Quote
Naturalust

Quote
ROPENI

Quote
Naturalust
I finally figured it out.... Gram must've slept with all these naysayers wives, back before the cruel and difficult divorces. peace

WOW,very deep,you have outdone yourself with this one....

Thank you ROPENIS , I'm sure your ex-wife loved it. peace

Quote
Naturalust
Well sorry about your loss but sounds from your bitterness and venom to likely be true, and I hate to break it to you but I'm not hanging on your every word. Do you think you could please leave me ALONE for a day or two.....talk about adolescent behaviour. peace

Quote
Marie

I like Gram Parsons and having been raised in the South I grew up on country music. Having said that most people in the South (as well as other parts of the country) have never heard of Gram Parsons. No offense...as I said I like Gram Parsons.

Quote
swiss

Quote
stonesrule
He let himself down in many parts of "Life"...Flawed, as we all are, to some degree. He disrespected the band who made him rich and famous, put his ego above the music. In his heart, he knows this.

So we move on and give him a break.

Omit me from this use of the royal "We."

It's far more complex than Keith disrespecting his band and letting them down--and especially implying that he alone put his ego above music.

I see no reason to give Keith a break. He needs no "break" from me or anyone else.

And what, specifically, leads you to the assertion that Keith let himself down in LIFE? Perhaps you were let down. As well as others who hoped to see him in a certain way. I wasn't let down at all. It's an unevenly "written" piece, reflecting someone fluctuating at a great many levels of emotional honesty--and commitment to mining his memories--as authentically as he could. The portrait that emerges is tremendously uneven. And often does not showcase himself, doesn't put himself in a favorable light. I mean, really--he shines a harsh and unflattering light at himself sometimes, and it seems he's aware of that and saying "Take it or leave it--this is me." Other times he's immersed in/obscured by self-illusion, what Tele refers to as his "weapons" talk--when he starts brandishing his shooter or the blade and saving the day, or whatever.

But I am more impressed with LIFE than almost any auto/biography I've read, and I've read a lot. To allow that unevenness was bold of Keith, and the publishers. But that is life, isn't it? We can try to sand it down, and create lovely coherent narrative for ourselves and others. But the more honest we are the more contradictions and frayed uncontrolled edges emerge. And LIFE allows for that. I think it's stupendous, and brave, work. Again, certainly didn't let me down--as much as I rolled my eyes at Keith at times when he'd start spinning off into wishful thinking "story land."

-swiss

Quote
lem motlow


i wonder why he doesnt get all sentimental and carry on about his time with ry cooder.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
swiss

Quote
stonesrule
He let himself down in many parts of "Life"...Flawed, as we all are, to some degree. He disrespected the band who made him rich and famous, put his ego above the music. In his heart, he knows this.

So we move on and give him a break.

Omit me from this use of the royal "We."

It's far more complex than Keith disrespecting his band and letting them down--and especially implying that he alone put his ego above music.

I see no reason to give Keith a break. He needs no "break" from me or anyone else.

And what, specifically, leads you to the assertion that Keith let himself down in LIFE? Perhaps you were let down. As well as others who hoped to see him in a certain way. I wasn't let down at all. It's an unevenly "written" piece, reflecting someone fluctuating at a great many levels of emotional honesty--and commitment to mining his memories--as authentically as he could. The portrait that emerges is tremendously uneven. And often does not showcase himself, doesn't put himself in a favorable light. I mean, really--he shines a harsh and unflattering light at himself sometimes, and it seems he's aware of that and saying "Take it or leave it--this is me." Other times he's immersed in/obscured by self-illusion, what Tele refers to as his "weapons" talk--when he starts brandishing his shooter or the blade and saving the day, or whatever.

But I am more impressed with LIFE than almost any auto/biography I've read, and I've read a lot. To allow that unevenness was bold of Keith, and the publishers. But that is life, isn't it? We can try to sand it down, and create lovely coherent narrative for ourselves and others. But the more honest we are the more contradictions and frayed uncontrolled edges emerge. And LIFE allows for that. I think it's stupendous, and brave, work. Again, certainly didn't let me down--as much as I rolled my eyes at Keith at times when he'd start spinning off into wishful thinking "story land."

-swiss

I didn't think it was a particularly brave work...but I'm with Stonesrule...let's just move on.

Quote
71Tele
Probably because A) Ry Cooder was an actual musical equal, which was apparemtly quite threatening to Keith, to the point where he wouldn't turn up for sessions where Cooder was present

Quote
swiss

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
swiss

Quote
stonesrule
He let himself down in many parts of "Life"...Flawed, as we all are, to some degree. He disrespected the band who made him rich and famous, put his ego above the music. In his heart, he knows this.

So we move on and give him a break.

Omit me from this use of the royal "We."

It's far more complex than Keith disrespecting his band and letting them down--and especially implying that he alone put his ego above music.

I see no reason to give Keith a break. He needs no "break" from me or anyone else.

And what, specifically, leads you to the assertion that Keith let himself down in LIFE? Perhaps you were let down. As well as others who hoped to see him in a certain way. I wasn't let down at all. It's an unevenly "written" piece, reflecting someone fluctuating at a great many levels of emotional honesty--and commitment to mining his memories--as authentically as he could. The portrait that emerges is tremendously uneven. And often does not showcase himself, doesn't put himself in a favorable light. I mean, really--he shines a harsh and unflattering light at himself sometimes, and it seems he's aware of that and saying "Take it or leave it--this is me." Other times he's immersed in/obscured by self-illusion, what Tele refers to as his "weapons" talk--when he starts brandishing his shooter or the blade and saving the day, or whatever.

But I am more impressed with LIFE than almost any auto/biography I've read, and I've read a lot. To allow that unevenness was bold of Keith, and the publishers. But that is life, isn't it? We can try to sand it down, and create lovely coherent narrative for ourselves and others. But the more honest we are the more contradictions and frayed uncontrolled edges emerge. And LIFE allows for that. I think it's stupendous, and brave, work. Again, certainly didn't let me down--as much as I rolled my eyes at Keith at times when he'd start spinning off into wishful thinking "story land."

-swiss

I didn't think it was a particularly brave work...but I'm with Stonesrule...let's just move on.

Reasonable people can disagree on the value of Keith's autobio, to be sure, Treacle.

But stonesrule was saying Keith "disrespected the band who made him rich and famous, put his ego above the music. In his heart, he knows this. So we move on and give him a break."

Not saying move on with this thread.

If you want to move on from this thread, you can! But it's still shambling along, and some good points are still being made.

I was just saying to stonesrule not to count me among a "We" who see Keith as having done his band wrong but we are in possession of enough largess to forgive him. He doesn't need to be given a break. Thass all

swiss

Quote
swiss

Quote
71Tele
Probably because A) Ry Cooder was an actual musical equal, which was apparemtly quite threatening to Keith, to the point where he wouldn't turn up for sessions where Cooder was present

Source, please, Tele!

And did you read my quote from the previous page from Keith? (it's in colord type for easy re-finding ) But do you think Keith just made it up that he bonded personally and musically with Gram? and actually he just wanted to shoot heroin with someone and Gram was the closest shnook to do it with?

And I sometimes winder why people get so skreeched out by the fact that these musicians did drugs together? You know I love you Tele, but how prude are we here as a community? Can't we be fairly comfortable with the fact that the '60s was a very. druggy. time. ? Mick did drugs too in 1968. All of them did. Ry Cooter might've been a "straight," but if not, he prolly did his share.

Perhaps Keith and Ry just didn't like each other the way Gram and Keith did. I mean, look at the 3 personalities. Who are the 2 who would click and bond, who would really like each other? It's just not going to be Ry Cooter and Keith Richards. You and I like each other. We probably always would have or however we happened to X paths. But not everyone does. Keith and Gram dug each other and fug music in a very similar way to each other.

ah well...our first iorr fight {aaaww}
-swiss

Quote
treaclefingers
Agree to disagree...I've also read my share of biographies. I found this at times mind numbing and tedious. He was very honest with certain subjects, but I don't think all subjects, and he was often very introspective but at other times completely shallow.

Quote
71Tele
As Swiss aid, "Life" was interesting because Keith didn't sanitize himself. We got his true voice: Sentimental, cynical, funny, boastful, poetic, ridiculous. There's a difference between being a storyteller and a historian. Keith is definitely the former. His stories are very entertaining, and often even contain a germ of truth, but are not reliable as an objective recitation of events. To argue over his words when he has so often taken both sides of an issue himself at different times, is really silly.

I thought I'd do my bit to keep this thread "shambling along"

Quote
treaclefingers
I really wanted to like it and was just disappointed. I'm not 'forgiving' because I agree he probably doesn't 'need or want that', but moving on because why belabour it? So incidentally I wasn't suggesting we 'move on' from this thread, but rather, 'move on' from the exhaustive analysis of whether Keith 'slighted' the band or Mick. It's all just a bit too much and love it or loathe it, it's done.

Quote
treaclefingers
The book I'd like to read is Charlie's perspective. That would be an interesting, and I would bet very credible read.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
swiss

Quote
71Tele
Probably because A) Ry Cooder was an actual musical equal, which was apparemtly quite threatening to Keith, to the point where he wouldn't turn up for sessions where Cooder was present

Source, please, Tele!

And did you read my quote from the previous page from Keith? (it's in colord type for easy re-finding ) But do you think Keith just made it up that he bonded personally and musically with Gram? and actually he just wanted to shoot heroin with someone and Gram was the closest shnook to do it with?

And I sometimes winder why people get so skreeched out by the fact that these musicians did drugs together? You know I love you Tele, but how prude are we here as a community? Can't we be fairly comfortable with the fact that the '60s was a very. druggy. time. ? Mick did drugs too in 1968. All of them did. Ry Cooter might've been a "straight," but if not, he prolly did his share.

Perhaps Keith and Ry just didn't like each other the way Gram and Keith did. I mean, look at the 3 personalities. Who are the 2 who would click and bond, who would really like each other? It's just not going to be Ry Cooter and Keith Richards. You and I like each other. We probably always would have or however we happened to X paths. But not everyone does. Keith and Gram dug each other and fug music in a very similar way to each other.

ah well...our first iorr fight {aaaww}
-swiss

It WAS a druggy time, but not all drugs and people are (or were) equal. I think it's obvious that keith reserved a special kind of empathy for those who did junk with him. It's a junkie thing, you're "in" the club or you're not. Mick did drugs, sure, but he was never "one of us", as Keith might think of it. Source? "Life" and about a million interviews Keith has done over the years, as well as the other books written about him.

I know you're joking, but I don't feel it's a fight at all. At least I don't feel I'm fighting. Here's a humorous emoticon to prove it:

Quote
71Tele
...which was apparemtly quite threatening to Keith, to the point where he wouldn't turn up for sessions where Cooder was present

Quote
swiss

Quote
71Tele

Quote
swiss

Quote
71Tele
Probably because A) Ry Cooder was an actual musical equal, which was apparemtly quite threatening to Keith, to the point where he wouldn't turn up for sessions where Cooder was present

Source, please, Tele!

And did you read my quote from the previous page from Keith? (it's in colord type for easy re-finding ) But do you think Keith just made it up that he bonded personally and musically with Gram? and actually he just wanted to shoot heroin with someone and Gram was the closest shnook to do it with?

And I sometimes winder why people get so skreeched out by the fact that these musicians did drugs together? You know I love you Tele, but how prude are we here as a community? Can't we be fairly comfortable with the fact that the '60s was a very. druggy. time. ? Mick did drugs too in 1968. All of them did. Ry Cooter might've been a "straight," but if not, he prolly did his share.

Perhaps Keith and Ry just didn't like each other the way Gram and Keith did. I mean, look at the 3 personalities. Who are the 2 who would click and bond, who would really like each other? It's just not going to be Ry Cooter and Keith Richards. You and I like each other. We probably always would have or however we happened to X paths. But not everyone does. Keith and Gram dug each other and fug music in a very similar way to each other.

ah well...our first iorr fight {aaaww}
-swiss

It WAS a druggy time, but not all drugs and people are (or were) equal. I think it's obvious that keith reserved a special kind of empathy for those who did junk with him. It's a junkie thing, you're "in" the club or you're not. Mick did drugs, sure, but he was never "one of us", as Keith might think of it. Source? "Life" and about a million interviews Keith has done over the years, as well as the other books written about him.

I know you're joking, but I don't feel it's a fight at all. At least I don't feel I'm fighting. Here's a humorous emoticon to prove it:

My call for a source was in response to this assertion of yours

Quote
71Tele
...which was apparemtly quite threatening to Keith, to the point where he wouldn't turn up for sessions where Cooder was present

pleasant non-threatening emoticon to you too, Tele!
swiss

Quote
stupidguy2

Yeah, I grew up in Texas where Johnny Cash, Hank Williams, Buck Owens were part of the scenery every Saturday night or riding in the car with your dad.

Quote
stonesrule
"NaturaLUST" don't you think it's time to take your childish fantasies back to the latest issue of Playboy?

Pretend you're an adult. Don't you think that you owe Ropeni a sincere apology?

And while you're at it, why don't you look up the definition of Peace?

Quote
Bliss
Regarding Ry Cooder - he became permanently and publicly embittered when he discovered that, unbeknownst to him, the tapes had been rolling all through their jam sessions, and in his view, Keith lifted riffs and techniques that he introduced him to. I have no reason to doubt this assertion, because it isn't the first or last time musicians have claimed this.

Quote
Bliss
Regarding Ry Cooder - he became permanently and publicly embittered when he discovered that, unbeknownst to him, the tapes had been rolling all through their jam sessions, and in his view, Keith lifted riffs and techniques that he introduced him to. I have no reason to doubt this assertion, because it isn't the first or last time musicians have claimed this.

As to Keith letting the band down in 'Life' - I am thinking you mean, he let down the band's legacy in their sunset years. Given that Mick and Keith have had a very rocky r'ship since the early-mid 70s, according to Mick Taylor, how could any autobiography Keith wrote have any authenticity at all if it didn't reflect that one way or another? They have been frenemies for 35+ years, while their friendship was probably less than half that time.

I would also not underestimate the machinations of the editor of 'Life', who Marianne states has had a vendetta against Mick for decades. Yes, it's Keith's book, but the editor put it together, and decided what to include and what to omit.

So I read 'Life' with a very large grain of salt. Keith is what is known in literature as an unreliable narrator. Many autobiographies are in this camp. Consider the time Keith was writing it - his head injury, Patti's cancer, seeing his abilities as a musician diminish, his age combined with decades of serious substance abuse - and adjust your expectations accordingly. But I defy anyone who has read 'Life' to say that their knowledge and understanding of Keith and RS history was not enlarged after reading it.

Quote
stonesrule
"NaturaLUST" don't you think it's time to take your childish fantasies back to the latest issue of Playboy?

Pretend you're an adult. Don't you think that you owe Ropeni a sincere apology?

And while you're at it, why don't you look up the definition of Peace?

Quote
Redhotcarpet

Quote
Bliss
Regarding Ry Cooder - he became permanently and publicly embittered when he discovered that, unbeknownst to him, the tapes had been rolling all through their jam sessions, and in his view, Keith lifted riffs and techniques that he introduced him to. I have no reason to doubt this assertion, because it isn't the first or last time musicians have claimed this.

Not only in his view, it's quite obvious and explainable. I also see the credits for mandolin and slide on two tracks that hasnt got anything to do with Ry Cooders abilites as a smart move from Mick and Keith. Like giving Ronnie "inspiration" creds on Negrita and or iorr. Cooders role in shaping Keiths new standard riff style (Monkey man, Rambler) and open G style is underrated, same goes for certain licks that helped shape a song like HTW.

Keith: I took Ry Cooder for everything I could get.

Quote
71Tele


I will find the source, and I promise there is one! I have been a Rolling Stones fan for so long that many of these myths and legends are embedded so deep in my gray matter that the original thing that put them there is long forgotten. It may have been Bill Wyman who wrote about Keith not turning up when Ry was there. This is how we got "Jamming With Edward" incidentally.

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
71Tele


I will find the source, and I promise there is one! I have been a Rolling Stones fan for so long that many of these myths and legends are embedded so deep in my gray matter that the original thing that put them there is long forgotten. It may have been Bill Wyman who wrote about Keith not turning up when Ry was there. This is how we got "Jamming With Edward" incidentally.

Bill or someone else may have said that, but there are photos by Michael Cooper from spring 1969 where we see The Rolling Stones(minus Bill) with Ry Cooder playing at Keith's Redlands home.

Quote
lem motlow
swiss-my reference to ry cooder was pure sarcasm.i know very well who ry is, his guitar playing skills,and of course his relationship to keith.

if ry had left without saying a word and died of a drug overdose i'm sure we would be hearing "he was a wonderful guy,turned me onto the blues.he was such a great player"

the difference is ry actually worked with the stones in the studio,played on a couple of records and of course taught keith the open g which became his signature sound.he didnt really care for people[i'm sorry,a person] who rolled tape and then went back and lifted his ideas without giving him credit.

just like brian didnt do anything after a certain point even though his multi instrumentalist talents virtually define the mid-sixties stones.unless of course i'm not really hearing sitars,flutes.,dulcimers,etc on ruby tuesday,paint it black,shes a rainbow...

i sometimes think keiths biggest talent is convicing the media of his version of the truth.

Quote
swiss

It's far more complex than Keith disrespecting his band and letting them down--and especially implying that he alone put his ego above music.

I see no reason to give Keith a break. He needs no "break" from me or anyone else.

And what, specifically, leads you to the assertion that Keith let himself down in LIFE? Perhaps you were let down. As well as others who hoped to see him in a certain way. I wasn't let down at all. It's an unevenly "written" piece, reflecting someone fluctuating at a great many levels of emotional honesty--and commitment to mining his memories--as authentically as he could. The portrait that emerges is tremendously uneven. And often does not showcase himself, doesn't put himself in a favorable light. I mean, really--he shines a harsh and unflattering light at himself sometimes, and it seems he's aware of that and saying "Take it or leave it--this is me." Other times he's immersed in/obscured by self-illusion, what Tele refers to as his "weapons" talk--when he starts brandishing his shooter or the blade and saving the day, or whatever.

But I am more impressed with LIFE than almost any auto/biography I've read, and I've read a lot. To allow that unevenness was bold of Keith, and the publishers. But that is life, isn't it? We can try to sand it down, and create lovely coherent narrative for ourselves and others. But the more honest we are the more contradictions and frayed uncontrolled edges emerge. And LIFE allows for that. I think it's stupendous, and brave, work. Again, certainly didn't let me down--as much as I rolled my eyes at Keith at times when he'd start spinning off into wishful thinking "story land."

-swiss

Quote
Naturalust
Hey Ropeni, I am truly sorry my somewhat adolescent joke hit you where it shouldn't have. My intention was not to imply anything personal and I truly would be wrong to play light about a partner who was lost in this lifetime. I know loss and should have lightened up. Truly nothing personal and I hope you find love again in this life. My thought about music and musicians, especially male, singer song writers form california , slightly screwed up , may have colored my passions in this thread. I am for from a psycopath but if i was I probably wouldn't know it, I think I'll choose not to take your word for it. Let's stay civil if not supportive, I'm sorry dude. peace

Quote
ROPENI

Quote
Naturalust
Hey Ropeni, I am truly sorry my somewhat adolescent joke hit you where it shouldn't have. My intention was not to imply anything personal and I truly would be wrong to play light about a partner who was lost in this lifetime. I know loss and should have lightened up. Truly nothing personal and I hope you find love again in this life. My thought about music and musicians, especially male, singer song writers form california , slightly screwed up , may have colored my passions in this thread. I am for from a psycopath but if i was I probably wouldn't know it, I think I'll choose not to take your word for it. Let's stay civil if not supportive, I'm sorry dude. peace

Naturalust,Thank you for your words,and apology accepted,and yes l have been blessed with a second chance at love,but my first wife was "the one" for me,plus she was also a huge Stones fan,perhaps cause of that l ,overreacted very strongly to ur post,and proceeded to get into name calling etc,for that my apologies to you,as civilized people all we have to is agree to disagree. Have a nice evening.
Roland.