[Bryter Layter]

Originally Posted by raven

Well, I know he did talk about groupies and could be dismissive, bordering on sexist may as well say and definitely sexist and wrong with regards to seeking out a prostitute like a Western arrogant tourist idiot in Thailand but that said as far as I'm aware there was never any suggestion that he was interested in young girls beyond some malicious shit stirring with absolute no foundation.

Hmmm...not sure him messing around with teenage girls has no foundation. Several women who associated with them backstage have long since confirmed this including a forum member here who many years ago wrote about how he seduced these girls backstage some of which she knew for a fact he was aware of their age (I believe the youngest she personally knew about was 15). I guess it comes down to who you believe. I personally have always believed these woman and continue to do so. Not sure why you seemingly think this is some kind if malicious slander campaign given that these stories didn't really reach mass consumption until about 4 or 5 years after he went missing when these young women began using the internet as the forum that they never had previously, to tell their stories unlike Richey who had access to the media which he used to belittle and dehumanize both hardened groupies and young smitten fans alike. I mean, what would be their motive for addressing not only sex with girls as young as 15, but also the grooming and seduction involved?

Originally Posted by raven

I hear what you're saying about Jo. Even 19 is young to 27.....not wrong of course not but quite a gap at that age. That said it didn't seem unequal if that makes sense, he seems to have found someone he could talk to on an equal level, she didn't sound naive and I'm not entirely sure she was a big fan of the band?

I'm not talking about him dating her at 19, I'm referring to the fact that he met her when she was 15/16 years old and I find it very hard to believe his relationship/involvement with her was platonic from the start. The authors are very careful not to make reference to her as a love interest until she's 17, but even then only publish an innocent passage from one of his letters to her. It's only after she would have been 18 when they include a passage from a letter to her that makes reference to any kind of romance between them (if I can use the word "romance" to describe their relationship given he would later claim to have gotten a hand job off a prostitute around the same time he wrote said passage). I just find it really backwards and extremely out of touch to romanticize a relationship between a teenage girl and a mid-20s guy in a band.

He probably could talk to her, but how do you know that a man in his 20s isn't manipulating the thoughts of a still developing young person? How is that on an equal level? As for being a fan of another band, how is that relevant? He met her backstage at a gig and I would hazard a guess that him being cute and in a band, regardless of whether she liked the Manics or not, had a lot to do with why she accepted the sporadic communications and rarely seeing him. Can you honestly say she'd be ok with that type of dynamic if he was Richard Edwards the librarian?

Originally Posted by starfucker

^ Which is itself a direct rip-off of / homage to, depending on how you view these things, Tulips by Sylvia Plath.

Both are rip offs of Tulips even if Richey/Nicky's lyrics are less blatantly so.

Originally Posted by vaiden

A couple of other things I wanted to point out and was confirmed by some fans around that time was that the fan Becky got herself checked into the priory at the same time to get closer to Richey (?).

I heard that too, but I don't remember anyone actually confirming it. That's an expensive private facility and from what I know about her, I don't think she came from money nor do I think she personally had the resources to pay for a stay there. I might be wrong though.

Originally Posted by Glass Angel

Book thoughts
I have to preface this by saying that my views were prejudiced by what I read about SHR’s behaviour, before I started reading.

I think we all were. Lol! It turned out that a lot of the apprehension was warranted though because most of the book is a bit shit. Ha!

Originally Posted by Glass Angel

some of the praise of Richey’s geniuses is laughable; and he really, really does not sound nice.

I don't personally think he came across as not particularly nice in his adolescent/teen/early 20s, but I was surprised to see that he actually was quite arrogant or at least tried to present himself as such. I was also really disappointed to read about how he viewed women even if I really shouldn't have been given how he clearly had contempt for the women he slept with. I guess I was just surprised that his "sluts and saints" attitude towards women stretched back to his teens.

Originally Posted by Glass Angel

But most importantly, what is with that one paragraph about when Richey was 10 years old?!

I didn't have the same response to this story as you did. I saw it as her trying to remember if there was any sort of trauma in his youth that may have been the catalyst for what began to manifest from puberty onwards. I know everyone on this forum seems to have some pretty negative opinions on psychiatric diagnosis which is completely fair, but he was diagnosed by people who actually examined him (from the sounds of it, a few doctors gave him the same diagnosis) so I don't think it's unreasonable to believe this may have been at least one of the illnesses that affected him especially when he exhibited almost to the T all the symptoms and affects of BPD. If he indeed had BPD, then childhood trauma is sometimes a catalyst so for Rachel to explore any possible traumatic experiences he had as a child seems warranted to me.

Someone mentioned earlier why his relationship with his mother wasn't really touched upon and I should think it's fairly obvious why that is. It's pretty clear that both Rachel and the authors believe that a lot of Richey's issues were the result of his father's attitudes - what we now call toxic masculinity - which is why he's mentioned a lot more than their mum.

Originally Posted by Glass Angel

School reports. Not exceptional, sorry. Two Bs doesn’t make ‘excelled at history’.

Ha! I said something similar earlier in the thread, but someone had a smartass remark about it so I deleted the post. I just thought it was humorous that they considered it "exceptional" that he got a B in history, but said nothing about the A he got in French, etc. It's pretty obvious why they did that. Lol!

Originally Posted by Glass Angel

predicted Nirvana’s Pennyroyal Tea more than ten years before it was written?

Speaking of Nirvana, I found it incredibly annoying the way they kept making comparisons between him and Kurt Cobain. Like they were in competition with each other, but Richey was always beaten to the punch by Cobain or something. I highly doubt Cobain even knew who he was.

Originally Posted by Glass Angel

Regarding girlfriends, I just have to say it - some of those descriptions are pretty incel-like. Girls are perfect or they are sullied. Eurgh.

Yep! Incel-like is a pretty good description. I never considered him a feminist anyway and have never taken his outrage over sexism seriously. For an intelligent guy, he was pretty clueless about what sexism actually entailed.

Originally Posted by handbag

Speaking of no Nirvana, it's always stated that In Utero was the tape in the car but this book says it was Sex Pistols. Did I miss something?

Every source I've seen up to this book stated that it was In Utero in the cassette deck. I would think Rachel would know better though, no?

Originally Posted by handbag

Speaking of Nicky's wedding, I found that description of a man broken by his friend's marriage strange. He's beaming harder than anybody else on the wedding photos.

That doesn't necessarily mean anything though. He could have been ecstatic initially, but then got depressed about his future once he started drinking.

What bother's me about that passage in the book is why did they throw that reference from Jo about him being in love with Nicky in and then not expand on it in anyway? If it was used in reference to how he allegedly acted at the wedding, why does his sister surmise that he may have been down out of jealousy for not being able to have a lasting relationship like that or maybe because he was losing his best friend. Where does the "he was in love with Nicky" factor into this story? Lol!

Originally Posted by Europa Gluten Free

It's clear that SHR doesn't know anything. It's sad that it appears that Rachel wasn't so close to Richey around this time and doesn't offer anything either.

.

I suspect that is the case too. I think the only people who knew him the best during that period was the band and to a lesser extent, Martin Hall.

Originally Posted by handbag

I'm surprised SHR didn't attach some deep meaning to the tape left in the car.

"At the end of the Sex Pistols final gig, Lydon repeated, No fun, no fun, this is no fun at all...Ever get the feeling you've been cheated? Was Richard telling us he felt cheated by the other band members? Are the lyrics to No Fun telling us how alienated they were making him feel? No fun to be alone/Walking by myself. Let's look at every track by the Sex Pistols for clues. Holiday in the Sun...[write something about the reference to Belsen and Richey's striped pyjamas look]."

That could've been half chapter's worth of word count.

I genuinely had a LOL moment when I read this.

I hate to say it, but I think this book has made me less of a fan of his than I was before. I feel great sympathy for him given the mental challenges he faced especially throughout '94 and into '95 and I'll always consider him a great lyricist and a fairly decent provocateur, but beyond that, I don't have much regard for him anymore. Maybe I'm just too old to hero worship guys in bands (not that I ever considered him a hero per say, but I did kind of admire him).