Drugs. What have been our greatest burn out tragedies?

[Chris Moise]

Id be interested to know what Pete thinks about the effect that the heroin had on Pages output.Certainly, his post Zep output took a pretty dramatic downturn for about 10 years.On the other hand, Clapton seemed to get more technically proficient, but a lot less interesting once he gave up the h and the booze.

I'm of the opinion more and more that Jimmy hasn't really written a great song since "Achilles Last Stand" - which was written in 75/76. If you ever get the chance to see the Earls Court DVD from '75 and compare it with the Seattle DVD of 77, the effect is quite shocking. He had really gone - there are very few (if any) nights from 77 that match 75. I think Heroin was the 'icing' on the cake - he didn't really indulge until the 77 tour (I believe). From there on, it's rapidly downhill.

I agree, I'd also say there are very few nights from '75 that are as good as '73.

[The Slider]

Yet 79 is way better than 77.

let's face it, they ran out of steam after 75, despite the slight Indian summer.
I love In Through The Out Door, but that is Plant and Jones - Page contributes very little.

Nobody that I can see still had much to give except Syd and possibly Jimi.
And Hendrix's studio work was very good toward the end but his live workouts were self-indulgent rubbish. Depends which way he went, I guess.

As great as all the people that Andy mentions were, they weren't exactly pushing at the boundaries were they?

[Jeff K]

Peter Laughner comes to mind. He started Pere Ubu and before that, Rocket From the Tombs. He wrote or co-wrote such punk favorites as Final Solution, 30 Seconds Over Tokyo and Ain't It Fun. He also had a self -destructive side to him and ended up OD-ing at 22.

[The Slider]

Brian Wilson is still putting stuff out though.
Some old and but much new.

I find it hard to believe that he more weird imaginings that he hasn't graced us with.

[Jeff K]

I wonder what kind of music Brian Jones would have made had he straightened himself out, with or without the Stones.

[The Slider]

i actually cried.

Oh you do surprise me.

No, I see where you are coming from, but I don't see where he had to go.
It wasn't as though he was stopped from producing whatever he chose to pour out like poor old Syd was - by actually being mad.
Brian is damaged and there is no doubt about it, but he isn't a shoe-chewing loon like Syd is.
Braidn has continued to work and to write music and issue it - it is what is is - maybe he would have continued to make vaguely unhinged music (such as Smile) but I doubt it - look at what he thinks the benchamarks are.
I watched Beautiful Dreamer quite recently and yes, it is a bit sad in some places, but it also shows what the mentally ill can do in this day and age and I think that is a positive thing. 30 or 40 years ago he would be incarcerated, or elected to parliament, I'm not sure which.

[The Modernist]

I think Gil-Scott Heron would be revered right now as an elder statesman, sadly his drug problems seem to have eclipsed his artistry.

[The Slider]

It wasn't as though he was stopped from producing whatever he chose to pour out like poor old Syd was - by actually being mad. Brian is damaged and there is no doubt about it, but he isn't a shoe-chewing loon like Syd is.

for fuck's sake, john, wasn't it obvious from beautiful dreamer (and all the landy stuff that we know about which wasn't even touched upon in the film) that brian was not completely there? the man is, after years of god knows how much hell, even now only a faint echo of the young genius that he clearly once was.

So you think he was so mad that he couldn't carry on writing?
And now he isn't?

Brian has continued to work and to write music and issue it - it is what is is - maybe he would have continued to make vaguely unhinged music (such as Smile) but I doubt it - look at what he thinks the benchamarks are.

not quite sure what your point is here but i will say that with SMiLE he was pushing the envelope of what pop music was held to be - more so than syd and maybe even jimi. who knows where he might have gone. yes, he might well have quickly become an anachronistic irrelevance devoid of inspiration but he might not have. he was 25, let's not forget, and a gigantic talent. he was the artist that the beatles looked to. maybe they even felt threatened by him. no mean praise, if you accept that.

[/quote]

My point is that what Brian holds up as great - the things he thinks he should have striven for - are usually, frankly, cack. He reveres McCartney's worst excesses, while seeming to ignore the aspects of the Beatles that actually did elevate them above their contemporaries.

He has continued to make music (granted, with intermittent enforced layoffs between then and now).
He wasn't ever prevented from doing so.
The fact that he is a ment (wether it is due to LSD or Murray) is no obstacle to his creative process, is it?
I mean he fought his own demons to bring Smile to life on stage - so why not anything else he thought up in the intervening years?

[RcL]

Another one who bit the dust (and the bottle):



Apologies for the small pic - erm, on second thoughts, maybe for the best.

[The Slider]

McCartney was streets ahead.
He found Brian an inspiration - something to push him harder.
Brian on the other hand found Mccartney an unreachable goal.

My guess is that is partly what sent him over the edge.

[The Slider]

Quite honestly, as much as I enjoy Smile, I do not see many barriers being broken musically.
It is a rich old stew, but it isn't really pushing any envelopes that haven't already been pushed - even by rancid old dullards like The Byrds.

They started out as followers of the Beach Boys, but the Americana aspect of Smile comes at least as contemporaneous if not a bit behind The Byrds' explorations in that direction.

[The Modernist]

Frimleygreener.

[The Modernist]

McCartney was streets ahead.
He found Brian an inspiration - something to push him harder.
Brian on the other hand found Mccartney an unreachable goal.

i wonder what would have happened were wilson in the beatles and mccartney a member of the beach boys. what wilson was doing on his own was setting a benchmark for - for fuck's sake - the beatles to aspire to. not bad, really. certainly, to say that mccartney was streets ahead is quite laughable. you know, i'm sure even macca would agree with me on this one.

My guess is that is partly what sent him over the edge.

i'm sure it was a factor - but it really has no relevance to the discussion at hand, does it?

I've yet to hear McCartney compose anything as simultaneously moving and sophisticated as Surf's Up.

[The Modernist]

I agree Wilson's decline was incredibly sad, the one silver lining though was it allowed the other Wilson brothers to come through and shine.

I wonder if the myth of Smile isn't ultimately more beguiling than the likely reality. I think had it been released it would be regarded now as something of a magnificent folly, spellblinding in parts, hopelessly indulgent in others.

[The Modernist]

I wonder if the myth of Smile isn't ultimately more beguiling than the likely reality. I think had it been released it would be regarded now as something of a magnificent folly, spellblinding in parts, hopelessly indulgent in others.

go and see it live then tell me that.

But people wouldn't have heard it live would they?

[The Modernist]

I wonder if the myth of Smile isn't ultimately more beguiling than the likely reality. I think had it been released it would be regarded now as something of a magnificent folly, spellblinding in parts, hopelessly indulgent in others.

go and see it live then tell me that.

But people wouldn't have heard it live would they?

i have. twice.

Double post!

[Livet]

i will say that with SMiLE he was pushing the envelope of what pop music was held to be - more so than syd and maybe even jimi.

I can't let that one go. While I love Smile, and was fortunate enough to see Wilson do it last year, for me it doesn't even come close to Hendrix or Barrett as far as 'pushing the envelope'.

[Snarfyguy]

i will say that with SMiLE he was pushing the envelope of what pop music was held to be - more so than syd and maybe even jimi.

I can't let that one go. While I love Smile, and was fortunate enough to see Wilson do it last year, for me it doesn't even come close to Hendrix or Barrett as far as 'pushing the envelope'.

I think it does. Its broad themes and interlocking, cyclical structure are very advanced. Hendrix may have explored sonic structures that nobody else had imagined, and Barrett's off-kilter pop ditties are genius for sure, but Smile was definitley a major statement (unuttered as it may have been, of course).

[The Slider]

But aside from its suite-like structure which, let us not forget, has not really been finalised until late last year, it doesn't really make much of an advance on Pet Sounds, does it?
In fact in many ways, it looks backwards rather than forwards.


But as we are supposedly returning to the point, I'm still not sure how BW was stopped from following his vision.
He carried on writing music, even though he was beyond performing it himself.
Like almost everyone else he had his greatest ideas (in 65-67) then ran out of them.
The madness was a red herring - he was mad when he wrote Pet Sounds and Smile. It didn't stop him then, so I don't see why it should have stopped him carrying on.

[Diamond Dog]

i will say that with SMiLE he was pushing the envelope of what pop music was held to be - more so than syd and maybe even jimi.

I can't let that one go. While I love Smile, and was fortunate enough to see Wilson do it last year, for me it doesn't even come close to Hendrix or Barrett as far as 'pushing the envelope'.

Don't know about Barrett - but, as regards Hendrix, I agree entirely Rita. As time goes on, I'm more and more of the opinion that Hendrix opened up a wholenew world with the three albums he did put together - the changing of the sonic landscape was without precedent, almost.