|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
Sir Stonesalot wrote:
You would think that people writing these types of books would come to places like this to get fact checkers.
while they're here they bring along the fuckmooks who research their sleevenotes as well... |
|
|
| Break The Spell |
quote:
Gazza wrote:
while they're here they bring along the fuckmooks who research their sleevenotes as well...
It would be great if they did come here for info, sadly it seems to come down to making easy money rather than publishing a great product. |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
Riffhard wrote:
I stand by my claim the his book is the definitive Stones book available. He was writing from a perspective that no other biographer was ever privy to,and that counts for alot in my mind. His story about the riot in Blackpool is one of the funniest things that I have ever read about the band!
I used to work with a woman who,as a teenage girl, was on holiday from Belfast in Blackpool in 1964 and got tickets for that show. (for those outside the UK, Blackpool is a popular, but now fading, English seaside holiday destination. When the Stones played there, I think it was the week the Glasgow shipyards were closed for the summer holidays, so there were a lot of worse-for-wear Scottish tourists at the show, who partly instigated the brawl. Anyway, she told me what the riot was like (this was before I'd ever read about it) and her account was incredible (Brian was physically thrown off the stage and landed at her feet). Booth (and from memory, Wyman's) account of it is quite hilarious. The story that Stu recollects in Booth's book about the Blackpool riot seems pretty accurate, and the bit about Keith sparking it off by kicking the guy in the face who was leaning over the front of the stage spitting at him exactly matches how I heard it.
The thing is, she already had had tickets to see the Stones' show in Belfast a week later. Despite her parents' advising her not to go after what happened in Blackpool, she went anyway....the show was abandoned after about ten minutes due to a riot, with girls being carted off in straightjackets.
Cant be too many people who were at both of those abandoned riot shows a week apart, I would imagine |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
Break The Spell wrote:
It would be great if they did come here for info, sadly it seems to come down to making easy money rather than publishing a great product.
I'm not exaggerating when I say I could have researched those sleevenotes in five minutes off the top of my head - maybe three minutes if I'd consulted this website and one or two others to cross check the facts. |
|
|
| keithriffhard |
probably my favorite book out of my rock book collection which contains 200 books about The Stones themselves, Zeppelin, The Who, Beatles, Metallica, U2, Black Sabbath, Pink Floyd, Bob Dylan, Cream, Kiss, The Doors, and many others. I thought this book was a classic piece of pure rock journalism! Cameron Crowe would be proud (although he could write a better version of this). I thought it gave justice to each person when it was due. Drugs are a big part of rock and roll life along with the sex and drugs and the creative highs and lows. All were perfectly touched on. Beautiful book! |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
keithriffhard wrote:
probably my favorite book out of my rock book collection which contains 200 books about The Stones themselves, Zeppelin, The Who, Beatles, Metallica, U2, Black Sabbath, Pink Floyd, Bob Dylan, Cream, Kiss, The Doors, and many others. I thought this book was a classic piece of pure rock journalism! Cameron Crowe would be proud (although he could write a better version of this). I thought it gave justice to each person when it was due. Drugs are a big part of rock and roll life along with the sex and drugs and the creative highs and lows. All were perfectly touched on. Beautiful book!
There is one huge mistake in your analysis of the book. You refer to it as "rock and roll journalism". By that standard alone Old Gods is pure shit. The facts are so easily refuted that the word journalism is not a word that springs to mind at all.
The guy is a hack. As I stated before he is the equivilent of Kitty Kely for the rock and roll set. If I can find so many obvious mistakes within the first chapetr alone his journalistic integrity as an author has just been blown out of the water. It's pure rock and roll fantasy and should be read with a very jaundiced eye at best.
Riffy |
|
|
| parmeda |
Hey Riffy...I thought of you Sunday night.
I did!
Did you see The Sopranos? |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
parmeda wrote:
Hey Riffy...I thought of you Sunday night.
I did!
Did you see The Sopranos?
LOL! Yes I did! One of the producers of the show had called the station and told us to watch. He said,"we have a little treat for you guys!!" LOL!
We have previously worked with them when they were filming down here on The Shore. We even erected a big billboard with the tagline,"Yo Sopranos we got your Rat right here!"
We also did a big meet and greet with Stephen Shirripa(Big Pussy). We sent them a buch of Rat shirts,and they have asked us if we could send them some signage for possible inclusion on future episodes. They are good guys.
The funny thing is that a rival station was hosting a big Sopranos viewer party that night! LOL! Pretty cool,huh?
Riffy |
|
|
| parmeda |
Very cool story...
I swear, it stunned me!
Was it Silvio that said it? I can't remember...
But I do remember the "rat" kudos!
...very cool.
Riffy's on the map, folks! |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
keithriffhard wrote:
probably my favorite book out of my rock book collection which contains 200 books about The Stones themselves, Zeppelin, The Who, Beatles, Metallica, U2, Black Sabbath, Pink Floyd, Bob Dylan, Cream, Kiss, The Doors, and many others. I thought this book was a classic piece of pure rock journalism! Cameron Crowe would be proud (although he could write a better version of this). I thought it gave justice to each person when it was due. Drugs are a big part of rock and roll life along with the sex and drugs and the creative highs and lows. All were perfectly touched on. Beautiful book!
how can they be 'perfectly touched on' when the book is so full of basic factual errors?
What I mean is, if hes getting so many facts wrong, how you can take any of the other stuff at face value? Especially when he wasnt even there!
The sloppy research should automatically make you dubious about anything the guy writes.. |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
Gazza wrote:
how can they be 'perfectly touched on' when the book is so full of basic factual errors?
What I mean is, if hes getting so many facts wrong, how you can take any of the other stuff at face value? Especially when he wasnt even there!
The sloppy research should automatically make you dubious about anything the guy writes..
Eggzactly!
Riffy |
|
|
| keithriffhard |
what's funny is how you guys are basing the book's faults squarly on the fact that you think Stephen Davis is a "hack", and just cause you have a bad opinion of him. Please, tell me what factual errors were in this book? What makes it so journalistic is the fact that the truth has been stretched so authenticially as if you were reading it as a magazine. I think of it as a Rob Zombie movie. The acting and writing is horrible, but the visuals are great because it's just an homage. Great book though
|
|
|
| gypsy |
quote:
Gazza wrote:
I'm not exaggerating when I say I could have researched those sleevenotes in five minutes off the top of my head - maybe three minutes if I'd consulted this website and one or two others to cross check the facts.
I know you're not exaggerating. There have been newbies cropping up left and right, wanting us to basically write a bio for them, give them high quality agency photos, and download movies for them. And it's for the sole purpose of taking what they nicked off of us and posting it on their own fan sites or what have you. I don't see why they can't put in the time and energy to do their own research when they have the entire internet, which is loaded with information. But I guess they're just lazy and/or not smart enough to do it on their own. |
|
|
| Break The Spell |
quote:
gypsy wrote:
I know you're not exaggerating. There have been newbies cropping up left and right, wanting us to basically write a bio for them, give them high quality agency photos, and download movies for them. And it's for the sole purpose of taking what they nicked off of us and posting it on their own fan sites or what have you. I don't see why they can't put in the time and energy to do their own research when they have the entire internet, which is loaded with information. But I guess they're just lazy and/or not smart enough to do it on their own.
I've noticed that as well, and then when they get the pictures / video they want for their collection or their website, you never hear from them again. People like Gypsy are just too kind to say no. |
|
|
| corgi37 |
I never trust anyone under 500 posts. |
|
|
| StickyFishFingers |
I haven't read the book you guys are all talking about but i've read the Zeppelin biography Hammer of the Gods and Im just about finished reading his Jim Morrison biography& the one thing i have noticed about Mr Davis, is that he loves to focus on the sensationalistic stuff, the urban myths etc. Based on what you guys has posted here & the 2 books i've just mentioned, I think I'll be giving his Stones book a wide berth. thanks for the tip off, you've saved me some cash. |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
keithriffhard wrote:
what's funny is how you guys are basing the book's faults squarly on the fact that you think Stephen Davis is a "hack", and just cause you have a bad opinion of him. Please, tell me what factual errors were in this book? What makes it so journalistic is the fact that the truth has been stretched so authenticially as if you were reading it as a magazine. I think of it as a Rob Zombie movie. The acting and writing is horrible, but the visuals are great because it's just an homage. Great book though
what factual errors were in it? How long have you got? Seriously - I gave up halfway through it was so laughable.
He even uses other journalists' fictitious crap (eg the Keith punching Ronnie onstage at Wembley in 82 myth)
It not a 'homage' at all, its a hatchet job. And not a very convincingly put together one at that.
My bad opinion on the book has nothing to do with Davis on a personal level or the type of journalist he is. I just find it hard to take seriously accounts of stories from people who werent there when they cant even get basic facts right
I dont mind some of Davis' other stuff..I read Hammer of the Gods and found it entertaining (but then again I dont consider myself a Led Zep historian so for all I know there could be loads of factual errors in it too). If you like books written on that level, its fine. For a proper account of the Stones' history, its a failure.
if you want to read well written accounts of parts of the band's career, it helps if the author was actually THERE - Stanley Booth, Bob Greenfield, Chet Flippo etc. Oh, and all three of them happen to be good writers. |
|
|
| Joey |
quote:
corgi37 wrote:
I never trust anyone under 500 posts.
Christ, that's posting on loan from God right there.
|
|
|
| keithriffhard |
you're forgetting 1 thing, here Mr.Bush................. |
|
