[Bryter Layter]

Originally Posted by Velocitygirl

I'm surprised to hear that Richey comes off as toxic in the book. I was under the impression the authors, not to mention Rachel, were trying to lionize the man.

He comes off as toxic to me (at least in the beginning. Towards the end, it's just really sad), but I don't think the authors intended that. Lol! Tbh, I think they wanted to show him warts and all, but when you're too close to the subject, nothing is challenged and known facts that may not gel with the narrative being pushed, are glossed over or ignored entirely.

Best of luck to his sister with this book and her intentions for it, but if you ask me, they should have left the veil down.

Originally Posted by raven

Why wasn't he at home with his mum & dad? I remember him alluding to it once briefly but never really explaining

Do you mean Lennon or Richey? My memory is dicey on the details about Lennon, but I believe his father abandoned the family when he was a baby and his mother became involved with another man and I don't think her new BF wanted him around so Mimi and her husband took him in and raised him.

Originally Posted by raven

Surprised? I'd be more surprised if that wasn't explored. It must have been hard for his sister to make the decision and that's why in part for all the criticism it's impossible to judge her harshly as she's opening her family up, her brother up but there's nothing to be ashamed of in mental illness so it shouldn't be something that needs to be hidden and his previous suicide attempt is of relevance. Of course when Richey was around and in the band it was up to him and why should he bare his soul or sit and invite judgement and opinion, it's a private matter and it can be something that in one moment you're absolutely set on and in another absolutely not. It shouldn't be something that defines you so I can see why he would have liked privacy but now circumstances are different. I believe the police were told at the time? It's relevant is what I'm trying to say. And his treatment is also of relevance. I feel he, like so many, was let down by the hospitals and the professionals, they still let people down now and...a whole other topic...but it's absolutely relevant

Obviously not surprised that they discussed it, I'm surprised at how much they divulged. I mean, they don't go into details about what he said in therapy or anything like that, but they spoke with people who observed him in there and his routine. I just don't think something like that should be discussed publicly unless the patient has given permission or was open about it. He limited what he said to the press and kept to the general concerns like how poorly mental healthcare is funded in a public system, dispelling the myths associated with mental illness, etc - but he stopped short of discussing what he personally went through and I think that's important to remember. That being said, this is my personal opinion which clearly not everyone shares. If his sister felt it was the right thing to do then that's her call, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to question why she would.

Originally Posted by raven

This antisemitism thing....again it's not something that should be thrown at anyone without clear evidence it's too important to be used so freely. True, I haven't read the book only your comments but I see no criticism of Jews there. It is true that the holocaust is referenced sometimes too quickly or when it suits an agenda - not by Jews but by governments - to furnish their moral high ground about some conflicts they take a stand against whilst others get ignored because it's not politically convenient. It's always the way. Churchill gets recycled ad nauseum by governments here to 'justify' certain military actions and involvement whilst we turn a blind eye to regimes we consider friends regardless of their appalling disregard of human rights.

True, but I didn't say it was antisemitic, I said it appeared problematic to me. In hindsight, I shouldn't have written antisemitic at all because you're right about throwing terms like that around. They loose meaning when you apply them to everything you find questionable which just might be the result of a miscommunication or something was taken out of context. In regards to what I wrote though, I just felt really uncomfortable reading her lyrical analysis of 'The Intense Humming Of Evil'. To me, it seemed like she was implying that Richey may not have been sincere with his words or he was deliberately trying to be provocative in a song about the Holocaust. It also wasn't clear if the supporting "evidence" she provided, which I felt was questionable and leading, were her interpretations or if they were based on something he wrote, which pissed me off (this is another reason why the book is a poor read. Half the time I can't tell if they're her ideas or if she's paraphrasing him from the 'archive')! Anyway, it's entirely possible I'm just hyper-sensitive these days to any discussions involving the Holocaust or antisemitic rhetoric/tropes, especially when they come from someone who is clearly into conspiracy theories.

Originally Posted by raven

Personally my own attraction to him and the band was his intellect and his insights. It was all about his lyrics.

My attraction was the same, but full disclosure, I was 15 and thought he was hot. Kind of still do actually. Lol!

The assumption that Richey wearing those PJs to look like a concentration camp victim is not a new one though. That's been around since the 90s. I don't think he ever disclosed to anyone why he was wearing pajamas and the book doesn't give much insight either. The anecdote about Rob Stringer is pretty much a non-event and I'm not sure why it was included except to show how the big bad record company was treating this suffering genius so appallingly. In fact, Rob Stringer probably fairs the worst in this book. He's really made out to be a money hungry prick.

I think they may have a had a limited stock. You should just get a digital copy.

Originally Posted by Routine Builder

Wasn't Richey's suicide attempt public knowledge already? Pretty sure Nick or James mentioned it at some point.

It was regarded as a rumour, but the book pretty much confirms that the rumour of what went down, was true. As Bonesy said, he left a very brief suicide note in a copy of Equus.

It's interesting to note though that the professionals who examined him said that his wounds were superficial and they believed it was more of a cry for help than an actual attempt.