There was something about this I can't quite put my finger on. I'm not sure I can pinpoint anything particularly wrong with it, yet it never once grabThere was something about this I can't quite put my finger on. I'm not sure I can pinpoint anything particularly wrong with it, yet it never once grabbed me. None of the four main figures come off well personality-wise. Drugs, egos and one flaky member consistently drove the group apart. Doggett certainly makes a case for how important and incredible their music was, but as someone who isn't a huge fan it felt a little overkill for me at times. I'm not going to lie, I was reading this solely for the drama and it only sort of delivered in that regard....more
I was dying to read this after reading A Song for Everyone earlier this year. I know there's a lot of what Fogerty says vs. what the other three CCR mI was dying to read this after reading A Song for Everyone earlier this year. I know there's a lot of what Fogerty says vs. what the other three CCR members say going on, but I wanted to hear it all from Fogerty's perspective since he really was the driving force behind that band.
The first half of the book is decent. He talks a lot about his influences and specific songs and albums that made a mark on him, which is cool. If you had the time, it'd be great to go through everything he talks about. The writing, however, is mostly pretty poor. The chronology is also a little too choppy when it doesn't need to be. He says he got married too young, but stayed with his first wife for a long time and had three children with her. He has basically nothing to say about any of them. He also doesn't paint a clear picture of the relationship between him and his brothers.
The highlight of the first half is of course the CCR years. Fogerty talks about how he came up with certain songs, and how his playing developed. This is the kind of insight you want, so it was great. But this is also where Fogerty's personality starts coming through. He gives the impression that he was the only competent one in the band - the other three never even came up with their own parts to play; that was all John telling them what to do. None of the other three cared about the band like he did. They didn't have the drive. He was always the smartest, always the only one who knew what to do.
But even the CCR years aren't super clear. He talks a little about Woodstock, or performing on a TV show, but only mentions touring in passing. So you don't actually get the impression that CCR were on the road much, even if they were. There are no good stories from this time, either. Did any of them ever have fun together? Doesn't seem like it, according to Fogerty. He also repeatedly calls CCR the biggest band in the world, but were they?
The second half is a real slog. It's just lawsuits and more complaining and bitterness. He definitely got screwed over and I can understand where his feelings are coming from, but it's been decades. I like that he was very honest in assessing his post-CCR albums, and how they often weren't up to his standard. He at least has enough self-awareness for that. But there was nothing too interesting in the whole second half. And all the stuff about his second wife comes across really cringey. There's also, throughout the whole book, long passages that appear in quotations. Kinda seems like he's just putting words in other people's mouths, and his own!
Fortunate Son is a very run of the mill autobiography. There's some good insight into Fogerty's writing, playing and influences. But the writing borders on being straight up bad. There are lots of questionable 'quotes' that appear, and in general just so much bitterness. The first half is definitely better than the second, and is worth a read if you can get this from your library. I could never recommend this, though....more
This was a very enjoyable read. In fact, I'd probably rank it among the best music autobiographies I've read. This is partly due to the fact that the This was a very enjoyable read. In fact, I'd probably rank it among the best music autobiographies I've read. This is partly due to the fact that the writing is actually good (simple and conversational in style, yet done with care) unlike most of them, and partly due to all the great stories Krieger has.
One thing I was a little unsure of was the way the book is laid out. Set the Night on Fire does not follow the standard chronological approach. Instead, chapters jump back and forth in time in a random way. At first I found this off-putting because I couldn't pin down a linear history. But as I read, I found that the jumping around actually kept things fresh. You don't have to read through chapters and chapters of (often) dull childhood memories to get to the good stuff. Just as you don't have to read through chapters and chapters of less-than-interesting post-band career after the good stuff. You get a nice mix of everything this way.
Krieger definitely tells some stories that don't paint him in the best light, but he comes across as such a nice guy, and really funny. Some fans may have issues with his interpretation of events, and some things said about other Doors members, but that was neither here nor there for me.
My mom is like the biggest Doors fan ever, but I've only recently started coming around to the band. Set the Night on Fire was a great book to read as I made my way through their albums. It wonderfully chronicles the brief but insane years of the Doors and beyond....more
Although their music is pretty ubiquitous, I knew literally nothing about CCR. I had wanted to start going through their albums, and A Song for EveryoAlthough their music is pretty ubiquitous, I knew literally nothing about CCR. I had wanted to start going through their albums, and A Song for Everyone was a pretty recent release, so I thought they'd pair together nicely.
The book provides plenty of context about what was going on politically and socially during the time CCR was active. I liked the idea of including this, because their music - while still so appealing today - is rooted in this period. It could, however, be overkill. When there was more of a direct link to the band and their music it was fine. But sometimes it seemed like there wasn't much of a real connection, so the book loses its footing a bit from time to time.
It's incredible how much great music the band churned out in such a short period. Yes, they had been together since they were young teenagers, and then worked under different names and different gimmicks while trying to make it. But CCR as CCR was only together a fairly short time in the late '60s and early '70s. They might not have been the most versatile band, but they were sure good at what they did. Their singles are just like knock-out song after knock-out song; even their albums are generally all killer no filler.
Underlying everything Lingan writes about, though, is the takeover of the band by John Fogerty to where it essentially became John Fogerty and The Other Three. They couldn't bring in song ideas. They couldn't record backing vocals. John told them to play what he wanted them to play. This slowly alienated the others until brother Tom Fogerty left, and they later went on to release their last album - the one where John decided Stu and Doug were to write a third of the album each, even though they only ever wanted collaboration.
The post-CCR years are covered extremely briefly, and I really wish this had been expanded on. There's so much that came after that is integral to the story and the members' relationships with each other, but it just doesn't get fleshed out here. The photo section, unfortunately, totally blows.
In the end, I'm not sure what I make of the whole thing. I spent most of the book thinking that John was an asshole; and maybe he is regardless. Watching them live, Stu, Doug and Tom certainly don't look or sound like they're incompetent. But great songwriters and gifted instrumentalists perhaps they were not. The CCR we got, I guess, wouldn't have been the same had John not been so controlling. He was really an amazing talent, from songwriting to singing to guitar playing.
I had a good time reading A Song for Everyone, though it's not a perfect book. It was fun to watch the Albert Hall documentary/concert on Netflix as I read; it's a killer performance. And going through all their albums made me realize that I like this band way, way more than I thought I did. Unfortunately the CCR story does not end as a happy one, but at least we have their tunes....more
I think this is one of the better rock autobiographies I've read. I'll note here that I wouldn't consider myself an Eagles fan per se, but I do enjoy I think this is one of the better rock autobiographies I've read. I'll note here that I wouldn't consider myself an Eagles fan per se, but I do enjoy their music in a general sense. But my only real knowledge of the group - aside from their music - comes from the 2013 documentary, History of the Eagles, which I've watched twice now. So going into Heaven and Hell, perhaps I'm not the best judge of its veracity. But what Don Felder writes here about people like Glenn Frey and Don Henley seems to be the impression I got of them from the documentary as well.
I wouldn't exactly heap praise on the writing here, but I still think it's quite a bit better than other musician autobiographies. Some of those are piss-poor; this actually feels like some effort was put into the writing. Heaven and Hell follows the standard layout for this sort of book, so nothing too special there. But there was something sort of endearing about Felder's story right from the start.
As usual, slightly too long is spent detailing his childhood, but then we move through the slow but steady rise through a music career, including his early run-ins with people who would become big names in the industry. But of course, the main point of the book is Felder's time spent in the Eagles, and his eventual firing.
It sounded like when things were good in the Eagles, they were really good. But generally that didn't seem to be the case. Felder depicts constant tension, and a feeling of a gradual take-over of the band by Henley and Frey. The other members of the band seemed to be slowly relegated to side-man status, working under Henley and Frey - not with them; their song ideas were less important, they received less money, and were told what to do or not do on stage. All this according to Felder, of course. Felder eventually gets the boot during the reunion years for asking too many questions about finances; fellow members Joe Walsh and Timothy B. Schmit don't back him up.
I guess what this all comes down to is how believable Felder's portrayal of events is. He portrays himself pretty positively throughout - not exactly an all-good narrator incapable of wrong, but as someone trying to keep the peace who was wronged by others and didn't get his due. There's probably more to the story than Felder lets on here, but it seemed grounded enough that for me, as a non-fan, it felt reasonable. I can't imagine Henley or Frey would ever come out and say anything that would've made them look like the all-controlling, money-hungry assholes they're often depicted as here. But it makes me wonder what Walsh and Schmit would honestly have to say about the whole situation if they weren't still members of the band....more
I had decently high hopes for this, and was looking forward to reading it. I'm a pretty casual Judas Priest fan, but in my mind I felt like frontman RI had decently high hopes for this, and was looking forward to reading it. I'm a pretty casual Judas Priest fan, but in my mind I felt like frontman Rob Halford would be someone to deliver a really great autobiography. I have to say I was a little disappointed with this, though.
It's not that Confess is bad - it's just pretty average. And I was expecting more. The writing isn't anything special, although it has that very personal quality to it, like he's sitting there telling you the stories. That has its own charm and appeal, but it also feels kind of basic and plain.
Of course, with Halford, you should go into Confess knowing that his personal life is going to play a major role. He kept his sexuality a secret from the public for decades, for fear of not only a more general societal unacceptance, but also alienating Priest fans and hurting the band. He writes, "In my mind, the bigger Priest got-and we were now huge-the greater damage I would do to the band, and to our career, if it emerged that I was gay." For how lighthearted Confess tends to be on the whole, this was extremely heavy.
Otherwise, you know how it goes with these books. Too much time spent on the childhood years. Very little info on recording sessions or the song writing process. But lots of good stories that allow Halford's personality to come through.
I think I was sort of hoping for something along the lines of Keith Richards' autobiography, or even Pete Townshend's (not that I liked Townshend's book, but the writing and detail were very good). So as enjoyable as this was for a quick read, I wanted something a bit deeper. I'd say Confess is somewhere between a 3 and 3.5 for me....more
The first chapter of Lords of Chaos goes through the use of dark imagery and lyrics in music, particularly rock and meReally not that great of a book.
The first chapter of Lords of Chaos goes through the use of dark imagery and lyrics in music, particularly rock and metal, with a large focus on the occult and the devil. This discussion feels very been-there-done-that to me. Maybe that wasn't so clearly documented when the book was first published in 1998, but it seems like well-trodden ground now. This is followed by an overview of bands that were influential to the '90s black metal scene and sound, such as Venom and Mercyful Fate. Familiar, yes, but still not too bad of a primer overall.
From there we move into the usual territory - suicide, murder, and the church burnings. There's some interesting discussion about the state of religion in Norway, the history of stave churches, and some good interview moments as well. But some of these interviews are really brief. I get that interview transcripts probably don't make the best read, but sometimes only a few questions are included so it doesn't feel like there's enough time to really get into things. And the guys they do interview... man, some of them are such dicks.
I really hated the sections where some 'expert' weighs in on what was going on. It seemed superfluous when you can sit down and interview most of the guys involved. And once you hit Chapter 8, it's pretty much all bullshit. A couple interviews here are worth reading, but otherwise just skim it all. It just feels so unnecessary. And there's so. much. Varg. Like, I don't think this man needs a platform to lie, and spew his abhorrent views. But feel free to read through if you want to go through pages and pages about Nazi UFOs. I wish I was joking.
Between reading Lords of Chaos and watching documentaries like Once Upon a Time in Norway and Until the Light Takes Us, my impression is that they really just let these guys say whatever the fuck they want, huh? It seems like there's never any questioning, or push-back, or actually attempting to verify. I understand the importance of getting people to talk freely, but to present it without comment doesn't always sit right. They do state in the intro: "It is not our job to pass judgment on our subjects; we expect the readers to have the intelligence to do that for themselves." Sounds more like an easy way to let yourself off the hook...
The authors were able to interview most of the notable people - which is great - but I feel like there are some big names missing. We don't hear anything from Necrobutcher or Darkthrone, for example. And then we get way, way too much Varg. The writing is consistently over the top when there's really no need for the extra dramatics. I think the authors lucked out in covering a topic that's already interesting, because they don't bring anything (or, perhaps very little) to the table themselves.
I guess one of the main issues when talking about the early '90s black metal scene in Norway is, as the authors indeed point out, that we'll never get any perspective from Euronymous: "The scene owes itself to Euronymous more than anyone, that is beyond doubt. As he is no longer here to speak, we shall never know how deeply or seriously aware Øystein Aarseth was of the monster he was bringing to life. But animate it he did..."
There's really a lot to pick apart in Lords of Chaos, but not necessarily in a good way. You're better off watching a documentary - even if those might not be the best, they're better than this....more
3.5 - Definitely enjoyable, but at the same time falls into the 'average' category of rock autobiographies. There's nothing groundbreaking or overly r3.5 - Definitely enjoyable, but at the same time falls into the 'average' category of rock autobiographies. There's nothing groundbreaking or overly revealing here, but there's lots of good stories and there's no reason this won't appeal to fans of the band. I think one main thing I took away from this is how much the members of Rammstein - still the original six - genuinely seem to like and respect each other, especially after all those years together.
I saw Rammstein almost a decade ago now, and it's probably the best concert I've ever been to. I'd love to see them again, but if not, I'm glad I got to see them once. There's certainly nothing else like them out there....more
This was so good, although I think it's a bit of a hard sell. If you're going to pick up Black Metal: Evolution of the Cult, I think you either have tThis was so good, although I think it's a bit of a hard sell. If you're going to pick up Black Metal: Evolution of the Cult, I think you either have to already be into black metal, or have a genuine interest to learn about it, and learn about it deeply. This isn't a short book, and I think the length and detail would maybe prove too much for just a casual 'let's try it' kind of read.
I've just started getting into black metal myself over the last month or so. This was probably spurred on by a recent re-watch of Metal: A Headbanger's Journey, although I've seen it many, many times since I was a teenager. The black metal scene is probably most known for the events that went down in Norway in the early 90s, which resulted in murder, arson and suicide. And because of this, it's easy to dramatize and sensationalize the genre, but the music on its own is really damn good.
The vast majority of the chapters in this book act as a biography for a specific band, generally flowing chronologically. We begin with the so-called 'first wave' bands such as Bathory, Venom and Celtic Frost - the bands that laid the foundation for what would come later. Then we move on to the second wave, including the likes of Mayhem, Burzum, Darkthrone, Gorgoroth. From there we see the further development of the genre, getting more industrial, electronic or folk-inspired, depending on the band.
Author Dayal Patterson does a very good job of keeping things fresh. You might think that reading chapter after chapter of band bios would get old very quickly, but generally that's not the case. Patterson provides info on albums, and events surrounding the music. It also helps that he personally interviewed most of the musicians featured in the book at one point or another. And Patterson is clearly a fan; the book is obviously written with a lot of love and respect for these bands, but he's not above critique either. There are a few chapters that are more thematic, focusing on things such as underground vs. mainstream, and NSBM bands as well.
Unfortunately, there's a lot of shitty people making really good music, and Patterson doesn't shy away from including these individuals' views. It's something that can't be divorced entirely from the scene. Mayhem also does get a lot of attention throughout the book, so if you're sick of hearing about them and the lore around the band, you're out of luck. I think it can't be helped though; they were so massively influential (as a group and Euronymous on his own) that it needs to be included. The story of black metal wouldn't be complete without the murders and church burnings.
As someone just getting into the scene, this book was really invaluable for giving me bands to look into and seeing what albums are sort of 'classics' of the genre. I'll keep going back to it as my knowledge and listening expands. But more than just being a tool for discovery, it was simply a really good read. Although filled with some seriously interesting characters and some outrageous stories, Black Metal is able to go beyond the sensationalism to discuss what matters most: the music....more
This was a bit of a strange book. Author Jesse Fink tells us that it is not meant to be a biography of any sort. And it isn't. And that's probably a gThis was a bit of a strange book. Author Jesse Fink tells us that it is not meant to be a biography of any sort. And it isn't. And that's probably a good idea. Last year I read Jeff Apter's High Voltage: The Life of Angus Young, AC/DC's Last Man Standing and found it a decent read but unsuccessful. I don't think you could do a Young biography, seeing as none of them would ever really talk. But the title of this book is The Youngs: The Brothers Who Built AC/DC. Is the book really about the three Youngs? I didn't think so.
I think the book more so tells a scattered story of AC/DC, with each chapter focusing on a certain song that reflects a period of their history. Quotes inside usually aren't from the Young brothers but rather people associated with the band: former members, radio DJs, producers, label execs, etc. There's a focus on people who have been wronged by the band (meaning the brothers), or never got credit for something they contributed or did.
Fink tells us himself: "This, in my opinion, is what has been missing from previous tellings of the AC/DC story or at least different parts of that story. The Youngs’ success was not achieved in isolation. Their music and their collective drive weren’t enough just on their own. It required the beneficence, vision and separate talent of a whole host of forgotten and unheralded people who saw something in them when others didn’t. This faith in and loyalty to AC/DC hasn’t always been returned." But why give this book the title it has if they're not really your focus?
But it's certainly an interesting take and adds another viewpoint. I don't like books that are overly positive while barely glancing at the negatives, like the other books I've read on AC/DC. Fink is definitely a fan of the band - this isn't coming from someone who wants to hate on them - but is more realistic in how he views them as people.
A topic that seems central to the book is that Angus and Malcolm didn't give credit where credit was due. They seemed paranoid about people ripping them off or not having their best interests in mind. Fink also suggests they were very concerned about the financial aspect of their career (why keep people around that have done a good job for you when you can find others to do the same work for less? Why not slap the band name and logo on a bunch of shitty merchandise?). One rumour related to this that I find interesting (and agree with) is that they stopped Brian Johnson from writing lyrics so they didn't have to share writing credits, getting more money for themselves.
The author is obviously a big Bon Scott fan, and seems to care little for Brian Johnson. Such a cliche. Like most fans, I'll agree that the Bon-era albums were better (even though I do like Flick of the Switch, Ballbreaker and most of Back in Black). But by the time BIB came out, they had already been a band for 7 years. You can't keep on churning out classics forever. And it's hardly Johnson's fault - it's still Young/Young writing the music.
There's lots of interesting quotes in here. And I think big fans of the band could have some really good discussions elaborating on some of the stuff that's presented inside. Although I am an AC/DC fan, I'm not a huge fan so sometimes Fink focused on certain topics a little too long for my liking. Do I really care about what American DJ claims to have broke the band in the US? No. Do I really care about who can take credit for suggesting Mutt Lange as a producer? No.
Fink is a serviceable writer. You'll certainly find stuff in here that's not in other books about AC/DC, which is a huge plus. But it's not always interesting, and sometimes Fink's own opinions get in the way. Sometimes he's not really able to conclude something even after talking to various people. I think if you're a big fan of the band, the book would be worth skimming through for some unique details, but I can't suggest this as a general recommendation....more
If there's any musicians that you think would absolutely need to write an autobiography, Eric Clapton is definitely one of them. The man has lived quiIf there's any musicians that you think would absolutely need to write an autobiography, Eric Clapton is definitely one of them. The man has lived quite the life, and was not only a massive influence on many guitarists but he helped shape the sound of rock in the late '60s and '70s. I had previously read Philip Norman's Slowhand and have seen the documentary Eric Clapton: Life in 12 Bars a couple times, so much of the story in the book was not new to me. Still, it was nice to hear it all from Clapton himself, and there is some stuff here and there that was missing from both of the aforementioned sources.
I appreciated how straighforward Clapton was in telling his story. He's been through so much, but he's also done some terrible things on his own. He recounts it all here with honesty. He doesn't make excuses (although the very brief reflection on his racist rant in the '70s was a little disappointing) and he doesn't ask you to feel bad for him. He's well aware of what he's done. His struggles with drug and alcohol addiction I knew enough about, but his relationships with women really surprised me - not in a good way. Most people know about the whole thing with Pattie Boyd (pines after her - gets her - doesn't want her anymore - treats her terribly), but his other relationships fared little better. He was always moving from one woman to the next, or having affairs. This isn't necessarily surprising for a rockstar, but it's like he would become obsessed with them and move too quickly. It seemed like things would have been a lot better for him had he just taken some time to be single and work on himself. But no.
I found the book very engaging up until the last few chapters. This is when we get into nice, family man Clapton. Of course it's amazing that he's finally put his addictions behind him and settled into a stable, loving family life. It doesn't make for the most exciting reading, though. And of course his wife is like 30 years younger than him. Typical! And totally a personal opinion here, but as time progressed I think his music gradually became more bland and safe. He did some great stuff with John Mayall, Cream, Blind Faith and Derek & the Dominos. Even his first couple solo albums are good. But after that I think his albums are quite hit-and-miss, and it becomes less interesting to hear about the creation of them throughout the book.
My only real complaint is that I wanted more detail. It would've been nice to get something closer in length to Keith Richards' book. But, all in all this was a good read and shouldn't be missed if you're at all interested in anything Clapton's ever done....more
Last year when I read Ian "Mac" McLagan's book All the Rage, I pretty much had no clue who either Small Faces or Faces were. But since completing thatLast year when I read Ian "Mac" McLagan's book All the Rage, I pretty much had no clue who either Small Faces or Faces were. But since completing that, I've become quite a big fan of both bands. I was pretty excited to find out that drummer Kenney Jones has also written a book spanning his career in those two bands, with the Who, and beyond.
I know we have to go through the obligatory childhood phase, but it really seemed to drag on. Way too much time spent here. Once we get to the Small Faces, things begin to pick up. Jones has some nice stories about his time together with Mac, Ronnie Lane and Steve Marriott. He doesn't go too into detail about writing and recording, but he does talk about his progression as a drummer. One of the main takeaways from this part of the book is how both Don Arden and Andrew Oldham screwed over the group. This slowly took a toll on the band, and along with not entirely being able to break away from the teeny-bopper scene, Marriott split the band.
So we move onto Faces - essentially Small Faces with Marriott being replaced by Rod Stewart and Ronnie Wood. Jones describes Faces as if it were a big party all the time. It sounds like he really had a riot with them. When talking about their music, he states that they made a few albums of "varying quality." I can agree with that. During this period, Rod Stewart's solo career was taking off; this resulted in Faces nearly becoming Stewart's backing band. If you look at concert advertisements from this period, you'll notice that sometimes they were even billed and promoted as "Rod Stewart and the Faces." Jones doesn't have much to say about Stewart in negative terms; he didn't seem bothered about this concert billing or playing second fiddle to the lead singer. He does say that he believes Rod kept all his best material for his solo work, though.
Eventually Faces also split up, and Jones is given the offer to play with The Who after Keith Moon passes. He talks about trying to balance his playing style with doing something that also fit in with The Who's sound and did justice to Moon's own drumming. Quite a challenge, I'm sure. He seemed to get along well with Pete Townshend and John Entwistle, but not so much with Roger Daltrey. At least not all the time.
In between his work with these three major bands, we do get insight into his personal life, his time spent doing sessions, the ill-fated Small Faces reunion, his love of polo and horseback riding, and various other musical endeavours and concerts he took part in. I think Mac's book contains more of the 'fun' stories; Kenney didn't seem to get into things the way other band members did, so he wasn't around (or wasn't getting into) all the hijinks and such. Jones comes across as a decently level-headed guy, not one to hold a grudge.
As much as I love Faces, I think the break up of Small Faces is sadder. To me, the four members of that band were best together. Marriott went on to form Humble Pie and Jones' opinion on them is basically my opinion on them: I just can't get into it. Marriott never went on to find the success he had with Small Faces and eventually died in a house fire in 1991. A sad end for one of rock's greatest vocalists. Over time, Ronnie Lane was reduced to not being able to do much of anything due to his multiple sclerosis, dying in 1997. And Mac passed away in 2014. So now only Jones remains, and he works hard to preserve their legacy and try to get back some of the royalties and such that had been denied to the band.
When the book works, it really works. But when Jones is going between major events, the book tends to drag a bit. Like, I get that he's very passionate about polo, but I do really care? And sometimes I wondered if he was giving us his real feelings about certain people. But overall I enjoyed it. It's one of those autobiographies that you read and think, 'that was fine. Enjoyable, even.'...more
"'It's not me [they idolise]' he said, 'they idolise the guy in the shorts.'"
Jeff Apter's High Voltage promises readers "the life of Angus Young," AC/"'It's not me [they idolise]' he said, 'they idolise the guy in the shorts.'"
Jeff Apter's High Voltage promises readers "the life of Angus Young," AC/DC's iconic lead guitarist. It's right in the title. However, we learn almost immediately from Apter himself that Angus is an intensely private guy. This doesn't give the author much to work with. Because of this, High Voltage reads more like an AC/DC biography. And I'm not sure it really excels at that.
Maybe I needed more of a break between AC/DC books, having just recently finished Maximum Rock & Roll, but I felt like I didn't get much out of this. Obviously Angus is the main focal point, with plenty of interview excerpts and quotes throughout, but because Angus is so attached to AC/DC we learn more about the band as a whole than Angus as a person. Since Angus has never really done anything outside of the band, you're essentially reading a book chronicling AC/DC's history.
This history feels a bit choppy. The book does read quickly and isn't bogged down with unnecessary information, which is nice, but it honestly could have used more detail. Very little of this book really goes in-depth - it's more of an overview, highlighting the main events. A clear takeaway is that Angus has an amazing work ethic, much like his brother Malcolm. We also learn that he's married to a Dutch woman, that he likes chocolate and... paints? That's about as much as we get.
You'll notice very quickly that this is a 'feel good' kind of book, reminding me very much of Maximum Rock & Roll and the books I've read on Van Halen. You have to expect a bit of boastful writing when the book has clearly been written by a fan, but sometimes it's just too much. Like, AC/DC was apparently infinitely better than any band they ever played with; in fact, it's not just that AC/DC was better, the other bands were laughably bad. Come on... It got old fast. And again, like Maximum R&R, we don't get much of an opinion or insight into AC/DC's lowest point - a string of unimpressive albums in the '80s. It's sort of passed over, or the blame is shifted.
One thing definitely working in this book's favour is that it was released last year. It's about as up-to-date as you can get. That means all the most recent albums and tours are covered, and we learn what the members have been doing. The book ends wondering what will come next for AC/DC, if anything at all. There's lots of rumours floating around, but nothing concrete.
While in the end I don't feel like I really learned much that I didn't know already and the writing could be a bit much, it was still an enjoyable read. The book doesn't drag, and it's decently informative with all the major career points covered. If you're expecting an in-depth look at Angus Young, you'll probably be a bit disappointed. But taking the book as-is, it's a decent AC/DC bio with some nice quotes from Angus thrown in....more
Philip Norman's Slowhand provides a sweeping overview of Clapton's life and career from his highly unusual childhood to his worldwide success - multipPhilip Norman's Slowhand provides a sweeping overview of Clapton's life and career from his highly unusual childhood to his worldwide success - multiple times over. At just over 400 pages, it's no tome packed with detail. Some readers might come away feeling like they needed more, particularly long-time fans. But for those like myself, who know very little about the man, you'll get a very well-written and enjoyable look at his life.
To say Clapton's childhood was unusual is actually quite the understatement. Born to a too-young mother who all but abandoned the boy, he was raised by his grandparents, thinking they were his parents and his uncle was his brother. His grandmother absolutely doted on Clapton. Anything he wanted he had. She completely spoiled him. As a result, Clapton never really had to do much himself; everything seemed to be taken care of for him.
Showing an early interest in guitar, he of course received one. The author states that while he was good, he was not some instant child prodigy. His brilliance as a player came a bit later. A recurring theme in the book is Clapton's desire for something he didn't have, or couldn't have. Once he received it, he no longer wanted it. We see an early example of this with a guitar his grandmother bought him. It was exactly what he wanted, but as soon as he had it, he wanted something better.
Moving forward, we get all the career and personal highs and lows. I think any author can easily chronicle a figure's childhood and early life, but tackling the rest of their life becomes more difficult. If it's too adulating, it becomes a little eye-roll worthy; too deprecating and it becomes an unpleasant read. Norman is really able to balance his view of Clapton. He absolutely praises Clapton for his skills and the success he's had over the decades, but does not shy away in the slightest from the many, many lows he's experienced.
Clapton's addictions are well documented here, as well as his difficult personality. Never happy with what he had, he was always leaving bands, moving between musical projects, adding musicians to his live acts and then firing them. His heroin addiction left him down and out for quite some time. Upon overcoming this, he went into a full-blown alcohol addiction. He was also a horrible womanizer. And just like as a child when his grandmother spoiled him and did everything for him, this continued into adulthood with his manager. In some ways, Clapton comes across as a bit pathetic.
The music is handled very well, too. One of the best things a biography can do is get you wanting to check out the songs and albums it talks about if you're unfamiliar with them. This one did that for me (I'm actually listening to Clapton's MTV Unplugged as I write this). From the constant fighting of Baker and Bruce during the Cream years and his boredom during The Yardbirds, to the tragic incident that inspired "Tears in Heaven" and beyond - it's all here. Again, big Clapton fans would probably want more detail and insight, but I was happy with how Norman covered things.
A constant presence throughout the book is Pattie Boyd. Initially the object of his obsession while she was with George Harrison, she eventually became his partner and then wife. She inspired some of his biggest songs, including "Layla" and "Wonderful Tonight." I think my biggest takeaway from this book was how awful I felt for Pattie. She was treated terribly by both Harrison and Clapton. It seemed she was another case of something he didn't want after he got it. He was extremely manipulative, cared little for her feelings, and cheated on her constantly. The whole time I read this book, all I could think was, 'girl, leave him!' I can't believe she stayed as long as she did.
I think Slowhand is a great biography. The writing is clear and easy to follow. The author provides (what I see as) an unbiased look at one of rock's greatest figures. You get enough detail and context to get a good picture of each period of Clapton's career and personal life. Huge Clapton fans might not get too much out of this, but if you've never read a book about him, this is an excellent place to start....more
Ah, AC/DC. The band that I've considered basically The Worst since forever, save for a very few select songs. But something changed recently. One of tAh, AC/DC. The band that I've considered basically The Worst since forever, save for a very few select songs. But something changed recently. One of their songs came on the radio and, for some reason, I didn't change the station with lightning speed as I'd normally do. Dare I say I found the song catchy? Enjoyable even? I had to rethink everything. And so, I have found myself digging them for the first time.
Maximum Rock & Roll is a decently recent book, having been published in 2007. It covers the band's history right from the Young family's move from Glasgow to Australia until about 2005/6. Although this book has pretty good reviews, it just didn't really work for me - right from the beginning.
The first chapter of the book talks about the aforementioned move from Scotland to Australia, then largely focuses on Angus and Malcolm's older brother George. He found some success as a member of the Easybeats, then later writing and producing for others. This is definitely a logical place to start - after all, George had quite a hand in AC/DC's career, at least in the earlier years. But I thought it seemed a bit choppy. Like all the information wasn't there. However, I thought, it's just the first chapter, we're just getting going. It'll improve once we actually get into AC/DC. George isn't the focus anyways, right?
Actually, nothing changes. The book feels choppy all the way through. It's mostly quotes from the band, their crew, (former) management and other bands stitched together. The authors didn't actually get to interview the band for the book so, really, all the information isn't there. There's definitely gaps and a lack of detail in key areas. And sometimes, what was included seemed completely superfluous. It'd be fairly often that I'd read something and think, 'why is this even in here? What is it adding?' This maybe wouldn't be so bad if there was more input from the authors. They really only serve to stitch these quotes and pieces of information together. There's basically no argument, critique or explanation from them at all.
Like, they'll drop some piece of information and then just move on, leaving it vague. For example, when Phil Rudd was fired, they take a quote from someone who claims it had something to do with a "a messy personal situation that involved someone in the Youngs' circle..." We know drugs were involved - they include that - but someone in the Youngs' circle? Who? Why use such a vague quote if it can be (at least partly) chalked up to his drug use? Similarly, when they cover former manager Ian Jeffrey's firing, they use a quote from Phil Carson (label exec) who said: "Certain members of the band had personal issues. And personal issues caused a great deal of paranoia. And they fired crew members, Phil Rudd went...." What issues? Elaborate, please. Angus gets married. To who? There were lots of moments like this for me.
The early chapters of the book obviously deal with the band's rise to fame, which they really achieve with the massive Back in Black album - the first with Brian, the first without Bon. I think you do come away with a good sense of what the band went through, save for the choppiness of the writing. They talk about the slower and reduced sales for albums and concerts during the 80s, but never give an opinion. Was it a changing music landscape, or did those albums just really suck? How much did Malcolm's drinking affect the songwriting? Were they just burnt out? Who knows!
Speaking of the band members, this book is heavily focused on Malcolm and Angus. Perhaps because they did more press than the others? I'm not sure. But Cliff is basically MIA through the whole thing, and Phil is never painted in a particularly good light, although his drumming is praised by the authors. Brian is portrayed quite well, and I think they actually give a balanced view of Bon.
And, to the authors' credit, some of the quotes they included were very fitting. It was so nice to see that they had an actual quote from the band in regards to a certain event - it helps everything feel more concrete. The input from people around the band was nice, too. I always looked forward to what Ian Jeffrey had to say, so of course I was bummed to read that he was fired, thus removing him from the book from that point on. There's lots of good stories in here, too; some really funny ones about Malcolm. The man really had a way with words!
As the book rolls to a close, the chapters become much shorter and begin to cover larger spans of time as the band becomes less active. There's no album per year like they were doing in the 70s and early 80s, so it's to be expected in a way. But I feel like there's a noticeable difference in the way the Bon years and Brian years are covered. Bon and his time with the band gets about 12 chapters, whereas Brian's time gets about 10 - and he's been there way, way longer. By the time we get to the last handful of chapters it really just feels like: this happened, then this happened, then this... then...
This isn't a bad book. I certainly came away with a good understanding of the band's career, their mentality towards their music, and their work ethic. But the writing feels choppy because of missing information and a lack of input from the authors - the latter was sorely needed, imo. I kind of struggle to understand who the book was aimed at - it's a bit long for a casual fan or non-fan, and I can't imagine a hardcore fan would get much new information out of this....more
My main introduction to Sebastian Bach came when I actually saw him live, although I knew Skid Row's big singles beforehand. At tThis was... not good.
My main introduction to Sebastian Bach came when I actually saw him live, although I knew Skid Row's big singles beforehand. At the time, Bach was touring in the supergroup Kings of Chaos. I remember being really impressed with his voice. But when I read other people's reviews of these shows, there were comments about how he wasn't as good as he used to be. I was shocked. So I checked out the first two Skid Row albums and was blown away. I mean, the songs aren't particularly amazing, but his voice is just phenomenal, especially on the Slave to the Grind album.
So the vocal talent is there, but Bach's always seemed off-putting as a person. I've seen him in different documentaries and shows, and he just seems super obnoxious and difficult to be around. Unfortunately, 18 and Life on Skid Row mostly just proves this.
I've seen others comment on the quality of the writing in this book. Yeah, it's not great. But honestly, I don't think it's much worse than some of the other stuff I've read recently lol. While the book does flow chronologically, every once and a while Bach will go off on a tangent and get into some semi-related story from a different time period. But even then, the linear style of this book is mostly just random stories told in order; there's not really a good flow here.
Very little to do with the actual music. We do get some info about tours, but don't expect much in terms of the recording or writing process. Bach's family life is covered quite well, though. And there's lots of pictures (although most go unlabeled). He also details his stints doing musicals, which I wasn't so interested in.
But I just couldn't believe some of the stuff in here. And he tells it so nonchalantly. Like, am I supposed to find his obnoxious personality, his awful treatment of women, or his disregard for others around him funny? Was I actually supposed to enjoy those stories? 'Cause I didn't. It's no wonder people didn't want to be around this guy. He comes off as a huge, immature asshole at every point in this book.
Sometimes I feel like I have to warm up to this type of book. This one was the opposite: I thought it started alright, but I just became uninterested and even a wee bit repulsed. I wouldn't recommend this one....more
I'll freely admit that I took out this book purely to read about the Van Halen drama. I've read Greg Renoff's book about their rise to fame, and also I'll freely admit that I took out this book purely to read about the Van Halen drama. I've read Greg Renoff's book about their rise to fame, and also Noel Monk's book that generally covers the David Lee Roth period. I thought Sammy's book might be a good next step.
So, I knew very little about Sammy Hagar. I knew his name and the song "I Can't Drive 55," but that was about it. I also knew very little of the music to come out of the Van Hagar years, save for "Why Can't This Be Love?". Hagar begins where everyone else begins their autobio: childhood. This seemed to drag on - which is impressive considering how short and not-detailed the book actually is. Needless to say, I was pretty unimpressed with how this started and figured I wasn't going to enjoy it.
But, I don't know. I guess I just got accustomed to the writing. And I began to enjoy it much more as I continued to read. Like, by no means is this a really good book. But it's fine. Hagar's personality really comes through - he's confident and self-assured, driven. Everything he's ever done has been awesome - that's his opinion anyways. I don't think I really buy into that.
I think the thing that really sold me on the book was Hagar's honesty. He just tells you like it is. He gives you his real opinions about people. The part where he calls Eddie Van Halen a fruitcake? Priceless.
Those years Hagar spent with Van Halen didn't sound like they would have been much fun. It seemed like things started out okay, but then quickly deteriorated. The brothers seemingly had little respect for Michael Anthony, and were suspicious of anything Hagar did outside the band. Then Eddie's alcohol problems (and most likely drug problems as well) really began to take a toll on the relationships within the band and Eddie's own playing abilities. So, Sammy is unhappy and Sammy leaves.
Reading about all of Hagar's business ventures was pretty uninteresting, and as I've said, the beginning really dragged, but overall this isn't a bad book. It absolutely falls into that casual reading type of autobiography. It was fine, or maybe even enjoyable. Nothing more, nothing less....more
The second book I've read about a band I don't particularly love. Why? I dunno; I guess I'm running out of options for ebooks. But also, I had seen thThe second book I've read about a band I don't particularly love. Why? I dunno; I guess I'm running out of options for ebooks. But also, I had seen this mentioned various places online - always with praise. So why not give it a go?
The book begins with Eddie and Alex's story. We learn about their parents, their musical upbringing, their move to the United States and the forming of bands that would eventually lead into the David Lee Roth-fronted Van Halen. The same detail and insight isn't really given to Dave (and certainly not Michael Anthony), but we do get a bit of backstory. Dave didn't have the musical upbringing of the Van Halen brothers, nor was he blessed with Eddie's talent, but the man had tons of ambition.
That was something I really took away from this book - how driven Dave was. Once he decided he wanted to be a rock star that was it. He'd do anything to make it happen. It seemed like he bugged the two brothers to let him in the band forever until they finally relented, largely over a PA. And while the book makes sure to let us know that David Lee Roth was Not A Good Singer, he was a killer frontman and huge part of the draw of Van Halen. Do good vocals really matter in rock anyways?
The author interviewed tons of people that witnessed Van Halen's early years and rise to fame firsthand. It makes for some very interesting accounts. They all basically say the same: they couldn't believe how good this band was. Or, at the very least, how good Eddie was. Anything included from the band members themselves were taken from various magazine interviews given over the decades.
The book ends on a positive note. In 1978 they release their debut album, they tour with Journey and then Black Sabbath, then get propelled to superstardom. From here, the book gives a very brief overview of their career after this. It seems to ignore all the problems within the band and the fact that they basically imploded in 1984 - only a mere 6 years after their debut.
While a good read on its own, I'm sure you'll get the most out of this if you're already a Van Halen fan. I feel like I don't really 'get' them. I'm making my way through their albums and have finished all the ones with DLR, so I'm about to move into the ones with Sammy Hagar. Even though I'm continually blown away by Eddie's playing, the rest doesn't usually do it for me - the lyrics, the party~ vibe. I actually really love their debut album, but I don't think anything after really measured up completely.
If you are a VH fan, don't miss out on this book. It's well written, well organized and even with so many different people having input to the story, it never feels choppy or disjointed. The author really did a great job putting this thing together. If you're not a VH fan, I still say don't skip it. It's a fun read and interesting to see the development of one of rock and metal's most famous bands....more
Most of the books I've been reading have been by/about bands or artists I'm not really interested in, or maybe only mildly enjoy. But I love Black SabMost of the books I've been reading have been by/about bands or artists I'm not really interested in, or maybe only mildly enjoy. But I love Black Sabbath. And I love Tony Iommi. There's something about him that feels a bit intimidating, but I've watched enough interviews with him by this point to know that he actually seems like a nice guy; funny, even. And that's the Iommi you get in this book. Honest, open, funny, self-critical and not taking himself too seriously.
I'd say this book is comparable to Ozzy's. It's a really light, easy read with plenty of entertaining stories. So it reads very fast and rarely feels slow because of too many details. I think you get more insight into the recording process than with Ozzy's book because Iommi had much greater involvement both in songwriting and, later, in producing.
I like that Iommi is able to look back on his past and be honest about what didn't work or what wasn't a good idea in hindsight. It doesn't really feel like he's making excuses. There's been some bad albums, not so great tours, rocky relationships, and he's pretty open about it all. I loved the retelling of his experience in The Rolling Stones' Rock and Roll Circus. Obviously he had nothing to do with its creation, he just showed up and did what was asked of him. But man, it sounded like a weird, unpleasant experience.
But the book is also comparable to Ozzy's in that it's mostly just a collection of stories strung together. Sometimes I really wanted more detail. Like, I didn't need him to go to Keith Richards or Pete Townshend levels of detail, but sometimes it felt a bit too light.
But sometimes that's what you need - just an easy read. I have no real complaints about this book. I enjoyed it all the way through. Just keep in mind what kind of book this is and you shouldn't be disappointed....more
Keith Richards' Life is quite a tome at over 500 pages. However, it's pretty much all quality content. This isn't some surface-level autobiography thaKeith Richards' Life is quite a tome at over 500 pages. However, it's pretty much all quality content. This isn't some surface-level autobiography that some musicians push out, where it might be decently long but really just skims the surface. This is a really in-depth look at the insane life Richards has led. That's not to say it isn't readable, though. It is long, but it rarely feels bogged down.
One of the best things about this book is that Richards' personality comes right on through the pages. Everyone knows who Keith Richards is, but I didn't actually know much about him as a person. But the way the book is written allows Richards' voice to come through. It reminded me of Ozzy Osbourne's autobio in that sense - except this one is way more structured and detailed, of course.
Richards' transparency and openness about basically everything in his life makes the book what it is. However, as some other users have pointed out, it seems like he doesn't really acknowledge what kind of toll his drug abuse took on those around him.
For a book this long and with so many tales to tell, its organization is excellent. It doesn't jump all over the place and rarely inserts a story from another time period - it stays very linear. And like I said, it has little filler. The momentum keeps going up until maybe the last 1/5 or so. It's not that the end isn't enjoyable, it's just not as enjoyable as what preceded it.
People say, "Why don't you give it up?" I can't retire until I croak. I don't think they quite understand what I get out of this. I'm not doing it just for the money or for you. I'm doing it for me.
And nearly a decade after this book was published, the man is still going. You do you, baby. You do you....more
Loading...
