For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
elunsi
Please Bliss, why do you believe all that what that person writes? As I wrote in the other threat, it was not Mick who wanted that paternity test, it was for the court - this is what Luciana said and in Luciana´s own words he was supportive from the beginning. Maybe he made a mistake with Karis, I don´t know, but someone here said, that he bought them a house. And I am sure Jerry can live with the 12m pounds that she got. What for does she want 50? A ceremony in Bali cannot be divorced, because it IS no marriage.
Quote
stupidguy2
I could care less. WHat if Mick was a saint? That would be boring. They're Rock Stars, legendary, iconic figures of an iconic time (60s,70s)
They're work speaks for itself. Who cares if the music is good, or if it moves you - their supposed 'sins' is just another facet of their humanity, what makes them real.
And Doxa is right - Mick's peccadilloes are tame in the public arena. He isn't a monster. If an artist makes a racist comment, that would bother me because it speaks to their character. Mick's relationships with women speaks more to his own personal imperfections, hangups etc.....
And Jagger has never been fond of airing out his dirty laundry and always seems to have tried to keep his personal life personal....
His exes to do that for him. He doesn't claim to be a saint.
As a fan of Brian Jones I love Brian - the musician. Brian as the abusive drug addict who couldn't pull out his prick in time is not behaviour I excuse.Quote
Bliss
Following on from the excerpts of Christopher Anderson's recent revelations about Mick's scandalous private life, I am wondering where others draw the line in terms of their admiration of an artist's work when they cannot respect their personal behaviour.
Does it matter at all? Or do they have to have similar values to your own? Or is there a line that artists cannot cross if you are going to give them your time and money?
Quote
tonterapiAs a fan of Brian Jones I love Brian - the musician. Brian as the abusive drug addict who couldn't pull out his prick in time is not behaviour I excuse.Quote
Bliss
Following on from the excerpts of Christopher Anderson's recent revelations about Mick's scandalous private life, I am wondering where others draw the line in terms of their admiration of an artist's work when they cannot respect their personal behaviour.
Does it matter at all? Or do they have to have similar values to your own? Or is there a line that artists cannot cross if you are going to give them your time and money?
To me the music should always be separated from the persons playing it. That said I don't mind reading about Brian since I find him and his interaction with Mick, Keith and others interesting.
Still I know I do defend his behaviour a bit because he never got the chance to tell his side of the story.
???Quote
elunsiQuote
tonterapiAs a fan of Brian Jones I love Brian - the musician. Brian as the abusive drug addict who couldn't pull out his prick in time is not behaviour I excuse.Quote
Bliss
Following on from the excerpts of Christopher Anderson's recent revelations about Mick's scandalous private life, I am wondering where others draw the line in terms of their admiration of an artist's work when they cannot respect their personal behaviour.
Does it matter at all? Or do they have to have similar values to your own? Or is there a line that artists cannot cross if you are going to give them your time and money?
To me the music should always be separated from the persons playing it. That said I don't mind reading about Brian since I find him and his interaction with Mick, Keith and others interesting.
Still I know I do defend his behaviour a bit because he never got the chance to tell his side of the story.
Do you realy think Charlies wife would "particularly like" Mick if he was such a bad person?
Quote
tonterapi???Quote
elunsiQuote
tonterapiAs a fan of Brian Jones I love Brian - the musician. Brian as the abusive drug addict who couldn't pull out his prick in time is not behaviour I excuse.Quote
Bliss
Following on from the excerpts of Christopher Anderson's recent revelations about Mick's scandalous private life, I am wondering where others draw the line in terms of their admiration of an artist's work when they cannot respect their personal behaviour.
Does it matter at all? Or do they have to have similar values to your own? Or is there a line that artists cannot cross if you are going to give them your time and money?
To me the music should always be separated from the persons playing it. That said I don't mind reading about Brian since I find him and his interaction with Mick, Keith and others interesting.
Still I know I do defend his behaviour a bit because he never got the chance to tell his side of the story.
Do you realy think Charlies wife would "particularly like" Mick if he was such a bad person?
Quote
TrulyMicks
What about an author's character and morals? Christopher Anderson is making my stomach turn. It's sickening to think someone can make a living off of writing such gossip and passing it off as fact.
Quote
Bliss
Following on from the excerpts of Christopher Anderson's recent revelations about Mick's scandalous private life, I am wondering where others draw the line in terms of their admiration of an artist's work when they cannot respect their personal behaviour.
Does it matter at all? Or do they have to have similar values to your own? Or is there a line that artists cannot cross if you are going to give them your time and money?
Quote
GazzaQuote
Bliss
Following on from the excerpts of Christopher Anderson's recent revelations about Mick's scandalous private life, I am wondering where others draw the line in terms of their admiration of an artist's work when they cannot respect their personal behaviour.
Does it matter at all? Or do they have to have similar values to your own? Or is there a line that artists cannot cross if you are going to give them your time and money?
The problem with this discussion is that you're giving Anderson's 'revelations' too much credibility from the outset, when - based on the excerpts - they appear to be a mixture of rehashes of stuff that's already public knowledge, major exaggeration, supposition based on an inventive imagination and total invention.
Unfortunately the more threads that get started about this book and the more column inches it gets in the media, the more exposure this talentless shitweasel passing himself off as a biographer gets and the richer he becomes.
Quote
GazzaQuote
Bliss
Following on from the excerpts of Christopher Anderson's recent revelations about Mick's scandalous private life, I am wondering where others draw the line in terms of their admiration of an artist's work when they cannot respect their personal behaviour.
Does it matter at all? Or do they have to have similar values to your own? Or is there a line that artists cannot cross if you are going to give them your time and money?
The problem with this discussion is that you're giving Anderson's 'revelations' too much credibility from the outset, when - based on the excerpts - they appear to be a mixture of rehashes of stuff that's already public knowledge, major exaggeration, supposition based on an inventive imagination and total invention.
Unfortunately the more threads that get started about this book and the more column inches it gets in the media, the more exposure this talentless shitweasel passing himself off as a biographer gets and the richer he becomes.
Quote
Naturalust
Morality and personal code of ethics is all we have in the end really. This is the stuff that moves and ispires me as an artist, way more important than most here make it out to be. I think we have a pretty high sense of it here on IORR, probably why I choose to spend any time here at all.
I think the most important thing is just choosing to have a sense of morality at all. We are lucky to be comfortable enough to be able to make such choices and if we are wise enough to choose one,good or bad, our outside world becomes a reflection of that.
The seemingly opposite aspects of it that swiss talks of are certainly common enough but I think people who choose to operate at those levels are somewhat unaware of the ramifications. Of course inner conflict and turmoil can create univerally understood good Rock and Roll and Blues and listening to one mans battle (musically speaking) can be enough to satisfy the darker aspects of my morality. Oh yeah, that's what emotional pain sounds like......peace
Quote
Lady JayneQuote
TrulyMicks
What about an author's character and morals? Christopher Anderson is making my stomach turn. It's sickening to think someone can make a living off of writing such gossip and passing it off as fact.
I'm with you on this one. I'm really surprised at the judgmental attitudes from Stones fans towards Mick's well known and consistent sexual 'infidelity'. So far as I have read, Mick Jagger has, since the earliest, days consistently made it clear he does not believe in monogamy. Surely, his belief system must have been equally clear to the women he hooked up with and they chose to live with it. He is no hypocrite ( unlike, perhaps, all his fellow Stones, with the honorable exception of Charlie, who have all been unfaithful to long-term partners but get none of the flak meted out to Jagger ). Equally, he was never legally married to Jerry, any more than Keith was to Anita, so how is he wrong to deny it? I think what infuriates people about Jagger (certainly the press and it would appear some 'fans') is he keeps his own counsel and doesn't answer back when various of his WAGs moan and bitch. I admire that. It's way more respectful to his kids than slagging off their parent.
Quote
swissQuote
Naturalust
Morality and personal code of ethics is all we have in the end really. This is the stuff that moves and ispires me as an artist, way more important than most here make it out to be. I think we have a pretty high sense of it here on IORR, probably why I choose to spend any time here at all.
I think the most important thing is just choosing to have a sense of morality at all. We are lucky to be comfortable enough to be able to make such choices and if we are wise enough to choose one,good or bad, our outside world becomes a reflection of that.
The seemingly opposite aspects of it that swiss talks of are certainly common enough but I think people who choose to operate at those levels are somewhat unaware of the ramifications. Of course inner conflict and turmoil can create univerally understood good Rock and Roll and Blues and listening to one mans battle (musically speaking) can be enough to satisfy the darker aspects of my morality. Oh yeah, that's what emotional pain sounds like......peace
N-lust I'm not sure you're saying this, but do you think a person can be either Good or Bad? (i.e., one or the other?). That they make either Good or Bad choices? that because they're stellar in one area (e.g., writing, art, music) they're therefore likely to make stellar moral choices as well?
I think with the exception of Johann Sebastien Bach, truly very few others but Charlie may be one of them, few artists are that consistently closely aligned with the ideal morality....people by our natures are full of contradictions, are imperfect, and often deeply flawed. Some of the best and most profound transformative art arises from the better nature of artists who in other ways may be supremely schmucky
- swiss
Yes, thanks LJ, well said!Quote
elunsiQuote
Lady JayneQuote
TrulyMicks
What about an author's character and morals? Christopher Anderson is making my stomach turn. It's sickening to think someone can make a living off of writing such gossip and passing it off as fact.
I'm with you on this one. I'm really surprised at the judgmental attitudes from Stones fans towards Mick's well known and consistent sexual 'infidelity'. So far as I have read, Mick Jagger has, since the earliest, days consistently made it clear he does not believe in monogamy. Surely, his belief system must have been equally clear to the women he hooked up with and they chose to live with it. He is no hypocrite ( unlike, perhaps, all his fellow Stones, with the honorable exception of Charlie, who have all been unfaithful to long-term partners but get none of the flak meted out to Jagger ). Equally, he was never legally married to Jerry, any more than Keith was to Anita, so how is he wrong to deny it? I think what infuriates people about Jagger (certainly the press and it would appear some 'fans') is he keeps his own counsel and doesn't answer back when various of his WAGs moan and bitch. I admire that. It's way more respectful to his kids than slagging off their parent.
Thank you!
Quote
Bliss
Following on from the excerpts of Christopher Anderson's recent revelations about Mick's scandalous private life, I am wondering where others draw the line in terms of their admiration of an artist's work when they cannot respect their personal behaviour.
Does it matter at all? Or do they have to have similar values to your own? Or is there a line that artists cannot cross if you are going to give them your time and money?
Quote
stonesrule
Bliss, while I commend you on initiating this worthwhile thread, I feel I have to say that your comments about Marsha Hunt, Karis, and separately, regarding Princess Margaret, are not accurate.
To keep it brief, Marsha has always been rather a manipulator, she and Karis were not peniless and I recall Karis, at approximately age 5, detailing to me what she thought about seeing The Rolling Stones, especially "my daddy," in concert. I know of no serious medical maladies to her health, and Marsha's long-suffering mother in California sent her frequent checks.
To claim that Mick and Princess Margaret had an affair is again not quite how it was.
Quote
Bliss
Following on from the excerpts of Christopher Anderson's recent revelations about Mick's scandalous private life, I am wondering where others draw the line in terms of their admiration of an artist's work when they cannot respect their personal behaviour.
Does it matter at all? Or do they have to have similar values to your own? Or is there a line that artists cannot cross if you are going to give them your time and money?