Mick Jaggers responds to Keith Richard's bio

[Eric Jx]

A good read.

 

link

[Dana.]

But totally bogus.

[drawback]

Hoax.

 

 

[WWW]

Hoax.

 

How do you know?

[Tonysounds]

I wonder. The bit about it mistakenly going to the wrong Wyman is completely b.s. for sure (obviously the essay was not written from one confidante to another), and I dont know anything about this Slade site, but I will say even if its fiction, its damn fine fiction. It has all the makings of a real lament: bittersweet recollections of adventures past, true insight and self-awareness, and the non-romanticized recall of the fragmenting of a relationship. If its real, its more human than I ever thought Jagger was, and is incredibly sad. If its bogus, the author is an artist. I am filled with mixed emotions having read this, mostly sadness for both those guys. To be at that age, and to be that at odds with arguably the most significant other in your life, is truly tragicin the most Shakespearean tradition.

[AnotherScott]

Hoax.

 

How do you know?

 

Read the comments at the bottom of the article.

 

Still a good piece, though.

[Tonysounds]

Sucks you have to read 3 pages of comments to confirm it wasn't Jagger's writing. But definitely good writing nonetheless.

[reidmc]

Boring. Not in Jagger's voice. Couldn't finish it.

[drawback]

Hoax.

 

How do you know?

 

Read the comments at the bottom of the article.

 

Still a good piece, though.

 

 

Wyman admits it.

 

 

 

 

[Jonathan Hughes]

Sucks you have to read 3 pages of comments to confirm it wasn't Jagger's writing. But definitely good writing nonetheless.

 

 

At the top of the article it says "Imagine if Mick Jagger responded to Keith Richards about his new autobiography"

[Joe Muscara]

That shit wasn't there when I wasted my time reading the whole frakking thing four hours ago, wondering, "is this real?"

 

If this were in print, they never would have done this without a disclaimer somewhere. Instead, we had to wait for Wyman to admit it in the comments (which some never read) and for them to change the title. Fucktards indeed.

[Griffinator]

Sucks you have to read 3 pages of comments to confirm it wasn't Jagger's writing. But definitely good writing nonetheless.

 

No, you don't.

 

First paragraph, just below the title:

 

Imagine if Mick Jagger responded to Keith Richards about his new autobiography.

[Sven Golly]

What sucks is that a group of reasonably proficient keyboardists are behaving like rubberneckers at a freeway accident.

 

Just my $0.02.

[Dana.]

That shit wasn't there when I wasted my time reading the whole frakking thing four hours ago, wondering, "is this real?"

 

If this were in print, they never would have done this without a disclaimer somewhere. Instead, we had to wait for Wyman to admit it in the comments (which some never read) and for them to change the title. Fucktards indeed.

 

Always check the comments.

[ksoper]

"Nothin to see here. Move along." --Chief Wiggum

[JpScoey]

Total bulls**t - apart from the 'imagine if' statement, there are at least two obvious errors...

 

1) Us English (particulary folks of Mick Jaggers age)

 

don't use the expression 'grade school' - that's an American expression...

 

it's either 'primary' school (age 4 to 11), or 'secondary' school (age 11 to 16).

 

2) Although it's pronounced the same, 'asshole', is spelt 'arsehole'.

 

 

Bah humbug !

[StartRun]

What sucks is that a group of reasonably proficient keyboardists are behaving like rubberneckers at a freeway accident.

 

Just my $0.02.

 

...I'll add a $20.00 bill to that comment.

 

Who gives a Hoot-in-Hell about these buffoonish six-string jockeys ?

 

Oh ! Is it because they're "icons" ?

 

Spare us...

 

 

[Eric Jx]

I'll admit I naively assumed that I was reading the thoughts of Mick Jagger. Even though it turned out to be somebody elses words, I still think it was a provoking piece, and it has nothing to do with whether the subject matter plays guitars or keyboard, or swings a hammer for a living.

 

As I was reading it I could imagine how it must feel to have your entire identity linked to someone else so self-destructive, and despite your best efforts, you couldn't escape the relationship.

 

The strongest passage for me was :

 

"In the book Keith blames me for not touring during the 1980s. I was quoted, unfortunately, saying words to the effect of 'the Rolling Stones are a millstone around my neck.' This hurt Keith's feelings. He thinks it was a canard flung from a fleeting position of advantage in my solo career, the failing of which he delights in. He's not appreciating the cause and effect. Can you imagine going on tour with an alcoholic, a junkie, and a crackhead? Millstone wasn't even the word. I spent much of the 1980s looking for a new career, and it didn't work. If I had it to do over again I would only try harder. "

 

 

 

[Joe Muscara]

I try to avoid comments on most web articles, because it tends to destroy what little faith I have in humanity.

 

BTW, to the OP, I like the way you titled this thread, as you called them "Mick Jaggers" and "Keith Richard." Wait, what?

[Tonysounds]

I'll admit I naively assumed that I was reading the thoughts of Mick Jagger. Even though it turned out to be somebody elses words, I still think it was a provoking piece, and it has nothing to do with whether the subject matter plays guitars or keyboard, or swings a hammer for a living.

 

As I was reading it I could imagine how it must feel to have your entire identity linked to someone else so self-destructive, and despite your best efforts, you couldn't escape the relationship.

 

The strongest passage for me was :

 

"In the book Keith blames me for not touring during the 1980s. I was quoted, unfortunately, saying words to the effect of 'the Rolling Stones are a millstone around my neck.' This hurt Keith's feelings. He thinks it was a canard flung from a fleeting position of advantage in my solo career, the failing of which he delights in. He's not appreciating the cause and effect. Can you imagine going on tour with an alcoholic, a junkie, and a crackhead? Millstone wasn't even the word. I spent much of the 1980s looking for a new career, and it didn't work. If I had it to do over again I would only try harder. "

 

 

 

+1. I thought it was a great piece, even if fiction; Keef wouldn't be half so glamorous if it was your sister he was with, or it was your band he was in.

[Tonysounds]

I try to avoid comments on most web articles, because it tends to destroy what little faith I have in humanity.

 

Again, +1.

 

And regarding "Always read the comments?" Why the F would I do that? How much time can you possibly have on your hands? Most of the time, I'm not interested in what trolls have to say about anything!

[Adan]

The problem I have with the piece is that, as someone else said, it's not Mick Jagger's "voice." Granted, I've never read anything written by Jagger. But this doesn't read like I imagine he would write, not even remotely close. That completely obliterates my ability to "imagine," as the author wants me to do.

[Dana.]

And regarding "Always read the comments?" Why the F would I do that?

Heaven forbid you might learn something.

 

[Joe Muscara]

Comments generally have a very poor shit/useful ratio. Most of the comments I saw in this very article were at best, "great job!" [where's the wacking off smiley?] Last I checked, Wyman's confirmation that it was fake was buried pages down.

[Mr. B.]

Sven, I agree with you 100%. You all have interesting opinions of the read, but unless you have met and talked to any of the Stones you are all just talking. Yes, I am old enough and when I was much, much younger I lived in London and met them. I wanted to play drums then and the Stones drummer, never could remember is name would sneak me into some of the clubs they played in. No, I do not remember any of the stuff I heard, they were just fun to be around. The Stones and so many other English bands had no come to the states yet. Most of the guys were 20 years older than I was, grown ups. One of them had to give me a ride home one night because it was so late but I don't remember who. They were very nice and was even nicer to my Mum. He gave her two tickets for club/pub show. It was just fun.

I really hope Mick never reads the book, I do think it was therapy for Keith. He did an interview on 20/20 I think and he sounded and looked better than he had in years.

 

I don't get why all the people here are so interested in reading the book? I thought about reading it but that is as far as it went.

[Tonysounds]

And regarding "Always read the comments?" Why the F would I do that?

Heaven forbid you might learn something.

 

 

Yeah, O K. There is such insightful contribution! When I really dug in, I realized you were right: this was so much more informative. Much like this exchange.

 

http://www.macosxaudio.com/forums/download/file.php?avatar=4674_1263587685.gif

 

 

[Dana.]

The only exchange here is between you and your hand.

[Tonysounds]

The only exchange here is between you and your hand.

 

 

See, reading comments can be informative.

[gryphon]

Although it's pronounced the same, 'asshole', is spelt 'arsehole'.

It is? Then why is there an 'r' in it?

[longfuse]

My favourite Keef interview:

 

[video:youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BKRZTalEys

 

Actually, he was interviewed for an hour last week on the Beeb's culture show. IIR, Richards said that Mick had read the book and, by and large, was OK with what he'd written. At the end of the day it seems that there's still respect between the two of them, despite the inevitable tiffs.