Did the Red Hot Chili Peppers Air-Guitar on the Super Bowl? Axl Rose Weighs In

[jarmo]

D-GenerationX , how long can you wait until you talk about something before it's too late? Would you say all those books that musicians write about their careers should only focus on the last year or so and not try to "set the record straight" on old matters that are too late to "fix"?

When Slash's book came out.  If you have that big a problem with it, you speak up.

He promoted the shit out of that.  If you truly, honestly feel its full of bullshit and lies, you correct the record.

And really, that goes for just about anything, not just that book.  Which, to be frank, I don't think makes Axl look all that bad.  He could have BURIED Axl with some of the stories he could tell.  I expected Axl to come off way worse than he did.  I know a lot of people that read that thing, and they all said something similar.  Some said point blank they were looking for more crazy Axl stories.

I wasn't talking about that book. I was talking in general and asking you for a time frame. Since, most of this kind of books talk about things from years, or decades, ago.

So since you refused to answer, it's not ok for Axl to comment on something years later in an interview, article, discussion or chat, but it's ok for authors to write books about issues from years ago?

Or is this just another "issue" you have with Axl only? Nah, that could not be it....

Rampant insecurity and a victim complex.

So it's got nothing to do with the band feeling misrepresented in the press at the time? Something I think is still happening while some of you try to justify with some thing that sounds like "since Axl doesn't release albums when I want him to, it's ok for the media to write shit about him"...





/jarmo

[dolphins]

..... and in other news Axl is sitting back at home in Malibu laughing at the arguments his satirical blog has caused between fans   

[Ali]

I disagree completely.  It was a mockery of the entire situation and the big deal being made of it.  It was a joke about the situation, not a serious dig at the Peppers.  I think a clear, careful reading can reveal that.  A careless reading can lead to mischaracterization, irrespective of Axl's reputation as being a joker or not.

I actually agree. 

But I can also see how it might be interpreted the other way.  And if it was, I'm not going to get up on my soapbox about the unfairness of it all.

We need to have a serious discussion about what is this supposed slanted coverage Axl gets though. 

Example :  Axl Rose, notorious for being difficult...

But if its the opening line of a piece, some here blow a fucking gasket.  Most people would just read it and nod. 

Here?  Here is the reaction around here, by the usual suspects :

So this author knows him?  He can name instances where he has been difficult?

It's "nice" how "people" can say "things" about how "difficult" Axl can "be".

I'm not getting up on any soapbox about how unfair it is.  I think it was misinterpreted, perhaps because of a lack of careful reading of what he wrote, or because of his reputation of being a serious and/or angry guy, or both.  Which, is understandable in one sense, but reactionary and based on misinterpretation nonetheless.

Ali

[D-GenerationX]

I wasn't talking about that book. I was talking in general and asking you for a time frame. Since, most of this kind of books talk about things from years, or decades, ago.

So since you refused to answer, it's not ok for Axl to comment on something years later in an interview, article, discussion or chat, but it's ok for authors to write books about issues from years ago?

Or is this just another "issue" you have with Axl only? Nah, that could not be it....

There is the off chance that I bring it up about Axl here because this is...wait, let me double check...yep, its a Guns N' Roses message board.  But that's just one man's theory.

Axl can do whatever he wants.  Isn't that you usual mission statement around here?  I'm not even debating it this time around.  I'm simply asking how wise it is to let "lies" go unchallenged for years when it so obviously bothers the shit out of you.  Its almost like you are setting up a situation to get pissed about.

Which it a is a nice segue into...

So it's got nothing to do with the band feeling misrepresented in the press at the time? Something I think is still happening while some of you try to justify with some thing that sounds like "since Axl doesn't release albums when I want him to, it's ok for the media to write shit about him"...

I grew up on Hit Parader and Circus magazine.  Not exactly titans of the journalism world at the time.

But its a classic case of setting up a situation to rail against.  Like the ridiculous contract they tried to get all the journalists and photographers to sign at Rock In Rio II.  Didn't take Colombo to figure that, number one, they weren't going to sign it.  Number two, it was going to get a bit ridiculed.  And number three, not going to do a lot to refute the already existing theory that you are rather high maintenance and difficult.

I'll stop there so you can pick your jaw back up.  I know its always rather jarring for you to ever hear anything about his negative perception since its all news to you.

But that shit happened, guy.

[D-GenerationX]

I'm not getting up on any soapbox about how unfair it is.  I think it was misinterpreted, perhaps because of a lack of careful reading of what he wrote, or because of his reputation of being a serious and/or angry guy, or both.  Which, is understandable in one sense, but reactionary and based on misinterpretation nonetheless.

Agreed.  Perception is reality, almost always.

We fans have read real venom from him, so we all pretty much knew that he was just goofing.

[jarmo]

There is the off chance that I bring it up about Axl here because this is...wait, let me double check...yep, its a Guns N' Roses message board.  But that's just one man's theory.

You're going around in circles.

I'm simply asking how wise it is to let "lies" go unchallenged for years when it so obviously bothers the shit out of you.  Its almost like you are setting up a situation to get pissed about.

Well, judging by your "track record", according to you Axl has probably never done anything you'd consider wise. So I don't think you're one to judge....

Let's take this topic as an example. Would you say Axl's piece on the RCHP performance brought more attention to said performance in the media or not? Now you'll insert some kind of smart ass remark that nobody cares about Axl and how it's impossible to get more attention to their performance since it's one of the most watched televised events... But I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about what's been written and said after. So, in your opinion, did Axl's words add to the amount of time that this thing is considered interesting/news worthy or not?

Now imagine if somebody says something, and Axl comments on it. Would you say it would bring more attention to that piece? No, of course not! Because it would be "wise" of Axl to go on TV doing interviews promoting somebody else's work! "So there's a new unofficial book about you out this week and you're here to tell people not to buy it...."

Totally impossible to have any understanding why Axl wouldn't speak out on something that bothers him at the exact moment it bothers him. Your understanding is reserved for those who are outside of GN'R. The media, the record company, anybody else that speaks out against Axl, and so on. I get it.

I grew up on Hit Parader and Circus magazine.  Not exactly titans of the journalism world at the time.

And I thought you were more of a MAD reader.... 

But its a classic case of setting up a situation to rail against.  Like the ridiculous contract they tried to get all the journalists and photographers to sign at Rock In Rio II.  Didn't take Colombo to figure that, number one, they weren't going to sign it.  Number two, it was going to get a bit ridiculed.  And number three, not going to do a lot to refute the already existing theory that you are rather high maintenance and difficult.

On the subject of the song, Get In The Ring and GN'R's issues with the media in the past. The song's original title, and probably idea for it, existed already in 1990. Way before Rock In Rio II in January 1991 and that contract.

You can say that contract made the media more hostile, sure. I'm saying they were hostile even before.

What often happens: Band is unknown, media loves the unknown "next big thing". Band becomes huge, band realizes they don't need to please everybody, they don't need to make more money for certain publications, they don't have time. People get pissed off. Egos get bruised. Shit starts. Band is labeled "has beens". Band keeps going. Band becomes cool again, media loves them again.


Seems like in your world, the media is just this innocent little entity that wants to tell us the truth... And in your opinion, if they ever wrote something negative about Axl, it's only because it's his fault.
Funny how there's other people who are in the entertainment business, who've also had issues with what's been written or said about them. I'm sure they're just "difficult".

I'll stop there so you can pick your jaw back up.  I know its always rather jarring for you to ever hear anything about his negative perception since its all news to you.

But that shit happened, guy.

Where am I supposed to pick my jaw up from exactly? I get it, I'm supposed to be impressed by the fact that you claim to have grown up..... Guy....


For a person who has so much understanding for everybody from the record company to the media, who have to deal with Axl, it's amazing really how little understanding you have for your favorite band.



/jarmo

[Axl4Prez2004]

Like it or not
(personally, I loved it...very funny)
why can't everybody agree that in an age of professional public relations' handlers, an age where every fucking thing spoken in public goes through a series of filters to ensure the client is seen in the best possible light (or in some cases, the worst...for example sex tapes, whatever makes the client and the p.r. rep. the most money...) we've got Axl.  I'll go out on a limb and guess his message wasn't edited and/or affected in any way by anyone but Axl himself.  To me, that's cool.   

[jarmo]

Everything you said makes sense to me.

Unfortunately, people today are used to what you gave examples of and anything out of the norm is considered "not wise". No matter that Axl's always been true to his beliefs on the issue of speaking his mind.




/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

Like it or not
(personally, I loved it...very funny)
why can't everybody agree that in an age of professional public relations' handlers, an age where every fucking thing spoken in public goes through a series of filters to ensure the client is seen in the best possible light (or in some cases, the worst...for example sex tapes, whatever makes the client and the p.r. rep. the most money...) we've got Axl.  I'll go out on a limb and guess his message wasn't edited and/or affected in any way by anyone but Axl himself.  To me, that's cool.   

Everyone always talks about how politicians, athletes, and any celebs, really, don't need the media anymore in the age of Twitter.  Its a great deal for people that would rather bypass that step.

[Ginger King]

So, the general consensus here is that Axl's piece is a joke. I tend to agree...I think it's snarky and satirical, with maybe a slight, but friendly, dig (like a "come on guys, you're the RHCP, you're better than that").  However, the general consensus in the media has been the opposite.  I've seen several headlines like, "Axl slams RHCP"...or "Axl mocks RHCP."  Which raises several questions:  is this just another example of the media out to get him? Did the media not "get it"? Did they just rush to criticize Axl or is there real ambiguity in his article?  And, are we doing the same thing we're criticizing the media for (i.e. rushing to declare this a joke)?

I don't know the answers...I just find it odd that the media reception is completely opposite to our reception.

[Siamese Democracy]

According to Rolling Stone, Axl penned this for Billboard.