Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Clash clash clash. ¡VIVAN LOS NORTEAMERICANOS DEL IMCT Y LAS BRIGADAS DEL CADILLAC NUEVO!
Hammy
Dirty Punk
Posts: 50
Joined: 01 May 2011, 5:04pm

Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Post by Hammy » 20 Jun 2018, 4:53am

Was thinking – Joe was always very vocal about the details of Topper's actual sacking (Paul's basement flat/walk 'round the block and returning etc)
but how come Mick has spoken up about it? Was Mick as deeply into drugs as Topper – at this time...maybe not smack but I know for a fact, Mick was very druggy (you get the impression that was back during GEER days but who knows?)
It appears Mick was losing his partner in crime (at least musically – he must have had plenty to say?!)

Heston
User avatar
God of Thunder...and Rock 'n Roll
Posts: 27219
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
Location: North of Watford Junction
Contact:

Re: Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Post by Heston » 20 Jun 2018, 8:02am

Hammy wrote:
20 Jun 2018, 4:53am
Was thinking – Joe was always very vocal about the details of Topper's actual sacking (Paul's basement flat/walk 'round the block and returning etc)
but how come Mick has spoken up about it? Was Mick as deeply into drugs as Topper – at this time...maybe not smack but I know for a fact, Mick was very druggy (you get the impression that was back during GEER days but who knows?)
It appears Mick was losing his partner in crime (at least musically – he must have had plenty to say?!)
I think I've read a quote from Mick that he didn't want Topper to go but he was outvoted. As for the drugs, I think they all liked them to different extents, up to them what they stick in their bodies imo. It certainly fuelled some great art anyway.
I just polished off some Low Country shrimp & grits and a mess of collards. That's a hell of a strain on the arm.

Low Down Low
Graffiti Bandit Pioneer
Posts: 1382
Joined: 21 Aug 2014, 9:08am

Re: Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Post by Low Down Low » 20 Jun 2018, 8:12am

Heston wrote:
20 Jun 2018, 8:02am
Hammy wrote:
20 Jun 2018, 4:53am
Was thinking – Joe was always very vocal about the details of Topper's actual sacking (Paul's basement flat/walk 'round the block and returning etc)
but how come Mick has spoken up about it? Was Mick as deeply into drugs as Topper – at this time...maybe not smack but I know for a fact, Mick was very druggy (you get the impression that was back during GEER days but who knows?)
It appears Mick was losing his partner in crime (at least musically – he must have had plenty to say?!)
I think I've read a quote from Mick that he didn't want Topper to go but he was outvoted. As for the drugs, I think they all liked them to different extents, up to them what they stick in their bodies imo. It certainly fuelled some great art anyway.
I'd concur. Once they were still producing the art it wouldnt matter much to me what stuff they were doing, as much as drug abuse saddens me. But in Toppers case, he had virtually ceased being functional and was becoming a liability. Maybe it could all have been handled in a better way, but it wasnt a good situation for anybody and I certainly wouldnt be hard on Joe and Paul for taking the decision they did.

Kory
User avatar
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 8453
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 1:42pm
Location: In the Discosphere

Re: Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Post by Kory » 20 Jun 2018, 5:48pm

Low Down Low wrote:
20 Jun 2018, 8:12am
Heston wrote:
20 Jun 2018, 8:02am
Hammy wrote:
20 Jun 2018, 4:53am
Was thinking – Joe was always very vocal about the details of Topper's actual sacking (Paul's basement flat/walk 'round the block and returning etc)
but how come Mick has spoken up about it? Was Mick as deeply into drugs as Topper – at this time...maybe not smack but I know for a fact, Mick was very druggy (you get the impression that was back during GEER days but who knows?)
It appears Mick was losing his partner in crime (at least musically – he must have had plenty to say?!)
I think I've read a quote from Mick that he didn't want Topper to go but he was outvoted. As for the drugs, I think they all liked them to different extents, up to them what they stick in their bodies imo. It certainly fuelled some great art anyway.
I'd concur. Once they were still producing the art it wouldnt matter much to me what stuff they were doing, as much as drug abuse saddens me. But in Toppers case, he had virtually ceased being functional and was becoming a liability. Maybe it could all have been handled in a better way, but it wasnt a good situation for anybody and I certainly wouldnt be hard on Joe and Paul for taking the decision they did.
It's hard to make incisive decisions when you're coming down from spliffs all the time.
Inder:
Absolutely. Here's another collection of words:

Table salt (spoon hinge)
Octopus (Ukraine)
St. Petersburg (arms)
Ginger beer (cauliflower)
Pat Sajak (PSak)
Lamp post (self evident)
Florida Timeshare (ditto)
Heraclitus (EMI)
Developers (Developers Developers)
Boogie With Your Children

hairydot61
User avatar
Dirty Punk
Posts: 123
Joined: 04 Aug 2016, 5:23pm

Re: Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Post by hairydot61 » 24 Jun 2018, 5:12am

Kory wrote:
20 Jun 2018, 5:48pm
Low Down Low wrote:
20 Jun 2018, 8:12am
Heston wrote:
20 Jun 2018, 8:02am
Hammy wrote:
20 Jun 2018, 4:53am
Was thinking – Joe was always very vocal about the details of Topper's actual sacking (Paul's basement flat/walk 'round the block and returning etc)
but how come Mick has spoken up about it? Was Mick as deeply into drugs as Topper – at this time...maybe not smack but I know for a fact, Mick was very druggy (you get the impression that was back during GEER days but who knows?)
It appears Mick was losing his partner in crime (at least musically – he must have had plenty to say?!)
I think I've read a quote from Mick that he didn't want Topper to go but he was outvoted. As for the drugs, I think they all liked them to different extents, up to them what they stick in their bodies imo. It certainly fuelled some great art anyway.
I'd concur. Once they were still producing the art it wouldnt matter much to me what stuff they were doing, as much as drug abuse saddens me. But in Toppers case, he had virtually ceased being functional and was becoming a liability. Maybe it could all have been handled in a better way, but it wasnt a good situation for anybody and I certainly wouldnt be hard on Joe and Paul for taking the decision they did.
It's hard to make incisive decisions when you're coming down from spliffs all the time.
Hello, I agree it was a difficult situation, drugs are not for everybody, you would need a good degree of self discipline in order to have them in your life, ...I have read and seen in interviews that Mick Jones smoked weed daily during a lot of time in the band, some people aren't hypocrites, i.e people in glass houses don't throw stones, the kettle calling the pot black etc, I also saw that Joe Stummer was extolling a positive message (in general) and what was going on within the band but not totally in the media was at odds to what he was projecting, that and the unreliability that certain drugs brought to the table?,
I also saw that the reason that Mick was asked to leave or one of the reasons he was asked to leave was that when The Clash wanted to capitalise on the momentum of the band at the time, Mick did not want to tour, or so Paul Simenon has said. If you have ever done weed to a daily degree then as artistically horizon broadening as it can be the down side of that is eating and sitting and thinking of great ideas which yer normal channels wouldn't inspire in you?,
Black market drugs you take a chance on, if you check the recent history of prescribed medicines to mainstream artist like, Whitney Houston, Prince, Micheal Jackson and possibly George Micheal although George did weed as too Whitney, Prescribed medication is a minefield too,... as a fan and being around at the time of Toppers exit from the band the weekly music papers all came out with Topper has gone for health reasons as far as I can remember, I stand to be corrected on any observations that are in this post, the bottom line is, as stated by a previous poster that music would be a poorer place if certain people didn't push limits and boundaries with drugs, but this is not an advert for people to take drugs (Disclaimer), incidentlly I am writing this after taking a half tablet a day for a week of anti histimine for the first time in my life due to hayfever!, that freely available medication had a adverse reaction on me, an accumolutive effect that made me feel so totally shit that I didn't want to get out of bed, I thought I had a Zombie virus, but!, it inspired me to react to this post so everything is relative!, haha, am I rambling or what?.
. "Bikini Reds a state of mind,
I'm in a state and She don't mind"
  • Comforting the Disturbed and
    Disturbing the Comfortable

>>>>The Caped Curator<<<<

matedog
User avatar
Purveyor of Hoyistic Thought
Posts: 20345
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
Location: 1995

Re: Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Post by matedog » 26 Jun 2018, 10:17am

Hammy wrote:
20 Jun 2018, 4:53am
Was thinking – Joe was always very vocal about the details of Topper's actual sacking (Paul's basement flat/walk 'round the block and returning etc)
but how come Mick has spoken up about it? Was Mick as deeply into drugs as Topper – at this time...maybe not smack but I know for a fact, Mick was very druggy (you get the impression that was back during GEER days but who knows?)
It appears Mick was losing his partner in crime (at least musically – he must have had plenty to say?!)
I think his firing had less to do with his live/studio performances as much as he was becoming a liability. Between 1980-1981, Topper had that "fight" where he broke his arm in early 80 and they had to postpone/cancel a bunch of shows, missing the beginning of that June 1, 1980 show such that they got a rando to play drums on the first eight songs, got in trouble with the law at the end of 1980 (I don't remember the details, just that it almost put the S! tour in jeopardy), apparent withdrawal issues on the Asian tour of 82. His live performances throughout were usually tight and Combat Rock contains some of his best drumming, but he was definitely becoming a liability on account of his addictions.
Look, you have to establish context for these things. And I maintain that unless you appreciate the Fall of Constantinople, the Great Fire of London, and Mickey Mantle's fatalist alcoholism, live Freddy makes no sense. If you want to half-ass it, fine, go call Simon Schama to do the appendix.

Heston
User avatar
God of Thunder...and Rock 'n Roll
Posts: 27219
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
Location: North of Watford Junction
Contact:

Re: Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Post by Heston » 26 Jun 2018, 11:20am

matedog wrote:
26 Jun 2018, 10:17am
Hammy wrote:
20 Jun 2018, 4:53am
Was thinking – Joe was always very vocal about the details of Topper's actual sacking (Paul's basement flat/walk 'round the block and returning etc)
but how come Mick has spoken up about it? Was Mick as deeply into drugs as Topper – at this time...maybe not smack but I know for a fact, Mick was very druggy (you get the impression that was back during GEER days but who knows?)
It appears Mick was losing his partner in crime (at least musically – he must have had plenty to say?!)
I think his firing had less to do with his live/studio performances as much as he was becoming a liability. Between 1980-1981, Topper had that "fight" where he broke his arm in early 80 and they had to postpone/cancel a bunch of shows, missing the beginning of that June 1, 1980 show such that they got a rando to play drums on the first eight songs, got in trouble with the law at the end of 1980 (I don't remember the details, just that it almost put the S! tour in jeopardy), apparent withdrawal issues on the Asian tour of 82. His live performances throughout were usually tight and Combat Rock contains some of his best drumming, but he was definitely becoming a liability on account of his addictions.
I think he stole a bus stop.

There was also another incident where he was charged with handling stolen goods. It was a timpani drum which had been stolen from the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra.
I just polished off some Low Country shrimp & grits and a mess of collards. That's a hell of a strain on the arm.

Low Down Low
Graffiti Bandit Pioneer
Posts: 1382
Joined: 21 Aug 2014, 9:08am

Re: Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Post by Low Down Low » 26 Jun 2018, 12:44pm

Heston wrote:
26 Jun 2018, 11:20am
matedog wrote:
26 Jun 2018, 10:17am
Hammy wrote:
20 Jun 2018, 4:53am
Was thinking – Joe was always very vocal about the details of Topper's actual sacking (Paul's basement flat/walk 'round the block and returning etc)
but how come Mick has spoken up about it? Was Mick as deeply into drugs as Topper – at this time...maybe not smack but I know for a fact, Mick was very druggy (you get the impression that was back during GEER days but who knows?)
It appears Mick was losing his partner in crime (at least musically – he must have had plenty to say?!)
I think his firing had less to do with his live/studio performances as much as he was becoming a liability. Between 1980-1981, Topper had that "fight" where he broke his arm in early 80 and they had to postpone/cancel a bunch of shows, missing the beginning of that June 1, 1980 show such that they got a rando to play drums on the first eight songs, got in trouble with the law at the end of 1980 (I don't remember the details, just that it almost put the S! tour in jeopardy), apparent withdrawal issues on the Asian tour of 82. His live performances throughout were usually tight and Combat Rock contains some of his best drumming, but he was definitely becoming a liability on account of his addictions.
I think he stole a bus stop.

There was also another incident where he was charged with handling stolen goods. It was a timpani drum which had been stolen from the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra.
I guess he'd already got enough traffic cones.

Hammy
Dirty Punk
Posts: 50
Joined: 01 May 2011, 5:04pm

Re: Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Post by Hammy » 27 Jun 2018, 8:19am

C'mon – we've all stolen bus stops?!
Seriously, this handling of stolen goods nonsense is clearly somebody junkie's are visiting
and off-loading random swag on...

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 36905
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Post by Marky Dread » 01 Jul 2018, 3:15pm

Drugs are rock n roll. Don't necessarily make good rock n roll.

If a band are on form it's all cool about the drugs. If they turn out something mediocre then it's "What were they on".

It's all fucking bullshit. Yep it's up to the individual what he or she puts in their bodies. But drugs help fuck all anyone who says drugs help their creative process is a wanker. If you have a good idea then it's simply a good idea. You would've made that art without the drugs.
"NIBBLED TO DEATH BY AN OKAPI"

hairydot61
User avatar
Dirty Punk
Posts: 123
Joined: 04 Aug 2016, 5:23pm

Re: Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Post by hairydot61 » 02 Jul 2018, 7:19am

Marky Dread wrote:
01 Jul 2018, 3:15pm
Drugs are rock n roll. Don't necessarily make good rock n roll.

If a band are on form it's all cool about the drugs. If they turn out something mediocre then it's "What were they on".

It's all fucking bullshit. Yep it's up to the individual what he or she puts in their bodies. But drugs help fuck all anyone who says drugs help their creative process is a wanker. If you have a good idea then it's simply a good idea. You would've made that art without the drugs.
Hello,
"Drugs are rock n roll. Don't necessarily make good rock n roll. "

I can relate to that statement, it is documented that when well known musicians have recorded tracks and gone away then come back to listen to what was created, what sounded good at the time needed to be re-recorded due to their perception at the time of being intoxicated, agreed that can happen.
The other side of that and in a different context, Jazz musicians long dead, John Coltrane, Chet Baker & Miles Davis, all drug addicts, possibly helped their playing flow and audacious freestyling (discuss).

"If a band are on form it's all cool about the drugs. If they turn out something mediocre then it's "What were they on"."

In some respects you've contradicted yourself with statement number 3 " anyone who says drugs help the creative process is a wanker", ...I've been called worse.
Albums that I'm aware of that have turned out detrimental possibly by the use of drugs ' The Second coming' rumoured to be coke and relationship problems within the band, I'm thinking hard now, Spacemen 3 Recurring album, essentially the two musicians (Pearce & Kember) took a side of the album each as the pair had fallen out, the drugs probably didn't help, people chose to take drugs for different reasons but this particular thread is about taking whatever for creative reasons, depending on what you take, where you take it, who you take it with and what 'emotional baggage' you may have filed away, speaking from my own past experience of substances, true, physically working under the influence creatively can have detramental effects on what you are trying to produce, (insert personal nightmare senario here), drugs can open up new possibilites and different ways of thinking, these can be intense at the time of peaking on what ever drug you have taken and best reflected on later, note pads are great ideas if you do, drugs also make you forget things.
Bob Dylan, Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix, Syd Barrett, Peter Green, Iggy Pop, David Bowie, Mick Jones, Brian Wilson, The Beatles, Spacemen 3, Rolling Stones, The Kinks and I'm sure the list would go on, we're not even talking about comedians, Bill Hicks,  George Carlin, Lenny Bruce, Richard Prior, did drugs, must have at some point been opened up to a different way of thinking due to substances (discuss), Painters, Film makers, fashionistas, all creative genres possibly have their fair share of twats on drugs.
I am not advocating taking drugs but as you point out, it is down to the individual what they put in their body, I am pro choice as long as you are not hurting or infringing on any others life, that includes treatment of animals and the environment.
"Drugs can be a catalyst for creativity."
MD, I understand you have personal reasons for your outlook and opinion regarding the use of drugs, we have exchanged thoughts elsewhere on this  but personally I felt like I had to give a balanced view of what would appear to be a blanket statement, I've had some personal experience with substances, none of them class A's because I was clued up and wary of them and they don't appeal to me.
Ken Kesey wrote One flew over the Cukoos nest, never read the book, brilliant film, Ken Kesey post taking acid didn't do much of note (as far as I'm aware, help me out here?), as far as I'm aware he said, after the acid 'experience' he felt that the drug had altered him and that his conciousness and by 'that' his way of thinking was that he had nothing left to prove, the drug possibly had taken his 'ego' (in my opinion, am not an expert), thing is I can relate to what he said due to personal experience and the profound effect that it had on me that hung about for a long time, acid opens doors that will give you the horrors (understatement) if you do not 'know' yourself, people have died in circumstances under its influence its dangerous and should be handled with caution (see Personal Baggage)
Bernard Sumner of New Order allegedlly took prosac to help him through some writers block, couldn't do it straight wanted to see what it would bring out of him.
Ok, cop out here, have cut and pasted stuff from the net to illustrate post
This must be from 90's.....
Sumner's determination to break with the habits of a lifetime even led him to allow TV cameras into his previously mysterious creative process . Last year he took part in a bizarre BBC2 programme in which the psychiatrist Oliver James sought to assess the effects of Prozac on creativity by giving it to (and, in one traumatic case, taking it away from) a series of artistic individuals who suffered from depression. Sumner is not happy about how James represented him: "He said I suffered from hyper-critical voices, that I had this big eye watching me all the time and I would crumble when it was looking at me, but if that was true I wouldn't have been standing there with a camera stuck up my nose but why on earth did he agree to the whole idea in the first place? "I was interested in Prozac from a personal point of view, because I can be a bit moody - things do get on top of me sometimes - so I was quite keen to find out what it would do to my personality." What did it do? "It made me a little less deep," Sumner admits with a half smile, "but it made my life and how I got on with people a lot easier. My girlfriend was in a state of shock the day I ran out. You don't feel like you're on drugs. You just have all the lows filtered from your personality so you end up floating through life on a little fluffy cloud."
This relates to the song TRUE FAITH
According to Bernard Sumner, the lyrics were changed at the last minute to sanitize the lines "When I was a very small boy, very small boys talked to me, now that we've grown up together, they're all taking drugs with me" to "they're afraid of what they see," at the suggestion of producer Steven Hague, who felt the song had more hit potential without the drug reference. Sumner would sometimes sing this original lyric during live performances.
This is a New Order Fans perspective........
In the mid-1990s, a story circulated in the British music press about how Bernard Sumner, the leader of the band New Order, had participated in a BBC documentary about the effects of Prozac. He had written lyrics under its influence and then submitted to psychoanalysis. As a clean-living and curious teen, I was deeply concerned: I had no idea what Prozac was. My research revealed that it was a drug, but not one that set the user a-swirling. Rather, it was designed to make you feel content and more or less tempered. I found it strange that people needed a drug to induce this kind of spiritual evenness—placid and calm, happy but not cripplingly so. I already knew the feeling well: This was exactly how listening to New Order felt.
I don't have time to check this for typos or cohesion, I have a fence to mend that I really don't want to do due to apathy and I know whats involved, just as an aside " Opinions are like aresholes....everyones got one." ;)
 
. "Bikini Reds a state of mind,
I'm in a state and She don't mind"
  • Comforting the Disturbed and
    Disturbing the Comfortable

>>>>The Caped Curator<<<<

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 36905
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Post by Marky Dread » 02 Jul 2018, 8:04am

hairydot61 wrote:
02 Jul 2018, 7:19am
Marky Dread wrote:
01 Jul 2018, 3:15pm
Drugs are rock n roll. Don't necessarily make good rock n roll.

If a band are on form it's all cool about the drugs. If they turn out something mediocre then it's "What were they on".

It's all fucking bullshit. Yep it's up to the individual what he or she puts in their bodies. But drugs help fuck all anyone who says drugs help their creative process is a wanker. If you have a good idea then it's simply a good idea. You would've made that art without the drugs.
Hello,
"Drugs are rock n roll. Don't necessarily make good rock n roll. "

I can relate to that statement, it is documented that when well known musicians have recorded tracks and gone away then come back to listen to what was created, what sounded good at the time needed to be re-recorded due to their perception at the time of being intoxicated, agreed that can happen.
The other side of that and in a different context, Jazz musicians long dead, John Coltrane, Chet Baker & Miles Davis, all drug addicts, possibly helped their playing flow and audacious freestyling (discuss).

"If a band are on form it's all cool about the drugs. If they turn out something mediocre then it's "What were they on"."

In some respects you've contradicted yourself with statement number 3 " anyone who says drugs help the creative process is a wanker", ...I've been called worse.
Albums that I'm aware of that have turned out detrimental possibly by the use of drugs ' The Second coming' rumoured to be coke and relationship problems within the band, I'm thinking hard now, Spacemen 3 Recurring album, essentially the two musicians (Pearce & Kember) took a side of the album each as the pair had fallen out, the drugs probably didn't help, people chose to take drugs for different reasons but this particular thread is about taking whatever for creative reasons, depending on what you take, where you take it, who you take it with and what 'emotional baggage' you may have filed away, speaking from my own past experience of substances, true, physically working under the influence creatively can have detramental effects on what you are trying to produce, (insert personal nightmare senario here), drugs can open up new possibilites and different ways of thinking, these can be intense at the time of peaking on what ever drug you have taken and best reflected on later, note pads are great ideas if you do, drugs also make you forget things.
Bob Dylan, Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix, Syd Barrett, Peter Green, Iggy Pop, David Bowie, Mick Jones, Brian Wilson, The Beatles, Spacemen 3, Rolling Stones, The Kinks and I'm sure the list would go on, we're not even talking about comedians, Bill Hicks,  George Carlin, Lenny Bruce, Richard Prior, did drugs, must have at some point been opened up to a different way of thinking due to substances (discuss), Painters, Film makers, fashionistas, all creative genres possibly have their fair share of twats on drugs.
I am not advocating taking drugs but as you point out, it is down to the individual what they put in their body, I am pro choice as long as you are not hurting or infringing on any others life, that includes treatment of animals and the environment.
"Drugs can be a catalyst for creativity."
MD, I understand you have personal reasons for your outlook and opinion regarding the use of drugs, we have exchanged thoughts elsewhere on this  but personally I felt like I had to give a balanced view of what would appear to be a blanket statement, I've had some personal experience with substances, none of them class A's because I was clued up and wary of them and they don't appeal to me.
Ken Kesey wrote One flew over the Cukoos nest, never read the book, brilliant film, Ken Kesey post taking acid didn't do much of note (as far as I'm aware, help me out here?), as far as I'm aware he said, after the acid 'experience' he felt that the drug had altered him and that his conciousness and by 'that' his way of thinking was that he had nothing left to prove, the drug possibly had taken his 'ego' (in my opinion, am not an expert), thing is I can relate to what he said due to personal experience and the profound effect that it had on me that hung about for a long time, acid opens doors that will give you the horrors (understatement) if you do not 'know' yourself, people have died in circumstances under its influence its dangerous and should be handled with caution (see Personal Baggage)
Bernard Sumner of New Order allegedlly took prosac to help him through some writers block, couldn't do it straight wanted to see what it would bring out of him.
Ok, cop out here, have cut and pasted stuff from the net to illustrate post
This must be from 90's.....
Sumner's determination to break with the habits of a lifetime even led him to allow TV cameras into his previously mysterious creative process . Last year he took part in a bizarre BBC2 programme in which the psychiatrist Oliver James sought to assess the effects of Prozac on creativity by giving it to (and, in one traumatic case, taking it away from) a series of artistic individuals who suffered from depression. Sumner is not happy about how James represented him: "He said I suffered from hyper-critical voices, that I had this big eye watching me all the time and I would crumble when it was looking at me, but if that was true I wouldn't have been standing there with a camera stuck up my nose but why on earth did he agree to the whole idea in the first place? "I was interested in Prozac from a personal point of view, because I can be a bit moody - things do get on top of me sometimes - so I was quite keen to find out what it would do to my personality." What did it do? "It made me a little less deep," Sumner admits with a half smile, "but it made my life and how I got on with people a lot easier. My girlfriend was in a state of shock the day I ran out. You don't feel like you're on drugs. You just have all the lows filtered from your personality so you end up floating through life on a little fluffy cloud."
This relates to the song TRUE FAITH
According to Bernard Sumner, the lyrics were changed at the last minute to sanitize the lines "When I was a very small boy, very small boys talked to me, now that we've grown up together, they're all taking drugs with me" to "they're afraid of what they see," at the suggestion of producer Steven Hague, who felt the song had more hit potential without the drug reference. Sumner would sometimes sing this original lyric during live performances.
This is a New Order Fans perspective........
In the mid-1990s, a story circulated in the British music press about how Bernard Sumner, the leader of the band New Order, had participated in a BBC documentary about the effects of Prozac. He had written lyrics under its influence and then submitted to psychoanalysis. As a clean-living and curious teen, I was deeply concerned: I had no idea what Prozac was. My research revealed that it was a drug, but not one that set the user a-swirling. Rather, it was designed to make you feel content and more or less tempered. I found it strange that people needed a drug to induce this kind of spiritual evenness—placid and calm, happy but not cripplingly so. I already knew the feeling well: This was exactly how listening to New Order felt.
I don't have time to check this for typos or cohesion, I have a fence to mend that I really don't want to do due to apathy and I know whats involved, just as an aside " Opinions are like aresholes....everyones got one." ;)
 
Musicians not at their creative peak hiding behind drugs. Jazz and the freeform version may be one of few instances where people think drugs have enhanced the playing. What a crock of shit, I mean what does that say about Coltrane that he was incapable of making "A Love Supreme" without being stoned. Think of all the great albums you like are they really made by a bunch of stoners. XTC, The Jam yep they must've been out their noodles when they wrote "Senses Working Overtime" and "The Dreams of Children" . :rolleyes:

No one is saying those classic musicians didn't take recreational drugs that led to addiction in some cases. But to say the drugs improved their conciousness to a broader musical style and that in order to produce such great music those drugs in question were essential. That just denigrates all those great musicians that don't do drugs. Yeah it's great to say drugs are cool it's sounds oh so rock n Roll. But seriously it's all bullshit. Drugs have destroyed more bands and denied listeners a greater listening pleasure in my opinion. Drugs are like a phase when you are young and part of culture but no fucker forces you to take them and anyone with a single brain cell in their heads already knows prior to taking them they will hurt you in the long run.

Drugs/Religion ...yep Rock n' Roll is my drug and religion of choice. That and a little precious thing called life.
"NIBBLED TO DEATH BY AN OKAPI"

Low Down Low
Graffiti Bandit Pioneer
Posts: 1382
Joined: 21 Aug 2014, 9:08am

Re: Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Post by Low Down Low » 02 Jul 2018, 8:41am

hairydot61 wrote:
02 Jul 2018, 7:19am
Marky Dread wrote:
01 Jul 2018, 3:15pm
Drugs are rock n roll. Don't necessarily make good rock n roll.

If a band are on form it's all cool about the drugs. If they turn out something mediocre then it's "What were they on".

It's all fucking bullshit. Yep it's up to the individual what he or she puts in their bodies. But drugs help fuck all anyone who says drugs help their creative process is a wanker. If you have a good idea then it's simply a good idea. You would've made that art without the drugs.
Ken Kesey wrote One flew over the Cukoos nest, never read the book, brilliant film, Ken Kesey post taking acid didn't do much of note (as far as I'm aware, help me out here?), as far as I'm aware he said, after the acid 'experience' he felt that the drug had altered him and that his conciousness and by 'that' his way of thinking was that he had nothing left to prove, the drug possibly had taken his 'ego' (in my opinion, am not an expert), thing is I can relate to what he said due to personal experience and the profound effect that it had on me that hung about for a long time, acid opens doors that will give you the horrors (understatement) if you do not 'know' yourself, people have died in circumstances under its influence its dangerous and should be handled with caution (see Personal Baggage)
I like the book purely for the fact that it is narrated by the Chief which, if nothing else, gives it a different and interesting perspective compared to the film, which I believe Kesey was less than enamoured of for some reason. On his wider point regarding the taking of acid, I wouldn't have much of a considered opinion, but I would note that of the artists and writers I know and like who were either alcoholics or frequent drug takers, I would consider nearly all of them to have been chronic underachievers. Even Flann O'Brien who has 3 great novels to his name.

Heston
User avatar
God of Thunder...and Rock 'n Roll
Posts: 27219
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
Location: North of Watford Junction
Contact:

Re: Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Post by Heston » 02 Jul 2018, 10:58am

I liked the Beatles before they got into pot and acid but those first few albums were written on copious amounts of coffee and cigarettes, which are technically drugs. A lot of the great philosophers and thinkers used coffee as a tool to jump start their minds.
I just polished off some Low Country shrimp & grits and a mess of collards. That's a hell of a strain on the arm.

Marky Dread
User avatar
Messiah of the Milk Bar
Posts: 36905
Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 11:26am

Re: Judging by his guitar playing during this period – he was high as a kite

Post by Marky Dread » 02 Jul 2018, 11:08am

Heston wrote:
02 Jul 2018, 10:58am
I liked the Beatles before they got into pot and acid but those first few albums were written on copious amounts of coffee and cigarettes, which are technically drugs. A lot of the great philosophers and thinkers used coffee as a tool to jump start their minds.
Sex and Coffee and Rock n Roll!

You've been watching Straight to Hell for too long.

I was sad when Sid Vicious died of a Kenco overdose. Only 21 years old. Such a shame as he had years of coffee drinking left in him.
"NIBBLED TO DEATH BY AN OKAPI"

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests