|
|
| StickyFishFingers |
I'm half-way thru reading this book. I'm interested to know the opinions/knowledge of others with respect to Sanchez and his book. I'm finding the book entertaining to read simply because it is sensationalistic but can't help but feel he is a bit of a bullshit artist - for example he is always quoting entire conversations which took place a very long time - I assume he is either making the conversations up or stating what was essentially said. Some of it though I'm sure is crap - for example when he talks about Marianne Faithful popping all those pills in Australia & prior to passing out she was looking in the mirror and saw Brian whom she then had a conversation with when she od'd - what a load of bollocks. |
|
|
| glencar |
Your opinion probably reflects everyone else's. It was the first book about the Stones that I ever bought but I know now that it's mostly crap. Still, it's highly entertaining. |
|
|
| Gazza |
I think the Marianne/Brian coma tale predates Sanchez' book by some years - I dont have it handy right now, but she may have told that story in Scaduto's Jagger biography from the early 70s
keith basically summed the book up by saying that some of the basic facts were true, but obviously it had been juiced up for the most part by Sanchez's ghost writer. as keith put it, "Tony can barely write his own name.." |
|
|
| StickyFishFingers |
Cool - thanks guys for your input. |
|
|
| Zack |
I think the "Tony can barely write his own name" quote by Keith is as big a load of bollocks as anything in the book.
Lack of literary prowess notwithstanding, Tony had great stories to tell - he was there through it all. And he did just that to some Fleet Street hack who put it into the juicy, gossipy format. And the stories ARE in fact sensational. Keith was one of the biggest drug-crazed fanatical libertines of the rock and roll era. His antics are legendary. Somebody needed to dish the dirt, and I am sure Tony was treated very badly in the end, much like most of the people who Keith used and discarded, so he was not entirely unjustified in what he did. Didn't seem to hurt Keith's career much either. |
|
|
| Gazza |
Keith may have dismissed Sanchez's literary ability, but in fairness he never seemed too outraged by the book's contents, nor did he suggest it was a work of invention, more a case of some of it being embellished for tabloid purposes
I guess it adds to the myth. Especially the 'blood change' story! |
|
|
| GotToRollMe |
quote:
glencar wrote:
Your opinion probably reflects everyone else's. It was the first book about the Stones that I ever bought but I know now that it's mostly crap. Still, it's highly entertaining.
Ditto. |
|
|
| Jumping Jack |
I am low brow in my tastes, but I enoyed Spanish Tony's book a lot more than True Confessions that jumps all over the place and is harder than hell to make sense out of with one read. Rock and roll books don't have to be literary masterpieces IMHO. |
|
|
| Saint Sway |
the FACT is that Sanchez was Keith's dealer and constant companion during the Keiths wildest years.
based on that, the stories cant be that far off.
the only problem I've ever had with the book was in the way that Sanchez occassionally portrays himself as the victim or paints himself in a slightly more innocent light than Keith/Anita/Gram etc. The fact is that it was the 70s, they were all hooked on dope, travelling around having fun - so they were all shady characters to some extent, but probably none more so than Spanish Tony. |
|
|
| glencar |
I haven't read it again yet but I did buy the reissue that came out a couple of years ago. |
|
|
| Riffhard |
I am in full agreement with glencar here. A fun read,but full of embellishments that don't border on bullshit but rather fully cross over the line into absolute bullshit. I have said it many times on this forum,the best book ever wtitten about the Stones is Stanly Booth's The True Adventures of the Rolling Stones.
Booth was there as well,and he really can write. This is also the only bio fo the band that the band actually signed off on. A great read.
Riffy |
|
|
| glencar |
I have the Stanley Booth book but have yet to open it. As much as I love the Stones & buy many books on the subject, I rarely read them. |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
glencar wrote:
I have the Stanley Booth book but have yet to open it. As much as I love the Stones & buy many books on the subject, I rarely read them.
Hate to sound cliche here,but Blue I'm tellin' ya once you crack the cover of that book you will be hard pressed to put it down. I love the style he writes in. He jumps form era to era,but he does it in a way that really gives the reader a complete overview of the band's carreer. It only goes up to about the 1975 tour,and the vast majority of the books deals with the 1969 tour,but it's a great read. Wait until you read about the Blackpool riot! Funny stuff!
Love to see what you think about it after you finish it.
Riffy |
|
|
| glencar |
It will be my next book to read! |
|
|
| stonedinaustralia |
i don't know why some of you dismiss the tales told in the book as "bullshit"- which ones exactly?? - to me it all sounds totally credible considering the characters are '70s rock and rollers (and their various attendants) with heaps of cash and raging drug habits
as gazza points out keith himself has admitted that the contents are essentially correct
my favourite anecdote - the hovercraft that ended up in the moat - typical '70's rock and roll excess - yeah i got my own hovercraft but i crashed it into my moat (where it stayed)!!
[Edited by stonedinaustralia] |
|
|
| BILL PERKS |
quote:
Jumping Jack wrote:
I am low brow in my tastes, but I enoyed Spanish Tony's book a lot more than True Confessions that jumps all over the place and is harder than hell to make sense out of with one read. Rock and roll books don't have to be literary masterpieces IMHO.
THAT'S FUCKING BLASPHEMY |
|
|
| lotsajizz |
Yes, glencar, please read it ASAP... |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
stonedinaustralia wrote:
i don't know why some of you dismiss the tales told in the book as "bullshit"- which ones exactly?? - to me it all sounds totally credible considering the characters are '70s rock and rollers (and their various attendants) with heaps of cash and raging drug habits
as gazza points out keith himself has admitted that the contents are essentially correct
my favourite anecdote - the hovercraft that ended up in the moat - typical '70's rock and roll excess - yeah i got my own hovercraft but i crashed it into my moat (where it stayed)!!
[Edited by stonedinaustralia]
I never said that it was all bullshit. However,some of it is without question. The story of Brian attempting to stab Mick with both of them falling out of the window for example has been refuted many times. It's an interesting read,and many aspects of it ring true,but for the best read you got to go with Booth's book. There is a very real reason he called it The "True" Aventures...by the way. It was a direct retort to Spanish Tony's book.
Riffy |
|
|
| stonedinaustralia |
i am not syaing you did say it was all bullshit
i thought scaduto started that brian/mick knife fight story (which Keith book did suggest contained some fanciful anecdotes courtesy of marianne faithfull) - i don't have a copy to hand of tony's book and wished i did -
anyway,i agree re True Adventues it is great work and not just for the story it tells but for the way it is told - i doubt booth invented the idea but the tripod narrative is used to full and telling effect
- like the Maysles he was lucky (meant to be) in the right time and the right place to capture it
having said that the huge flaw in the book are booth's references to himself and his making his story part of the book - he just sounds pretentious and/or boring
[Edited by stonedinaustralia] |
|
|
| BILL PERKS |
quote:
stonedinaustralia wrote:
i am not syaing you did say it was all bullshit
i thought scaduto started that brian/mick knife fight story (which Keith book did suggest contained some fanciful anecdotes courtesy of marianne faithfull) - i don't have a copy to hand of tony's book and wished i did -
anyway,i agree re True Adventues it is great work and not just for the story it tells but for the way it is told - i doubt booth invented the idea but the tripod narrative is used to full and telling effect
- like the Maysles he was lucky (meant to be) in the right time and the right place to capture it
having said that the huge flaw in the book are booth's references to himself and his making his story part of the book - he just sounds pretentious and/or boring
[Edited by stonedinaustralia]
THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS I LOVE IT.
[EDITED BY CARDINAL FANG]
|
|
|
| texile |
quote:
GotToRollMe wrote:
Ditto.
yup...
it's tacky - but when i was 12 years old it was the coolest thing ever.
the stories, the myths, the characters....it all started my stones obession in motion.
|
|
|
| texile |
quote:
stonedinaustralia wrote:
i am not syaing you did say it was all bullshit
having said that the huge flaw in the book are booth's references to himself and his making his story part of the book - he just sounds pretentious and/or boring
[Edited by stonedinaustralia]
true.
booth was a little too in awe of the stones -
and even more in awe of his close proximity to them.
greenfield is my favorite stones' chronicler....
a fly on the wall that kept it's distance -
what a good documentarian should do.
|
|
|
| Saint Sway |
I think Keith did drugs. |
|
|
| theanchorman |
quote:
Riffhard wrote:
I am in full agreement with glencar here. A fun read,but full of embellishments that don't border on bullshit but rather fully cross over the line into absolute bullshit. I have said it many times on this forum,the best book ever wtitten about the Stones is Stanly Booth's The True Adventures of the Rolling Stones.
Booth was there as well,and he really can write. This is also the only bio fo the band that the band actually signed off on. A great read.
Riffy
Up & Down... is simply the best book on the band. Has the best stories...written by someone who lived with the band. True Adventures I actually had trouble finishing....Sanchez' accounts of Nellcote alone are worth the price of the book.
[Edited by theanchorman] |
