| Author | Message | ||
     a nicoll Member Username: Andrewnz Post Number: 1 Registered: 08-2005 |
In NZs Sunday Star-Times on 21 August was a recent interview with Robert: http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3384408a1860,00.html. Bit of a shame that the recent tour hasn't brought them this far... | ||
| Kurt Stephan Member Username: Slothbert Post Number: 61 Registered: 04-2005 |
Interesting article. I can't recall hearing Robert be so self-deprecating before, although he does manage to call himself a really good songwriter (which isn't boasting, just fact). He may be right about some bad gigs, but what shit records did they make? Not everything is classic, but I can't think of another major, long-lived group that recorded fewer embarrassments. I'd have trouble thinking of more than five album tracks of theirs that I actively dislike. Even "Cut It Out" isn't THAT bad. Some of the solo records, however, have extremely embarrassing moments...so they are capable of being bad as individuals, but the GoBs "editing" process seems to be the reason their collective output is of such a high standard. | ||
| Mark Leydon Member Username: Mark_leydon Post Number: 16 Registered: 05-2005 |
This is a great interview by Grant Smithies. I'm copying it below before it disappears off the Stuff.co.nz website Go-Betweens go all the way 21 August 2005 The Sunday Star Times (NZ) Despite protestations of overstatement from the band, the Go-Betweens remain the best indie rock band to come out of Australia, writes Grant Smithies. It's not often that you're faced with a singer who wants to tell you that his band is vastly overrated. But that is what is happening to me today. I'm talking to Brisbane songwriter Robert Forster who, alongside co-leader Grant McLennan, formed ace Australian quartet The Go-Betweens in 1981. The band made six excellent albums before calling it quits in 1988, then - after 12 years apart - reconvened with a different rhythm section in 2000. There have been three fine albums since that reunion, but it's mid-80s classics such as Tallulah, 16 Lovers Lane and Spring Hill Fair that long ago convinced many listeners - myself included - that the Go-Betweens was the best indie rock band ever to come out of Australia. "We weren't, though," insists Forster between gusty drags on a fag. "We were often far more crap than people think we were. For some reason critics have spent the last decade rewriting history, telling the world that we were this infallible golden band that wrote nothing but timeless masterpieces during the 80s. But some things that we did are very dodgy, really. Some songs were shit, and we did some shocking shows when we were off form. We made some extremely crappy videos. I'd rather be honest about our shortcomings than bask in undeserved praise." Forster can say what he likes, but I'm not buying it. The fact is that, other than Sydney garage rockers Radio Birdman and pioneering Brisbane punk combo The Saints, there are very few Australian bands even fit to shine the shoes of the Go-Betweens. Forster and McLennan have always written the kind of smart, tender, highly addictive songs that quietly insinuate themselves into your life and become lodged somewhere deep in your emotional core. New album Oceans Apart is full of such songs, each buoyed by sympathetic backing from bassist Adele Pickvance and drummer Glenn Thompson and given a bright, sparkling sound by studio veteran Mark Wallis, who previously produced classic 80s albums by Talking Heads, The Smiths and, yes, the Go-Betweens. "People say Ocean's Apart is our best record since the 80s, and I hope that's true," says Forster. "Grant and I have always tried hard to come up with melodies nobody has tried before, and to avoid lyrical cliches. We love to put unexpected corners in our songs, which is probably why students and wanky journalists love us so much." He's referring here to a comment made by original Go-Between's drummer Lindy Morrison. She declined to rejoin the band in 2000, saying she was tired of being in "an eternal cult band" that was appreciated only by "a fistful of wanky journalists and some students". Perhaps she has a point. I'm a wanky journalist, and I love these guys. "She's right about us being a cult band, anyway. Our 80s records weren't big mass-market blockbusters like Springsteen's Born In The USA, and we weren't getting teenage girls all hot and bothered like Guns n'Roses either. We had a certain nerdy image that didn't appeal to schoolgirls and brick-layers or whoever it is that buys huge mainstream pop albums. Students love us, too, and music journalists, but then so do a whole lot of other unexpected people, particularly in Europe." True enough. In Austria, Germany, Switzerland and Spain, in particular, the band gets serious radio play, thus attracting a much younger crowd and heaps of mainstream media attention. Germany's Rolling Stone magazine even did a 16 page spread on these unlikely Ocker pin-ups recently, the kind of attention normally reserved for the likes of U2 or Metallica. "It's very strange. These kinds of publications ignored us the first time around, but now here I am, an old bugger of 48, suddenly getting treated like a pop star. We're doing much the same thing we've always done, but more people seem to be getting it this time for some obscure reason." Actually, the reason is probably not all that obscure. There are simply fewer great songwriters in the musical marketplace these days. Many of the best early songsmiths have retired, and pop radio these days favours generic love songs that are pretty much written by committee. Also, major labels have become increasingly timid, merely waiting until there's a breakthrough new artist such as David Gray, and then signing a hundred more David Grays who all sound pretty much the same. This all conspires to leave genuinely original and distinctive songwriters such as McLennan and Forster sticking out like the family jewels on a blue heeler. Another thing that makes Go-Betweens albums so special is the stylistic contrast between these two songwriters, earning them inevitable Beatles comparisons. Forster is the darker, more cynical soul, offsetting McLennan's tendency toward lush, romantic McCartney-isms with his own tart twist of Lennon. "Yes, people always have me pegged as the more nervous and cerebral one and him as the wistful romantic," says Forster, "and there's some truth in that. But there are also times when he's brooding and I'm wistful. You must have heard that, surely, listening to the album?" Indeed I did. And I've been listening to it almost daily, sometimes with my CD player jammed on auto-repeat, savouring every burnished melody and shrewdly ambiguous phrase. I'll never tire of surprising little songs such as McLennan's "Finding You", which alternates between dry dirt-road poetry in the verses and swooning San Francisco folk-pop choruses, or his dream-like "No Reason To Cry", which follows a travelling couple as they argue their way around the globe, and contains the lovely line "you bit my tongue on a Lisbon road". Like all the best songs, you hear it and you feel it has happened to you. Forster has also excelled himself. His album opener "Here Comes A City" sounds like prime-era Talking Heads, and his weary, hypnotic album closer "The Mountains Near Delray" has such a strong sense of place you feel as though you've been magically transported to this parched landscape and left to doze in the shade of a whispering wattle. Forster's affectionately nostalgic "Darlinghurst Nights" has my favourite line on the record: "I'm going to change my appearance every day, I'm going to write a movie then star in a play, then I'm going to go to Caracas". Unsurprisingly, the central character is Forster himself, 20 years ago. "That song is set in inner-city Sydney in 1985, and full of people I knew in cafes there. It's such a special time when you're 25, isn't it? You think you've got all this amazing stuff before you. There's gonna be a novel, a play, and you're probably gonna design a building as well. You're on fire, consumed by dreams. And if you're lucky some of it comes true." Forster feels lucky to have been allowed to become a musician at all. His parents had very different plans for him. "I had these straight-up suburban sports-loving Aussie parents, and my father worked all his life as a fitter and turner in factories. I was the eldest son, the first one in three generations to go to university, the golden boy, so everyone wanted me to be a lawyer, or at least a schoolteacher. They were very bitter about me deciding to make music, which seemed disreputable somehow." But a musician he is, thank God, and one of his nation's finest. "I'm just happy that I turned out to be a really good songwriter. I can look back and see that each song I've written is like a stepping stone towards that goal. The Go-Betweens has been a great vehicle for that, but as I said, we've also done some complete shit in our time." | ||
| david nichols Member Username: David Post Number: 74 Registered: 09-2004 |
A lot of these attributed quotes don't ring true for me. I can't really imagine Robert Forster claiming that the GoBs have 'done some complete shit in our time' or using words like 'dodgy' and 'crappy'. The fact that at least part of the Lindy Morrison quote is from 1993 (see page 15 of my book) not 2000 and that it comes hot on the heels of the absurd inference that she was asked to rejoin the group, suggests to me that someone is making stuff up. Perhaps putting words into RF's mouth rather than fabricating content/sentiment, but who knows. | ||
| Peter Collins Member Username: Tyroneshoelaces Post Number: 28 Registered: 05-2005 |
I didn't know Lindy had (maybe) said that. I haven't been a student for 20 years, although I am a wanky journalist. Dammit! Interesting bit about Here Comes A City - I immediately thought of Life During Wartime when I first heard it. | ||
| Duncan Hurwood Member Username: Duncan_h Post Number: 12 Registered: 05-2005 |
He's certainly right about the videos, though. Every single one in the 1980s was awful. I'd be surprised if any of them inspiried anyone to go and buy the record. | ||
| Donat Member Username: Donat Post Number: 68 Registered: 11-2004 |
That's funny - I used the same Lindy quote in my interview with RF for Time Off. http://www.ourbrisbane.com/whatson/gig/reviews/2005_08_03_2.htm Yes, I realise the Dylan reference is in 'Darlinghurst Nights' - not sure what happened there. I didn't know that Robert will still smoking! I know Grant still does. Useless trivia, I know. | ||
| Donat Member Username: Donat Post Number: 69 Registered: 11-2004 |
That's funny - I used the same Lindy quote in my interview with RF for Time Off. http://www.ourbrisbane.com/whatson/gig/reviews/2005_08_03_2.htm Yes, I realise the Dylan reference is in 'Darlinghurst Nights' - not sure what happened there. I didn't know that Robert was still smoking! I know Grant still does. Useless trivia, I know. | ||
| Michael Bachman Member Username: Michael_bachman Post Number: 17 Registered: 01-2005 |
Lindy was asked to rejoin the band in 2000? Are we to believe this as fact or fiction? I wish Lindy would pipe in and give use her perspective on this issue. | ||
| Richard Lim Member Username: Re17 Post Number: 11 Registered: 05-2005 |
The Head Full of Steam video was certainly great - it's the only one I remember clearly (I haven't played that Beggars VHS compilation in years - don't even know where my copy has got to). Spring Rain wasn't a bad video either. Richard | ||
| Richard Lim Member Username: Re17 Post Number: 12 Registered: 05-2005 |
PS: I'm shocked the Triffids weren't mentioned in that article - surely an indie band par excellence, despite a couple of Island albums at the end. They were probably a little more consistent than the Go-Betweens on record (though the Go-Betweens' albums definitely hogged my turntable more back then), were technically pretty impressive and were fantastic live. Richard | ||
| david nichols Member Username: David Post Number: 76 Registered: 09-2004 |
He's not 'right about the videos' if he didn't say it. Your Turn My Turn was an excellent video. Spring Rain, Right Here, HFOS, the Australian Streets of Your Town - all good. Even Bachelor Kisses is OK. I really doubt he would be so dismissive of these. Also, Lindy was not the original drummer - merely the most original. | ||
| Brook Crowley Member Username: 1_fan Post Number: 46 Registered: 02-2005 |
Michael, I myself would have loved to hear about Lindy rejoining, but it's nothing but fiction. Neither Lindy, Amanda, Robert Vickers, John Willsteed nor Michael Armiger were asked to come back; I reckon Robert F and Grant were obviously pleased they were gone forever! But me, I still have mixed emotions about it all. | ||
| Randy Adams Member Username: Randy_adams Post Number: 61 Registered: 03-2005 |
I am used to Robert making rather sweeping self-congratulatory comments about the quality of his and Grant's songs. However, I've always assumed he did that with a bit of a twinkle in his eye. Didn't he end up disliking the bulk of "Send Me a Lullabye?" Maybe that's what he's talking about if he did actually make those comments. | ||
| david nichols Member Username: David Post Number: 77 Registered: 09-2004 |
He claimed a couple of years ago to have come around to an appreciation of SMAL. | ||
| Jeff Whiteaker Member Username: Jeff_whiteaker Post Number: 104 Registered: 10-2004 |
have to agree, some of those videos are totally classic, especially spring rain, and i love the tacky but totally tongue-in-cheek head full of steam, especially for robert vickers' smooth, sexiest-bassist-alive dancing. | ||
| Jerry Clark Member Username: Jerry Post Number: 94 Registered: 08-2004 |
Roberts quote in the last paragraph could be an early draft of "Born To A Family". | ||
| Kurt Stephan Member Username: Slothbert Post Number: 62 Registered: 04-2005 |
I have to chime in about the videos too--with the exception of the awful "Right Here" and nearly as bad "Was There Anything I Could Do?" videos (both featuring embarrassing Grant/Amanda hamming), they weren't bad by the standards of the times. "Spring Rain" is my favorite of the bunch. | ||
| Pádraig Collins Member Username: Pádraig_collins Post Number: 32 Registered: 05-2005 |
That kiwi article is rubbish. So many factual errors. I hate when articles are full of wrong dates and mischievous, out of context quotes. Checking dates is not hard. Using quotes in their proper context is not hard. | ||
| Mark Leydon Member Username: Mark_leydon Post Number: 17 Registered: 05-2005 |
I disagree that the article is rubbish. The guy is obviously a major fan of Go-Betweens and the article is well written and generally insightful. There may be a few factual inaccuracies - but who gives a shit. The guy is passionate about the music and that counts for a lot in my eyes. This is so much better than your average warmed-over press release that appear in the arts/entertainment sections of many major publications these days. | ||
| Hamish Walke Member Username: Hamish Post Number: 4 Registered: 05-2005 |
I thought the article was interesting and the writer clearly an avid fan but, as with many others, was most intrigued by the Lindy 'quote.' Is there any truth in the idea that she was asked to rejoin? I had always assumed that Grant, at least, would not have wanted her to be in the reformed G-Bs and that probably both R & G wanted to pursue 'their' band free from all other former members. Surely though R & G must have debated whether Lindy or anyone else should be asked to rejoin or whether it was right to restart without them? Sorry, haven't finished David's book yet so apologies if that covers this issue towards the end but would be interested to know people's thoughts. Spring Rain video is great. | ||
| david nichols Member Username: David Post Number: 78 Registered: 09-2004 |
I imagine next time Lindy visits this board she will be able to clarify whether she was asked to rejoin in 2000 (even if she was, it wouldn't change the fact that she didn't make the 'wanky journalist' statement in response at that time - she made it in 1993, and Smithies obviously had my book in front of him and copied the quote from there knowing full well where it came from). In the meantime perhaps Mark L. could point out which bits of the article are insightful? Apart from the rather lazy David Gray rumination I can't find anything other than sycophantic meandering used to bolster/connect the RF 'quotes' which are entirely the product of the writer's imagination. Even if you think this is irrelevant, and I admit some of my objections border on pedantry, it surely casts doubt (at the very least!) on the veracity of other things Smithies says. | ||
| Ciaran Member Username: Ciaran Post Number: 1 Registered: 08-2005 |
I have been following this thread with increasing amazement, particularly the comments by David Nichols, such as "the RF 'quotes' which are entirely the product of the writer's imagination. " Accusing a professional journalist (of reasonable standing in his home country) of making up quotes by Robert Forster after interviewing him, is rather below the belt. My question is, why would Smithies feel the need to pluck quotes from his imagination? He has resources available to him; namely a major-Fairfax- newspaper that presumably pays for his international phone calls to interview subjects. Is Nichols trying to insinuate that this interview by phone never actually took place? Another thing. Smithies didn't obviously have your book in front of him, given that a Google search of Go-Betweens+Lindy+Wanky journalists returns several results which refer to that comment, and do not attribute them to your book either. So Smithies made a factual error about the year of that quote. I don't see how that entitles David Nichols to then write off the whole piece in such a cavalier and mean-spirited manner. If I was a journalist my professional integrity was slurred in such a way I would have quite a problem with that, given some of the scandals in recent years (in the US) resulting from journos fabricating pieces for print. Get off your high horse, Nichols, and get a life! | ||
| david pestorius Member Username: David_pestorius Post Number: 7 Registered: 08-2005 |
Here, Here. Mr Nichols' comments can only be described as the pot calling the kettle black, to use that awful expression, but I can't think of another which is more apt in the circumstances. He uses this message board as a promotional tool for himself (as the 'voice of authority'), and for a book that is itself so riddled with factual errors and sloppy scholarship (the Verse Chorus Press second edition 'update' is a shocker), that one sometimes wonders whether it is better than nothing at all. | ||
| Jeff Whiteaker Member Username: Jeff_whiteaker Post Number: 107 Registered: 10-2004 |
mr. prestorius, if you're going to make such a bold assertion regarding nichols' book, you may want to back that up with a few examples. just give us a few "factual errors," and maybe find a good paragraph or two displaying this "sloppy scholarship," as you put it. as for the article, i can see where nichols is coming from, at least from the standpoint that forster comes off in an uncharacteristically self-deprecating manner. it's an attitude he never usually seems to display when interviewed, regardless of whether or not he really feels that way. | ||
| david pestorius Member Username: David_pestorius Post Number: 8 Registered: 08-2005 |
To begin, my name is spelt with just one 'r'. As for the substantive issue, if I have something to say then I'll say it, as Morris Louis and later David Byrne said (in a slightly different way). In recent times I have made the occasional post here in relation to things that I have some direct knowledge of. Donat's posts also occasionally allude, sometimes in a sly way, to factual problems with David Nichols' book. I suggest you scrutinise the information there and compare those facts with the contents of David Nichols' book. I have privately communicated to David some of my problems with his book, and he has privately acknowledged some of them. He is not, for obvious reasons, quite so forthcoming with respect to these problems in this context. | ||
| Grant Smithies Member Username: Grant_smithies Post Number: 1 Registered: 09-2005 |
Grant Smithies here, the New Zealand writer who wrote the article that is creating such ridiculous drama on this message Board. A friend of mine brought this whole palaver to my attention a few days ago, so I had a look. I was stunned when I read David Nichols’ post, which I found both peculiar and very insulting, but I was also gratified to read responses from one or two people defending my journalistic integrity. Many thanks to these people for that. I joined this board yesterday so that I could post a short reply. Firstly, as one poster called “Ciaran” points out, I have no need to make up quotes. I talked to the guy, at length. I had so many great quotes the most distressing part of the feature-writing process was that I had to leave so many of them out! All the Forster quotes in my piece are accurate, but perhaps some readers of the story missed the point. The “we’ve done some complete shit” bit was- quite obviously, I thought- intended by him as a joke more than anything, a response to all the endless trowelling-on of praise by most critics. There might be some confusion re: the Lindy “wanky journalists” quote, though. When researching for the interview I read on the net (and not in Nichols’ book, which I’ve never seen) that she had said the "wanky journalists" line when asked to "rejoin the band”, so of course I asked him about it. It seems that this Net story was incorrect about the timing of the quote (other people posting here say it’s from 1993), but Robert didn’t correct me about the “asked to rejoin” bit, so I assumed this was true. It’s possible that he just missed this part of the question, because he didn’t bother to correct me, so this date may be wrong. If this has misled or distressed anyone, I apologise. This is my mistake, entirely. But as for Forster being so self-deprecating throughout the interview, that’s just how it was. He was in an excellent mood, and very warm and funny. We talked for nearly an hour, in the end. At one point I read him a bunch of “best band in the universe” style quotes from various mags, and he was straight into- Oh god no, we were often complete shit etc- but he was, I daresay, saying this with his tongue somewhat in cheek. He also said he’d made one “appalling” solo record, full of cover versions, but I didn’t use this quote in the story. He had some great stuff to say about growing up, too, and the motivations behind the song Born To A Family, but I didn’t have space to use much of this. I doubt I'll post here again but in closing I must say this: it’s distressing to see someone have such a public go at me. I can only assume that Mr. Nichols has indulged in such a surprisingly virulent attack because, as someone who has apparently written a book about the GB’s, he wants to protect his patch as a self-appointed “expert” on this band, an unimpeachable authority on what they would and wouldn’t say. Fair enough. He can of course say, and think, what he likes. I will say this though- I’m extremely disappointed that someone I have never met, who knows nothing of me, my methods, my professional integrity, would lurch into print calling me- essentially- a liar. This says nothing for Nichols’ own integrity, and I certainly won’t be buying his book or recommending it to others. Grant Smithies | ||
| Donat Member Username: Donat Post Number: 74 Registered: 11-2004 |
Forster was most likely on the phone all afternoon and there's a sight possibility that he could shift out of character and say things that aren't typical of his persona. I'm sure Robert's more than capable of saying "crap" and "dodgy." Forster has often stated a certain unhappiness over some of the band's material (ie 'Cut It Out', 'I Want To Be Today') in other interviews besides the one with Smithies. The Teeki tapes feature more than eight tracks that made up the bulk of 1999's 'The Lost Album.' Surely the other songs that were recorded in May '79 were left off for good reason? There's a ton of Go-Betweens songs from the band's 79-81 era that were never officially released, such as 'I Am An Architect', 'Beach Comber', 'The Missing One' etc, that were excluded from the recent run of reissues. It would be safe to assume that Robert and Grant felt that those songs were not worthy of public opinion. David Pestorius's comments on The Go-Betweens book are spot on. Adding to that, I find Nichols's biography on the Go-Betweens leaves many questions unanswered, much like Andrew Stafford's book, Pig City. All this does is leave a window open for a more thorough analysis on the Go-Betweens in the future - no big deal. | ||
| david nichols Member Username: David Post Number: 80 Registered: 09-2004 |
Obviously I was too hard on Grant Smithies and should not have cast these aspersions on him. I apologise to him here and will do so privately if I can find him. He, like I, would know that journalists sometimes make things up and also that subeditors and editors rewrite articles entirely to say what they want them to say (it's certainly happened to me numerous times). Which is a roundabout way of saying that it's the music (or the mainstream) press I don't trust, not Grant Smithies. If that looks like fudging the issue I repeat: I apologise to Grant Smithies. No history book is ever without inaccuracies or contestable elements. I stand by my book absolutely. I don't contribute to this message board to stake out a patch OR to plug the book. In a forum like this as far as I am concerned all opinions, within reason, have equal validity. | ||
| Grant Smithies Member Username: Grant_smithies Post Number: 2 Registered: 09-2005 |
Hello David, And many thanks for this apology. After over 20 years writing about music, among other things, I did find it hurtful for someone to suggest I was making things up, which was absolutely not the case. It's not my style, even though, as you say, the practice is widespread. I hear what you're saying re: editors, sub-editors etc. changing copy though. I too have had this happen many times, though not with this particular story. Bastards! Anyway, thanks for reconsidering your position, David, and having the good grace to apologise. I really appreciate it. No hard feelings, Regards Grant S. | ||
| david nichols Member Username: David Post Number: 81 Registered: 09-2004 |
What a great guy! I feel a bit go-betweened out, I think I will absent myself from this message board for the time being... | ||
| david pestorius Member Username: David_pestorius Post Number: 9 Registered: 08-2005 |
David Nichols effectively admits to the sloppy scholarship that has been alleged against him here, yet he claims to "stand by" his book and its "contestable elements". He also denies his presence on this message board has been promotional in its intent, yet he now gracefully proposes to withdraw. One can only ask, rhetorically: Are these statements and acts really consistent, or are they just the latest manifestation of the same sins ? | ||
| Mark Leydon Member Username: Mark_leydon Post Number: 18 Registered: 05-2005 |
I'm still amazed at the vitriol that Grant Smithies piece copped on this forum from the likes of David Nichols and Padraig Collins (e.g "That kiwi article is rubbish. So many factual errors. I hate when articles are full of wrong dates and mischievous, out of context quotes.") Over the past few months I've seen articles/reviews on the GBs that could have been written by Beavis and Butthead for all their insight and accuracy. Yet Smithies interesting and informed piece is the one that gets singled out for special condemnation. Why? | ||
| mingus Member Username: Mingus Post Number: 1 Registered: 06-2005 |
David Nichols is not the only person to use this message board as a promotional tool in recent times. Others have also been engaging in or hinting at promotion of their own (or friends) current/planned Go-Betweens related projects. | ||
| James Member Username: James Post Number: 30 Registered: 05-2005 |
What a shame David feels the need to withdraw from this message board for the time-being. While I cannot test the accuracy of his book I am very glad that it exists and enjoyed reading it. | ||
| Peter Collins Member Username: Tyroneshoelaces Post Number: 30 Registered: 05-2005 |
As a production/sub-editor myself, I'd just like to stand up for my profession, roundly condemned by both of the main contributors to this whole palaver. My job, as I see it, is to take raw copy, ensure it is grammatical and spelt correctly, to cut it to fit where necessary (with subtlety and sympathy to the writer's 'voice'), to check facts and to make sure it observes house style. It most emphatically is NOT to rewrite pieces to fit in with my own, the editor's or the title's agenda(s). In my experience, complete rewrites occur only where the submitted piece is either very badly written, missing the point or excessively long - and it is done with the knowledge of the writer and their input where this is possible. Like other journalists, of course, sub-editors can be under immense pressure from deadlines and, being human (like most writers - a little joke there), can make mistakes. I take great pride in my work - it's not easy, even though most people think it's just a case of 'cutting from the back'. Some of us may be 'bastards', but rarely because we deliberately want to fuck up a writer's piece. Part of my job is to ensure so far as possible that the writer is happy with any sustantial changes I make - in that respect, it's something of a collaborative process, not an 'us v them' situation at all. Alternatively, as I might say after a few pints, 'my job is to turn shit into gold'. Just needed to get that off my chest. | ||
| Jeff Whiteaker Member Username: Jeff_whiteaker Post Number: 108 Registered: 10-2004 |
James, I totally agree with you. I have always enjoyed Nichols' contributions to this board, and I completely disagree with the allegations of Nichols using this board merely as a promotional tool for his book (he made some lighthearted references to it when the latest edition came out, but I feel that what he did could hardly be seen as *serious* promotion). Besides, I haven't seen anyone else here attempt to write a book on the subject, NOR have I seen anyone provide ANY examples to show where Nichols gets his facts wrong or engages in "sloppy scholarship." I've really not seen any serious discussion of that here, though it's possible I missed it during some months when I wasn't around much. I enjoyed the book immensely, and while I certainly had issues with parts of it (which I've expressed on this very board), taken as a whole, I think he does a good job, especially with the latest edition. At any rate, I would hate to see Nichols vacate this board simply due to a misunderstanding and a couple of blowhards who have nothing better to do but sit around lambasting a book about a rock band. | ||
| mingus Member Username: Mingus Post Number: 2 Registered: 06-2005 |
Yes, if some participants here have "something to say" and they'll "say it", then they should actually say it rather than making twee references to (a) Louis & Byrne; or (b) historical posts from others, for clues as to their claims! (You have to say something once before you can opt to say why say it again?). | ||
| david pestorius Member Username: David_pestorius Post Number: 10 Registered: 08-2005 |
Why say it again, indeed. I know the word 'twee' is a cliché of indy-rock parlance these days, but I was not intending to be cute, sweet, or chic when I said "if I've got anything to say I'll say it". I was merely indicating that I have no intention of providing a list of the problems (factually and otherwise), that I have with David Nichols' book. I posted when the hypocracy of David Nichols' attack on Grant Smithies seemed to me to go beyond the pale, and I have no interest — repeat no interest — in turning this message board into some sort of 'alternative account' to the Nichols canon. Sorry to disappoint. | ||
| mingus Member Username: Mingus Post Number: 3 Registered: 06-2005 |
Point taken. I took your reference to "if I have something to say..." the wrong way. | ||
| mingus Member Username: Mingus Post Number: 4 Registered: 06-2005 |
btw, I didn't realise "twee" was a cliché of indy-rock parlance! | ||
| mingus Member Username: Mingus Post Number: 5 Registered: 06-2005 |
There is no disappointment per se here in relation to the lack of substantiation; I find all the (implied) "I know RF better than you do" stuff a tad tiresome. It just seemed to me a bit pointless to say publically, that the book is factually incorrect etc, and not elaborate publically. | ||
| david pestorius Member Username: David_pestorius Post Number: 11 Registered: 08-2005 |
Just to finish this off. There was nothing implied about it. What was said needed to be said. It is only regrettable that you should express things in such banal terms. | ||
| mingus Member Username: Mingus Post Number: 6 Registered: 06-2005 |
Finish this off? Yeah, right. I didn't realise there was a requirement for me to express things in less obvious or boring terms! Damn, I should have made a twee reference to one of Greenberg's crew; wouldn't I feel smug then. What does the degree of banality in one's terms have to do with the core discussion going on here? | ||
| Donat Member Username: Donat Post Number: 79 Registered: 11-2004 |
In converation with Lindy Morrison over the weekend, she said that there was no invitation for her to join the Go-Betweens in 2000. | ||
| mingus Member Username: Mingus Post Number: 7 Registered: 06-2005 |
How was the performance (with Dear Nora) ? | ||
| lindy morrison Member Username: Lindymorrison Post Number: 92 Registered: 09-2004 |
Hi all, I was never asked to rejoin the band. The silence was deafening. In that year I wrote to RF and asked him if we could play a protest rally in Brisbane to stand up against Howard and Ruddock's appalliing treatment of refugees in this country. RF replied that I should rout all further enquiries to the manager. I didn't get to play with the marvellous Katie Davison (dear nora) as I was ill that night. I just saw her play in Sydney, she is brilliant, it would be hard to play with her as she is fabulous and quirky with her times and extends pieces whenever she feels like it. The lyrics are poignant yet hilarious at times. She is a real treat. I think I said the wanker quote in about 1990. | ||
| Brook Crowley Member Username: 1_fan Post Number: 50 Registered: 02-2005 |
Hmmmm, "rout all further inquiries"? What did robert mean when he told you that in his reply, Lindy? And, was Grant with him that day? | ||
| lindy morrison Member Username: Lindymorrison Post Number: 93 Registered: 09-2004 |
I think it was a polite way of telling me to go away. I must have had a brain snap to even ask. Just seemed like something worthwhile at the time. | ||
| Cichli Suite Member Username: Cichli_suite Post Number: 68 Registered: 08-2004 |
Robert's remark does sound a bit callous all the same. For the record, the reformed Go-Betweens did play a benefit gig in aid of the refugees and emigrants incarcerated by the Howard administration. It was in the Jubilee Hotel in Brisbane in May or June 2002. A great show too. | ||
| Matthias Treml Member Username: Matthias Post Number: 28 Registered: 05-2005 |
One of the things I love most about Robert is that he seems to be unaffected by the adoration of fans and critics to a large extent and sees his career in a very sober light. The liner notes of Bellavista Terrace are a fine example and I think the best summary of their career by anyone. I'm continually surprised by the fan forums that declare that all or 99% of a band's work is pure genius and any dissension by a forum member results in rude attacks of his or her character for such blasphemy. Fortunately, this forum is better than the rest in this regard and a main reason why I participate. I salute you! So here again in his article Robert's giving his opinion about the band's work. And I agree. There were some crap songs and videos (have you ever watched them- I could have done a better job with my camcorder- beggars what was the budget of those?) and although the two shows I have seen were through rose-colored glasses and therefore magnificient, I'm sure there were nights that someone was tired, or drunk or just plain "off" as Robert says. I mean I have days in the Office where my TPS reports are not formatted correctly too. hehe. So I appreciate his candor. It's unbelievably refreshing in a world of bloated celebrity egos and media reports of god-like idols to hear one of my heroes talk like a human being. You get the impression you could hang out with them and have a sandwich together. Quote for the article at the top: ...that long ago convinced many listeners - myself included - that the Go-Betweens was the best indie rock band ever to come out of Australia. "We weren't, though," insists Forster between gusty drags on a fag. "We were often far more crap than people think we were. For some reason critics have spent the last decade rewriting history, telling the world that we were this infallible golden band that wrote nothing but timeless masterpieces during the 80s. But some things that we did are very dodgy, really. Some songs were shit, and we did some shocking shows when we were off form. We made some extremely crappy videos. I'd rather be honest about our shortcomings than bask in undeserved praise." |