The Slash autobiography thread

[DEAD HORSE]

If you are fan of the band he used to be in, then that makes you fan of Slash.?

For example: Lets say I'm a fan of Black Sabbath, and there fore, I'm a fan of Ozzy, but lets say I dont like Ozzy's solo material, Am I still fan of Ozzy as (singer/frontman/song writer, you name it)?? OF course I AM! 'cause I liked him with Sabbath!? it's common sense. I dont need to like his music or be a "fan" of his solo project, but I'm a fan of his contribution with Sabbath.

*Anyway I love Ozzy with Sabbath and as a solo artist (it was just an example)?

Not really. I like Black Sabbath too, but I can't stand Ozzy and his voice. Just because you like a band does not mean you're a fan of each and every member.

thats strange, you like Sabbath (Ozzy era) but you don't like THE SINGER? 

[Bobarcord]

I just don't agree with your opinion.





/jarmo

You aren't the only one chief.

[Genesis]

If you are fan of the band he used to be in, then that makes you fan of Slash. 

For example: Lets say I'm a fan of Black Sabbath, and there fore, I'm a fan of Ozzy, but lets say I dont like Ozzy's solo material, Am I still fan of Ozzy as (singer/frontman/song writer, you name it)?  OF course I AM! 'cause I liked him with Sabbath!  it's common sense. I dont need to like his music or be a "fan" of his solo project, but I'm a fan of his contribution with Sabbath.

*Anyway I love Ozzy with Sabbath and as a solo artist (it was just an example) 

Not really. I like Black Sabbath too, but I can't stand Ozzy and his voice. Just because you like a band does not mean you're a fan of each and every member.

thats strange, you like Sabbath (Ozzy era) but you don't like THE SINGER? 

Why is that difficult to understand? I like the music and Iommi's guitaring, but can't stand Ozzy's voice. For example, I wouldn't mind if they dubbed out his vocals and replaced it with somebody else's

Now I like all the members of Guns N' Roses, for example.

But my point being that you don't have to like each and every member of a band to like the band's music.

[Kasanova King]

Robert Plant and Jimmy Page were the 2 most important parts of that band

Maybe to someone who wasn't around when they were making music. It was Gonzo's death that brought about their demise, and irrelevant of how Jones was treated after the break up, I doubt that Page or Plant share you view.

Yes, you are right, it was Gonzo's death that caused the breakup but to say that Page & Plant weren't the backbone of that band puzzles me.  I was not around when they were making music (or way too young to remember it, I'm 31 now) but from what I've read and from the general public's views of the band, Page & Plant were Led Zeppelin.  I feel that since they are both very honorable men, they would not come out and brag about it.  They were very loyal to their original members and that is something that is very sacred to them....so of course if you were to ask them you probably would get the "loyalist" answer but if you were to ask the majority of their fans, the truth would come out.

[DEAD HORSE]

If you are fan of the band he used to be in, then that makes you fan of Slash.?

For example: Lets say I'm a fan of Black Sabbath, and there fore, I'm a fan of Ozzy, but lets say I dont like Ozzy's solo material, Am I still fan of Ozzy as (singer/frontman/song writer, you name it)?? OF course I AM! 'cause I liked him with Sabbath!? it's common sense. I dont need to like his music or be a "fan" of his solo project, but I'm a fan of his contribution with Sabbath.

*Anyway I love Ozzy with Sabbath and as a solo artist (it was just an example)?

Not really. I like Black Sabbath too, but I can't stand Ozzy and his voice. Just because you like a band does not mean you're a fan of each and every member.

thats strange, you like Sabbath (Ozzy era) but you don't like THE SINGER??

Why is that difficult to understand? I like the music and Iommi's guitaring, but can't stand Ozzy's voice. For example, I wouldn't mind if they dubbed out his vocals and replaced it with somebody else's

Now I like all the members of Guns N' Roses, for example.

But my point being that you don't have to like each and every member of a band to like the band's music.

I know  that, and I understand your point, even tho is "different" because , cool you said you can't stand Ozzy which is fine, but in Jarmo's case he said liked Slash in GN'R. He doesnt like him in VR (which is cool) but just because (another example)  I dont like the idea of Jimmy Page  recording an album with the Black crows (which i didn't like anyway) doesnt mean I have to quit being a fan of Jimmy Page in "GENERAL" 
Jimmy Page is going to be Jimmy Page whether he plays with puff daddy(which I didnt like or agree either) or Led Zeppelin...same shit with Slash.

[jarmo]

For the record, I liked the music he was part of in GN'R. Not him alone.

It's not like I started listening to GN'R because of Slash alone.


Which is almost what you're trying to say with this whole "you're a fan of him" crap...




/jarmo

[Kasanova King]

If you are fan of the band he used to be in, then that makes you fan of Slash.?

For example: Lets say I'm a fan of Black Sabbath, and there fore, I'm a fan of Ozzy, but lets say I dont like Ozzy's solo material, Am I still fan of Ozzy as (singer/frontman/song writer, you name it)?? OF course I AM! 'cause I liked him with Sabbath!? it's common sense. I dont need to like his music or be a "fan" of his solo project, but I'm a fan of his contribution with Sabbath.

*Anyway I love Ozzy with Sabbath and as a solo artist (it was just an example)?

Not really. I like Black Sabbath too, but I can't stand Ozzy and his voice. Just because you like a band does not mean you're a fan of each and every member.

thats strange, you like Sabbath (Ozzy era) but you don't like THE SINGER??

Why is that difficult to understand? I like the music and Iommi's guitaring, but can't stand Ozzy's voice. For example, I wouldn't mind if they dubbed out his vocals and replaced it with somebody else's

Now I like all the members of Guns N' Roses, for example.

But my point being that you don't have to like each and every member of a band to like the band's music.

Very true...for example I think the new songs from Guns N' Roses are awesome but quit honestly the only member I would consider myslef a fan of is Axl Rose....the rest of the guys just don't do it for me. ?Fink & Bumblefoot are good musicians and I respect them but I woudn't go pay to see them unless Axl was fronting them. ?- Nuff said.

[Kasanova King]

For the record, I liked the music he was part of in GN'R. Not him alone.

It's not like I started listening to GN'R because of Slash alone.


Which is almost what you're trying to say with this whole "you're a fan of him" crap...




/jarmo

I agree with you on this one, Jarmo, if you look at my previous post I same feeling about the new band as you do of Slash, so I completely understand your point.

[Voodoochild]

and please...you will have a hard time to convince me and exspecially the Rio/south american fans with "plans changing" in this. they toured so many other countries since but the mainman -all in love he appears to be with Brazil- didnt perform there again yet for the next ~ 7 years, neither there was any excuse for.

I AM Brazilian and I don't need to convince you (in fact, you already have your opinion no matter what people say or prove). I know for a fact that people tried to bring GN'R, but they failed to do that. Just because I don't know the facts behind this I wouldn't say it was because he simply didn't want to. It's not that easy to bring big bands like GN'R to South America because of money and logistic issues. Simple as that.

[Ines_rocks!]

Just got the book today (so damn late lol)!? Already read 4 chapters... it has been a great read so far. I?ll review it as soon as I have read it.?

[Eclipsed107]

 Another key is that last time Slash was on Conan O'Brien, he talked about his book, spoke about Guitar Hero III, talked about G N' R....guess who he didn't mention 1 word about....yep, you got it, not 1 word mentioned about Velevet Revolver.  Now if that doesn't say something to you, what will??

Was he asked about Velvet Revolver?  No.

Was he asked about Gn'R?  Yes.

Why do you think he was on the show?  To promote his book and Guitar Hero III.  That's what's in his contract.

I'm not saying that things are great in VR, because I don't think they are either.. I'm just saying, he wasn't on the show to talk about VR.

[Kasanova King]

 Another key is that last time Slash was on Conan O'Brien, he talked about his book, spoke about Guitar Hero III, talked about G N' R....guess who he didn't mention 1 word about....yep, you got it, not 1 word mentioned about Velevet Revolver.? Now if that doesn't say something to you, what will??

Was he asked about Velvet Revolver?? No.

Was he asked about Gn'R?? Yes.

Why do you think he was on the show?? To promote his book and Guitar Hero III.? That's what's in his contract.

I'm not saying that things are great in VR, because I don't think they are either.. I'm just saying, he wasn't on the show to talk about VR.

Conan did mention he was currently in the band Velvet Revolver and that would have been Slash's cue to say something about the band but he didn't.  It could have been a little mention of the new album considering the slagging sales, any mention would help.  I just find it odd that his current band is on the bottom of his priority list.

By the way, I like your avatar...I was fucked over in Philly in '02 as well....I was in the tenth row with three hot chicks....the best part of that night was that I ended up hooking up with all three of them after the riot.

[Eclipsed107]

Haha, I was about 20 rows back (Can't remember exactly) with one hot chick, who I am still with today.

I had tickets for the next night too, it sucked but what can you do.

Did you get to see them in 2006?  I drove all the way up to the Medowlands in NJ and saw them, it was a 2.5 hour drive, but well worth it.

[Ali]

The only problem with your scenario is that you and I don't know each other all to well, while Axl & Slash (at that time) had spent the last 10 years practically attached at the hip.? What I'm getting at is that it wouldn't be the first time Axl would be late nor the second or the third....to me, that meeting would have been the straw that broke the camel's back....a final incident, after numerous prior incidents, that made Slash realize things were never going to change....Axl would always be Axl, if it wasn't his neighbors keeping him up it would be the maid's dog next time that kept him up all night....see what I'm saying??

Doesn't Slash say in the book that he doesn't know what Axl thinks or how he works etc.?




/jarmo

Yes he does, and that's exactley my point...he knows Axl so well that's what he means...that's a nice way of saying the man is unreliable...he doesn't want to come out saying that b/c he knows that would hurt Axl's feelings.? Slash, I believe, cares about Axl and knows how delicate he needs to be when communicating with him.? So by Slash saying, I don't know how he thinks, works, etc, it's realy the opposite.

I think you are reading way too much into that.  Way too much. 

I think all that Slash meant by that is that he doesn't understand Axl and wouldn't presume to know what is in his head.

Ali

[Jim Bob]

The only problem with your scenario is that you and I don't know each other all to well, while Axl & Slash (at that time) had spent the last 10 years practically attached at the hip.  What I'm getting at is that it wouldn't be the first time Axl would be late nor the second or the third....to me, that meeting would have been the straw that broke the camel's back....a final incident, after numerous prior incidents, that made Slash realize things were never going to change....Axl would always be Axl, if it wasn't his neighbors keeping him up it would be the maid's dog next time that kept him up all night....see what I'm saying??

Doesn't Slash say in the book that he doesn't know what Axl thinks or how he works etc.?




/jarmo

Yes he does, and that's exactley my point...he knows Axl so well that's what he means...that's a nice way of saying the man is unreliable...he doesn't want to come out saying that b/c he knows that would hurt Axl's feelings.  Slash, I believe, cares about Axl and knows how delicate he needs to be when communicating with him.  So by Slash saying, I don't know how he thinks, works, etc, it's realy the opposite.

I think you are reading way too much into that.  Way too much. 

I think all that Slash meant by that is that he doesn't understand Axl and wouldn't presume to know what is in his head.

Ali

no man. they are attached at the hip.  they are axl and slash and they are GNR 4eva Lolz!!!!!1111111111111

Conan did mention he was currently in the band Velvet Revolver and that would have been Slash's cue to say something about the band but he didn't.  It could have been a little mention of the new album considering the slagging sales, any mention would help.  I just find it odd that his current band is on the bottom of his priority list.

would you want to claim Libertad if that was your album?

[fuckin crazy]

would you want to claim Libertad if that was your album?

I get up around 7, get on the bus about 9. I don't worry bout nothin' cept wastin' my fuckin time.

[ppbebe]

interesting article comparing the book with  Eric Clapton's new memoir.
http://www.vaildaily.com/article/20071116/AE/71116019

"Guitar gods rock new memoirs
.......
The ?top hat aesthetic?
Living in a different time, playing a different style of rock ?n roll, Guns ?N Roses axeman Slash led a life remarkably parallel to Clapton. Slash, whose driver license is issued to Saul Hudson, easily the most un-rocking name ever for a Rock God, is perhaps the most accomplished player of his era, and certainly the most recognizable (nobody has done more for the top hat aesthetic since Abraham Lincoln).

The offspring of biracial, bohemian parents, Slash struggled to find his niche in Los Angeles. His companions quickly became the guitar and drugs, and later the fine fellows that formed Guns ?N Roses, a band pundits and suburban mothers alike deemed volatile, explosive, and dangerous. Though both will never deny that Guns rocked. Hard.

Slash spares no detail of his somewhat depraved life. His constant struggle with heroin, and subsequent relapses are the backbone, somewhat unfortunately, to this memoir. But Slash also offers plenty of insight into the creation of Guns? lauded debut, ?Appetite for Destruction,? which would sell more than 20 million units as well as the double disc opus of ?Use Your Illusion.? He?s also chock full of stories from the Sunset Strip of the 1980s, as well as from relentlessly touring the world for nearly three straight years.

Frank and honest about the lifestyle Guns led (women?s activists beware), he?s also candid as to the band?s implosion at the hands of lead singer Axl Rose. Mercurial and moody, Axl is described as Slash?s ?fishing buddy, two guys who have nothing in common when they?re not fishing.?

Slash offers no insight as to Rose?s strange behavior, which may make for a nice moral high ground but makes for boring reading on a dynamic personality. Once and for all, Slash also douses the flames of any reunion talk. Besides, as he points out, he?s too busy rocking with his latest band, the very average Velvet Revolver.

?Formulaic but thoroughly interesting reading?
While both memoirs are virtually devoid of any literary merit (but, come on, is that what anyone would be after with these offerings?), they are loaded with anecdotes of two of the three most important rock ?n roll scenes (Seattle of the mid 1990s being the third) of modern history. At times, both Clapton and Slash seem to string together a bunch of little stories together, making for formulaic but thoroughly interesting reading.

Clapton played with just about everybody, and was always rumored to be joining this group or that, effectively making him a prodigy for hire. Slash?s outside collaborations are startling to the Guns layperson. In roughly a 10-year span, Slash cut tracks with everyone from Iggy Pop to Ray Charles, and was even Michael Jackson?s touring guitarist during the Black and White Tour.

Both also seem to reaffirm the rock adage that the classic tunes are the easiest to write. For example, ?Layla? was written on the fly while just about every track on ?Appetite for Destruction? was written in an afternoon. Slash and Axl?s ode to women, ?Sweet Child O? Mine,? was actually written by accident yet still hit No. 1 on the charts.
It?s also easy to take umbrage with the clarity of both memoirs. These icons make no secret of their drug habits, and admit to spending much of their free time hunched over coffee tables or locked in bathrooms consuming massive quantities of whatever was put in front of them. This begs the question, how can someone so dependent on illicit substances all the time provide a salient memoir? Hmmm.

Neither quite cop to the method used in David Crosby?s memoir issued last year. Crosby fully admitted to not remembering stretches of his life because of drugs. Clapton nor Slash are willing to concede that level of honesty.

Conquering addiction
Both, though, do conquer addiction after several tries. Clapton celebrates his cleanliness by opening his Crossroads treatment facility in the Caribbean. Slash opts for a cardio defibrillator surgically implanted in his chest. He also, astutely, notes this was a somewhat radical procedure at the time. Again, neither seem to take a firm anti-drug stance, which is troubling especially to the potential younger, impressionable readers.

Slash?s memoir, however, suffers dearly from design flaws. The decisions to use random block print letters and randomly disperse photos throughout, as well as incorporate some of Slash?s, um, insightful essays/free verse poetry, are disappointing, and probably hurt the book?s credibility. However, it is nowhere nearly as gratuitous and ridiculous as the memoir just issued by Motley Crue founder Nikki Sixx.

Clapton is overtly concerned with his largesse, both musically and monetarily, which comes off as arrogant at times. Yes, you?re awesome and rich, we get it. He seems to want readers to understand just how vital he was, and still is.

Slash, meanwhile, understands that it?s meaningless to make compelling music if nobody hears it, making this an unofficial thank you to his legions of fans.

Both are now proud parents, at peace with their once reckless lifestyles and entirely at ease with their legacies. Sure, they?re older and wiser and, by both accounts, lucky to be alive, but they want you to know that they still indeed rock."


do I beat funky?

[FunkyMonkey]

^^Thanks for posting...I haven't seen a lot of write-ups on the book? 




And yes

[FunkyMonkey]

The errors you're pointing out are insignificant. How you can let something as insignificant as the exact date they started playing/rehearsing with a backing band, and a few other errors of a similiar ilk, spoil your enjoyment of the book is beyond me. It's a bit sad actually. Its a good book, enjoy it for what it is; instead of pointing out every little irrelevant mistake.

This is the problem with you people.

I didn't say it spoiled any enjoyment.

But as you read the book and time after time there's factual errors that I know of, it really makes you start feeling like they should've done at least some fact checking.

It also makes you wonder how accurate it is as a whole.

The guy even manages to get his birth place wrong. So I'm reading and he says "I was born in Stoke-on-Trent" and I think to myself "I thought it was Hampstead".....

You keep reading and things like that pop up all the time.


If something took away from the reading enjoyment, it would be all the "we'll get to that later" phrases. 



Why is it a good book in your opinion?



/jarmo

Talk about an error in the book, he gets wrong where he was born.   And he didn't catch it until his Dad told him?

MP3 interview here:

http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=85074

[jarmo]

The errors you're pointing out are insignificant. How you can let something as insignificant as the exact date they started playing/rehearsing with a backing band, and a few other errors of a similiar ilk, spoil your enjoyment of the book is beyond me. It's a bit sad actually. Its a good book, enjoy it for what it is; instead of pointing out every little irrelevant mistake.

This is the problem with you people.

I didn't say it spoiled any enjoyment.

But as you read the book and time after time there's factual errors that I know of, it really makes you start feeling like they should've done at least some fact checking.

It also makes you wonder how accurate it is as a whole.


The guy even manages to get his birth place wrong. So I'm reading and he says "I was born in Stoke-on-Trent" and I think to myself "I thought it was Hampstead".....

You keep reading and things like that pop up all the time.


If something took away from the reading enjoyment, it would be all the "we'll get to that later" phrases. 



Why is it a good book in your opinion?



/jarmo

Talk about an error in the book, he gets wrong where he was born.   And he didn't catch it until his Dad told him?

MP3 interview here:

http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=85074

Doesn't his dad know better?

This is even funnier now:

if the guy says he was born in Stoke-on-Trent then he was born in Stoke-on-Trent.

 



/jarmo