Quote
Rollin92
Latest from MT Facebook page, he won't be there and this explains the response from Exhibitionism;

There was no initiative on their part to include me. I'm afraid they're playing PR games.
In response to an e-mail to the gallery my office received a reply at the eleventh hour (after a lot of people complained on social media) that they would let me have 2 tickets. Which need to be collected before 15:00 tomorrow. I don't live in England. And nobody with any authority has contacted me. So it's a case of: Too little, too late.

Very sad state of affairs

Wouldn't mind betting they've done the same to Bill, which will explain it if he isn't there tomorrow.

Is that it? Had Mick or Keith invited him themselves, he would have appeared?

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Rollin92
Latest from MT Facebook page, he won't be there and this explains the response from Exhibitionism;

There was no initiative on their part to include me. I'm afraid they're playing PR games.
In response to an e-mail to the gallery my office received a reply at the eleventh hour (after a lot of people complained on social media) that they would let me have 2 tickets. Which need to be collected before 15:00 tomorrow. I don't live in England. And nobody with any authority has contacted me. So it's a case of: Too little, too late.

Very sad state of affairs

Wouldn't mind betting they've done the same to Bill, which will explain it if he isn't there tomorrow.

Is that it? Had Mick or Keith invited him themselves, he would have appeared?

No, he lives abroad so his invite yesterday is practically meaningless. He means that not one of the Stones ever thought to contact him about it before. He's an after thought. It's about respect and general human courtesy at the end of the day and I don't blame him at all for being angry - this is the last straw for MT.

I was hopeful that band pettiness/arguments with past Stones would be put aside to celebrate their legacy. I realise now I was being naieve.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016-04-04 10:57 by Rollin92.

If Mick Taylor (or Bill Wyman) has problems with the band or with band members, he should call them or contact them (and don't give me that nonsense about not having their phonenumbers). This public whining is the worst possible reaction one could have and it will only make things worse for himself. My expectation is that the Stones will shrug this off, maybe feel a bit sorry for Mick T. and go on with whatever they wanna do.
I could even imagine they initially didn't invite him because it's not the first time he's complaining about the treatment he got, and they just don't want to have someone around who's only moaning. The only one in the band who is allowed to publicly complain seems to be Keith Richards. Not even Mick Jagger ever publicly complained about his problems within the band.

Quote
matxil
If Mick Taylor (or Bill Wyman) has problems with the band or with band members, he should call them or contact them (and don't give me that nonsense about not having their phonenumbers). This public whining is the worst possible reaction one could have and it will only make things worse for himself. My expectation is that the Stones will shrug this off, maybe feel a bit sorry for Mick T. and go on with whatever they wanna do.
I could even imagine they initially didn't invite him because it's not the first time he's complaining about the treatment he got, and they just don't want to have someone around who's only moaning. The only one in the band who is allowed to publicly complain seems to be Keith Richards. Not even Mick Jagger ever publicly complained about his problems within the band.

If MT doesn't "publicly whine" then how is his side/grievances going to be understood. They didn't want him there because Jagger is terrified of nostalgia and is obsessed purely with what is ahead.

Also, it's ok for the Stones to publicly snub MT but not ok for MT to publicly voice his complaints?

Quote
Rollin92

Quote
matxil
If Mick Taylor (or Bill Wyman) has problems with the band or with band members, he should call them or contact them (and don't give me that nonsense about not having their phonenumbers). This public whining is the worst possible reaction one could have and it will only make things worse for himself. My expectation is that the Stones will shrug this off, maybe feel a bit sorry for Mick T. and go on with whatever they wanna do.
I could even imagine they initially didn't invite him because it's not the first time he's complaining about the treatment he got, and they just don't want to have someone around who's only moaning. The only one in the band who is allowed to publicly complain seems to be Keith Richards. Not even Mick Jagger ever publicly complained about his problems within the band.

If MT doesn't "publicly whine" then how is his side/grievances going to be understood. They didn't want him there because Jagger is terrified of nostalgia and is obsessed purely with what is ahead.

Also, it's ok for the Stones to publicly snub MT but not ok for MT to publicly voice his complaints?

I haven't heard any of the Stones snub MT, not even Keith, who's normally the only one who cannot stop himself saying whatever he thinks.
Look, I am not defending the Stones, but neither accusing them. Clearly their relationship is not very good (and the same goes for Bill), and somehow the "50 and counting" shows didn't help. For whatever reason, and we don't know what that reason is. But the only ones I heard complaining and snubbing were Mick T and Bill W. Maybe they have a reason to be angry, I don't know, but then they should tell these complaints to Jagger, to Keith, to Charlie or Ron. Not to the social media or the Daily Mail. What do you expect the Stones to do? "Oh, it's alright you complaining about us, we're gonna invite you anyway"? What would you do?
I mean, it's one thing to invite an ex to your birthday, but it's another if that ex is all over the media complaining about you, no? I have the feeling (and his facebook posts confirm this) that Mick T considers himself "the best guitar player the Stones ever had". I know a lot of people of this forum think so too. And hell, yes, he was an excellent player, and did beautiful things clearly out of reach for Ron or Keith. But you really think with that attitude the Stones are eager to take you on board? I think - for one thing - that Ronnie Wood has showed admirably restraint and courtesy and respect. I can't honestly think of many guitar-players who would have accepted having Mick T back on stage. I thought that was a beautiful gesture. And somehow - and I am not saying I know how or what - something went wrong. But one should wash one's dirty clothes indoors, not in public.

Quote
matxil

Quote
Rollin92

Quote
matxil
If Mick Taylor (or Bill Wyman) has problems with the band or with band members, he should call them or contact them (and don't give me that nonsense about not having their phonenumbers). This public whining is the worst possible reaction one could have and it will only make things worse for himself. My expectation is that the Stones will shrug this off, maybe feel a bit sorry for Mick T. and go on with whatever they wanna do.
I could even imagine they initially didn't invite him because it's not the first time he's complaining about the treatment he got, and they just don't want to have someone around who's only moaning. The only one in the band who is allowed to publicly complain seems to be Keith Richards. Not even Mick Jagger ever publicly complained about his problems within the band.

If MT doesn't "publicly whine" then how is his side/grievances going to be understood. They didn't want him there because Jagger is terrified of nostalgia and is obsessed purely with what is ahead.

Also, it's ok for the Stones to publicly snub MT but not ok for MT to publicly voice his complaints?

I haven't heard any of the Stones snub MT, not even Keith, who's normally the only one who cannot stop himself saying whatever he thinks.
Look, I am not defending the Stones, but neither accusing them. Clearly their relationship is not very good (and the same goes for Bill), and somehow the "50 and counting" shows didn't help. For whatever reason, and we don't know what that reason is. But the only ones I heard complaining and snubbing were Mick T and Bill W. Maybe they have a reason to be angry, I don't know, but then they should tell these complaints to Jagger, to Keith, to Charlie or Ron. Not to the social media or the Daily Mail. What do you expect the Stones to do? "Oh, it's alright you complaining about us, we're gonna invite you anyway"? What would you do?
I mean, it's one thing to invite an ex to your birthday, but it's another if that ex is all over the media complaining about you, no? I have the feeling (and his facebook posts confirm this) that Mick T considers himself "the best guitar player the Stones ever had". I know a lot of people of this forum think so too. And hell, yes, he was an excellent player, and did beautiful things clearly out of reach for Ron or Keith. But you really think with that attitude the Stones are eager to take you on board? I think - for one thing - that Ronnie Wood has showed admirably restraint and courtesy and respect. I can't honestly think of many guitar-players who would have accepted having Mick T back on stage. I thought that was a beautiful gesture. And somehow - and I am not saying I know how or what - something went wrong. But one should wash one's dirty clothes indoors, not in public.

This is important, and very true, imo.

But I have to add that we don't really know what's been going on here. Obviously, something happened that pissed off Taylor and his people. It's easy to take sides, but as we really don't know both sides of the story (or what really happened), it's foolish to start blaming anyone, imo.

I think he also means that the gallery contacting him about it is not the same as the Stones organisation doing so. The Stones office runs the PR, and presumably virtually everything else save the ticketing, for Exhibitionism.

Anyway, it's awfully crappy behaviour from the Stones, and kind of a dark cloud over Exhibitionism for those of us that are mainly fans of that era and were looking forward to going. Still no word over whether Bill's been invited, but it would be amazing if he hadn't since some of his archive is on loan to the gallery.

About Wood's comments in The Australian, which I hadn't seen before:

1) He's basically just sticking to the party line: there's no real difference between this and Keith saying he'd heard Taylor was sick. All of it extremely vague, and meant to reinforce the age-old rumours about MT's alleged health issues. Wood doesn't come across as very sincere here, given that he's played with Taylor quite a lot over the past few years.

2) I'm not a subscriber so can't read the full interview, but assume that his comments were a response to a journalist asking why Taylor wasn't brought along for Zip Code. If Wood had thought about it for a second, he'd have realised that 'MT has huge personal problems but is fine once he has a guitar in his hands' applies equally to, ahem, other members of the band, and also isn't a reason to exclude him from the tour (if it's true at all).

3) Re: what jammingedward said a page ago, Wood has done this before. He has a long history of chumming up to Taylor in public while trashing him in the press: spreading rumours that he was actually the Stones' first pick after Brian died, endlessly repeating the story about Taylor's stage fright, his reaction to Kansas City '81, and so on. There was a suggestion on one of the Facebook threads yesterday that Taylor has finally had enough of this, and has broken with Wood as well:

Quote

Trond Bertil Barstad: How about Ronnie, I believe he is your friend. Call him, Mick! Maybe the two of you could "date" just to piss MJ off. I think it is MJ, and not KR or CW who is behind this And bring the infamous James Phelge along...Yep the fourth guy from 102 Edith Grove - I have his e-mail if you want it, Mick

Mick Taylor (micktaylor.com): They're all as bad as each other

If I'm reading that comment the right way, this really is a very sad state of affairs.

I don't believe that these Facebook posts are by Taylor himself. I have a good idea who it will be, but I really am past giving a f**k.

The Stones are a set of ruthless bast**ds - is this really news to anyone ?

When they supposedly only cared about the music and earning enough to buy guitar strings............they dumped Stu.

This is nothing new.

Someone has really pushed Taylor's buttons and he's taken it too far. As Woody said to Clapton - " yes (you could have had my job) but you've got to live with these....people"

sc uk



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-04-04 12:16 by straycatuk.

------



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016-04-04 13:06 by TaylorYears.

I don't believe either that Mick Taylor himself is writing these Facebook comments. Maybe whoever is writing them thinks they're doing him a favour but instead it just comes across as petty and undignified.

---------

Quote
TaylorYears

Quote
Beast
I don't believe either that Mick Taylor himself is writing these Facebook comments. Maybe whoever is writing them thinks they're doing him a favour but instead it just comes across as petty and undignified.

And the Rolling Stones are completely fed up with it. One of the reasons why they didn't invite him on the last tour.

Yes - that person purporting to speak out for MT is flogging a dead horse.

I think it's actually not allowed by facebook to have an account with a fake name. So when it's really not him, he could (should) complain to facebook to stop the account.

But just because they're flogging a dead horse doesn't mean there is no justification to MT's grievances. As Straycatuk says the Stones are ruthless.

Anyway, en route to London, excitement is building for tonight. Would be something special if there was a club show tomorrow night

It is supposedly his verified FB page with the (micktaylor.com) on it,and I saw all those comments coming from MT on there ,and thought, ' He's making things worse for himself here'.

I don't think it is him, but probably someone very close.

There has always been speculation about it.

Mind you, still a bit confused as the same post is on the other Mick Taylor FB page but different comments from ''him ''.

It's all a bit strange.

RE MICK TAYLOR
'Jagger is terrified of nostalgia and is obsessed purely with what is ahead" ???

Isn't Exhibitionism all about nostalgia?
Isn't performing on stage 50 year old tracks an exercise in nostalgia?

Just a thought.

Quote
Rollin92
But just because they're flogging a dead horse doesn't mean there is no justification to MT's grievances. As Straycatuk says the Stones are ruthless

Agreed. I'm very sure he has his grievances, but Facebook is not the place to air them.

-----------



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-08-02 23:04 by TaylorYears.

So has Taylor been able to get his "official" page back after he had to surrender it to the Stones media girl when he got on board for the 50th concerts?

As others have said this is all rather sad and miles away from the joy it was to see him pop up on stage at the O2 or see the CYHMK and Sway vids from the 2013 LA show. It seems it's been pretty much downhill from there, with the rumoured "arguments" during the HP shows, then being informed by their "manager"/"Director of Business Affairs" that he wouldn't be invited for the ZIP tour, now the Exhibitionism "snub", Wood being as "bad" as the others, etc...

As for Exhibitionism in itself, dunno, hopefully those who go there will have a good time.

--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio

Quote
jlowe
RE MICK TAYLOR
'Jagger is terrified of nostalgia and is obsessed purely with what is ahead" ???

Isn't Exhibitionism all about nostalgia?
Isn't performing on stage 50 year old tracks an exercise in nostalgia?

Just a thought.

We don't really know that yet...

Asking whether MT himself personally wrote those Facebook posts is surely the wrong question, no? The issue is whether the comments reflect his views and were written with his consent, and the answer to that has to be yes. The alternatives are impossible.

Is Exhibitionism only a temporary display or will it be permanent like the Abba museum in Stockholm?

Quote
Stoneage
Is Exhibitionism only a temporary display or will it be permanent like the Abba museum in Stockholm?

It will travel around. For four years, I think.

It's doing a world tour after London ,with Paris,New York, maybe Tokyo and Sydney and maybe coming to your own home town.

Thanks.

Quote
crawdaddy
It's doing a world tour after London ,with Paris,New York, maybe Tokyo and Sydney and maybe coming to your own home town.

Hope it will be coming to Amsterdam.
Jeroen

Why would the Stones invite him? It's an affair of the current band, not of the band from 43 years ago.

And it seems that his involvement with the band in 2013 and 2014 has gone quite sour...

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs
Why would the Stones invite him? It's an affair of the current band, not of the band from 43 years ago.

And it seems that his involvement with the band in 2013 and 2014 has gone quite sour...

Mathijs

The exhibition goes back to their days at Edith Grove so it goes back further than 43 years so Mick Taylor should have been invited along with other people from the band's past. I can't make any sense of the first half of your post. The second part I agree with though I can't see the point in stating the obvious.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-04-04 19:45 by Harlem Shuffler.

Quote
Mathijs
Why would the Stones invite him? It's an affair of the current band, not of the band from 43 years ago.

And it seems that his involvement with the band in 2013 and 2014 has gone quite sour...

Mathijs

I understood that the Stones did invite him?

Quote
Rollin92
But just because they're flogging a dead horse doesn't mean there is no justification to MT's grievances. As Straycatuk says the Stones are ruthless.

Anyway, en route to London, excitement is building for tonight. Would be something special if there was a club show tomorrow night

I sincerely doubt it but that would be amazing