Carol Ann Harris

[jellyman10]

Originally Posted by michelej1

Lindsey denies that that ever happened. And Stevie never said he slapped her either when she described what happened.

My impression is that both LB and SN are or have been very careful what they say about 'that day', and that SN always takes care to emphasise that he was provoked rather than focusing on what he actually did. But we really could go all round the houses on this .... I'm of the school that thinks he did have a problem with his temper around women, but he recognised it and it's ok now. I respect anyone who sorts themselves out like that.

Originally Posted by michelej1

As for CAH's book, some of the things I find incredible have little to do with Lindsey and it's not about location, dates or chronology either.

It's that her book is full of descriptions of events that are so ridiculously flattering to herself that make me discount its credibility.
Michele

I totally agree with you here. The actual content of CAH's book is far more questionable than Mick's, but the real problem is not that you can't believe any of it, it's that some of it is almost certainly true!

The annoying thing for all of us who spend too much time thinking about these matters is that it's impossible to know which bits they are, but some people don't really admit that. I mean, sometimes on here it's almost like I could say 'Fleetwood Mac released an album in 1977 called Rumours - I know that because it's in Carol Ann Harris's book' and someone will pop up and say 'Well, I wouldn't put any store in that, because she's was a cokehead and her book's full of lies.'

I guess people just have to read it themselves and draw their own conclusions, really?

Loz

[Silver Springs]

Originally Posted by jellyman10

I guess people just have to read it themselves and draw their own conclusions, really?

Loz

Alot of what has been discussed in the thread thus far is exactly why I refuse to read anymore of Carol's book. I'm the first to admit how sensitive I am when it comes to reading about my idols, and especially so idols who I hold in the highest of esteem. I try to avoid anything that could shatter my rose tinted spectacles. Having said that, I'm not naive enough to not know some of the more grim aspects of the band. I know perfectly well that they're not saintly, at least they weren't in their heyday. But rather than upset myself to the point of turning myself off of them and ruining the whole experience for myself, I choose not to dwell on what has happened. I guess it's an embodiment of the "Never meet your Idols" advice, really. You get to know them to such an extent that the enjoyment and esteem you had for them dissipates, and such familiarity more often than not breeds contempt.

[jellyman10]

Originally Posted by Silver Springs

I guess it's an embodiment of the "Never meet your Idols" advice, really.

Quite so. If I'd had my wits about me I would have said I guess people just have to read it - or not! Couldn't agree more.

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by jellyman10

My impression is that both LB and SN are or have been very careful what they say about 'that day', and that SN always takes care to emphasise that he was provoked rather than focusing on what he actually did.

At the time that Stevie said that, she was at odds with the band and had lots of negative things to say. It wasn't a diplomatic period for her. Plus,
I doubt she'd be careful about what she said regarding that 1987 incident, when her description of him kicking and throwing the guitar at her has only become more elaborate over the years, not less so. She's not really careful at all.

Michele

[jellyman10]

Originally Posted by michelej1

At the time that Stevie said that, she was at odds with the band and had lots of negative things to say. It wasn't a diplomatic period for her. Plus,
I doubt she'd be careful about what she said regarding that 1987 incident, when her description of him kicking and throwing the guitar at her has only become more elaborate over the years, not less so. She's not really careful at all.

Michele

Hmm. I'd be genuinely interested to see what your sources are for saying this, because it's really not the impression I get, and I've read and seen just about everything!

We'll just disagree, then, unless you care to persuade me with evidence (and I am definitely persuadable - I love to have my mind changed!)

Loz

[PenguinHead]

Originally Posted by louielouie2000

I've expressed my opinion on Carol Ann (I'll leave out my nickname for her, because some people get offended ) and her book many times. I say regardless of what you think of her, read the book. Realize you must take every single thing she says with a grain of salt. Look more at the big picture. I think overall, she weaves a pretty accurate tapestry of at least the way the band interacted during it's heyday. I wouldn't give any specific events she mentions much credence at all. Despite that, I think this is still a must read for any avid Mac fan. It's pure gossipy trashy fun... and that's what the Mac is all about!

I agree with you. Almost all autobiographies or tell-all books are part fact and part fiction. I like the book because, as you say, it does paint a very good eye-witness account of social dynamic of the group, as well as individual characteristics.

I love when Carol describes the situation when Lindsey suffered a seizure during a huge outdoor show. He ended up the hospital for a few days, a couple of scheduled shows were cancelled, and no one from the band ever visited Lindsey.

In bizzare attempt to show Carol empathy to what was a potentially tragic situation, Stevie related a similar experience: when her dog was left in a sunroom and almost died from the heat. Carol shared the weird story with Lindsey, who exclaimed that Stevie was crazy.

I absolutely see Stevie saying that!

[MissLadyLoki]

Originally Posted by PenguinHead

I agree with you. Almost all autobiographies or tell-all books are part fact and part fiction. I like the book because, as you say, it does paint a very good eye-witness account of social dynamic of the group, as well as individual characteristics.

I love when Carol describes the situation when Lindsey suffered a seizure during a huge outdoor show. He ended up the hospital for a few days, a couple of scheduled shows were cancelled, and no one from the band ever visited Lindsey.

In bizzare attempt to show Carol empathy to what was a potentially tragic situation, Stevie related a similar experience: when her dog was left in a sunroom and almost died from the heat. Carol shared the weird story with Lindsey, who exclaimed that Stevie was crazy.

I absolutely see Stevie saying that!

Like the book or not, that part had me rolling. I could even see CAH, standing around all upset and Stevie, stoned out of her mind, telling her the story, and the look on her face

[CADreaming]

Originally Posted by MissLadyLoki

Like the book or not, that part had me rolling. I could even see CAH, standing around all upset and Stevie, stoned out of her mind, telling her the story, and the look on her face

You mean you could see CAH stoned out of her mind, standing around and Stevie stoned out of her mind telling her the story...

Two peas in a very proverbial pod.

[CADreaming]

Originally Posted by michelej1

At the time that Stevie said that, she was at odds with the band and had lots of negative things to say. It wasn't a diplomatic period for her. Plus,
I doubt she'd be careful about what she said regarding that 1987 incident, when her description of him kicking and throwing the guitar at her has only become more elaborate over the years, not less so. She's not really careful at all.

Michele

She gets sloppy at times (or just loopy) but she's careful when it behooves her to be so.

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by jellyman10

Hmm. I'd be genuinely interested to see what your sources are for saying this, because it's really not the impression I get, and I've read and seen just about everything!

We'll just disagree, then, unless you care to persuade me with evidence (and I am definitely persuadable - I love to have my mind changed!)

Loz

What do you mean what's my source? I'm not relaying backstage gossip. I'm talking about interviews Stevie has given. In that Rock Family tree interview, she is dissing all of FM to the point where even John objects and complains that according to her everything about FM was bad and he says her version is all lies.

If you look at the entire Rock Family tree interview (transcript from the video) in which she describes the 1987 fight, she's negative about everything she says about FM. Based on the timing of that interview, when she was mad at both Lindsey and Mick, I don't think she would be careful about what she said Lindsey did to her.

Moreover, in that interview she says she thought he was going to kill her. That's pretty extreme. That's not pulling punches. I don't know why she'd lie and say she provoked it when she didn't or not say he slapped her, if she's going to say he killed her.

I compared that to her descriptions of the earlier New Zealand incidents where she said he kicked her or something (in the earlier interviews October 30, 1997 Rolling Stone, she didn't remember exactly what he did, but said he must have kicked her or something) and then around the time of SYW she started adding to that description and said that he threw a guitar at her on stage in New Zealand and she ducked and that's why it missed her. Her version of the New Zealand incident has gained more details over time. In Mojo 2007 she said,

“I think I was singing through one of his solos or something, and he walked across the stage and kicked me and then went back to his microphone and we just sort of went on with the show. Me being pretty much the ultimate professional, I’m like, OK that didn’t just happen, it was just a joke everybody. Then he threw his guitar at me, wwwosh! I saw it coming and ducked. And he would have killed me if it had hit me; a Les Paul weighs about 30lbs.

It's not like she makes a habit of protecting Lindsey by changing the violent descriptions of events Mick has given. Her version of the August 1987 incident is violent enough, it's just not the same as Mick's version. Since she was one of the 2 people involved in the fight I believe her over Mick and based on other things she has said about Lindsey's temper, I don't think she softened the events of 1987 to protect him, especially not when she gave the interview, when she and Lindsey weren't talking, she wasn't with FM and was not saying favorable things about her days with the band. Michele

[iamnotafraid]

Unless they have video proof of this guitar throwing incident,
I don't believe it.

It does sound like a Stevie story though, those Les Paul's
weigh a third of what she suggested.

If he threw a guitar at her, she was nuts to stay.

[David]

Originally Posted by iamnotafraid

Unless they have video proof of this guitar throwing incident, I don't believe it.

I believe one of those Down Under Tusk shows featured a drunken Lindsey who did a Stevie dance with his jacket during "Rhiannon." I believe Christine's corroboration of the anger the band all felt about it because it embarrassed all of them. Stuff like that probably happened more than once during the heavy touring years. It happens in other bands regularly, so why shouldn't it happen in Fleetwood Mac?

But throwing a guitar at the sexy lead singer? Rolling Stone would have written that up in Random Notes way back in 1980!

It does sound like a Stevie story though, those Les Paul's
weigh a third of what she suggested.

Stevie's probably got the story wrong--& definitely got the guitar wrong. There was no Les Paul onstage in 1980.

[Nikolaj]

Wow, this thread just keeps coming back and back, but the fact that Michelej1 writes here makes me lurk though I've never written anything here before- Someone questioned Michele? Of course that person has a right, and said he liked to have his mind changed. I bet she did it.
Michelej1 doesn't get things wrong. She just doesn't. And she's nice, too. Never met her in my life, I just know.
No, I am not kissing up; nyet. I am being helpful. Yes, you do!
The initials of the writer of this book in question spelled backwards incorrectly, kind of sums her up, whether or not it's "k" to think so. I think I think so. Michele, let me know!
Now, I want to go back and see if that guy told Miss Michele that she indeed did convince him of what she was right about.
Admit it, Mister
- I know it can be tough, soon I have to go back to another forum and concur that the 'How Still My Love' scarf dance was sexy, just as Michelej1 said. I was wrong to say I thought SN looked silly, like she was dusting an enormous, invisible Wardrobe and it looked like she was going to spray the scarf with Lemon Pledge any second. But she never wanted to be a cleaning lady, she wanted to be a star, I forgot.
Imagine how I feel, I was so sure.

[Nikolaj]

Not trying to change anyone's minds, think as you do, of course. So, I'll just do the same.
I believe Lindsey did kick Stevie, did throw a guitar at her, no matter if it was a Les Paul or not, did choke her against the automobile the day he left Fleetwood Mac in '87- and Christine confirmed years ago that she chased LB from the stage to the dressing room when he performed the ghastly 'Rhiannon' spoof at the band's expense during a concert.
I also believe SN at times provoked Lindsey.
In the past, many years ago, I believe LB was violent against women he was involved with, yes. Much of it could have been substance abuse related, or perhaps there are issues from his childhood, abusers often have been abused or have witnessed it. I believe he got help, or changed, or SN wouldn't be working with him.
Stevie, Mick, John and Christine all have made public statements that the various instances did take place. I don't think all four of them would lie.
The man is flawed. They all are, we all are.
I know nothing. But 4 people of the 5 gave accounts very similar to each other, at very different times, over the years. LB probably has a lot on them, too. I don't think that Mick, John, Christine and Stevie all lied.

[jellyman10]

Originally Posted by Nikolaj

Someone questioned Michele? Of course that person has a right, and said he liked to have his mind changed. I bet she did it.
Michelej1 doesn't get things wrong. She just doesn't. And she's nice, too. Never met her in my life, I just know.

Now, I want to go back and see if that guy told Miss Michele that she indeed did convince him of what she was right about.
Admit it, Mister

Don't worry, it's all good, Nikolaj. I've been sleeping, that's all! I live in Scotland and it was gone 1.00 a.m. when I last posted (now about 6.30 a.m. and the first thing is, I'm back on the Ledge, ha ha).

Has Michele changed my mind? No, not really, regarding my original assertion that, taken over the whole piece, both LB and SN are very careful about what they say about the day of the argument in 1987. It could just be that our judgement of what 'careful' means doesn't agree, but I still think they talk around it, and that that's deliberate.

Has Michele changed my mind about whether SN has embellished and changed the guitar-chucking episode? Yes, I think so. And I also think that she's absolutely right to bring up that the state of SN-FM relations colours what she says.

Two other wee points: I think the HSML dance is sexy, too. And I'm a woman. (I registered when I was trolleyed one night listening to Tusk, used a name that's a private joke and now have to live my whole Ledgie life with it! )