ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board | |
http://rocksoff.org/cgi-bin/messageboard/YaBB.pl
GENERAL >> MAIN BOARD >> Two questions about Brian's firing http://rocksoff.org/cgi-bin/messageboard/YaBB.pl?num=1298867130 Message started by StonesFan1990 on Feb 27th, 2011 at 10:25pm |
Title: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by StonesFan1990 on Feb 27th, 2011 at 10:25pm
1) What was the final straw, or the final straws, which made it clear that Brian had to go?
2) More speculative: If he hadn't died, and if he had gotten himself together and gotten himself back on the right track, do you think the Stones would ever--even say, years down the line--have let him back in the band? |
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by Edith Grove on Feb 28th, 2011 at 4:23am
I think The Glimmers were mostly worried about Brian being too much of a liability for the '69 tour.
|
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by corgi37 on Feb 28th, 2011 at 5:14am
If it was now, he would have been in rehab only half as much as Ronnie.
Or, he would be Charlie Sheen. |
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by Sioux on Feb 28th, 2011 at 8:38am
1. I think Brian was ready to leave the band when he did.....not saying it wasn't hard, but he knew he couldn't tour, and his musical tastes were running more towards roots music again.
2. I don't think Brian would have wanted back in the band---or needed to be back in, if he had lived. He had many musical interests, and I think he would have found his way into a variety of musical "venues"....from blues to world music...to maybe managing and producing. Who knows? But it would have all been interesting, I'm sure. :) |
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by Heart Of Stone on Feb 28th, 2011 at 10:33am
From what I read Brian was really up to starting a new band, didn't he get in contact with Alexis Korner to look into this? there was talk of a band with Steve Marriott, even John Lennon, don't know how accurate that is, what I could never get was Brian was leaving because he wanted to get back into roots blues music, yet Beggar's Banquet & even some of Let It Bleed is blues, but of course it was the fact Mick & Keith wanted to get back to touring again & Brian had trouble doing that.
|
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by uncleson on Mar 1st, 2011 at 12:23pm
Ive read differnt things First that he had recorded with lennon and mitch mitchell, and hendrix.
Second, that he was lined up to practice with Steve Marriott and Humble Pie. |
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by the soft parade on Mar 1st, 2011 at 3:54pm
A few things I have read are that the agreement between the Glimmer twins and Brian seem like they were pretty much laying him off, until he could clean himself up physically and legally. But I don't know what they actually had in mind. Brian definitely would have done something else.
|
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by Gazza on Mar 1st, 2011 at 5:45pm
Aside from the declining relationship with Mick and Keith post-Tangier and the fact that by '68 and early '69 his increasingly rare studio appearances amounted to a contribution that was pretty minimal due to his condition, the bottom line is that his drug convictions pretty much guaranteed he wouldnt get a visa for working in the US for the forseeable future.
There would have been no US tour in '69 had Brian remained in the band. Unless they hired someone to tour in his place. You could point to the Beach Boys as setting a precedent for this as by 1964 Brian Wilson had stopped touring following his own nervous breakdown - the difference being that he concentrated on songwriting and producing their records. By the time Brian Jones left the Stones he was at best a peripheral figure in the studio. If he couldnt be used on the road either as the band were returning to touring, then the rest of the band were unable to carry him. Unfortunate in every way - not just because of the timing. A few years later and he probably could have sorted himself out. Whether the relationships within the band could ever have been repaired though, I have my doubts. |
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by philgood on Mar 2nd, 2011 at 6:27am Heart Of Stone wrote on Feb 28th, 2011 at 10:33am:
That's right. I talked about this with Alexis Korner in October 1969. IIRC the plans were still pretty vague. |
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by andrews27 on Mar 2nd, 2011 at 9:13am
He should have sold that house and made a taxile to New York, hooking up a new band and vocalist, as he couldn't have survived musically without them. Alone, he would have produced albums that sold as well, maybe, as Syd Barret's, and were about as ephemeral.
He needed a group venue for both the blues and for co-written pop that showcased his instrumental genius. In the Beatles-dominated market that was about to fall, that kind of pop would have fit in and gone over, taking him into the 1970s. But it's anybody's guess how he'd fare in the market of 1975. |
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by corgi37 on Mar 6th, 2011 at 4:14am
Hendrix looks likely now to have been murdered.
Jimbo died in mysterious circumstances (and no one knows who signed his death certificate). Brian was likely to have been murdered. I blame the CIA! |
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by StonesFan1990 on Mar 6th, 2011 at 7:31am corgi37 wrote on Mar 6th, 2011 at 4:14am:
With Jim, sadly, it looks like he might've died totally by accident. Jim was no addict--but he was a recreational cocaine user. He never used heroin as he was incredibly afraid of needles. His health was actually recovering--He had lost weight in the months in Paris and felt better mentally and was even excited to come back to America in October 1971 and work with the Doors on a next album after hearing about the success on LA Woman. However, his girlfriend Pam was a big time Heroin user, an addict. It's believed that he may have mistaken her heroin for cocaine, snorted it, and died, and she and several of their Paris circle helped cover up his death. Marianne Faithfull is believed to have known about it, or been around Paris at the time (she was seeing the same Count that Pam was cheating on Jim with, and this Count was big into H himself). These pictures are the last photos of Jim alive. They were taken June 28th 1971. As you can see, he looks rather healthy and skinny. He died July 3rd 1971: |
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by Heart Of Stone on Mar 6th, 2011 at 9:02am StickyStones wrote on Mar 6th, 2011 at 7:31am:
Great pictures, I read the book "No One Here Get's out Alive" years ago, back in the 80's, interesting take on the mistaken coke for heroin, I didn't know he was that big on coke, he certainly was a big time juicer, maybe that's what happened, I could never understand the cover up though with his death, why????????????? |
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by Lantern<High on Mar 6th, 2011 at 10:06am
I too had read that book and after years have see the movie..
But it seem that Jimi had exchanged coca for heroin. And very weird no one had signed his death certificate. And in few years all the persons that were around him were been gone already. In ugly and cheaper ways :areyoufuckingserious |
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by StonesFan1990 on Mar 6th, 2011 at 11:57am Heart Of Stone wrote on Mar 6th, 2011 at 9:02am:
From what I've read, Jim loved coke. Not as an addict but he had a high tolerance for the stuff. Coke and Booze were his passions in the latter years, whereas earlier (1965-1967/1968) it had been psychedelics. The drinking made him gain weight and gruffed his voice up, and the coke did God knows what. He had an accident around May 1971 in Paris while drunk, wherein he fell from the second floor of a building to the top of a car, and supposedly he damaged his lung and began thereafter having frequent fits where he'd throw up blood, but no one knows for certain. The most likely story is: "In Wonderland Avenue, Danny Sugerman discussed his encounter with Courson after she returned to the U.S. According to Sugerman's account, Courson stated that Morrison had died of a heroin overdose, having insufflated what he believed to be cocaine. Sugerman added that Courson had given numerous contradictory versions of Morrison's death, at times saying that she had killed Morrison, or that his death was her fault. Courson's story of Morrison's unintentional ingestion of heroin, followed by accidental overdose, is supported by the confession of Alain Ronay, who has written that Morrison died of a hemorrhage after snorting Courson's heroin, and that Courson nodded off instead of phoning for medical help, leaving Morrison bleeding to death." Thus the cover up--She could've been held criminally liable, perhaps, for essentially letting him bleed to death. "In the epilogue to No One Here Gets Out Alive, Hopkins says that 20 years after Morrison's death, Ronay and Varda broke silence and gave this account: They arrived at the house shortly after Morrison's death and his girlfriend Pamela Courson said that she and Morrison had taken heroin after a night of drinking. Morrison had been coughing badly, had gone to take a bath, and vomited blood. Courson said that he appeared to recover and that she then went to sleep. When she awoke sometime later Morrison was unresponsive, and so she called for medical assistance." So basically it was Pamela's fault that Jim died, and it was a tragic accident. He wasn't ill, he wasn't depressed or suicidal. His junkie girlfriend let him die. |
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by StonesFan1990 on Mar 6th, 2011 at 12:00pm Lantern<High wrote on Mar 6th, 2011 at 10:06am:
No, Jim was never a heroin user himself. He was scared of it, and needles. He mistakenly (probably while drunk) snorted Pam's heroin thinking it was coca. |
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by Sioux on Mar 6th, 2011 at 3:59pm
So, what of the "report" that's been going around that Jim did not die in the bathtub...but in a club or eatery and his body was smuggled out and put in the bath??
|
Title: Re: Two questions about Brian's firing Post by StonesFan1990 on Mar 6th, 2011 at 10:47pm Sioux wrote on Mar 6th, 2011 at 3:59pm:
Tabloid BS from a self described ''friend'' of Jim. Both Pamela and Alain Ronay (their friend in Paris) told the same story--the accidental heroin snorting in their apartment story--over the years. If the "death in the Rock N' Roll Circus" (that was the name of the club in Paris the story refers to) was true, I doubt Pamela would've blamed herself for his death, going so far as to say she "killed" him. Him mistakenly snorting her heroin while drunk out of his mind and her nodding out on her H and leaving him bleeding to death is a more likely scenario given Pamela herself died of a Heroin overdose just three years after Jim. |
ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2! YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2025. All Rights Reserved. |