Wow, thanks! Well, what sums it up for me is Nick's response. I haven't seen the e-mail from him yet, but according to Mark, Nick felt that the book -- and the way that we presented the story -- vindicated his time in the band. And, yes, Fayne's observations were crucial, in terms of documenting how CTC came into being -- that piecemeal-built Frankenstein we've all God knows how many hours discussing and deconstructing on this board here.Ralph, you and Mark really have to be commended for a fantastic work of journalism and a definitive reckoning of the history of this band.I really applaud how sympathetic you are to Joe but at the same time fully demonstrate how severely mentally-ill he really was. I don't know what really went on in the Mellor home but I get the strong feeling it wasn't good. But whatever the problems he was having, they certainly fueled those incendiary performances. They used to call that "art."
Conversely, Bernie just comes off as the insane, pathetic cunt we all know he really is and Kosmo comes off as the oily snake you and I know he is as well. Nick is his usual salt-of-the-earth and Vince and Pete seemed to have mellowed quite a bit with age. And so they were able to present a far more holistic view of their experiences than they had in past interviews.
The biggest surprise was Michael Fayne, who comes across as deeply insightful, perceptive and worldly-wise. He had some brilliant insights into the band's psychology, on a personal and a depth-level. Really appreciated his observations. Sometimes you need to have someone on the inside but on the outside as well to really get the full picture.
Yes! Absolutely. It always used to irritate me, seeing that done, again and again and again -- that historical context is crucial to understanding those songs, especially the more directly topical (Are You Ready For War?, for instance) ones. Otherwise, you're left with another story of rock 'n' roll skulduggery gone sideways. And while there was plenty of that -- that's not the whole story, by a long shot.The historical context is immensely useful since too often this band is removed from their environment and their times. You really brought a lot of memories flooding back and really put me back in that headspace that this lineup existed within. I don't think you can understand this story without looking at what was happening around it.
Lots of artists suffer from that syndrome, certainly. The Heartbreakers come to mind, since I just finished reading the Jerry Nolan bio, and interviewed the author for my website...but as Curt notes, the LAMF sessions were already spiraling out of control before Jerry apparently took it upon himself to remix it, resulting in a) louder drums, and b) a bigger, taller wall of mud...the irony being, he quit the band over that issue, anyway. Go figure, eh?The only fault I find with the book-- and it's not yours or Mark's-- is the burning frustration I had with Joe and Bernie's appalling cluelessness. This ridiculous, self-defeating contempt they and Mick had for professional producers is just so mind-numbingly moronic and narcissistic it staggers the imagination. Joe had far more material in hand to take into the studio than he needed if they had hired a real producer. By many band's standards (including the Clash's) he had enough more than enough material for another Sandinista.
A Chris Thomas or a Glyn Johns could have fleshed out the material with the band in the studio and smoothed out the clunkiness and beefed up the hooks. But I still maintain a Clash record wouldn't have made any sense in 1985. Any Clash record.
In Joe's and Mick's case, I suspect that the misery of making Give 'Em Enough Rope permanently poisoned their view against "leaving it to the professionals" (so to speak). From then on, the most they would concede along those lines was working with a topflight engineer like Bill Price, as they did on London Calling -- whose critical raves, I'm sure, reaffirmed the decision they'd made to go that route.
There's also a point where people just outgrow each other. By the time Joe told Mick to go, their respective trains were running on decidedly different tracks, and they were no longer willing to try and compromise further, for the sake of the partnership.
And, yeah, I think it would have greatly helped the cause if that record had come out a year later, as originally mooted and promised. Three years between records amounted to a lifetime in pop music, especially at that time.
From my perspective, it might be 29 years late, since I started working in '89 toward the idea that exists today. But, however, you count the passage of time, I'm glad it worked out like it did, and that it worked out so well. Thanks again!Even though the scope is obviously limited to the post-Mick period I think this is by far the best-written book on this band and an astonishing time capsule of the early 80s.
Everyone else, you're in for quite a treat. Five years late? So what. Serve no wine before its time.