I seem to remember an interview with Keith a few years ago when he spent the early part of the interview doing a bit of image-building, talking about his Stoli and Orange tipple ( "Nuclear waste" ) - and then when he nipped out for a pee, the interviewer lifted the glass, took a sip - and found that it was ALL orange juice.....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-07-07 18:37 by Gazza.

Quote
Gazza
I seem to remember an interview with Keith a few years ago when he spent the early part of the interview doing a bit of image-building, talking about his Stoli and Orange tipple ( "Nuclear waste" ) - and then when he nipped out for a pee, the interviewer lifted the glass, took a sip - and found that it was ALL orange juice.....

Love it!!
It's quotes like these that are often more enlightening than all the other nonsense out there in the media (and what was probably in that particular article/interview).

Its interesting to think about their relationship. My guess is that there has to be resentment. In any partnership, each party thinks they have contributed more than the other. Or at least more than they get credit for.

I think it must have been devestating for Mick when his solo career went nowhere. Surely it was sobering for him to realize that he wasn't as popular without the rest of the group.

It has to bug Mick that most people see an equal contribution from Keith as they do from him.

My belief is that they must be sick and tired of each other. For 40 years you can't mention one without mentioning the other. I'm sure there is a mutual respect, but that's about it.

To make the obvious comparison, another song-writing team got awfully sick of each other after 5 years.

Quote
Svartmer
No, but what I meant is that if we can´t write anything on this board that is not 100% a fact, then it will be very few comments in the future. I think we must have the right to speculate about things we´re interested in. After all, this is a discussion board, not a dictionary.

Eh, I never wrote that you cannot "write anything on this board board that is not 100% a fact"

What I did write was this: Let us not state as facts what we do not know 100% to be facts

Therefore - speculate all you will - like I did in the very same post as to the reasons for Keef's sub-standard performances (as I've had them related in papers and on this board) - but you cannot and shall not present these speculations as facts.

It would indeed be a very boring board, if we could not speculate to our hearts' desires.

But one piece of "fact" has always stuck in my brain: At one time on this board there was speculation as to whether it was true or not that Bill Wyman really did write "Jumping Jack Flash". Later - in a different thread - this was being presented as an established fact - Bill Wyman did indeed write "Jumping Jack Flash".

Now, I don't know if he did - I think not - but it has not been established as a fact that he did, therefore it should not be presented as a fact.

>> the scores of photos of Keith with bottle in hand! <<

scores of photos from when - are you perchance talking about photos from the 70s and 80s?

>> i have it on good authority that i don't know anything for sure about Keith's drinking habits. <<
>> We don't for sure - and that IS a fact. <<

right.

Quote
Gazza
I seem to remember an interview with Keith a few years ago when he spent the early part of the interview doing a bit of image-building, talking about his Stoli and Orange tipple ( "Nuclear waste" ) - and then when he nipped out for a pee, the interviewer lifted the glass, took a sip - and found that it was ALL orange juice.....

There was another occasion like that. It was annual Rock & Roll Hall of Fame show or something, Keith supposed to introduce and give a speech for someone, perhaps it was ZZ Top (sorry, my bad memory). Anyway, according to someone present there, sitting near Keith and his company, Keith sounded quite sober, coherent and all, and all of sudden, when it was Keith's turn to show up, he turned out to be totally incoherent, drunken character. Seemingly, the role was on.

Like I said in my post above, I think the 'real' Keith and his public persona are quite different entities nowadays. They used to be the same one - in the 70's - but since then the private Keith has demarged from the public figure we all know. I think that it is quite natural to take the Keef, the pirate mask on in public - the public life is much easier to cope this way. (But it needs to be noted that the mask most likely is not so easy to control - it is not totally intentional on/off thing for Keith.)

The issue of alcoholism is a deeper one, and I agree with one poster here that it is one of the things that is never discussed explicitly at all. In Bockris (?) book the author says something to the effect that Keith has never faced his own addictions: why he always needs something - be it the strange pills from his youth, heroin and the other hard stuff from late 60's to late 70's, and the king alcohol ever since quitting the 'hard stuff'. It looks like the guy can not spent a moment sober, at least while working. The fact that he seems to have a strong stamina etc. should not prevent to see the other fact that he is perhaps incapable of working without the 'doping'. I can understand that it is horrible for non-addicted, sober people to work with him. That is the message of Bill Wyman's books, and it can be very likely to be one of the reasons why Jagger does not seem to interest to spend time too much time with him anymore. I believe that Keith has a serious problem with alcohol and other drugs, even though he is the most luckiest alcoholic in the world in the sense that he has a public persona that is triumphed for that. If he is acting or not, we never know for sure... anyway I tend to think that he exaggarates his drunkness in public - he is a sort of untouchable that way.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-07-07 20:51 by Doxa.

Interesting to compare Mick 'n Keith's relationsip with the enduring friendship of Charlie and BILL.
Neither met until their early 20's; Charlie's main musical interest is jazz, Bill's leaning more towards R and B. Charlie has been married to Shirley for 40+ years, Bill has, 'em, shall we say, has (had) a different attitude to women.
Charlie spends a lot of time quietly in Devon. Bill seems to have work projects going on all the time.
Yet one of them (can't remember which, I think it was Charlie said that Bill was his best friend.
Whilst being key members of the rythmn section may not be as testing-relationship wise- as singer/composer it says a lot about maturity and balance that they still keep regularly in touch.
God bless 'em

Quote
Gazza

Quote
oldkr
what most are doing is taking their press personas and projecting them on to some bizarre domestic scene. this isn't stella street.

Mick and keith have a fine relationship- They dont need to spend every waking hour together to satisfy anyones curiosity about secret hatreds.

Theyre both entirely different than most here imagine them to be behind closed doors.

this really is such a non-issue

OLDKR

You're talking like you know them personally, Keith.....

closer than close my friend!

OLDKR

Some more material from other thread (thanks to Voja) to 'confirm' my point that Keith is a family man, and Mick not so much.

Charlie Watts: "I am what you would call a loner; I can get along just fine without people around me. We live on a farm, you know. Even worse, we have two. One in England and one in France. My wife runs the farm and I live there, so to speak. The only people about the house are men and women who are in agriculture. So there is no rock 'n' roll fuss. Occasionally we go out and dine with friends, but not too often. I am not like Ronnie Wood who needs to have people around him all day. If I am honest, I enjoy the company of dogs more than that of humans. Not that I loathe my species, but I am of no good to them, they would find me a miserable little man after a while. Keith doesn't go out at all either. He lives with his wife in Connecticut and his life isn't all that different from mine. Mick is the only one who, through the years, has succeeded in dragging me out of the house, time and again. Occasionally we go out together. When he was still with Jerry [Hall], we saw each other quite a lot. But after those two separated, it has become less and less. But on tour he is still the one I hang around with most. For instance, we go to museums together. Through the years we have developed the same cultural interests."

Question: But you and Mick seem to be opposites.

Charlie: "Well, we are. Mick is a social person and finds it important to get to know new people. In that respect, he drags me along. Because if it was up to Keith and me, we would never set foot outside our homes, so to speak."

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008-07-08 01:01 by Doxa.

The common 'best mate' theme in the Stones seems to be Charlie. Even though many of them have wildly differing lifestyles and passions than him, they all (Bill included) clearly absolutely and unconditionally love him and enjoy spending time with him. There doesnt appear to be the love-hate aspect which seems to typify the relationships between some of the other band members.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008-07-08 01:38 by Gazza.

Of all the people on earth, if one want to hear the most balanced view of Jagger and Richards, that is Charlie Watts. He knows them very well, he is a real mate, and even 'equal' to them, he is respected by both, plus: it is outstanding that he is not in any way jealous or bitter for them (read: unlike Bill Wyman), and without being any kind of yesyes-man, he is willing to give all the credit Mick and Keith deserve. He's unique.

- Doxa

When I first got into the Stones, I used to think that Mick was the man, like any casual Stones fan I guess.

Then I got to thinking that Keith was the real spirit of the band and so the most "important" and honest artistically.

Since his decline though, and despite many people's willingness to slate him (yes, he's had bad times but also good ones), I kind of thought Ronnie was very cool and kept the band together.

Charlie has always been Charlie and can't really be criticised. Shame Bill left too.

But now it really does come down to how great Mick is.

At keeping the whole show on the road, year in year out. We all know he does it for his own reasons of course (who wouldn't!) - i.e. fame, cash, legacy, 'biggest tour ever' etc.

But I, for one, am bloody glad he does.

It's only R'n'R but we like it!!!!!!!!

Seems odd to me that Charlie is still in the band. I realise the pay is good...but a man that age who is admittedley an introvert...why bother?

And no offense to all the drummers out there, but its hardly like he is responsible for a brilliant concert or a particularly moving experience. So why live in hotels and put up with the travel and all the other nonsense?

Two simple answers, Bianca

1) he still enjoys it, despite the impression he likes to give

2) He's been doing this for his entire adult life. He knows nothing else. He's on record as saying that when he's at home, he really does sit around and pretty much does nothing.

The Stones w/o Charlie would just be "The Jagger-Richards Band"!!
Not a fact,mickschix-just my opinion!!!SORRY! couldnt help myself! HEH-HEH



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-07-08 16:29 by scottkeef.

Mick seems clean, Keith looks like he stinks. That's probably why Mick won't hang around him too much.

Heh heh.

Mick smells wonderful, I can attest to that fact. Don't know about Keith, but I thought that was funny, Skip!! Made me LOL!! Yes, I agree with Gazza in that as much as Charlie seems to be the one they all have to drag back on the road, he HAS to love it or he'd simply quit! I bet he's never pick up a stick if left to his own devices. He has some gorgeous Arabian horses, I've seen a ton of photos of his stables and home and it is the kind of place I've dreamed of. Funny, he admits Shirley runs the places( both farms).

Quote
mickschix
Mick smells wonderful, I can attest to that fact. Don't know about Keith, but I thought that was funny, Skip!! Made me LOL!! Yes, I agree with Gazza in that as much as Charlie seems to be the one they all have to drag back on the road, he HAS to love it or he'd simply quit! I bet he's never pick up a stick if left to his own devices. He has some gorgeous Arabian horses, I've seen a ton of photos of his stables and home and it is the kind of place I've dreamed of. Funny, he admits Shirley runs the places( both farms).

You're quite correct, Debra. He doesn't. He's said that he never plays at home. If he's going to play the drums at all, he has to go on the road or into a studio.

I know that he does like an occasional gig at the 100 Club, or at least he used to. When I was in London way back in 1986 I had just missed his gig by a few days! I had a FIT! I would have given up my pinkie to have been at that gig! I was part of a college group and most of us explored on our own; that was the year I went to the Marquee Club and saw the play Lennon. Yoko was at the show the night before the one I attended! That was the year that I MISSED everything but a whisker.

He's more likely to play at Ronnie Scott's, I think. His band did a residency there around 2004 or so.

His fellow bandmates showed up to catch the show at various points during the run.

Have you ever seen Charlie solo, Gazza??

No. Its not really my type of music so I dont think I'd travel that far to see it.

The only Stone I've seen do a solo gig was Ronnie (dublin 2001 and Drury lane 2005, when Mick made a guest appearance), although Ive seen Taylor a couple of times too.

Yes, if you know of any Mick Taylor solo gigs please let me know. I think my first impression of him as a solo artists was so horrible that I need a second look. I guess I can google him and check his schedule; I am hoping for one fairly close to home. I may be crossing the pond next year, not sure when but I have the urge to see the U.K again in a big way.

well, I saw him at the 100 Club in London in August 2003 - but I was there anyway for the Stones shows that week and it was conveniently arranged on one of the nights when there was no show. The other time was when he played here in Belfast with John Mayall a couple of years ago.

It was nice to see him (and meet him afterwards) but, again, its not something I'd go out of the way to see.

I think he seems to play most of his shows on the continent.

Actually Charlie's been very willing to tour these last years.
"It's a lot better to play with and spend time with people you love and respect than to sit at home, being afraid to get cancer again." (From an interview with Australian TV)

The mutual bullying between Mick'n Keef is just a brotherly love thing. They love and respect eachother, even though they don't spend much time together on tour. People must have niticed the looks they sometimes give eachother on stage. Affection and respect. It's very touching when it happens. Like in Stockholm 2003 (Cirkus) and in the O2 last August 26th.

And everyone loves Charlie. How can you resist an excentric English gentleman? Dresses up in a three piece suit before ge goes up to punch Jagger's jaw... And he's not afraid to speak up, either. He doesn't have real arguments with people, but when he raises his voice slightly, everyone listens. Like when he told Jagger: ".......And by the way, stop being nasty to Ronnie". A man of few words and many talents.

I've only just read this thread,
But from the outside looking in view, which is all most of us have...I find it hard to disagree with Doxa's early comments about four posts in.

Keith for example lets his guard drop much more often these days...and makes it obvious to all but the dimmest observer that he's nothing whatsover like his image.
[Probably never was if truth be told. Anybody can get hooked on heroin... or any other substance if it's there.]

Many inherently shy people project an image that's different from their real persona ..it's just usually not so "technicolour" as Keith's.
And Doxa's right. Keith is stuck with his image...so he might as well enjoy preserving it ;^)

Quote
Gazza
The only Stone I've seen do a solo gig was Ronnie (dublin 2001 and Drury lane 2005, when Mick made a guest appearance), although Ive seen Taylor a couple of times too.

Those were nice gigs!

I've been told, by someone who actually worked with Keith, that he smelled like piss. At that time. I dunno about the rest of the time. I would just think - the dude smokes like a oil refinery - so he stinks like that to begin with.

Quote
Addicted
And everyone loves Charlie. How can you resist an excentric English gentleman? Dresses up in a three piece suit before ge goes up to punch Jagger's jaw...

This is one of these stories we al love to hear. I'm sure at least 99% of it is made up.

I think it's pretty much been confirmed by all parties, hasn't it?