believe in it by himself.
That's best I can do. Now stone me.
- Doxa
I agree with that point with one exception - why make a metaphor sound 'literal'? That's the problem, compounded with Keith adding layer upon layer of "truth" to it. It's too specific. If that was Keith's way of saying 'their not doing well' because the music had fallen out of place in society why didn't he just say that? He had no trouble inventing something that never happened when everyone around Keith never saw Muddy painting the ceiling? The truth is always easier to tell. It can provide good fodder here though: Keith saw Muddy painting the ceiling and grabbed him so Mick's jacket wouldn't go in the canal. Etc.
The 'locked in the kitchen' was an obvious 'get the boys together to come up with something' kind of story. I've never known a kitchen to have a door on it that could be locked.
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: July 7, 2012 16:23
Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBluesQuote
DoxaQuote
Green Lady
A question I've never got an answer to from anyone here: if Keith simply invented the Muddy Waters story, what was his motive? I don't think it's a flat-out lie because I can't see any reason for him to tell such a lie.
I've alwasy thought that it is Keith metaphorical way to speak about the fact that the blues was out of fashion in black circles in America when The Stones got there. Because his records were not selling, Muddy was painting the ceiling. I think the story of ALO locking Mick and Keith to kitchen is a similar way to tell metaphorically a story with a certain moral in it. Jagger has always laughed to that story, and I think it is really harmless, if we understand its metaphorical nature. Keith talks a lot with this rhetorical manner, and mostly his stories are rather entertaining, clever nad even accurate in catching the point.
Anyway, the problems started when people started to take the stories literally. In the case of Muddy, it was actually Muddy's relativies and friends from a black community who were offended by it: Muddy the proud man would never do such a thing (there were also other implicit problems in it from afroAmerican point of view a naive kid and a pop star from England couldn't probably grasp).
But the problem nowadays is that Keith himself claims it to be literally true - and that's the part I really don't know what to think of. Rockman's misreading of Buddy Guy's book gave us one way out of the dilemma, but now we are back where we started.
My interpretation still is that it is origanally an artefact of Keith's wit imagination, but the story started to live its own life, and now he needs to defend it in order to save his face. It could be also very well that he honestly can't remember any more the actual event - or the lack of it - but just the story he has repeated so many times ever since. So might even believe in it by himself.
That's best I can do. Now stone me.
- Doxa
I agree with that point with one exception - why make a metaphor sound 'literal'? That's the problem, compounded with Keith adding layer upon layer of "truth" to it. It's too specific. If that was Keith's way of saying 'their not doing well' because the music had fallen out of place in society why didn't he just say that? He had no trouble inventing something that never happened when everyone around Keith never saw Muddy painting the ceiling? The truth is always easier to tell. It can provide good fodder here though: Keith saw Muddy painting the ceiling and grabbed him so Mick's jacket wouldn't go in the canal. Etc.
The 'locked in the kitchen' was an obvious 'get the boys together to come up with something' kind of story. I've never known a kitchen to have a door on it that could be locked.
LOL!
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
latebloomer
()
Date: July 7, 2012 16:30
Quote
DoxaQuote
Green Lady
A question I've never got an answer to from anyone here: if Keith simply invented the Muddy Waters story, what was his motive? I don't think it's a flat-out lie because I can't see any reason for him to tell such a lie.
I've alwasy thought that it is Keith metaphorical way to speak about the fact that the blues was out of fashion in black circles in America when The Stones got there. Because his records were not selling, Muddy was painting the ceiling. I think the story of ALO locking Mick and Keith to kitchen is a similar way to tell metaphorically a story with a certain moral in it. Jagger has always laughed to that story, and I think it is really harmless, if we understand its metaphorical nature. Keith talks a lot with this rhetorical manner, and mostly his stories are rather entertaining, clever nad even accurate in catching the point.
Anyway, the problems started when people started to take the stories literally. In the case of Muddy, it was actually Muddy's relativies and friends from a black community who were offended by it: Muddy the proud man would never do such a thing (there were also other implicit problems in it from afroAmerican point of view a naive kid and a pop star from England couldn't probably grasp).
But the problem nowadays is that Keith himself claims it to be literally true - and that's the part I really don't know what to think of. Rockman's misreading of Buddy Guy's book gave us one way out of the dilemma, but now we are back where we started.
My interpretation still is that it is origanally an artefact of Keith's wit imagination, but the story started to live its own life, and now he needs to defend it in order to save his face. It could be also very well that he honestly can't remember any more the actual event - or the lack of it - but just the story he has repeated so many times ever since. So might even believe in it by himself.
That's best I can do. Now stone me.
- Doxa
Would never throw stones at you Doxa, the best you can do is usually much better than many on this board can do, including me!
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
melillo
()
Date: July 7, 2012 16:51
Quote
JumpinJeppeFlash
Keith looks fine
compared to what? an exhumed corpse
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
proudmary
()
Date: July 7, 2012 18:04
Quote
Green Lady
..... Frankly my dears, I don't give a damn. Keith is Keith, and he tells tall stories. Live with it.
Anyway, I'm not a fan of the fashionable new sport of attacking Keith whenever he is mentioned....
The point is that there is the fashionable old sport of attacking Mick on every opportunity. Why was it necessary to bring this story and open a Pandora's box? But there are people who really enjoy from this mental pic - Charlie punches Jagger in the face. Like in this nice exchange on Yahoo.com
Thewhatnow? • Boston, United States •
I respect this guy a whole lot. My favorite drummer. AND he punched Mick Jagger in the face (wish I saw that) when Mick was being a drunken douche one night.
Jim
I'd buy a ticket to see that!
So this is Charlie's main achievement in the life! I think he is very happy about it
Yes, Keith is Keith, and he tells his tall stories not only because he is a harmless pathological liar, but because he has agenda behind it. Live with it.
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
shortfatfanny
()
Date: July 7, 2012 18:14
Quote
proudmaryQuote
Green Lady
..... Frankly my dears, I don't give a damn. Keith is Keith, and he tells tall stories. Live with it.
Anyway, I'm not a fan of the fashionable new sport of attacking Keith whenever he is mentioned....
The point is that there is the fashionable old sport of attacking Mick on every opportunity. Why was it necessary to bring this story and open a Pandora's box? But there are people who really enjoy from this mental pic - Charlie punches Jagger in the face. Like in this nice exchange on Yahoo.com
Thewhatnow? • Boston, United States •
I respect this guy a whole lot. My favorite drummer. AND he punched Mick Jagger in the face (wish I saw that) when Mick was being a drunken douche one night.
Jim
I'd buy a ticket to see that!
So this is Charlie's main achievement in the life! I think he is very happy about it
Yes, Keith is Keith, and he tells his tall stories not only because he is a harmless pathological liar, but because he has agenda behind it. Live with it.
well...constant Keith bashing for nothing seems to be the fashionable old sport this season...sigh
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
letitloose
()
Date: July 7, 2012 18:46
ProudMary, we know you despise Keith Richards. I don't know how you square that with being a Stones fan. Do you shudder when you hear a Keith riff, or do you convince yourself that it's really Mick playing it? you probably think it of me, but I'll say it to you first. I really wish you would just go away.
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: July 7, 2012 19:06
Quote
shortfatfannyQuote
NaturalustQuote
shortfatfanny
Anyone here investigated the paris studio incident when Keith fell asleep under the mixing desk after a session and the police troops came in for rehearsals next morning ?
another stellar moment in band´s history...or not ?
uhmmm....who cares about music,by the way...
What music? All we have is stories of music for many years now, but at least the stories get better with the telling while the songs only had one shot on the day they were recorded.
I always wondered about that French police band story. It seems highly unlikely that the Stones would let anyone into the studio with all their gear about. They are know for "locking out" studio space for months at a time, especially back then. I don't buy it as truth but just a fairly good story. peace
You missed my point,but that´s fine with me.
If I missed your point, I'm pretty sure everyone else did too. Fine with me too but I'm all ears if you really want understanding here. What was your point? peace
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
shortfatfanny
()
Date: July 7, 2012 19:21
Quote
NaturalustQuote
shortfatfannyQuote
NaturalustQuote
shortfatfanny
Anyone here investigated the paris studio incident when Keith fell asleep under the mixing desk after a session and the police troops came in for rehearsals next morning ?
another stellar moment in band´s history...or not ?
uhmmm....who cares about music,by the way...
What music? All we have is stories of music for many years now, but at least the stories get better with the telling while the songs only had one shot on the day they were recorded.
I always wondered about that French police band story. It seems highly unlikely that the Stones would let anyone into the studio with all their gear about. They are know for "locking out" studio space for months at a time, especially back then. I don't buy it as truth but just a fairly good story. peace
You missed my point,but that´s fine with me.
If I missed your point, I'm pretty sure everyone else did too. Fine with me too but I'm all ears if you really want understanding here. What was your point? peace
Actually it´s very simple and I´m sure those who paid attention to this thread and especially to the last pages didn´t miss my point.
Pretty sure you got it now.
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
angee
()
Date: July 7, 2012 22:32
Doxa, I think you know how much I respect your posts here, in general.
I have asked before and yet I am still a bit mystified about what Keith's book destroyed in you, in
your feelings about the man. Indulge me again, along with what you've said, is it primarily a certain pettiness and/or self-aggrandizement you see that overshadows the "cool" of the musician you so loved before? To me, every
autobiography or memoir is going to have stories that others see differently, shades of truth...
And Doxa, my goodness, I don't believe you've resorted to much if any name-calling here:
Keith defenders are the "Johnny Depps" here? Yikes! Ouch.
~"Love is Strong"~
I have asked before and yet I am still a bit mystified about what Keith's book destroyed in you, in
your feelings about the man. Indulge me again, along with what you've said, is it primarily a certain pettiness and/or self-aggrandizement you see that overshadows the "cool" of the musician you so loved before? To me, every
autobiography or memoir is going to have stories that others see differently, shades of truth...
And Doxa, my goodness, I don't believe you've resorted to much if any name-calling here:
Keith defenders are the "Johnny Depps" here? Yikes! Ouch.
~"Love is Strong"~
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
hbwriter
()
Date: July 7, 2012 22:59
Quote
angee
Doxa, I think you know how much I respect your posts here, in general.
I have asked before and yet I am still a bit mystified about what Keith's book destroyed in you, in
your feelings about the man. Indulge me again, along with what you've said, is it primarily a certain pettiness and/or self-aggrandizement you see that overshadows the "cool" of the musician you so loved before? To me, every
autobiography or memoir is going to have stories that others see differently, shades of truth...
And Doxa, my goodness, I don't believe you've resorted to much if any name-calling here:
Keith defenders are the "Johnny Depps" here? Yikes! Ouch.
Doxa - I concur with all of your thoughts on this matter
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: July 8, 2012 00:56
Damn, I feel like spoiling a holy mess here- Doxa
Hey Ho Doxa ...Yeah bit of a stuff up
..was some weeks ago that i glanced thru Buddy book...
shoulda had the printed words in front of me and guess it
shows when time and memory hang around tagether they can play some funny tricks on ya...
ROCKMAN
Hey Ho Doxa ...Yeah bit of a stuff up
..was some weeks ago that i glanced thru Buddy book...
shoulda had the printed words in front of me and guess it
shows when time and memory hang around tagether they can play some funny tricks on ya...
ROCKMAN
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
Rolling Hansie
()
Date: July 8, 2012 01:24
Quote
Rockman
shows when time and memory hang around tagether they can play some funny tricks on ya...
Happens to me all the time ... makes life kinda fun
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: July 8, 2012 01:52
Quote
Rockman
Damn, I feel like spoiling a holy mess here- Doxa
Hey Ho Doxa ...Yeah bit of a stuff up
..was some weeks ago that i glanced thru Buddy book...
shoulda had the printed words in front of me and guess it
shows when time and memory hang around tagether they can play some funny tricks on ya...
Bestest way of making a strong point with the subtle charm we've come to expect from the rock of man.
Come on Doxa, we know Keith is full of shite a lot of the time, but we also know he has a unique way of capturing special things with a sentence or a riff.
You know that I know and I kow that you know... Stoned!
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
angee
()
Date: July 8, 2012 19:24
Quote
Rockman
Damn, I feel like spoiling a holy mess here- Doxa
Hey Ho Doxa ...Yeah bit of a stuff up
..was some weeks ago that i glanced thru Buddy book...
shoulda had the printed words in front of me and guess it
shows when time and memory hang around tagether they can play some funny tricks on ya...
I got the book rahtcheer, if you need anything more, RM!
~"Love is Strong"~
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
KeithNacho
()
Date: July 8, 2012 19:41
The KR's pirate stuff comes from the end of 60s. It is nothing new, as well as ChW's gentleman clothes.
I imagine than Jhony Depp is a big KR's and RS's fan ; he is also a good friend of KR. MJ is a good friend of the Eurythmics's leader and i don't see anything wrong in it.
..........well , i must admit i don't like both, but it does'nt mean nothing wrong
I imagine than Jhony Depp is a big KR's and RS's fan ; he is also a good friend of KR. MJ is a good friend of the Eurythmics's leader and i don't see anything wrong in it.
..........well , i must admit i don't like both, but it does'nt mean nothing wrong
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
soulsurvivor1
()
Date: July 9, 2012 11:05
Dam I was going to go ...
For those of you old enough to remember, Keith Hair is resembling Bozo The Clown's !
Rock On Boys!
SOULSURVIVOR!
For those of you old enough to remember, Keith Hair is resembling Bozo The Clown's !
Rock On Boys!
SOULSURVIVOR!
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: July 9, 2012 17:46
Quote
soulsurvivor1
For those of you old enough to remember, Keith Hair is resembling Bozo The Clown's !
he's stuck in the past, man! hung up on some clown from the sixties, man!
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
stonesnow
()
Date: July 10, 2012 03:08
Last night of the book-signing tour.
Re: Tonight at the Iridium... Keith
Posted by:
Green Lady
()
Date: July 10, 2012 23:34
Thanks all who had a go at answring the question. Not posting much as I am on holiday and wifi spots are few and slow. Normal service will resume next week.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
adrianmfa2 , drwatts , exilestones , Jfk19562003 , keefriffhards , Kevinstones78 , Peachykindagirl , SecondSet , StonedRambler , strat72 , Taylor1 , zowie
Guests:
1478
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10