According to 101 he was opiated. Never seemed the druggy type.
Best biography on The Clash and/or Strummer?
- Heston
- God of Thunder...and Rock 'n Roll
- Posts: 38370
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
- Location: North of Watford Junction
Re: Best biography on The Clash and/or Strummer?
There's a tiny, tiny hopeful part of me that says you guys are running a Kaufmanesque long con on the board
Re: Best biography on The Clash and/or Strummer?
I always roll my eyes when people are extra harsh in criticizing the decisions of bands that did their work in their early 20s. Just think about the kind of decisions you made back then, and you weren't even under any pressure.speakeasy wrote: ↑20 Feb 2020, 2:08pmHey--I wanted to follow up after being given so much good advice here. I'm about half way through the Marcus Gray book. And yes--SO MUCH DETAIL. Some of it--unnecessary? But that's what I wanted, so I'm digging in.
In terms of him being opinionated--wow! It's like every page is filled with him following over himself trying to point out what poseurs/fakes/phonies the band is and how everything was completed calculated. Like the Monkees! And after a while--it's like, yea--I get it--enough!
And I think--oh, what--early 20 something artists messing with and playing with the concept of identity? Trying on different identities? Isn't that what 20 something people do? Especially artists? Identity is ALWAYS a construct. It's always some clothes that we're putting on for a moment.
Again--I'm definitely enjoying the book and the amount of research that went into it. I appreciate the sociological and historical explorations of the time period. These are very important to the story. But the constant obsession over authenticity (or the band's lack of it) gets old quickly.
Thanks again for the helpful suggestions!
"Suck our Earth dick, Martians!" —Doc
-
Low Down Low
- Unknown Immortal
- Posts: 5025
- Joined: 21 Aug 2014, 9:08am
Re: Best biography on The Clash and/or Strummer?
I'd agree on this. I wouldnt be overly harsh on the author either, there was scope for a myth busting, no holds barred portrayal of the band at the time he wrote it, but even at the time i remember finding it a bit nitpicky and irritating. And i think it rather dates it a bit too, though the factual account cant be faulted. More a Route 19 fan and also echo endorsements for Redemption and WATC.Kory wrote: ↑20 Feb 2020, 4:36pmI always roll my eyes when people are extra harsh in criticizing the decisions of bands that did their work in their early 20s. Just think about the kind of decisions you made back then, and you weren't even under any pressure.speakeasy wrote: ↑20 Feb 2020, 2:08pmHey--I wanted to follow up after being given so much good advice here. I'm about half way through the Marcus Gray book. And yes--SO MUCH DETAIL. Some of it--unnecessary? But that's what I wanted, so I'm digging in.
In terms of him being opinionated--wow! It's like every page is filled with him following over himself trying to point out what poseurs/fakes/phonies the band is and how everything was completed calculated. Like the Monkees! And after a while--it's like, yea--I get it--enough!
And I think--oh, what--early 20 something artists messing with and playing with the concept of identity? Trying on different identities? Isn't that what 20 something people do? Especially artists? Identity is ALWAYS a construct. It's always some clothes that we're putting on for a moment.
Again--I'm definitely enjoying the book and the amount of research that went into it. I appreciate the sociological and historical explorations of the time period. These are very important to the story. But the constant obsession over authenticity (or the band's lack of it) gets old quickly.
Thanks again for the helpful suggestions!
- 101Walterton
- The Best
- Posts: 21973
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 5:36pm
- Location: Volcanic Rock In The Pacific
Re: Best biography on The Clash and/or Strummer?
He went on a reading tour of NZ from which he never returned.
Who pfaffed the pfaff? Who got pfaffed tonight?