Here Today... Gone To Hell!

I like Def Leppard alright, but I didn't like this read much.

This is the relevant part towards Gn'R. Article link is below. What do you guys think?

?We obviously think it?s really f****** lame. I love Guns N? Roses, I think they?re really cool, I?d love to see Slash and Axl and Duff play together, that?s great. But I think it?s f****** lame considering we?ve been hardcore,? he snarls. ?Our integrity?s still intact, we?ve never split up. We?ve gone through if someone had a little sniffle or something, we soldier on.?

He has a point. Def Leppard survived the death of guitarist Steve Clark in 1991 from alcoholism, drummer Rick Allen losing his left arm in a car accident in 1984, and co-guitarist Vivian Campbell?s diagnosis with Hodgkin?s Lymphoma in 2013. Guns N? Roses fell apart after barely 10 years, leaving singer Axl Rose to surround himself with an ever-revolving carousel of fill-in performers.

?Someone dies, someone loses an arm, someone gets cancer, we soldier on. [With Guns N? Roses] if someone has a little barney backstage, they can?t deal with each other. I know it?s difficult, but I do think it?s pretty lame when you compare anyone else to us.?



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/02/02/def-leppard-guns-n-roses-reunion-its-really-f-lame/

I see what they are going for.

But the reality is that they didn't split up over money.  They didn't split up over a woman.  They didn't split up over some common occurrence.

They split up because Axl was crazy. 

As such, I have always felt other band's situations can't really be compared to GNR's because only GNR had the variable of Axl Rose.  No other band did.  Eagles, Van Halen, etc.  I have never accepted these as examples that relate to GNR's situation, because I don't think they are analogous.

I do agree with you. Gn'R's history is very unique. Very different in so many ways.

Never has a mainstream band lost everyone and started over with just the singer/frontman left right?

All of them had their issues, but I also blame Axl for most of it. Like 60-70% of the problems that Gn'R had whether it was long recording issues, coming on late etc.

I give him 100% blame for everything summer of 1994 onwards.

Can't think of one that worked.

I know that loony tune singer for Days Of The New sacked the whole band and started over.  But they weren't exactly Guns N' Roses in terms of legacy or status.

this ought to be good.....popcorn anyone?

Hahahaha

I don't see Def Lep getting a lot of support here.

Yeah Def Lep have some good songs, and I respect them, but some things go south in bands.

Really south. It happens. I think Def Lep are completely out of line.

COming from their point of view it might all seem really silly to them though.

The great ones don't last too long (i.e./ Mike Tyson) but during their time there's nothing better

Well, that's the thing.  No one ever really knew.

It wasn't a clear cut case of someone fucking someone's wife, or some dispute over money.

For years, when asked why GNR broke up, the answer was always the same : "That's just Axl, man.  He's crazy."

Axl's reasons for his behavior might have been 100% valid.  But without knowing, people just leave it at the boilerplate, almost clich? answer.

I don't really care about their comment. Just another seek for media attention.

This smells of yet another bullshit headline. Isn?t all he?s saying that Guns can?t be compared to DL as to what they?ve been through? He?s not saying the reunion itself is lame!

Jealousy is pretty lame...

I give Axl 100% credit for keeping the band going after Slash and Duff QUIT.

Some people grumble that roses have thorns; I am grateful that thorns have roses.

Lol...So GNR reunites for the first time in 23 years and they get more press and excitement with 3-4 shows than Def Leppard has since the Regan administration.  Someone's peanut butter and jealous.

Are they still bragging about playing more state fairs than The Beatles?

Like that's some great thing?

Hey, nothing helps fried dough and cheese curds digest like a little Pour Some Sugar on Me.  :hihi:

Right that is one way to looked at it... and your tryhard desperate attempt at that play on words was cute for sure.

Knew you'd comment. You always have some backwards/abrasive opinion.

Yeah he does get 100% credit for keeping the band going after Duff/Slash/Matt/Gilby etc..

For that, after they all left. We got Oh My God in 1999, and what? 4 or 5 shows from 1997-2001? That's keeping it together alright  :confused:

We also got only 1 album. So I wouldn't give Axl too much credit. While the 1 album we did get was great... it simply took way too long to come out. The original Gn'R took their time with albums for sure.

3 full length original albums from 86 to 1991. And just over 4 years from AFD and UYI. Took Axl 9 or 10 years with like 12 different band members to get 1 album out. I wouldn't give him too much praise. Besides he forced everyone else out trying to be a child about it all... and wanted to own the name etc...

Stop being such an Axl Rose mark. I love him too, but come on man. We all know he ruined old Gn'R. Stop giving him so much credit for "keeping" gn'r alive.

I'm glad we got the 1 album. BUt you're giving too much credit over.

And what about those many tour dates from 2003-2005? oh wait... ::)

How old are you?

I've been to many, many great GNR shows since 1996...I'm thankful the band carried on and I enjoy Chinese Democracy as well as Appetite For Democracy CD/DVD/Blu-ray.

I'm thankful the band didn't end in 1996, regardless of your little various opinions and assumptions.

Imagine that, a supportive and positive GNR fan on a GNR forum, what a novel concept!!

How revolutionary !  ::)

You really need some new stuff...

I like the Post 1997 Guns N' Roses. I saw them live. They were just amazing. I think CD is one of the most underrated albums ever.

You are simply giving Axl Rose too much credit. Yeah I'm glad he continued on too. That isn't in question.

You just tried to turn Axl burning down bridges in the old Gn'R and ignoring that... into that you give him credit for New Gn'R?

What is the point is that? You just won't acknowledge that he screwed up the old band in the first place. It's clear that he had the most to do with it.

You even made "quit" stick out. It means nothing. We know why they quit lol

Its all good. They are back together. Should be great.

I just wish Axl had done more with it and given it a real shot. I think that's a bigger gripe than the break-up, to be honest.

It's crazy that both incarnations of his band have a serious case of what might have been.  Different levels, but same general concept.

Good points.

Lol, Def Leppard.  Who's next?  Nelson or Warrant?  They are obviously trying to piggy back on the biggest story in rock right now.  Now if you google Guns N Roses this Def Leppard thing comes up.  Well played.

I think GNR imploded for a variety of reasons, and I find it very narrow minded and naive to heap all the blame on one person- when you aren't privvy to all the real details.

I don't require "new stuff" because I prefer actual fact and truth over half baked theories and assumptions.

In regards to New Music- The Money seems to be in touring in today's climate-
http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-how-pop-stars-make-money-now-that-people-dont-buy-music-2014-5

Only in certain "fans" perceptions.

Emily, there will always be safety in never taking a position.

"Not for me to say".  "That's up to them".  "I enjoy whatever I get".

All fine answers.  But about as milquetoast as it gets.

No, I don't think Axl maximized his chances or really wore it in his sleeve.  That's simply my opinion though. No one is claiming it as fact.

Is yours that you think he did?  No.  You roll with some variation of "not my place to say."

What a profile in courage.

Hard to believe that there would be actual GNR supporters on a GNR fan forum- foreign concept to you, I'm sure.

I support what the band does, I'm not a member of your "critical thinkers and negative minions" club.

We play on very different teams.

(http://thedailyquotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/entitled-to-your-negative-opinions-rachel-wolchin-quotes-sayings-pictures.png)

That's such a phony argument.

How exactly is it a phony argument to state the truth?

This is a GNR Forum, I- and others are actually positive and support the band and  aren't among the negative, toxic whiny complainer contingent.

Sorry that blows your mind, or is beyond your comprehension. :o

Emily just lumps Gn'Rs trouble into one big pile of dust and acts like its all equal.

It is quite obvious that Axl had the most direct reflection on Guns N' Roses issues with making the next record, and going further and onward.

I can list multiple things. I already have listed some to support my claim. It isn't my "opinion" it is history.

And yes DX I agree... she tends not to take a position, and in generalized with it all to be safe.

What a sad way to be. She's just very difficult to discuss anything with. If you look at all of her posts MOST of them are arguing something without any true logic.

Wrong, you seem to have a clear anti-Axl bias and want to demonize him and pile all the blame there when it honestly is so much more complicated than that.

You are entitled to an opinion, you aren't entitled to your own facts.

I'm not the one mentioning "post counts" here- so you really don't want to get into who is spewing juvenile nonsense.

Well, try stating the truth and we'll see how that goes.  Mix it up some.

Every single person here is a fan.  Deputizing yourself to determine who is or isn't isn't only laughable on it's face, your "logic" to determine such is not exactly airtight.

Me saying I don't think Axl really maximized his chances the past 15 years doesn't make me a lesser fan.  Conversely, you accepting any old thing you are given and labeling it all amazing doesn't mean you should be knighted.

The whole argument is phony.  Its not real.  It's fantasy.

Which is lame.  And in her defense, she's not the only one that does this.  I don't want to single her out on this, totally.

Thing that gets me is that her and other such "supportive fans" sure have an odd way of showing it.

Quick example.  I'll be shocked if another album ever comes out.  Pretty open about it.  This gets pushback.

But pushback in terms of a counterargument that takes the opposing viewpoint, that being that they do think it will come out?

Doesn't happen.  Its all vague "we'll just have to see" or "I'll just enjoy what we have".  What is that?  Those aren't answers.

Honestly, in my opinion, it just speaks to a lack of courage.  I may wind up being wrong.  If I am, we deal with it.  But the people that give me the most grief don't have that same sense of conviction.  They don't want to have to deal with sticking their neck out and being proven wrong.

Or...the dirty little secret...they don't totally believe it coming out either, but would never dare to vocalize it.  Can't be putting that on paper to be referenced later.  We can't even get straight answers on a favorite line-up for the same reason.  "I like them all."  "They are all equally great."

Weak.   

Haha  It's my opinion that some people are not fans but rather "fans" based on their history.

You know, opinion- like you are so fond of stating as fact.

It's amazing how some "fans" think the supportive positive fans are somehow out of place on a GNR Fan forum.  :hihi:

Oh I do believe there will be another album at some point and I fully intend to say I told you so.

It's hilarious how you attempt to paint your trolling and negative whining as somehow "noble" :D

I do like all lineups, someone's opinion can't be discounted simply because you don't like it.

I don't think anyone is out of place here.  Have said many times, at the end of the day, we are all on the same team.

I'm not the one sowing discord around here.  That's your crusade, not mine.

Hahahahaha.  That's fucking beautiful, coming from you.

It's times like this I wonder if you are the wind-up account so many say you are.

She probably is. Almost everything I say on this forum she has a view the opposite.

What I normally say is with logic and common sense. I'm not on here saying that Robin, Buckethead or anything else suck or something.

I do think Paul Tobias was a joke joining the band though. His presence really messed things up in the mid 90s. That is fact. Use common sense on that general thought, and Duff, Matt and Slash all had issues with him.

Then she'll act like I'm some kind of idiot for saying he helped break them up?

O M G

I disagree, you and I are very much on different teams.

I think you do sow your fair share of discord- not to mention whiny negativity.

Your posting history proves what you are really about.

I say I like all lineups and don't have a favorite- why exactly do you think I'm not allowed to like what I like?

Your double standards are amazing.

No, I wouldn't call you an idiot- but if the shoe fits feel free to put it on. :D

There are a multitude of reasons GNR imploded when it did, it isn't as simplistic as you are trying desperately to paint it.

Here's what Axl said about Paul- that's good enough for me.
Paul actually contributed a great deal-

Axl-

The public gets a different story from the other guys ? Slash, Duff, Matt - who have their own agendas. The original intentions between Paul and myself were that Paul was going to help me for as long as it took to get this thing together in whatever capacity that he could help me in. So when he first was brought into this, he was brought in as a writer to work with Slash.

At the time those guys never suggested one name. Nobody else. Ever. Paul was one of the best people we knew who was both available and capable of complimenting Slash?s style.

You could bring in a better guitar player than Paul. You could bring in a monster. I tried putting Zakk Wylde with Slash and that didn?t work. It brought out some interesting things in Slash but it was a different approach that ended up being overpowering and didn?t bring out the best in Slash. It brought out some interesting things and it would?ve worked to do some songs.

But Paul was only interested in complimenting Slash, laying down a foundation of a riff or something. That would accent or encourage Slash's lead playing. Now whether or not Paul was going to be officially on the album or on the tour that really wasn?t an actual consideration at the time. It was in the air as a possibility but Paul was a friend trying to help us and he had a huge respect for Slash. He is and this is the bottom line a good man and that's the reality behind things. That doesn't change what took place with old Guns. I feel that some of the recordings we did in that limited amount of time had some of the best playing that Slash had done at least since Illusions. I was there. I know what I heard and it was pretty exciting.
[...]

Paul helped us a lot in the writing and the recording of this record and to me was a vital part of not only the band but also my life. The world tour really wasn?t his cup of tea whereas he's much more comfortable in a studio setting [GN'R press release with Axl interview; gnronline.com, 2002]

It's statistically improbable.  And really, its the digging in and refusing to pick that seems off. 

OK, how about a favorite album?  Which album is your favorite?

I have seen all lineups starting with the AFD lineup, there have been things I enjoyed about every one- sorry to throw a wrench into your little statistic gears but I don't have a favorite.

Favorite Album-honestly depends on the day, same with favorite song- was enjoying UYI II in the car today on my commute.

What you are missing is that Paul never should of been brought in. He doesn't get a free pass cause he wrote 1 song on UYI I and knew Axl. He was clearly a very average guitar player. Axl fired Gilby without asking anyone. ANd just plugged Huge in. Clearly against both of their wishes. That is something you're missing badly.

I never said it was clear and easy to point out. It is very complicated. Axl Rose is the main issue with the original breakup. That is clear. Anyone that thinks anything else is just silly.

Everyone has a favorite. Or if it isn't a "favorite" its a lean towards something. You are just playing the generalized even field. It is such a safe annoying thing to do. I personally don't care what you like or don't like about Gn'R. It's whatever. I do know you're a huge Axl mark and CD is your favorite album.

From your posting. That.. is clear.

I don't see it that way, actually.  That CD is her favorite.

I see it more as a case of complete refusal to name a favorite anything, because that is somehow going be seen as a slight against the others.

Which is totally ri-god-damn-diculous.

AFD is my favorite album.  This does not mean I'm taking a shot at the UYI albums.

The 1991 line-up is my favorite line-up.  This does not mean I am shitting on any other line-up.

Statistically speaking, everyone has a favorite something.  There is an album you listen to more than the others.  There is a line-up you listen to more than the others.

That's just math.

Maybe you're right.

It does seem that she likes all eras of Gn'R, but she is pretty bias on the post 1997 Gn'R. And Axl at the least.

I like Axl too, but I DO KNOW from several and various reporting over the years that he was the MAIN issue with all the UYI era drama. She doesn't see it that way. She just lumps it all into one big pile of junk and you can't do that.

My favorite album is probably UYI II, but their best I think is AFD.

Chinese Democracy is right up there with the UYI albums I think too, but isn't close to AFD. That album took like 2 months to make or something, where CD took 10 years if you're being nice about it, up to 12 years if you want to be technical.

They let Mutt Lange record their albums with drum machines-against their wishes...Soldiering on indeed.

She's very emotionally invested in things people like you or I don't really care about.  And again, not just her, but several folks.

Like how this is all been a straight line evolution.  Its all Guns N' Roses.  It's all equal and its all the same.

People like you and I, we laugh at that.  We don't hate 2001 onwards, but see a clear line of demarcation here, and don't really begrudge anyone (ourselves included) for considering things to be on different levels.

But if you have a big issue with that line of thinking, you are never going to give any sort of ammo that anything is different.  The second you list a favorite anything, the next time you are lecturing someone about how terrible a fan they are for daring to label something anything that super awesome terrific, that person can say, "yeah, but even you said your favorite was <fill in the blank> so you obviously rank things too."

Such a person will shoot blood out their eyes before they give you that opening.  Just never going to happen.

Nope CD is not my favorite- You are posting blatant lies, not cool- but not unusual for you.

I find it amusing that some fans put an imaginary segregation line between GNR albums- they are ALL GNR.

I'm not "emotionally invested" in an online message board, another attempt at posting your little ideas as fact.

There is no imaginary segregation line for me with albums, it's all GNR and I listen to all of them.

Only one silly here is you, thinking your anti- Axl agenda is going to be accepted here- I can assure you it won't.

The breakup was due to numerous internal and external factors that were occurring at the time- it isn't as simple as you try and make it.

Pressure, conflict, outside influences, events and egos were all at play causing the implosion.

I suggest you invent a new narrative.

"Bands are like families that go through uncomfortable growing pains, and if it happens all at once, it's just too much to handle."

Dave Grohl

lmao  :rofl:

At this point is doesn't actually matter. Yet I just can't get over how general you are with it all.

I'm not anti-Axl at all. He's great. Hell I get thrashed sometimes from people that don't like him. He is a top 5 ALL-TIME frontman. He's brilliant.

That doesn't mean that I don't blame him for things. While none of this matters now because they are back together (some of them at least)... it does matter in how you are.

You interest me because I know you're not trolling about things... and what you post you actually think. That blows my mind. I've never met anyone that has such a "be all, do all, love all... enjoy all... EQUAL acceptance" of Guns N' Roses.

It is very clearly 2 different bands. It is clear. I like them both but you CAN'T lump it all together.

No matter what you think, or anyone else it is very reasonable to think of Guns N' Roses as 2 separate things. Why?

I could list several reasons why, but you won't get it. You'll just give me tasteless bland soup on why you think what you think.

If any person was ever a member in Gn'R you just love them. Without any reason. That is fine I guess. No problem with that. The problem is in which you don't see yourself, and that is what actually has happened over the years. The legacy and the everlasting image of the band.

Does Buckethead, Thal, Finck, Ashba, Tobias get the same credit as Slash/Izzy?

Hell no! Why? Cause they all were in the band on and off so many times and did 1 album. ONE. You can't group them in the same league.

Ashba was a touring guitarist Ems. Finck maybe you could exclude from that list, but he was so on and off... how many times did he leave and rejoin? Buckethead was in the band like what 5 years? 6 years? Thal is great but he didn't accomplish that much.

My problem with NU Gn'R while it was very good is that too many people came and went and the result was 1 album.

1 album. While it is very good album doesn't mean they get lumped together with the fuckign AFD and UYI era. 1987-1993 is what it was all about really. You think of it as all equal.

Just because Axl Rose pushed everyone out, and kept the name for being a crybaby about a contract he forced them to sign... and made up a new band that evolved like 3 times with guitarists doesn't mean that 1998-2014 Guns N' Roses is the SAME as the old lineup.

If you think so fine. That doesn't mean that it makes sense. What I've just typed makes perfect sense to anyone with common sense.

DOn't you wish you could buy common sense Ems?

I bet.

Your continued personal attacks don't strengthen you little points- how old are you, seriously? 12?

I have enjoyed every lineup and every album from GNR- of course the writing credits and contributions from members vary- but that has absolutely no bearing on my appreciation of the band.

There is no line of demarcation or segregation on GNR albums for me- they are all GNR.

I think it's ironic that some little fanboy on an internet forum would refer to Axl as a "crybaby" he has accomplished more with his life than you ever will.

Continue with the name calling and see where that gets you.

I bet your Dad could also beat up his Dad.

LoL...

you've been using the "how old are you" theme from the get go chick. Let it go. I use a lot of factual info to back up what I'm saying. It isn't making me any younger that is for sure.

After Slash/Duff/Matt left the band... NOTHING until early 2001. That's 3 years.

no touring at all from 2003-2006. almost 3 more years. a couple cnacelled tours. and CD didn't hit the shelves until 2008

It wasn't the same band post 1998. I guess you keep on using your illusions with it all lol.  :smoking:

this right here... shows that you're a Axl clown/fangirl             


He was a crybaby and wanted control. It is well documented. He did everything in his power to make life miserable for the older guys... and get the name. He did. with child like antics.

All that trouble to get the name Guns N' Roses then do little to nothing with it in the end. The tours were great from 2006 onwards, but it hardly seems like he did that much.

And yes a iconic rock n roll star, and one of the best frontmen ever... and one of my favorite singers all of time that wrote some of my favorite songs... HAS accomplished more than me.

so what? lmao.

The story about anyone being forced to sign over the GNR name rights has since been debunked by all the parties involved.


My favorite GNR album is Chinese Democracy  ;D
It's the only GNR album that I can name all the songs on it and know a good portion of the lyrics to those songs.  :hihi:

pipebomb

nice dude  :smoking:

Stooping to new depths to protect your little minion?

How sweet.  :hihi:

Nobody is a "crybaby" you are pathetic with the namecalling and apparently have zero knowledge of what really went on.

Nobody signed contracts under duress - that is illegal.

Here is Axl talking about it in the 2008 chats-

Q: We learnt in the press, that you asked the former members to sign a paper giving up the rights to the GUNS N' ROSES name and threatening not to go on stage unless they co-operated. Bullshit?

Axl: "So let's start here? the whole 'Axl wouldn't go on stage' yada yada? is complete and utter crap. Never happened, all made up, fallacy and fantasy. Not one single solitary thread of truth to it. Had that been the case, I would've have been cremated years ago legally, could've cleaned me out for the name and damages. It's called under duress with extenuating circumstances. In fact, the time that was mentioned, the attorneys were all in Europe with us dealing with Adler [original GUNS N' ROSES drummer Steven Adler] depositions.

"Couldn't talk sooner as it could have jeopardized whatever nonsense was going on.

"When GUNS renegotiated our contract with Geffen, I had the bit about the name added in as protection for myself as I had come up with the name and then originally started the band with it. It had more to do with management than the band, as our then-manager was always tryin' to convince someone they should fire me. As I had stopped speaking with him, he sensed his days were numbered and was bending any ear he could along with attempting to sell our renegotiation out for a personal payday from Geffen.

"It was added to the contract and everyone signed off on it. It wasn't hidden in fine print, etc., as you had to initial the section verifying you had acknowledged it.

"Now, at that time I didn't know or think about brand names or corporate value etc. All I knew is that I came in with the name and from day one everyone had agreed to it being mine should we break up and now it was in writing.

"I still didn't grasp any other issues until long after I'd left and formed a new partnership which was only an effort to salvage GUNS, not steal it."

"In my opinion, the reality of the shift and the public embarrassment and ridicule by others (which included a lot of not-so-on-the-level business types he was associating with at the time) for not contesting the rights to the brand name, were more than Slash [former GUNS N' ROSES guitarist] could openly face. Also, we aren't lawyers or formally business educated, so it was just a matter of all of us being na?ve and doing what we thought was right at the time. Slash was, in my opinion, being on the up and up in agreeing I had the rights, and I wasn't trying to be some snake in the grass pulling a fast one. The others could've cared less.

"But when the reality of the breakup hit and the strategy to have me crawl back was put into play, Slash had to save face and get business team and public support. Painting me as the one who held a crowd hostage forcing the others to sign over the name worked out pretty well in that regard. I'm the bad guy, and Duff [McKagan, ex-GUNS bassist], the fans and most importantly himself were the victims. Oh, and they had actually made the sacrifice for the crowd, the people, the fans at the show. But again? IT NEVER HAPPENED.

"Media and others ignorantly, wrongly and falsely harped on about it at mine and the fans' expense for years, and Slash has hoped to use all that to continually sue and have some sort of legal nonsense going on behind the scenes in an effort to reverse things. He wouldn't have been able to get the support and action on the part of his various team members over the years to do so if the truth were out there especially when the statute of limitations had run out years ago."


Read more at http://www.blabbermouth.net/news/axl-rose-why-i-am-continung-to-use-name-guns-n-roses/#yFvRCkOYFhw8e4O0.99

SO he actually didn't go on late multiple times?

He didn't fire Gilby without anyone else's consent?

He didn't take steven's 5% away in the beginning...

He didn't bring in Huge even though DUFF and Slash didn't want it.

He didn't threaten not to go on stage if they didn't sign that.

Okay...

I guess Duff/Slash and general media and history must be wrong then.

Axl's behavior in 90s wasn't great.

I agree with those who say it has much improved since then, because it has.  He's not the same angry lunatic he once was.  He should be commended for that.

But, at least from where I sit, we don't pretend all that shit in the 90s just didn't happen because its more convenient to pretend we all have amnesia.

Axl-
The misconception is that we kicked him out for the hell of it, and that l was the dictator behind it. The truth is, l probably fought a little harder to keep him in the band, because l wasn't working with him on a daily basis like the other guys were. They grew tired of not being able to get their work done because Steven wasn't capable of it. I've read interviews where he's saying that he's straight. Most of the time he isn't. (...) At one point, in order to keep this band together, it was necessary for me to give him a portion of my publishing rights. That was one of the biggest mistakes I've made in my life, but he threw such a fit, saying he wasn't going to stay in the band. We were worried about not being able to record our first album, so I did what l felt l had to do. In the long run l paid very extensively for keeping Steven in Guns N' Roses. I paid $1.5 million by giving him 15 percent of my publishing off of Appetite for Destruction. He didn't write one goddamn note, but he calls me a selfish dick!(...) I feel bad for him in ways, because he's a real damaged person, but he's making choices to keep himself in that damage. There's nothing we can do at this point. We took him to rehabs, we threatened his drug dealers, we helped him when he slashed his wrists.  I even forgave him after he nearly killed my wife. I had to spend a night with her in an intensive-care unit because her heart had stopped thanks to Steven. She was hysterical, and he shot her up with a speedball. She had never done jack shit as far as drugs go, and he shoots her up with a mixture of heroin and cocaine? I kept myself from doing anything to him. I kept the man from being killed by members of her family. I saved him from having to go to court, because her mother wanted him held responsible for his actions. And the sonofabitch turns on me? I mean, yeah, I'm a difficult person to deal with, and I'm a pain in the ass to understand, and I've had my share of problems, but Steven benefited greatly from his involvement with me - more than I did from knowing him. Steven had a lot of fans, but he was a real pain in the ass. I need to keep him in my life for you? F?!k you! ["I, Axl" Del James, RIP Magazine - 1992]

His behavior is much much improved since UYI era.

It was fucking horrible during that era. It so well documented. Talking about looking through rose colored glasses Ems.

Yikes.

Slash and Duff have improved as well, being off addictive substances constantly.

I doubt if you were even around for the 90's.

You seem to gullibly swallow loads of pure Troll gospel and vomit it up here.

This came up in a thread last year.

I was making a point that the April 1992 Chicago show was just about the perfect show of that era.  It had everything.  Good setlist, the full 12 piece band, and...I believe the term I used was... "3 ridiculous Axl rants".  I was making the point that you can't reference that era and not include that part of the concerts. 

Predictably, I faced a near immediate firing squad for labeling the rants "ridiculous".  Some even played the "emotional baggage" card saying that it was brave for Axl to talk about all that stuff, etc.

But that wasn't my point.

My point was that you just waited until, I don't know...11:00PM for them to come out.  They rip through scorching versions of 'Nightrain' and 'Mr. Brownstone'.  Axl then sends the band off the stage and rants for FIVE SOLID MINUTES about his family and how the universe is pretty much against him.  Put yourself in that crowd.  Talk about a buzzkill.  And live, that 5 minutes probably seemed like a half hour.  All this, after you've been sitting on your hands for 2 and a half hours waiting for him to take the stage.

Shit like that happened, and we can't pretend it didn't.  That sort of thing was part of that tour.  Does it mean I like that concert any less?  Hell no.  I love that concert.

What about him being "held up" in Paris?

They cancelled lots of gigs over him.

It is very much documented.

Here is what I find frustrating.  When people tell me that he doesn't do that any more, so it should never be brought up.

Because here's the rub.  He DID do that stuff...and that's what people remember.  He had his worst behavior at the absolute zenith of their popularity.

I sit here just shaking my head when people get all hot and bothered about any article that mentions his tardiness or propensity to storm offstage or cause riots.  Because, to them, so long as it didn't happen yesterday afternoon, it's out of bounds to bring up.

But its only because he behaved that way for YEARS that people are still conditioned to think that way about him.  You can't unring that bell.

I love when people say something is "so well documented" and have no argument to make their point.

pretty funny.

It is. Don't troll this thread dude.

Via books, and several people from the era.

Basically everyone from that timeframe has stated what I've said. I'm not making this up.

Wanting CD II a little too much? lol

They didn't cancel gigs over him?  That's what we're going with?

- they didn't have to cancel shows after the St. Louis riot in summer 1991?
- they didn't have to cancel shows in the spring of 1992 when they got word Axl would be arrested?
- they didn't cancel shows in the summer of 1992 because of "his throat"?
- a number of shows weren't cancelled in the spring of 1993?

What else are we going to try and peddle?  That he was actually well behaved?

Should I call up about 47 examples from bootlegs of him being totally miserable during that tour?

C'mon, man.  He's our favorite guy, always has been, always will be.

We obviously have all made our peace with it, otherwise we would not still give a damn about him.

But let's not deny reality.  Claim its all made up.  It all happened, man.  It's not in dispute.

Furthermore, its that total denial of reality and insistence on revisionist history that prolongs these conversations.  Just trying to get out in front of claims anyone is "dwelling on the negative".

Not when its response to silly claims.  Lack of silly claims cuts down on responses to them.

so basically what you're saying is every canceled shows are Axl's fault, and you found evidence in the press or books.

sure, that's well known that the press loved GNR and Axl, and that these books were written by people who always
said the truth, never lied to fill their own agendas or to look good in public eye...

I can tell when you're saying something stupid?your lips move

Basically, I'm not so reluctant to address the reality of what we could all plainly see and hear that I feel the need to invent some sort of shadow conspiracy (totally unverifiable, pro or con...like any good conspiracy theory should be) that explains, some, most, if not all of it away.

The UYI tour bootlegs are the things I listen to the most from this band.  Not just of live recordings, I listen to them more than the official albums, for the most part.

But while I love the music, the concerts do not paint the picture of a well behaved, or in some cases, even a very professional man.

But so what?  We are talking about 20 plus years ago, and he seems to have grown out of a lot of this.  That's a good thing.

However, his seeing the light < > erasing the past like it never happened.

so, watching the bootlegs of the shows who happened, you can tell why some others were cancelled.

well, you're a better man than I

I tend to not read article after article addressing the same repeated behavior over a period of time, and determine what's probably going on here is that the entire press community is in cahoots and out to get him.

One rogue article, OK, maybe.  Article after article, interview after interview, source after source...most with little to no connection to each other...and all telling the same story?  It's probably because that's what happened.

I'm an Occam's Razor sort of fella.  If you need to believe its all been a wacky misunderstanding...hey, salud.

I don't think that's terribly realistic, but am not going to go 12 rounds with you over it either. 

well, the thing is, I used to do that, and to make my own assumptions. Axl didn't help, because
he didn't talk, so I had just one side of the story to try to apprehend the whole thing.

then he began to talk more, and it always made more sense than what I've read before from the other side.

so I had to balance things, and even if there were no saint in that band, yes I tend to trust more Axl than
Slash, Niven, Goldstein, Zutaut and co...

Do you blame Axl's actions for the riot in St. Louis?

Put a percentage on it.

I'm still not sure what happened really. security seemed lame at that show. did the guy had a knife? a camera?
if it was a camera, it doesn't make any sense at all. if it was a knife and nobody cares, well...

what I thought for a long time was : Axl was hugely influenced by Jim Morrison at that time, and he wanted *his* riot.

so you can't accuse me to be a blind fanboy or whatever, I suppose ahah

From Doug Goldstein, GN'R's ex manager... The real story behind St. Louis...

About time the story is told...The fucking idiot who was taking pictures was a security guy who took the night off to see his "idol" Axl Rose! We all saw this prick knocking fans over to get a better seat, and spilling beers on everybody around him.
Axl pleaded with the local security company to "get the camera" but because he was one of them...they didn't..The reality (and I love all the guys we employed), but one of the 8 security guys we had working security on this tour SHOULD have interceded LONG before Axl did.

After the Melee...I spoke to Axl, and he said "Give me two minutes to clean up my scrapes and cuts" I assembled the band and we tried to go back out onstage as the crowd grew restless. The promoter and the police told us to "Fuck Off" and leave..I told them that the only way the fans would settle down is if they allowed the band back on..They formed a barricade of cops and again told us to "Fuck Off...we weren't welcome anymore"..at this time..I was concerned for the bands safety so I instructed John Reese the bands tour manager to load up and head to Chicago..I stayed until 5am fighting with the crowd and authorities.

I fucking HATE all the shit that AXL gets blamed for..He had every right to do what he did...try walking a mile in his shoes or the shoes of his bandmates,,its very scary when NO ONE has your back....Time to get the real shit out because Axl has never defended himself against all the haters

Haha.  That's not bad.  And I've heard that Morrison influence before.

I'd put that, say, 90% on Axl.  Part of me wants to say that its not his fault they tore the place up.  Part of me.

But...bit remiss not to point out that doesn't happen if he handles that a little better and doesn't storm off the stage in a huff.  I'm more of a "root problem" guy.

I'm not saying that he is the cause of every problem they ever had.  I was just trying to establish something I figured could be something of a baseline for this discussion.

Yeah, I don't really buy this story.

Even, sake of argument, you want to say it's accurate.  OK, fine.

Let's look at the situation.  You are in that crowd, and the singer has just stormed offstage after slamming the mic down and saying he's going home.

Chances you'd turn to the rest of your section and say "dude probably just needs 2 minutes, he'll be right back."?  Really now.

People are morons.  People in groups are morons.  And drunk/high people in groups are the biggest morons of all.

A riot, at least on some kind of scale, is going to happen after that turn of events.  Not a great decision by him, even if you believe Doug's yarn.

you have to blame the rest of the band too.

I mean, if you're in a band, and your singer storm off stage, your responsability is to avoid an even more shitty situation to happen.
you play something without him and you keep entertaining the crowd until things are back to normal.

They did this before. I think it was over in Europe. a couple times. he'd walk off stage like a child

then they'd burn through 14 years with izzy on vocals and string out a jam etc...

then he'd come back on.

The St. Louis riot isn't the 1 thing I'd focus on... cause in a lot of ways I thought he handled that well to be honest. Security was being stupid etc... fuck it.

He should of come back on though sooner.

He clearly has done that type of thing multiple times. So save the blind defenses.

A few more details from St. Louis


During the course of the concert, Duff got nailed in the arm with a beer bottle, but didn?t want to tell Axl for fear he would stop the show.
Axl: Also, other things happened at the St. Louis gig that I wasn?t told about until two days after the gig. Duff didn?t want me to get excited.

Musician: Such as?

Axl: Such as Duff getting hit with a bottle twice during the show. Duff knows I would have called the show and he didn?t want to be responsible for whatever happened out of that. Duff?s attitude is, ?I?m a man about things. I got hit with a bottle, big deal.? My attitude is that no, you don?t allow yourself to get hit by bottles because that encourages it in the future.Duff has the biggest bruise I?ve ever seen on an arm because he was hit by a bottle and he didn?t want to tell me onstage. If I had known that, we would have left the stage a lot earlier! And if it happens another night, we will leave again! [Musician ?There?s a Riot Going On? Sept 1991]

Guns N? Roses contract at the time guaranteed at least a 90 minute show. Axl said they had met that obligation by the time he left. Concert footage on YouTube clocks in at 84 minutes, but I?m not sure if it had been edited down or whether 6 minutes makes that big of a difference in the end. GNR wasn?t sued for breach of contract, so all parties must have deemed it acceptable.

Guns N? Roses could not be legally held liable for damages because, according to the performance contract, if a venue sold alcohol on the premises, the band was then not responsible.

The venue ? Riverport Amphitheater (now called Verizon Wireless Amphitheater) ?  had only been open for two weeks prior to the Guns concert. Previous shows included the likes of Jimmy Buffet, Steve Winwood, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and Mannheim Steamroller. Not exactly in the realm of GNR.

 [writer Babu Barat] had interviewed Gregg Hagglund from Contemporary Productions and asked him how Contemporary was going to prepare for a Guns N? Roses crowd. He said, ?We will be prepared. I don?t think, initially, that we?re going to change a lot of things. I think that the party revelers will respect the environment that they are in. It will be a lot bigger crowd. There will be a lot more of them. Those will be the only differences in terms of how we treat the crowd. We will just have more people to deal with, more customers.?
Axl?s response? ?That?s not very intelligent.? [Musician Sept 1991]

Because of the destruction to the stage, instruments, and equipment, Guns N? Roses had to cancel their next two shows in Chicago and Kansas City to give the crew time to make repairs and for the band to secure new equipment. The tour resumed in Dallas on 8 July 1991.

Stump admits to sneaking in not only the infamous camera, but also a knife and bottle of whiskey, ?like I always have.?

Once the settlement was reached between Stump and Axl and court adjourned, Stump approached Axl in the courtroom with his book of photographs and asked for an autograph. Axl ? as can be imagined ? wasn?t particularly enthusiastic, but he did sign it.

Axl:
The place allowed bottles and knives and whatever else inside? And they [public] think I did it just because I wanted to stop somebody from taking my picture. The camera was the last straw, the final thing. I was sick of it, at that point, with the security in the front. There was a weird space in my mind the entire night. I was thinking, ?Something isn?t right up here. Why is there this weird attitude, this passiveness, in the security?? There was no feeling that they were on the same team as us. Their feeling towards the crowd wasn?t right. A young boy and a girl were getting shoved over here while rowdy bikers are being allowed to do whatever they want. What is going on? I was very confused? One thing that is not being said in the press is that Earl Gabiddon [Axl?s bodyguard and head of GNR security at the time] was on the headset and he warned these guys [venue staff] in the front that either the cameras go or the show is off. He warned them four times. He was doing his job. [Musician, ?There?s a Riot Going On,? Sept 1991]



Having that information, the puzzle pieces begin to fall together. But there is more that further explains the depth of what occurred. Axl did not attack an innocent fan. As it turns out, the man with the camera was a member of the Saddletramps Motorcycle Club called Stump. Pulling out a camera wasn?t Stump?s only transgression of the night; it was just his last.

All through the concert, Stump and his buddies were on the front row, heckling Axl. If you watch the full concert video, you can see some of these things happen. During the fourth song of the set ? ?Dust n? Bones? ? Izzy takes the lead, while Axl dances around with a tambourine and chimes in on background vocals. This early in the concert, something was already striking him as odd: at 11:56 on the recording, he looks at the crowd and throws his arms out as if to say, ?What?s that about?? About a minute later, we can hear Axl calling out to someone in the audience, throwing his arms out again, but we can?t hear what he is saying over the singing. All during the song, we can see Axl looking hard at the crowd.

As he sings the closing notes, he leans down towards someone in the front row (15:48) and takes a small card. ? ?You have people yelling and screaming during the whole show,? says Rose, ?but this guy just wouldn?t stop, and he was loud ? almost as loud as my monitor. He?s holding up a card and I?m like, ?Okay yeah, that?s great.? But he still won?t stop yelling.? ?  ?I read his card, ? says Rose, ?and I said, ?Okay, you?re Stump from the Saddletramps ? was that worth interrupting the show for?? Rose says he asked what he was supposed to do with the card and that Stump told him to ?remember it.? ? [Rolling Stone 22 August 1991] With obvious annoyance and disgust, Axl flicked the card onto the drum riser while he got himself a drink.

Two songs later, Axl, trying to be a good guy and connect with his fans, shakes as many hands as he can reach while still singing. There are a few audience members who, not content with a handshake, try to pull Axl into the crowd. Of course, we can?t tell from the video whether one of these is Stump or not, but just the fact that rowdiness like that was permitted begins to explain the vibe of that night.

Despite that, there were lighter moments: Axl grinning and making jokes with Izzy during ?Patience;? Slash sitting atop the piano during ?November Rain? in just his shorts and socks; Axl laughing at him afterwards as he scurried offstage ?to find shoes.?

But things began getting tense again. ? ?During ?Jungle? ? I don?t stand during ?Jungle? ? I just stood there and watched a security guy shove a young kid and walk about four feet into the aisle just to act tough and show the crowd that he was a man. Then he turned around to me with a smile of pride on his face. I looked at this slob while he was looking at me with this pride on his face going, ?See what I do to your fans?? ? ? [Musician Sept 91]

Although, the video doesn?t show what Axl saw, we can see him standing and staring intently into the audience for about half a verse before he snaps out of his inner thoughts and resumes running around. The remainder of the concert appears to go off normally and Axl is in full Rocket Queen character, when suddenly his eye is caught by Stump raising a camera. We know what happens next.

 When Axl disappears from view (despite the ostentatious black fur coat) it seems to corroborate his story that he wasn?t fighting ? he was on the floor, hanging onto Stump so that he couldn?t get away. The band unperturbedly plays on as Axl?s bodyguard Earl lifts him to his feet. Axl is obviously still angry, pointing and yelling, and when a venue staffer leans in to say something, Axl cuffs him upside the head before being returned to the stage. Again the video seems to corroborate his story that he didn?t hit anyone except the venue security guard who was jawing at him.

? ?When I got back onstage, says Rose, ?I?d lost a contact, and I couldn?t see. My first thought was, ?I?m out of here. I?m paying these guys? [venue staff] salary, I don?t need to be treated like that by them.? I went backstage,? Rose continues, ?and found a new lens. It was getting crazy and we decided we were going to go back out and try to play, because we didn?t want people to get hurt.? ? [RS 22Aug91]

But by that time, it was painfully obvious that it was too late. The rioters destroyed the band?s drum set, projection screens, monitors and amps in addition to the damage inflicted on the venue itself and each other. 500 police were called in, 60 people sent to the hospital, 15 sent to jail, and damages were estimated around $500,000. Izzy?s Marshall stack was later found 2 miles away, abandoned at a bus stop.

A year later, Axl was arrested in New York as he was returning from a European leg of the tour and was charged with four misdemeanor counts of assault and one misdemeanor count of property damage, issued by the St. Louis county prosecutor. The week following his arrest, Axl appeared in court in St. Louis where he plead guilty to the charges and was put on two years probation, and donated $50, 000 to child abuse organizations and, later, reached a settlement with Stump for injuries sustained when Axl jumped on him. Guns n? Roses were banned from ever playing St. Louis again. When the Use Your Illusions albums came out in September 1991, that night was commemorated with a nice ?F*** you, St. Louis!? in the liner notes.

In an interview with Kurt Loder taking place between his arrest and trial date, Axl said, ?We lost $1 million worth of equipment in that show and I don?t see anyone else taking any responsibility for anything. And I?m saying, Yeah, I jumped offstage, and yeah, things went haywire after that, and maybe I could have handled it better or whatever, but no one was really handling anything at that point. So I took matters into my own hands with what I could do? but I don?t see anybody else in St. Louis really taking responsibility for anything that happened.?

The St. Louis inccident isn't really all on Axl. I agree.

We're not talking as if he had this one little riot. Are we?

he had multiple bullshit thigns happen. So stop trying to save the Axl world by posting rehashed stuff from St. Louis as if it is going to be the saving grace.

Please

Stop

thanks for the details EmilyGNR

You are welcome DeN  : ok:

I agree with this.

I don't. 

The band would of been slaughtered on stage   

Plus they supported there singers stood by him.  They didn't do anything wrong.  It was that American crowd

They did it, not that day in St. Louis but later. In Germany 91. People were throwing stuff on stage during the show. Axl got pissed off and left. The band went back stage and forced him out. It got kinda nasty among them. I mean there was really heating arguing and yelling at Axl.

Also in Ireland in 2010, there was a similar situation and Axl left. Back stage he kinda got in fight with the promoter. But he went back and finished the show

In St. Louis I guess they never imagine it could get that ugly. In youtube I watched the show. Everything was going great until that point. Despite the riot it is still an hour and a half show worth watching in my opinion. I would say there were only 5 or 6 songs left to play.

Yeah, probably.  They had already done the solo spots, which on that tour were done about 2/3 of the way through the set.

And you're right, its a good show up until then.

You just can't do what Axl did, the way he did it.  This is not to say that his concerns were not legit, they were.  But that's not how to handle it.

The oddest thing is that Axl, as a rule, doesn't want to see fans hurt.  But the way he handled that put everyone at risk.

Keep calm and go to see GN?R July 27th. You got your show in Philly. What more do you need???

Wait, WHAT??

I doubt you will even go    This opinion is based on your rants.    I am sure the sure the show would have to go on at 6 pm and be on a weekend. And be in you living room.  For you to actually watch it

On a side note

I am sure the audio file will be out of this world

Well, there you have it then. 

Thank god you came back to make sense of it all, really.  We're in your debt.

No problem big guy chief

Yeah I agree. Left a lot to be desired.

emily did an awesome job in this thread bringing up all those interview segments. very interesting to read up on a lot of that, thanks!

there is always two sides to every story. if you actually believe that everyone else was angelic and axl was a monster, then i have some ocean front property to sell you.

But conversely, you don't roll our eyes at any of this "where all this coming from?" routine.

Is everybody mistaken?  Is everyone out to get him?  Isn't more than a little possible some of these stories are very much true?

I'd say at the minimum Axl has been eccentric at time over the years.

Which is part of the appeal and what makes him great.

Denying that everything said about him is off... well... is off.

I agree with that, JAEBALL.  Well put.