not logged in
| re: Confusion about the new interview | |
Posted by:  |
The_Jackster 12:30 am UTC 10/03/07 |
| In reply to: | re: Confusion about the new interview - Pudding 07:59 pm UTC 10/02/07 |
| Really? With Meat in mind? So he thinks Meat's such an egotist that he'll brag to the girl he's lying next to that he was blessed when he gave the public these songs? Nah, Meat has an ego, but I think Jim was writing about himself and a past relationship, or more likely with that image he has in mind (described in every few interviews) of that "Soul Train" type show with the boy and girl lying next to each other on the fire escape while the music plays in the room they just left. > You're looking at it from the point of 'now' and not at > the point of 'then' before all the shitty middle part took > place. > > It would be quite easy to look at Meat and Jims > relationship today and convince ourselves that it must > have always been like that, but that wouldn't be fair to > either of them. > > I still firmly believe Jim wrote Rock'N'Roll Dreams Come > Through with Meat in mind. So, listen to the lyrics and > remember the time at which it was written. > > > Point taken, but the way it looks, I don't think they ever > > really got along. For that matter, they never respected > > each other either, suing each other when it suited them > > (Jim sues Meat in 1981 for 15m, Jim sues Meat in '95 to > > stop it "All Coming Back" to him, Meat sues Jim and Jim > > countersues in '06, etc.). If they can't get it together > > on a business footing, who's to say they ever had it on a > > personal footing as well? > > > > > > Was it ever a "legendary friendship" though? Wasn't it > > > > always more of a "partnership," legendary or otherwise? > > > > > > At the beginning I think it was. Jim needed a muse and > > > Meat had nothing the lose. They then worked closely > > > together as equals on something that was unique and > > > phenomenal for its time. You can't work that closely with > > > someone at the beginning of your career and not strike > > > some sort of special bond. > > > > > > | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Confusion about the new interview - Pudding 07:59 pm UTC 10/02/07 |
| Next: | re: Confusion about the new interview - RadioMaster 02:40 pm UTC 10/03/07 |
| Thread: |
|