Was Mick's Book 'Filled With Lies'?

[strandinthewind]

I was thinking this as I was reading, was Mick's book really that far from the truth. I mean I think the only thing that has been officially disputed is the LB slapping SN incident, which no one has flatly denied, except perhaps LB. Everything else seems the truth to me.

Fire Away!!!! :cool:

[DrummerDeanna]

Well, I read it at a time when I didn't know a whole hellofalot about the situation surrounding the book...i.e.: that many say Mick is full of it...

Sooo...I don't know...whether it was filled with lies or not, I found it to be an entertaining read :nod:

[dissention]

He was coked out of his gourd the whole time, how the hell could he remember anything to write about? It reeks of ****. :laugh:

[David]

I think there's a great deal of accuracy in that book. How could there not be, considering the sorry fact that huge chunks of it -- particularly throughout the sections covering the 1975-1987 incarnation -- were either paraphrased or lifted outright from articles in Rolling Stone, Record, Crawdaddy, Hit Parader, Circus & other music mags.

Some of its claims are dubious -- the August 1987 incident with Lindsey & the others, the contradictory stories from Clifford Davis & Mick Fleetwood (& even Dave Wilkinson) about the makeshift Mac -- but there's almost no way for us to know at this point just what went down on these occasions.

It may not be that much of an exaggeration to say that little of the book is actually Mick's anyway. The ghostwriter, Stephen Davis, must have done most of the legwork, which would have included digging up & poring over hundreds of articles & newspaper stories, as well as reading the other books on the Mac & listening to radio interviews. Davis is just a hack, but he knows how to do what he does (recombine published pieces of a band's history into something resembling a new story). For all we know, it may have been more Davis's fault than Fleetwood's that Lindsey's contribution to the group as an arranger & producer was downplayed (which is I think the term Lindsey himself used).

I think a lot of fans just weren't comfortable with many of the personal incidents described in the book (like the strip search of McVie & Nicks in Holland on tour), & their discomfort led them to claim from that point on that the book was nothing but a pile of lies.

In general, I don't understand the practically wholehearted dismissal of the book by so many fans. It's filled with accurate data & facts (again, much of that from newspapers & magazines) & a great deal of Mac lore that we didn't know about before it was published. It also serves up a heap of hearsay & lame psychologizing, but consider all the worthwhile information we got from it! It's information we would never have got from the "official" site. These are the kinds of tidbits for which I value Mick's book -- snapshot-like images of tours that have mostly faded from memory, musings over internal band communications, & long-forgotten facts that reveal essential elements of personality:

"Three shows down the road, in Albuquerque, Sara [Recor] stole the house cat from the venue & had a confrontation with [John] Courage, who didn't want a cat on the plane."

"She [Stevie] also wrote that she had started work on her first solo album. 'Recording has begun, & Rhiannon is afoot.' Then she told me she had moved to a small house by the beach & that I was a cheap bastard, so she was sending the girls in our office an extra $250. Stevie signed the note 'Katherine DeLongpre,' one of her many pseudonyms of the period."

"Peter was so respected, even by the usually churlish music press, for his simplicity & integrity that the monthly newspaper Record Mirror ran a regular feature titled 'The Peter Green Column,' which was dictated in part by Pete. 'Hello again, my flowers,' began one such essay. 'Hope you're all making out all right on nuts & cheese.' "

[strandinthewind]

ITA agree David. I, for one, was thankful for it.

[macfan 57]

I agree with David. I think much of what's in the book is pretty accurate. Bob Welch in his Q & A here on this website thought that it was, so I'll go with what Bob says. I think some fans don't want to believe some of the things in the book because certain members of the band, especially Lindsey, come off looking terrible. I like the book. It's a very interesting read and I'm glad Mick wrote it, even if he did it for the money.

[dissention]

I think some fans don't want to believe some of the things in the book because certain members of the band, especially Lindsey, come off looking terrible.

Nope. I think Stevie is the one who looked the worst. Mick really painted her as an airhead and someone who really didn't care about the band after awhile. We all know that really isn't true, but that was his depiction of her. The only parts I found really derogatory when it came to Lindsey was the whole "Tango" incident, which has never been coroborrated. The only thing that has been said was that Stevie attacked him, no one said that Lindsey slapped her and slammed her over the hood of a car except for Mick. I mean, his told an outrageous tale: Lindsey and Stevie screaming obscenities at each other while they chase each other up and down Christine's driveway, exploding in violence on Lindsey's part. It's a rather big pill to swallow.

The rest of the book? Eh. Not only was it badly written, but many of the details were hazy because he couldn't remember anything. He had Davis research all the stuff because he couldn't put pen to paper and write down the stuff because the coke rotted his brain. Not only was the book disrespectful to the people he had been together with for years, but it was just a blatant attempt at making money. It's a piece of trash.

As for the many other incidents that Mick described in his book, bleh. He made himself out to be the one who smelled like a rose after wallowing in ****. He painted quite the pretty picture of himself while casting a dark shadow onto almost everyone else. It's simply a tabloid rehash written in the first person.

[strandinthewind]

I disagree about Mick portraying Stevie as not caring about the band. He specifically says she came back to FM after Bella Donna when she cleraly did not need to. Also, he says they were lucky to get her and she came back out of loyalty, etc. He also says she came back after the post-RAL detox and gives her credit for that. :cool:

[cliffdweller]

I was thinking this as I was reading, was Mick's book really that far from the truth. I mean I think the only thing that has been officially disputed is the LB slap:cool:


A question for the ages isn't it? I often find myself wondering about this too. I can't believe that it was ALL fabrication, but the choppy style in which it was written (like he was in a hurry to get it published), coupled with the fact that he was "remembering" things that happened a long time ago (and in a coke haze mind you) lead me to believe that it's not too accurate. I don't know, I guess I would have to speculate that the books is mostly fabrication heaped on top of "little truths." I also found myself wondering while reading certain parts of the book, how can Mick remember specifically what people said in conversations 10 or 15 years ago? That makes me question the validity of a lot of it.

[CarneVaca]

This is the book that reasserted my fandom for Lindsey in a very strong way. I had become very enamored of Lindsey's work on Go Insane and Tango, and by reading articles about him, came to realize just how important his contribution to the band has been. Then comes Mick's book, which takes every possible chance to downplay Lindsey's contribution and portray him in a negative light. Stevie, meanwhile, was put on a pedestal, even though her Mirage and Tango studio presence had been minimal.

It was a hack job, at best. Yes, there is a lot of interesting factual information, but the whole tenor of the book is venal in regards to Lindsey. Mick himself admitted in the Lindsey Behind the Music that the book was "disloyal." Yeah, that's putting it mildly.

Ever since the book, I have found it very hard to have any kind of respect for Mick as a human being. I love his drumming, even though on SYW it sounds like he was phoning in it in. Regardless of what Lindsey says, Mick's drumming today lacks the vibrance of his earlier work, especially some of the stuff he did before Lindsey and Stevie joined.

Mick's book is a travesty. Unfortunately, that type of trash is all too common these days.

And let's not forget that the person who complained the loudest about the book was Stevie. The revelation of her affair with Mick evidently was something that she would rather have kept under wraps.

[CarneVaca]

I disagree about Mick portraying Stevie as not caring about the band. He specifically says she came back to FM after Bella Donna when she cleraly did not need to. Also, he says they were lucky to get her and she came back out of loyalty, etc. He also says she came back after the post-RAL detox and gives her credit for that. :cool:

I agree with you on this, Strand. I wanted to gag when he praised her contributions to the latter albums. Out of Mirage and Tango, in my humble opinion, on song stands out: Gypsy. The other Mirage contributions are decent, though not stellar. Yet, to Mick, they were the cat's meow. And he consistently downplayed Lindsey's work, even going so far as to say Lindsey was jealous of the ladies because they had the most hits. Let's say it's true, since it really isn't that far a leap; it still is grossly disloyal to the man who, without him, Mick probably would never have been able to snort as many millions as he did.

[dissention]

I disagree about Mick portraying Stevie as not caring about the band. He specifically says she came back to FM after Bella Donna when she cleraly did not need to. Also, he says they were lucky to get her and she came back out of loyalty, etc. He also says she came back after the post-RAL detox and gives her credit for that. :cool:

I was mostly referring to the way she was written about in the Tango era. I agree with Carne that she was put on a pedestal throughout the rest of the book. Lindsey had left the band by the time it was written, so of course he was going to butter up his meal ticket.

[dissention]

I agree with you on this, Strand. I wanted to gag when he praised her contributions to the latter albums. Out of Mirage and Tango, in my humble opinion, on song stands out: Gypsy. The other Mirage contributions are decent, though not stellar. Yet, to Mick, they were the cat's meow. And he consistently downplayed Lindsey's work, even going so far as to say Lindsey was jealous of the ladies because they had the most hits. Let's say it's true, since it really isn't that far a leap; it still is grossly disloyal to the man who, without him, Mick probably would never have been able to snort as many millions as he did.

Don't forget the way he portrayed Lindsey when he wrote about Lindsey talking to John about playing bass. I rolled my eyes when I read that and could certainly understand why Lindsey was furious. The coke he did for so mnay years rotted his brain and he never realized that Lindsey was his meal ticket all along.

[CarneVaca]

Dissention, I'm a little vague on that part. Was that when Lindsey told John to play simpler?

[dissention]

Dissention, I'm a little vague on that part. Was that when Lindsey told John to play simpler?

Yeah. And Mick wrote some really snide remarks about Lindsey being the new kid and how had no right to say anything to the god that is John McVie. :o

Ugh, where's the bucket?

[estranged4life]

It may not be that much of an exaggeration to say that little of the book is actually Mick's anyway. The ghostwriter, Stephen Davis, must have done most of the legwork, which would have included digging up & poring over hundreds of articles & newspaper stories, as well as reading the other books on the Mac & listening to radio interviews. Davis is just a hack, but he knows how to do what he does (recombine published pieces of a band's history into something resembling a new story). For all we know, it may have been more Davis's fault than Fleetwood's that Lindsey's contribution to the group as an arranger & producer was downplayed (which is I think the term Lindsey himself used).



is read Davis' "Hammer Of The Gods" (An awful telling of the history behind Led Zeppelin...Some facts, And <b>"Whole lotta crap"</b> ) to find out whatta hack he is.

[MikeB]

The only parts I found really derogatory when it came to Lindsey was the whole "Tango" incident, which has never been coroborrated. The only thing that has been said was that Stevie attacked him, no one said that Lindsey slapped her and slammed her over the hood of a car except for Mick. I mean, his told an outrageous tale: Lindsey and Stevie screaming obscenities at each other while they chase each other up and down Christine's driveway, exploding in violence on Lindsey's part. It's a rather big pill to swallow.
Actually,Stevie told that whole story herself to Rock Family Trees documentary on Fleetwood Mac in 1995.She said he followed her ''all around Christine's maze-like house'' and that he grabbed her and threw her against the car and she ''screamed horrible obscenities at him'' So I would tend to believe that whole Tango incident seeing as it came from Stevie's mouth too.

[CarneVaca]

Actually,Stevie told that whole story herself to Rock Family Trees documentary on Fleetwood Mac in 1995.She said he followed her ''all around Christine's maze-like house'' and that he grabbed her and threw her against the car and she ''screamed horrible obscenities at him'' So I would tend to believe that whole Tango incident seeing as it came from Stevie's mouth too.

Stevie has also said she attacked Lindsey. So which version is accurate?

Isn't it just safer to conclude there was a confrontation, which may have gotten somewhat physical, and that they both had equal parts blame?

[Nixxxed]

And let's not forget that the person who complained the loudest about the book was Stevie. The revelation of her affair with Mick evidently was something that she would rather have kept under wraps.

Stevie only complained about the book before it was released -- it was her very own White Wing Dove PR Blitz trying to get people to ignore it because she didn't know what Mick would put in it. She said in several articles that she told Mick something to the effect of, "If you slander me, I'll sue you, and you'll be poor again just like when you went bankrupt."

Then, when the book came out, she hardly said a word about it. In fact, didn't Mick say that Stevie liked the way their affair was portrayed in the book and that she wished he would have included more of the story, to get across that they really WERE in love (in their own way) for that little period of time? Of course, that claim is yet again from Mick's mouth, but don't you think that if Stevie really had a beef with it, that her lawyers would have been all over poor little Mick?

I actually enjoyed reading the book, but took it at its real value: a trashy rock-n-roll expose. It's supposed to be inflammatory. It's all about establishing legends and being larger than life, something the Mac has sadly lost in the past few years, despite making an awesome album and sounding incredible on tour.

I wish they all would have contributed to one big book, each writing separate sections contradicting each other. That would have been much more interesting and fun! And we'd all be discussing it and fighting about it until our deathbeds, just like our favorite band. :nod:

[dissention]

Actually,Stevie told that whole story herself to Rock Family Trees documentary on Fleetwood Mac in 1995.She said he followed her ''all around Christine's maze-like house'' and that he grabbed her and threw her against the car and she ''screamed horrible obscenities at him'' So I would tend to believe that whole Tango incident seeing as it came from Stevie's mouth too.

:confused:

I have that on video and she never said that. She said it got ugly and that she flew off the couch and attacked him. I'm going to whip that video out again to see just exactly what she said.

[dissention]

You were right, Mike. :) I was thinking about the VH1 doc from the early nineties, not the BBC one. This is what Stevie said on the BBC:

"Because of that guilt I've always had about not leaving Fleetwood Mac..I flew out of the couch and across the room to seriously attack him..and I did..I mean.I'm not real scary..but I can be fairly ferocious...and I grabbed him..y'know.....which almost got me killed. He ended up chasing me all the way out of Christine's maze like house and down the street..and back up the street..and he threw me against the car.and I screamed horrible obscenities at him..and I thought he was going to kill me..and I think he probably thought he was going to kill me too...and I said to him.if the rest of the people in the band don't get you..my family will..my dad and my brother will kill you."

[Les]

I don’t really think of it as a pile of lies. I don't really think of it as a paragon of truth either. But ultimately, I just don't think of it was being particularly good. I didn’t find it all that entertaining either because I’d already read most of it somewhere else. The new little bits didn't redeem it for me. I expected something different, something more, I guess.

In some ways, I would suspect David’s right that the book is more Stephen Davis’ story of the band than Mick’s. Because Davis did so clearly essentially plagiarize whole passages in the book from old magazine articles, and paste them together as he saw fit, that tells me that Mick couldn’t otherwise remember enough to give him too terribly much interesting to say. But if Mick couldn’t do that, it makes it very hard to swallow when Mick is then supposedly recounting actual lines of dialogue word-for-word 5, 10, 15, 20 years after the fact.

Having said that, I would have to assume it was told in the way that Davis presumed Mick wanted to hear it told at the time, since he was ghosting Mick. The general tone of it -- who was put on a pedestal, and who was downplayed, who's stupid moments were highlighted, who's stupid moments were smoothed over much more sympathetically -- ultimately rests on Mick's frame of mind at the time the book was written. Knowing that he was broke, an addict, furious with Lindsey for leaving the band (something he hasn't fully admitted to until much more recently) leaves a lot of room to view his motives and memories with something less than wide-eyed rapture.

That very few in the band seem to embrace the book with anything like fondness leaves me with an uneasy feeling about it. That doesn't say to me that it's worthless, but it does say something. I wouldn't expect Lindsey to have any response to the book other than the one he's had. But funnily enough, I always think of John McVie’s response to the book more than anyone else's. He complained that the book made it seem like the boys were assholes and the girls could do no wrong. Coming from one who Mick describes as a best friend and a brother, that says something to me. It also tells me that John, like a lot of fans, felt that the overall slant and tone left a poor taste in his mouth and it overshadowed most other things about the book.

[Les]

Stevie only complained about the book before it was released -- it was her very own White Wing Dove PR Blitz trying to get people to ignore it because she didn't know what Mick would put in it.

She complained about it after its release too. At first she didn't. But during the whole Silver Springs fight with Mick, she talked about the book again and complained bitterly. Maybe the bitterness had more to do with the Silver Springs battle than the book; I don't know.

These days, she's really hands off - "I lived it, I don't need to read someone else's version."

[Villavic]

I agree that the whole "Tango" incident, which has never been coroborrated, except the part when John said to Lindsey "You better leave now..."

That was true, at least John confirmed (i heard it in a wav I downloaded once), but he meant about leaving the room, not the band. So in fact something bad happened that day.

And I guess most of the book is true. I don't think Mick meant Stevie didn't care for the band, but her solo career was huge for several years so it's logical that managers recommend their customers to go for the best finnancial option.

And I remember Mick did blame on the managers.

[Villavic]

I did find the book really enjoying, because it was the FIRST and very complete source I had from Fleetwood Mac. I read it in 1992. At that point I wasn't sure if Chris and John were married or brothers, ha ha.... ;)

[Nixxxed]

But during the whole Silver Springs fight with Mick, she talked about the book again and complained bitterly.

You mean when Stevie wanted to put SS on Timespace? I remember the fight, but not the book comments. Of course that was the Dark Ages before the Net, and there were only so many hours I could spend at a magazine rack going page-by-page looking for a few sentences about the Mac...

[strandinthewind]

Of course that was the Dark Ages before the Net, and there were only so many hours I could spend at a magazine rack going page-by-page looking for a few sentences about the Mac...

:eek: :eek:

Did I see you there - becuase I sure used to go every weekend :laugh:

[Nixxxed]

:eek: :eek:

Did I see you there - becuase I sure used to go every weekend :laugh:

We used to have a Hasting's store in town (before the great Wal-Mart invasion). I knew everyone in the store, and everytime there was a Mac-related musical release, I got a call on the date they ordered it, and my own copy held behind the counter when it came out. (I'm in a pretty small town, so they only got 2 or 3 copies of anything, and sometimes had to special order things like Stevie's ignored HAEWAFY single.) Then, the store got a new manager, and he didn't like me sitting on the floor in front of the mag rack all day on a Saturday. But that was okay, because I soon went to college and started my own Wild Heart adventure. I'll post a thread when I publish my own expose. And believe me, unlike Mick, I WILL BE SUED. :angel:

[Johnny Stew]

Isn't it just safer to conclude there was a confrontation, which may have gotten somewhat physical, and that they both had equal parts blame?I think that's it, in a nutshell.
And if the book were written today, I imagine that episode would probably be written in a more balanced way.

Either Mick (to whatever extent he was actually involved in the writing) intentionally painted it in a rosier way to flatter the individual who was still in the band at the time (and, consequently, casting the individual who wasn't, in a more negative light), or he wasn't witness to the entire episode, and only recounted what he saw (for example, running outside in time to see Lindsey acting aggressively, but missing Stevie's own act of aggression just prior).
But either way, all parties concerned (especially Stevie and Lindsey) agree that the whole episode didn't go down exactly as Mick's book claimed it did.

In fact, I recall Lindsey (or was it Stevie?) saying in an interview, that, the first time Stevie and Lindsey saw each other again after the book was published, Stevie actually apologized to Lindsey for what was written.

As for the rest of the book... well, being that my fandom really kicked into gear in 1986/1987, when I was around 14 or 15, Mick's was the first book I found about the band (previous books were long out of print, and I didn't even know they existed), so I poured over (and damn-near memorized) the entire thing in one sitting. And loved every minute of it.

I think it IS valuable for the rich history it recounts, but you definitely have to keep in mind that it's the (sometimes foggy) recollections of ONE person in the band. :)

[chiliD]

"Lies"? I don't think so.

Ok, I've been watching the Beatles Anthology the last couple of weeks...in more than a few incidents, there are four (five, if you include Neil Aspinall; six if you count George Martin, too) DIFFERENT accounts & recollections of "what happened" at any particular moment depending on who's being asked. So, I just consider Mick's book "one man's view"...if any of the other members would've written a book, I would have probably read a whole different account of the same incident (or incidents).

[wildangel]

I was happy to have the book at that time becuase there was so little info about FM available to me ( I got into them around '84 when I was like 10 and had to go to the nearest drugstore to read the mags also :laugh: ) I was a little surprised by some of the stuff in it, but none of it seemed too farfetched for me to think it was'nt true. The " incident" descibed in the book did'nt really bother me, what bothered me was that he said " would he hit her again? He had done it before" kinda of insinuating that it was a pattern of behavior rather than an isolated incident. Later I heard about Carol Ann and his other girlfriend that he had paid off so she wouldnt talk about him and I really didnt want to believe any of it was true because I really like Lindsey but there was an awful lot of smoke to not be a fire :shrug: I like to think if any of this was true he has gotten help with those issues and he seems to be in a much better place these days :thumbsup:

[Dulcimer]

Maybe it wasn't so much about lying, but Mick's book had a tone, and not a very positive one. I agree with those who said he made Lindsey look like the devil incarnate. There's so much rancor toward the band's former guitarist at the time.

Lindsey sure gave it back to him, though, with "Wrong." That is still one of my favorite songs from Lindsey.

[snwriter]

Chili is right. The book is Mick's view. It's just as valid as Lindsey's view. Lindsey is not likely to admit that the things Mick said about him were true. Lindsey often came across as big baby in the book--which we've seen since can be the case.

[sodascouts]

Stevie has also said she attacked Lindsey. So which version is accurate?

Isn't it just safer to conclude there was a confrontation, which may have gotten somewhat physical, and that they both had equal parts blame?
I agree. I think we can't pretend Lindsey didn't get violent, but Stevie attacked him first.

That being said, a man should never hit a lady. I'm sure he regrets it now, though, and would never behave like that again.... even if he did do it more than once before.

[reebokandlace]

I have an old interview of Stevie somewhere in my pile of tapes, where she was asked about how she felt about Mick's recently released book and her comment was:

Stevie: "I never read it"

Interviewer: "You never read it?!"

Stevie: "No. But if I had read it I would have gone through it with a red marker and written 'big lie" across certain parts"


I have always thought it was a strange comment on Stevie's part. If she had not read the book, then how would she know there were lies in it?

Reebokandlace

[EveryHour]

[QUOTE=strandinthewind] I mean I think the only thing that has been officially disputed is the LB slapping SN incident, which no one has flatly denied, except perhaps LB. QUOTE]

Not only has it NOT been flatly denied, but in The Story Of FM mid-nineties UK doc, John flat out says Lindsey had his hands around Stevie's neck, and then Stevie says (in a literal, non-dramatic way) she thought LB was going to kill her. I don't know why LB denies it...he could just own up and say it was an awful moment he regrets. I wonder what his reasons are. I mean, obviously, he doesn't want to be known as a woman-beater or anything, but to me it's worse when we're left to speculate about the incident. I think Lindsey is really sensitive about these things now. I feel like he's found 101 ways to "tastefully" admit he's enjoying the male bonding of the musicians in the band with CM gone. Not to get into a Chit Chat Board topic here, but I hate that feminism has made men afraid to enjoy their maleness in a healthy manner (and I'm a woman). Equal rights, not women forcing men into feeling like they have to hide their masculinity! I think men are just so afraid of what woman find insulting these days that they don't even know what to do! I was in a store a couple weeks ago carrying a giant box which had some small items on top, and I dropped one of the small items right in front of this guy. It was clearly going to be very difficult for me to pick up the item, but he just stood there looking back and forth from me to the item like he was afraid to help me. :(

[Brad]

I have an old interview of Stevie somewhere in my pile of tapes, where she was asked about how she felt about Mick's recently released book and her comment was:

Stevie: "I never read it"

Interviewer: "You never read it?!"

Stevie: "No. But if I had read it I would have gone through it with a red marker and written 'big lie" across certain parts"


I have always thought it was a strange comment on Stevie's part. If she had not read the book, then how would she know there were lies in it?

Reebokandlace

Yeah, I have a video of that interview. It was during the Timespace era when she was TICKED about Silver Springs. Great interview, although I don't think I've ever seen her in a worst mood during an interview.

She also refers to Mick as their "great, terrific, TRICKY drummer," or something to that effect. She definitely calls him "tricky." And yeah, she does says the thing about marking in red pen "big lie" and "could've been written better."

To answer your question of why she thought there would be lies in it without having read it, I think she finally saw what Mick was capable of doing for money (ie, not letting her have Silver Springs). If he could treat a supposedly good friend in such a way, what would he do to sell books? Probably make stuff up or bend the truth to make it more interesting.

I don't know, that's just my opinion of it.

Brad

[Les]

Not only has it NOT been flatly denied, but in The Story Of FM mid-nineties UK doc, John flat out says Lindsey had his hands around Stevie's neck

Nope, he doesn't. John puts his hands around his throat to demonstrate it was ugly. His hands? Her hands? Both? Take your pick. He doesn't say. Given John's tendency to not be able to find words sometimes when expressing himself, and instead using hand gestures and body language, I always thought he was also referring to the unhappy and horrible nature of that meeting in general. There's no doubt it was a really horrible day from everyone's point of view. But trying to pin down the details always becomes problematic.

To address it at all - admittal or denial - is basically a losing proposition for Lindsey. Hey, Lindsey, have you clubbed your baby seal lately? ;)

[AliP]

I have an old interview of Stevie somewhere in my pile of tapes, where she was asked about how she felt about Mick's recently released book and her comment was:

Stevie: "I never read it"

Interviewer: "You never read it?!"

Stevie: "No. But if I had read it I would have gone through it with a red marker and written 'big lie" across certain parts"




Yeah, I've heard that quote before but can't remember where I heard it. Here is a different quote I dug up from Stevie:

People 12/10/90
Stevie: (about Mick's book) "I think he explained our relationship in the book pretty well. I've had three great loves in my life, and Mick's one of them. I still love him, and my memories of that time with him are incredible. . . . It's almost like we never did break up. (Question: Could you ever get back together?) "Maybe when we're real old. It's possible. I'll always love Mick. It's a wild thing to say, but no one could ever take that away from me."

[strandinthewind]

Interestingly, the only detailed version we have is Mick's - at least the details about LB's participation. Stevie gave her own account and confessed, if you will, to attacking him. I think that given that most of Mick's book is factual, this could be as well. I mean everything else he describes in that book happened so why should this account be any different. Clearly, there was a fight that day. Clearly it got ugly. Clearly there was a prolonged confrontation. Clearly, LB was asked to leave by John. So, that one detail of LB slapping and manhandling La Nicks is not beyond the realm of posibility, esp. considering another girlfriend said LB was violent with her and Mick refers to another incident 10 years earlier where LB kicked La Nicks on stage (which LB sheepishly denied - admitting only to playing off key that night) :shrug:

Food for Thought

[Gailh]

[QUOTE=strandinthewind] Mick refers to another incident 10 years earlier where LB kicked La Nicks on stage (which LB sheepishly denied - admitting only to playing off key that night) :shrug:

With regards to the above incident that was where Christine slapped Lindsey across the face and then threw her wine at him!

With regards to the LB/SN fight I once saw a programme on UK TV where Christine (talking at her house) said it was a "real ugly scene and it was in this house" when asked to expand on that she said "I don't think I should say"

Stevie said that she chased Lindsey up the street and he chased her up the street "screaming the whole time" (I think she meant both of them) She didn't say (as far as I can remember) that he hit her.

I believe John said to Lindsey "I think you should leave now" but he didn't mean leave the band!

I think there was some sort of fight but I don't suppose we'll ever know the exact truth.

Gail

[CarneVaca]

Not only has it NOT been flatly denied, but in The Story Of FM mid-nineties UK doc, John flat out says Lindsey had his hands around Stevie's neck, and then Stevie says (in a literal, non-dramatic way) she thought LB was going to kill her.

Hmmm... I don't think you have that right. If memory serves, Stevie has said she attacked Lindsey, and she may have been the one who actually put her hands around his neck. At that point, it's quite possible that he reacted in kind. I don't know too many people, male or female, who would not at least try to push away whoever was choking them.

Be that as it may, we'll never really know what actually happened, and I doubt even the participants remember it exactly as it happened. Time has a funny way of obscuring events and mixing actuality with emotions and replays.

Let's face it, if Lindsey struck first, there's no excuse for that. But if she attacked him, which she actually has admitted, I don't perceive the same aghast reaction from fans as if he had attacked her first. Double standard?

Violence is never the answer, but it's in all of us. The best we can do is try very hard to control the impulse.

[strandinthewind]

Hmmm... I don't think you have that right. If memory serves, Stevie has said she attacked Lindsey, and she may have been the one who actually put her hands around his neck. At that point, it's quite possible that he reacted in kind. I don't know too many people, male or female, who would not at least try to push away whoever was choking them.

Be that as it may, we'll never really know what actually happened, and I doubt even the participants remember it exactly as it happened. Time has a funny way of obscuring events and mixing actuality with emotions and replays.

Let's face it, if Lindsey struck first, there's no excuse for that. But if she attacked him, which she actually has admitted, I don't perceive the same aghast reaction from fans as if he had attacked her first. Double standard?

Violence is never the answer, but it's in all of us. The best we can do is try very hard to control the impulse.

That is because, right or wrong, society traditionally places a higher standard on the male not to strike the woman in any setting :shrug:

Plus, there is the overiding sense that LB was a cad and screwed the band over by leaving after the tour was booked. Then we have Stevie sticking it out with FM before, during, and after the recording process despite any personal turmoil she may have been going through or have gone through to get there. So, to many including me, despite La Nicks' attack on LB, there is a sense that LB provoked it for the abovementioned reasons and Stevie was unable to control her pent up anger, etc. Plus, Stevie did not need all of that drama as she was one of the biggest stars in the world at that time without FM and the drama. Yet, she kept coming back to it out of loyalty.

Note: I mean no slam on anyone. I am just giving what I perceive as the rationale for the fight and why people view their actions in different ways.

[strandinthewind]

So wait, even if she'd been an annoying bitch in general, he is not allowed to get angry at her? Is it not possible for her to be annoying? I only have to look at pictures of her from that period and I spontaneously shudder and become strangely outraged.

LOL - I am sure they BOTH can be annoying!!!!! to wit:

SN - (piningly) Linds sing me a love song about Rhiannon and her king and their ill fated love . . . . and let me put these colored lights in the lamps and burn some nag champRa and then drape your pad with shawls

LB - Well Bella Donna ( :rolleyes: ) you have to realize that the romantic aspects of Rhiannon really indicate she was in a cycle that will never reach fruition and it is an organic thing that seems pretty weird.

:cool:

[dissention]

LOL - I am sure they BOTH can be annoying!!!!! to wit:

SN - (piningly) Linds sing me a love song about Rhiannon and her king and their ill fated love . . . . and let me put these colored lights in the lamps and burn some nag champRa and then drape your pad with shawls

LB - Well Bella Donna ( :rolleyes: ) you have to realize that the romantic aspects of Rhiannon really indicate she was in a cycle that will never reach fruition and it is an organic thing that seems pretty weird.

:cool:

:xoxo: That was brilliant.

[CarneVaca]

Ah, repression?

Equating controlling your impulses with repression is a bit of stretch, wouldn't you say?

See, I believe everyone is violent. Most of us know how to control those violent impulses. If one is so violent to the point that one has to repress it until it explodes, then one has bigger problems. Nyet?

[sodascouts]

Wait, is a lady allowed to hit a man? Can a lady hit a lady? What if they're not even ladies, rather girls? Can a man hit a girl on the condition that she is not also a lady?

I want to hit someone.

I had a feeling a few people would respond badly to the maxim "A man should never hit a lady."

Well, of course, hitting is bad in all cases. Why? Because it's wrong to hurt someone, for women as well as men. So please don't hit me, Lux. Why would anyone think, that because I say a man should never hit a woman, that I thereby must find it acceptable for everyone else to go ballistic on each other?

The reason most people are especially appalled when men hit women is simple. In most cases (admittedly not 100% of the time) the man is bigger and stronger. They are just made that way. So, they have the greater responsibility. It's like "Pick on someone your own size," essentially. Now some men chafe at the idea that society frowns on them hitting a woman if she "deserves it." They feel this is unfair to men - why should a man be expected to exercise more control on his temper when fighting with women than he does when fighting with other men? I don't really know what to say to them if they don't understand the disparity there.

I do cut LB some slack if Stevie attacked him first, because it's human to, as CarneVaca stated, "respond in kind" (although the idea that he only put his hands around her neck because she first put her hands around his is really stretching it. Come on. We might as well say she pulled a gun on him and the only way he could disarm her was by choking her.) I do, however, wish he had been strong enough to resist the impulse to use his greater strength to overpower her (as he obviously did, big suprirse there) and hurt her. I find that upsetting and I'm not going to go around pretending that it was somehow OK, despite how much I love Lindsey. I also don't think it was OK for Stevie to attack Lindsey, but he wasn't the one getting flung across a car, now, was he? Of course not. Stevie wouldn't be ABLE to do that to him. He could have used that strength to restrain her, but he chose to use it to hurt her, and that's wrong. I find it discouraging that so many people want to justify it.

[David]

I want to hit someone.Go for it, slugger!

[David]

The reason most people are especially appalled when men hit women is simple. In most cases (admittedly not 100% of the time) the man is bigger and stronger. They are just made that way. So, they have the greater responsibility. It's like "Pick on someone your own size," essentially.That physical difference is very strongly ingrained in our psyche. I, too, react more unfavorably to hearing about men who knock women around than vice versa.

Being in a band is ipso facto dysfunctional, & bandmates (what an ironic term) frequently let their id overtake their superego. You can really come to hate your bandmates, even more so than family, because with your family you just stand up & walk out; but in a band, you're generally trapped by a commitment, usually a contract, to perform or show up or whatever. I've had a few altercations with bandmates, & plenty of shouting matches.

[CarneVaca]

(although the idea that he only put his hands around her neck because she first put her hands around his is really stretching it. Come on. We might as well say she pulled a gun on him and the only way he could disarm her was by choking her.

Nancy, I wasn't even arguing that, even though it may have come across that way. In all this speculation, I was merely suggesting that if she attacked him, as she says she did, it would be natural for him to react with force. I am not condoning it; I am merely saying I understand the impulse. The question is whether he went too far.

[dissention]

I had a feeling a few people would respond badly to the maxim "A man should never hit a lady."



Not me. I don't care if a woman is in the process of castrating a man, the man has no right to lay a finger on her. :laugh:

The fact of the matter is this: Stevie had absolutely no right to get violent with him and he had no right to get violent with her. They were both in the wrong and while Stevie instigated it, he could've just taken himself out of the situation and left without reciprocating her behavior. Simple as that.

[Johnny Stew]

I think the most telling thing of all, is that... whatever went down that day... Stevie & Lindsey are working together again, and appear to be on a friendlier basis than they've been in 30 years.
So it seems to me that both accept blame for whatever part they played in that altercation, and... perhaps more importantly... both have forgiven the other for their part in it.

It sure can be fun to talk about, but I'm glad it's all in the past. :nod: :)

[EveryHour]

Nope, he doesn't. John puts his hands around his throat to demonstrate it was ugly. His hands? Her hands? Both? Take your pick. He doesn't say. Given John's tendency to not be able to find words sometimes when expressing himself, and instead using hand gestures and body language, I always thought he was also referring to the unhappy and horrible nature of that meeting in general. There's no doubt it was a really horrible day from everyone's point of view. But trying to pin down the details always becomes problematic.



You're right...I shouldn't have written that John "said" that, but you can't quote a gesture! ;) I should have just taken the time to describe it instead. However, it is my opinion that the gesture is very specific to what actually happened, not in reference to the general ugliness of that day. You are also right in that he does not specify who's hands were around who's neck...I just assumed he meant Lindsey on Stevie because the very next clip is Stevie saying she thought Lindsey "was going to kill her" (again, she does not appear to be being sarcastic at all in saying this). So part of my perception could have been swayed by the drama of editing. ;) In the end, they probably both put their hands on each other. Everyone seems to already have gotten into the logistics of men and women putting their hands on each other, so I won't bother, but we're all just human in the end. :) It is funny when Stevie talks about she and Lindsey chasing each other up and down Christine's street! Didn't any of the neighbors video tape?! :laugh:

[EveryHour]

I think the most telling thing of all, is that... whatever went down that day... Stevie & Lindsey are working together again, and appear to be on a friendlier basis than they've been in 30 years.
So it seems to me that both accept blame for whatever part they played in that altercation, and... perhaps more importantly... both have forgiven the other for their part in it.


Johnny, you're always here to bring in a wonderfully simplistic and positive point of view after everyone (sometimes including myself ;) ) has been exhuatively dissecting and debating a topic. It's appreciated.

:wavey:

[CarneVaca]

Johnny, you're always here to bring in a wonderfully simplistic and positive point


Oh, come on, now. No need to call Johnny simple! :lol: :lol:

[Sugar]

Far as I can tell in 1987 we're lucky they didn't kill each other. I mean COME ON! :lol: The emotions that must have been running in both of them at that moment...professional commitments...personal commitments...and he's just WALKING!?!?

Eh, I think everyone got off pretty easy, myself... :laugh:

[EveryHour]

Oh, come on, now. No need to call Johnny simple! :lol: :lol:

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

That's why I tried to embellish with the word "wonderfully"! :)

[EveryHour]

Far as I can tell in 1987 we're lucky they didn't kill each other. I mean COME ON! :lol: The emotions that must have been running in both of them at that moment...professional commitments...personal commitments...and he's just WALKING!?!?

Eh, I think everyone got off pretty easy, myself... :laugh:

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[Janis_no1]

AHHH THis topic is hurting my brain..... :shocked:

Trying to catch up and read this.... too much too much

[wildangel]

Im trying to picture stevie choking lindsey I dont think it would be possible unless she had on her platforms and was on a stepladder :laugh:

[CarneVaca]

So it's better if I don't control the impulses? I should be smacking people at will, throwing computer monitors out windows and hurtling camera equipment at certain witches, I mean university lecturers? This is a new lease (leash)
on life (death). No more repression for me.

My humour seems to be lost somewhere in the typing process. Wait, found it again............no, it's gone.

Believe me, I get the sarcasm thing. The problem is in the execution.

I think you should act on your violent impulses. By all means, send that camera equipment and computer monitor flying. Give Joe a good thrashing. I, for one, enjoy seeing a bit of destruction. In fact, let's all act on our basest impulses and beat the crap out of equipment and each other. We sure as hell do it as nations and accept it, so what's so wrong with doing it as individuals?

[sodascouts]

Believe me, I get the sarcasm thing. The problem is in the execution.

I think you should act on your violent impulses. By all means, send that camera equipment and computer monitor flying. Give Joe a good thrashing. I, for one, enjoy seeing a bit of destruction. In fact, let's all act on our basest impulses and beat the crap out of equipment and each other. We sure as hell do it as nations and accept it, so what's so wrong with doing it as individuals?

Thank you for showing us how to succesfully execute sarcasm. What would we less skillful posters do without you to edify us on such matters? I know I am saving your example to my hard drive so that I may refer to it every time I attempt to implement this concept. Of course I could never hope to reach this level of brilliance, but one needs something to shoot for.

[strandinthewind]

. . . Give Joe a good thrashing.


RUN FOR YOUR LIFE JOE!!!!!!!

signed - THe Mad Hatter!!!!!!!!

:cool:

[strandinthewind]

Im trying to picture stevie choking lindsey I dont think it would be possible unless she had on her platforms and was on a stepladder :laugh:

I know - I am picturing Gulliver being attacked by a sole Lilipucian (sp.?)

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[CarneVaca]

Thank you for showing us how to succesfully execute sarcasm. What would we less skillful posters do without you to edify us on such matters? I know I am saving your example to my hard drive so that I may refer to it every time I attempt to implement this concept. Of course I could never hope to reach this level of brilliance, but one needs something to shoot for.

Nancy, thanks for recognizing my superiority in all matters sarcastic. However, I must point out to you that the example to which you refer does not qualify as sarcasm. I am taking time out of my busy day to inform you of this, lest you make the grievous error of filing it in the wrong folder. You see, what I used before was irony.

[CarneVaca]

My whole life I've been told never to show anger.

Not to beat this one to death, but showing anger and being violent are two different things. There are many healthy ways to express anger. I for one, believe everyone should express their anger as much as they can. And I'm not even being ironic this time.

[face of glass]

(Sorry to Lux for me continuing the therapy session)

Not to beat this one to death, but showing anger and being violent are two different things. There are many healthy ways to express anger. I for one, believe everyone should express their anger as much as they can. And I'm not even being ironic this time.

Which is what I agree with. And that's why I don't think it's necessary for Lindsey to publicly discuss the suggested "beating". I think he has overcome that occasion and learned to deal with his anger in ways that are less harmful to others. He's even capable of doing an exaggeration, a humorous description of those emotions. Which I think he did with "Come", which is basically about a strong will to possess someone, no matter what are the ways.

[strandinthewind]

(Sorry to Lux for me continuing the therapy session)



Which is what I agree with. And that's why I don't think it's necessary for Lindsey to publicly discuss the suggested "beating". I think he has overcome that occasion and learned to deal with his anger in ways that are less harmful to others. He's even capable of doing an exaggeration, a humorous description of those emotions. Which I think he did with "Come", which is basically about a strong will to possess someone, no matter what are the ways.

I, too, hope this for him. But, this is not the only incident. He kicked Stevie on stage in the Tusk tour and in the 90's one of his girlfriends said he hit her. So, I hope he has learned to deal with this cause I really like the guy, but that pattern ain't cool.

[CarneVaca]

I, too, hope this for him. But, this is not the only incident. He kicked Stevie on stage in the Tusk tour and in the 90's one of his girlfriends said he hit her. So, I hope he has learned to deal with this cause I really like the guy, but that pattern ain't cool.

Agreed.

Doesn't this topic make everyone just a little bit uncomfortable? Imagine how it makes him feel.

[CarneVaca]

I, too, hope this for him. But, this is not the only incident. He kicked Stevie on stage in the Tusk tour and in the 90's one of his girlfriends said he hit her. So, I hope he has learned to deal with this cause I really like the guy, but that pattern ain't cool.

Oh yeah, I should've mentioned I agree. BUT: I'm still going to kick your ass when I see you! :thumbsup: :]

[strandinthewind]

Oh yeah, I should've mentioned I agree. BUT: I'm still going to kick your ass when I see you! :thumbsup: :]

:eek:

YOU TALKIN TO ME?

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[face of glass]

I, too, hope this for him. But, this is not the only incident. He kicked Stevie on stage in the Tusk tour and in the 90's one of his girlfriends said he hit her. So, I hope he has learned to deal with this cause I really like the guy, but that pattern ain't cool.

Yes, it was naive and unprofessional and I hope this is one cycle he's been able to let go of. But I'm sure the level of emotional manipulation was much higher, not as visible/audible to people and both were guilty of it in the end.

[sodascouts]

Nancy, thanks for recognizing my superiority in all matters sarcastic. However, I must point out to you that the example to which you refer does not qualify as sarcasm. I am taking time out of my busy day to inform you of this, lest you make the grievous error of filing it in the wrong folder. You see, what I used before was irony.

I think there is a little of both. Therefore, I will make a new folder for it entitled "CarneVaca's Sarcastic Irony."

[CarneVaca]

I think there is a little of both. Therefore, I will make a new folder for it entitled "CarneVaca's Sarcastic Irony."

I think that works.

[chiliD]

What about Ironic Sarcasm?

[Johnny Stew]

And that's why I don't think it's necessary for Lindsey to publicly discuss the suggested "beating". I think he has overcome that occasion and learned to deal with his anger in ways that are less harmful to others.I've often wondered why, when asked last year what he'd be doing if he weren't a musician, Lindsey responded that he'd "probably be in prison."

Could've been a jovial response, of course, but there are a lot of other funny (and funnier) ways he could have answered that.
So now I'm wondering if he was acknowledging a "dark side" there?

[dissention]

I've often wondered why, when asked last year what he'd be doing if he weren't a musician, Lindsey responded that he'd "probably be in prison."

Could've been a jovial response, of course, but there are a lot of other funny (and funnier) ways he could have answered that.
So now I'm wondering if he was acknowledging a "dark side" there?

I don't think he was serious, Le Stew. :laugh:

He'd probably be an overweight pot smoker living in a seedy roach motel.

[strandinthewind]

I don't think he was serious, Le Stew. :laugh:

He'd probably be an overweight pot smoker living in a seedy roach motel.

They were interviewing LB not Mick. :cool:

[dissention]

They were interviewing LB not Mick. :cool:

:laugh: Mick would be dead, man. Six feet under.

[EveryHour]

So, I just consider Mick's book "one man's view"...if any of the other members would've written a book, I would have probably read a whole different account of the same incident (or incidents).

This is SO true. This is so important to remember here, because (I hate to admit it), but I doubt we'd be questioning things so much if we were discussing a book Stevie or Lindsey had written. I have to lean towards thinking we would take their words more as "truth" over Mick's and it's unfair and unfortunate. Forgive me if I'm wrong here, but I can just see it that way (and I'm not necessarily excluding myself) :nod: :distress: :) :) :) .

[glitter_fades]

This is SO true. This is so important to remember here, because (I hate to admit it), but I doubt we'd be questioning things so much if we were discussing a book Stevie or Lindsey had written. I have to lean towards thinking we would take their words more as "truth" over Mick's and it's unfair and unfortunate. Forgive me if I'm wrong here, but I can just see it that way (and I'm not necessarily excluding myself) :nod: :distress: :) :) :) .

I'm not sure S&L always shoot straight. Stevie has said totally contradictory things on certain topics. Talking about herself she often uses the words "I never married." We all know she was married to Kim Anderson, no matter how briefly. She needs to use a better choice of words or not say anything. For people that don't know her saga it's mis-stating the facts. Her way of seeing it is probably to forget it ever happened, but she needs to stop saying the words "never married." It's not the truth. She says Lindsey lies in GYOW about the shackin' up lyric. They lived together without being married, didn't they? In my day that was called shackin' up. Lindsey also admitted that line was not literal. Are they both lying a little, or just spinning when it suits them? I don't think either are bold face liars, but Stevie DID and SAID things on drugs that she's revised since then. Lindsey tends to keep quiet about the personal stuff but he's no saint either. All his ex-women have painted him as abusive. They can't all be lying psycho bithches. I don't believe he beat any of them down with his fists, but I'm uneasy about all the accusations against him in light of how misogynisitic his comments have been at times.

[sodascouts]

I'm not sure S&L always shoot straight. Stevie has said totally contradictory things on certain topics. [...] I don't think either are bold face liars, but Stevie DID and SAID things on drugs that she's revised since then.

First, I totally agree that they dont always "shoot straight." this is especially true of Stevie - Lindsey is more of a "Lie by omission" type, Stevie more of a "say it like you WISH it happened" type. As an avid fan, familiar with her history, I cringe every time I see her toss out another inaccuracy or statement that totally contradicts something she'd said previously. We all contradict ourselves sometimes, but it seems to me Stevie views her life more as a "narrative" she can alter to fit her current image rather than a set of actual historical events that she should be concerned about presenting accurately! Hardly shocking that one would want to control one's own image, but to pretend certain things didnt happen or to distort things that did is still disingenuous and, well, dishonest.

Lindsey tends to keep quiet about the personal stuff but he's no saint either. All his ex-women have painted him as abusive. They can't all be lying psycho bithches. I don't believe he beat any of them down with his fists, but I'm uneasy about all the accusations against him in light of how misogynisitic his comments have been at times.

Well, misogynistic is a very strong word. Lindsey's recent comments do contain wince-worthy terminology which we've discussed in another thread in the Lindsey forum. I frankly have no idea why he has decided to couch his criticisms of Rumours in those terms.... perhaps he associates "femaleness" with weakness and feels that by declaring his sound oppositionally "masculine" he is declaring his own strength and purpose? Perhaps he felt emasculated by the Rumours phenomenon because of how he perceived himself as being disempowered by it, and that's why he feels the need to re-assert his masculinity? Enough psychobabble. Whatever it is, I don't like it, but I also don't think it's misogyny - at least not in the way I define misogyny, which is as complete and utter hatred of women and everything about them.

While Carol Ann did go on Geraldo about Lindsey choking her, she also said that she still loved him. We know it ended ugly with Cheri but we don't know of any violence occurring. We all know what went down with Stevie - but Anne's never spoken of him as abusive. Needless to say, neither has Kristen! So let's not generalize too hastily. I dont think Stevie could still be friends with a truly abusive man.

[strandinthewind]

Anyway, hitting someone once or twice doesn't make them abusive, does it? It's not desired, but it's a stretch to label someone abusive because they had the odd outrage. 'Hit' is a very broad term.

I cannot believe you actually just said this as it is the most ridiulous thing I have ever heard. Yes, people make mistakes and can be forgiven perhaps once. But, LB has demonstrated a pattern and that is different. This exact rationale is why countless woman (and men for that matter) stay in dangerous and violent relationships without getting out or getting help. They think maybe it will get better next time if I just do this. Or maybe he won't hit me again. I do not know if LB has this problem and if he does I hope he gets or got help.

[Mari]

If hitting someone twice in a timespan of more than ten years is a pattern... Lord help me, I must be abusive too!
You're exaggerating, come on now!
Get real.
I find it véry offensive when accusations like these are made without actually knowing any of the persons involved.
And I'm not saying this because I'm naive or something. Abuse is not an uncommon thing in my family, unfortunately. But that's not what this subject is about, so I won't digress.
Back on subject: I agree with the idea that this is just one person's subjective view on history. Very amusing book, anyway.

[strandinthewind]

If hitting someone twice in a timespan of more than ten years is a pattern... Lord help me, I must be abusive too!
You're exaggerating, come on now!
Get real.
I find it véry offensive when accusations like these are made without actually knowing any of the persons involved.
And I'm not saying this because I'm naive or something. Abuse is not an uncommon thing in my family, unfortunately. But that's not what this subject is about, so I won't digress.
Back on subject: I agree with the idea that this is just one person's subjective view on history. Very amusing book, anyway.


Actually, Mick said LB kicked her at a NZ concert and then slapped her and tried to strangle and/or threw her on the hood of a car about seven years later. Then a few years later a former girlfriend stated he abused her. To me that is a pattern :shrug:

Again, if this was a pattern, I hope he got help.

[Mari]

This whole discussion, it's just amateur psychology! Did anyone here witness any of those events!? It's ridiculous.
Jeez, so I was three years off. It's still a period of many years.

[shackin'up]

hitting is abuse. once? it's abuse once. many times? it's abuse many times. no psychology needed.

[shackin'up]

I agree with the idea that this is just one person's subjective view on history. Very amusing book, anyway.

I agree. It's a fun book to read. It inspired me to do coke once in my lifetime, because it almost slips through the pages. Still have to do it though..... :lol:

[Mari]

hitting is abuse. once? it's abuse once. many times? it's abuse many times. no psychology needed.

so if I smack someone once, it's a pattern? :confused:

[HomerMcvie]

Don't make me smack you! :]

[CarneVaca]

All his ex-women have painted him as abusive.

Poor Lindsey. He abused them so much they decided to have sex operations!

[CarneVaca]

Actually, Mick said LB kicked her at a NZ concert and then slapped her and tried to strangle and/or threw her on the hood of a car about seven years later. Then a few years later a former girlfriend stated he abused her. To me that is a pattern :shrug:

Again, if this was a pattern, I hope he got help.

Uh, dude, aren't you a trial lawyer? You'll be laughed out of the courtroom with evidence like this. Hearsay from two known drug abusers. Come on now.

[strandinthewind]

Uh, dude, aren't you a trial lawyer? You'll be laughed out of the courtroom with evidence like this. Hearsay from two known drug abusers. Come on now.


An exception to the hearsay rule is hearsay can be used to establish a pattern :cool:

Now - credibility is a whole other issue :laugh:

[David]

Actually, Mick said LB kicked her at a NZ concert and then slapped her and tried to strangle and/or threw her on the hood of a car about seven years later. Then a few years later a former girlfriend stated he abused her. To me that is a patternWhat happened in '87 seems pretty serious from a physical as well as emotional point of view. But I hesitate to group that incident with the New Zealand concert incident, which I think has been blown out of proportion. After all, Stevie once fessed up to throwing her tambourine at a security guard. (Consider her physical placement in relation to that of security staff at the foot of the stage.) Neither of these acts is terribly admirable, but I just hesitate to consider either one of them as in some important way comparable to the way that Buckingham & Nicks allegedly pummeled each other in August 1987 at Christine's house.

At the Auckland concert in 1980 (some fans, in retelling this story, have even screwed up the year, moving it sinisterly backward or forward in time), Mick relates how Lindsey got drunk before a big show, & as a result started deliberately playing out of tune (this could be a good thing from an artistic point of view!), clowning around and mimicking Stevie while she was performing. Even in Mick's/Stephen Davis's exaggeratedly dramatic language, the incident doesn't come across as that of a tantrum or physical rage. It just seems like a guy got tired & bombed & left his professionalism at the entrance door. Even the word "kick," which Mick uses once, seems loaded & perhaps skewed. Many of the younger fans may not know this, but during the instrumental vamp in "Rhiannon" in the old days, when Christine & Lindsey are both twiddling to a straight 4/4, Stevie traditionally got down on her haunches off to the side of the stage (generally Christine's side), pulled her chiffon up over her head to hide her face, & began to sway. Variations of this move occurred at all the shows in those days (if you download "Rhiannon" from Mobile 1980 from Tiff's site, you'll hear a very looooong vamp -- Stevie took full advantage of these lengthy instrumentals to hunker down & sway).

So it was at this point in "Rhiannon" that Lindsey, according to Mick, "pulled his jacket over his head in a grotesque imitation of her pose," & "started to kick Stevie while she was trying to salvage the number. ... Lindsey would flick his foot at her & Stevie would shy away, trying to cover up his stoned-out behavior to save us all from dying of embarrassment."

Mick appeared on a Graham Nash interview show on A&E in the early 1990s & discussed this incident after Graham questioned him about it. Mick imitated Lindsey's actions to show Graham & the audience what happened: he didn't imitate a whomping kicking action, but what he called in the book a "flicking" action with his foot. It actually didn't look physically menacing at all -- just dopey & unprofessional.

Remember what Christine allegedly yelled at him? "Don't you ever do this to this band again"; the implication being that the foot-flicking was just one element in a series of actions that embarrassed the whole band in front of a big crowd that day/night. Also, according to Mick, apparently the crowd didn't even notice anything wrong, thinking it was even part of the act. Had he hauled off & really kicked a bandmate during a performance, you would assume that no one with any brains would consider that part of "the act."

[Johnny Stew]

Remember what Christine allegedly yelled at him? "Don't you ever do this to this band again"; the implication being that the foot-flicking was just one element in a series of actions that embarrassed the whole band in front of a big crowd that day/night. Also, according to Mick, apparently the crowd didn't even notice anything wrong, thinking it was even part of the act. Had he hauled off & really kicked a bandmate during a performance, you would assume that no one with any brains would consider that part of "the act."I agree... to me, Lindsey's behaviour during the "Auckland Incident" always seemed more embarrassing/unprofessional, rather than violent.

I imagine some level of aggression was manifesting itself there, but it's my belief that if Lindsey exhibited some profound level of physical abuse towards Stevie over the years, then she wouldn't be working with him today.


Stevie once fessed up to throwing her tambourine at a security guard. (Consider her physical placement in relation to that of security staff at the foot of the stage.)I remember her saying that, but I can't remember the reason she gave for the incident.

I *think* it involved Stevie witnessing the security guard roughing up fans, or at least one fan, and Stevie lashing out at him in kind.
Am I remembering correctly?

Regardless, that must smart getting thwacked with a flying tambourine! :laugh:

[Mari]

Don't make me smack you! :]
Well, if I can get a good lawyer to pretend this is a pattern, I might :p

[strandinthewind]

Well, if I can get a good lawyer to pretend this is a pattern, I might :p

it would not take a good one - men probably have been hanged on less evidence :laugh:

[Mari]

but this is the Netherlands, you can't get away with that here *yet* :p :D

[strandinthewind]

but this is the Netherlands, you can't get away with that here *yet* :p :D

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

BTW - I LOVE The Netherlands!!!!!

[HomerMcvie]

Hang on. Let me go put on my special leather "whoopin'" clothes. :lol:

[shackin'up]

so if I smack someone once, it's a pattern? :confused:

No. It's abuse once.

[Mari]

got that, but I had the impression we were discussing whether there was a pattern of abuse ;)

[Mari]

Sure Lux, if anyone wants to play Stevie, I'll smack her a couple of times :p
And then I'll wait seven years and smack her again. There: pattern! :blob2:

[wildangel]

The point I made earlier was that Mick could have said it was out of character or not like Lindsey after he described the incident, but he did'nt. He said that Lindsey might hit Stevie again because he had done it before. So just because we don't know of any other incidents the book is hinting that there were others. I have'nt read the book in a while but I think it quotes John as saying that "it did'nt take a rocket scientist to figure out what was gonna happen" (the fight) so that makes it sound like the band had witnessed violence between the two of them before. These are the things about the book that bothered me at the time, but thankfully everything seems to be a lot less dysfunctional these days :xoxo: