The new clues that suggest missing Richey staged his own dissapearance

[Routine Builder]

I do remember something to the effect that Richey had a girlfriend at the time and one of the boxes he left behind was for her. I also remember a band member stating there was nothing of relevance in the box.

With regards to JFPL, I'm pretty sure they got some form informal consent from Richey's family.

If I was to speculate about where a rift came from, it might have been the focus on the band rather than the family in the first years following Richey's disappearance. Quite a few raw things were said by both James and Nick that they would probably have not made public today. The family were ignored back then and it's only since around the mid 2000s did Rachel step up to claim his cause.

[Europa Gluten Free]

Originally Posted by Routine Builder

If I was to speculate about where a rift came from, it might have been the focus on the band rather than the family in the first years following Richey's disappearance. Quite a few raw things were said by both James and Nick that they would probably have not made public today. The family were ignored back then and it's only since around the mid 2000s did Rachel step up to claim his cause.

I think the rift came from the sense that the band accelerated Richey's issues. I think Nicky has mentioned this himself over the years. I'm sure the thought is there if he had never joined the Manics, he would be still around. And that's a plausible argument.

I also do wonder if the success of the band makes his sister feel that they profited from it. And you could argue that they have profited. The Manics have always been about rock n'roll mythology, and Richey's disappearance, the book he left behind etc etc is building up that myth. What if Richey just left in 1995? What would have happened? They wouldn't have had that emotional wave to ride on to produce an album like EMG. With a song like DFL it would have still been successful, but it wouldn't have been the same album.

It's a very difficult situation.

[Elizabeth M]

Perhaps Rachel's grudge against the band is a coping mechanism born of the years of dealing with the absence of her brother, with the search, the questions, the disappointments, etc., and the grief of losing both of her parents (who, if I recall correctly, died pretty close together) on top of that.

I remember reading that the Manics had asked permission of Richey's family to use the left-behind lyrics to make Journal For Plague Lovers. Richey being declared presumed dead was also the decision of the parents, the band had nothing to do with that. Perhaps those were decisions of Richey's parents that Rachel did not agree with, but now there's no one but the band left to be angry at.

[almostfamous]

I'll be reading this - seems cheapest at WHSmiths for £14 btw - but find it somewhat counter productive to aim to reclaim Richey from his Rock N Roll mythology whilst referring to him as "Richey Manic" in the title!?!

[Europa Gluten Free]

Originally Posted by almostfamous

I'll be reading this - seems cheapest at WHSmiths for £14 btw - but find it somewhat counter productive to aim to reclaim Richey from his Rock N Roll mythology whilst referring to him as "Richey Manic" in the title!?!

I won't be reading it. I can't see anything new coming out of it.

[Velocitygirl]

Originally Posted by Routine Builder

If I was to speculate about where a rift came from, it might have been the focus on the band rather than the family in the first years following Richey's disappearance. Quite a few raw things were said by both James and Nick that they would probably have not made public today. The family were ignored back then and it's only since around the mid 2000s did Rachel step up to claim his cause.

Yes, this. The family were ignored. But the band had to tread a very fine line. They couldn't, and wouldn't, deign to speak for the family, so they had to talk about Richey all the time without dragging his family into it or appearing to take "ownership" of him from his family. All they could really do was try to emphasise that the family were suffering a great deal more than them. The coverage has been undeniably skewed.

But it seemed like the band were trying to reclaim Richey from that hardcore group of fans who idolised him. In turn, Rachel's trying to reclaim Richey from that whole "rock star" image. It's difficult to explain.

[Velocitygirl]

Originally Posted by almostfamous

I'll be reading this - seems cheapest at WHSmiths for £14 btw - but find it somewhat counter productive to aim to reclaim Richey from his Rock N Roll mythology whilst referring to him as "Richey Manic" in the title!?!

To be fair, that would have been the decision of the publisher rather than the authors. Anything on the cover, dust-jacket or accompanying blurb is pretty much down to the publishers. As is the date of publication.

[Bryter Layter]

Originally Posted by handbag

I would prefer no choice
One bread, one milk, one food, that's all
I'm confused, I only want one truth
I really don't mind being lied to
on All Is Vanity

and

That shadow is a cross okay
Judgment must willing today
Silence is not sacrifice
Crucifixion is the easy life
from Doors Closing Slowly

Originally Posted by Red

Just about the whole thing is a bit of a hodge-podge of his lyrics.

I would like, I would prefer no choice,
Just one bread, one milk, one food for all,
I'm confused I only want one truth,
I really don't mind being lied to,
Don't mind being lied to...


are definitely his, and were recycled for All Is Vanity as

I would prefer no choice
One bread, one milk, one food, that's all
I'm confused, I only want one truth
I really don't mind being lied to


The second verse is also his -

The shadow is, the shadow is a cross okay,
But judgement must, judgement must be willing today,
SIlence is not sacrifice, crucifixion the easy life,
Crucifixion the easy life...

and was reused for (or taken from?) Doors Closing Slowly's chorus,

Thank you both! I knew that line in particular was familiar, but truth be told, I haven't heard Picturesque in ages and I haven't really listened to JFPL in full in a while.

I find it really suspect as to why Richey wasn't credited as a songwriter on Picturesque. Why wasn't this noted when JFPL came out?

Originally Posted by Elizabeth M

There’s no way Richey will be remembered widely for anything but his troubles and disappearance, especially because he was never really famous for anything else. That may do an injustice to him as an individual or as an artistic talent, but it’s human nature.

Exactly! I think to a lot of the Manics fan base, he is appreciated for his wit, cynicism, lyrics and artistic eye (to some he's also appreciated for his looks), but in terms of the wider world of music and pop culture in general, he's really only known for his self harm and his disappearance. Even then, in some places like where I'm from, most people don't even know he existed.

I found it rather odd that the author interviewed for that piece in Wales Online, suggested that Richey wasn't as famous as Kurt Cobain because nobody knows what his fate was. That's ridiculous! The reality is, he's not as famous as Kurt Cobain because he was never as successful as Cobain. It has nothing to do with the fact that Cobain - to be rather blunt - left a body.

Originally Posted by Elizabeth M

As for the book, it could be interesting, but to me it doesn’t seem there's any question as to whether or not Richey staged his disappearance. I think it has always been pretty obvious that he staged it. The questions is what happened to him afterwards.

Yep! I think most people definitely always knew it was planned and staged. I mean, if you know the story, it's pretty obvious.

Originally Posted by Routine Builder

I have severe doubts that the band would just pilfer the leftover lyrics for a free EP.

I don't think they would either, but why isn't he credited for those lines?

Originally Posted by Velocitygirl

I'd be interested to know where this story about "Vivian" came from and how they know she was in his hotel room. All the more intriguing because they seemt to be relating a verbatim conversation that was supposed to have happened between her and Richey. I forget the wording, but it was something along the lines of him trying to give her his passport, adding that he wouldn't be needing it anymore.

How do they know there was a woman in his hotel room? How do they know about a convo they had? That all seems like such a stretch to me. And, really, wtf is the point in him giving her his passport? What conceivable use would she have for it?

Right?! Hopefully they'll cite their sources for this info, but it's strange that no one has ever mentioned he had company in his room that evening. Perhaps it was a rumour started by some of the fans. I remember at the time that there were a lot of fans coming forward claiming to have had an encounter with him just before he split and a few days after. Some were probably legit while others were likely hoaxes.

Originally Posted by Velocitygirl

I think I heard somewhere that she wasn't happy about his lyrics being used in Journal.

Around 2009, someone popped up on this forum claiming to be Rachel and writing really nasty things about the band in reference to them using his lyrics for JFPL. At the time I think we all assumed this person was full of shit, but now, I'm not so sure. From what I remember of that member's rant, it sounded like they were accusing the band of pressuring the father into allowing the use of the lyrics. Still, I think her issues with them go back earlier than that though. If you read the Times review of the book, they even mention that she indeed has issues with them and those issues seem to stem from a few things including them not doing enough when he first went missing. Probably blames them for not doing enough for him when he was ill too.

Originally Posted by Europa Gluten Free

I think the rift came from the sense that the band accelerated Richey's issues. I think Nicky has mentioned this himself over the years. I'm sure the thought is there if he had never joined the Manics, he would be still around. And that's a plausible argument.

I think that's a plausible argument too, but I'm not sure how the band can be faulted for that. I don't think they forced him to be in the band. He was an adult and made his own decisions.

Originally Posted by Europa Gluten Free

I also do wonder if the success of the band makes his sister feel that they profited from it. And you could argue that they have profited. The Manics have always been about rock n'roll mythology, and Richey's disappearance, the book he left behind etc etc is building up that myth. What if Richey just left in 1995? What would have happened? They wouldn't have had that emotional wave to ride on to produce an album like EMG. With a song like DFL it would have still been successful, but it wouldn't have been the same album.

Listen, I love the band, but they 100% profited from both his self harm and his disappearance. The thing is though, Richey was totally complicit in this so again, you can't really fault them. It's not like they exploited something he himself wasn't exploiting already.

Originally Posted by almostfamous

...find it somewhat counter productive to aim to reclaim Richey from his Rock N Roll mythology whilst referring to him as "Richey Manic" in the title!?!

Based on what I've read elsewhere about this book, that seems to be a bone of contention among a lot of fans. Not only calling him "Richey Manic", but also the photo they've chosen to use. I guess, even when you have the best of intentions, you still realize that his mythology is what is going to sell the book at the end of the day.

[theplague]

So this is the cover artwork for the book and Rachel wants to reclaim her brother’s rep/legacy from the rock roll mythology, and is angry at the band for “exploitng” it(is this verified in any way at all? That she’s angry for that reason?)
She really can’t be feeling well herself. Understandable, but so out of touch with things.

https://raru.co.za/books/5276287-wit...erts-hardcover

The Vivian + kibbutz traces are a little interesting I must say. Will read the book for those reasons.

[Europa Gluten Free]

All these new leads gives Jimbo crooning "Oh, Vivian" a whole new meaning!

Someone start deciphering THOSE lyrics!

[rosetree]

I think the self harm was his truth that Richey wanted people to know about. I actually think the book sounds interesting compared to the usual stories that are written. I think the family trait stories unprecedented info, reports and artwork sound interesting to see and that he had undiagnosed aspergers. Even though he became unwell, the band members had been good friends from childhood and they always place him in high regard. Would Richey have mislead James in going to America to promote the album, if he'd planned to go missing? I also doubt he'd have planned to go live in a religious commune. I think it's really sad and it must be very painful every day for his sister to not know where he is and what happened. I also don't think another book about Richey is a detriment to anyone.

[handbag]

The Jerusalem Post have an article titled HAVE YOU SEEN RICHEY EDWARDS? Fucking madness.

[handbag]

Originally Posted by almostfamous

I'll be reading this - seems cheapest at WHSmiths for £14 btw

If you hang on it'll probably be one of the £5 books in Fopp before summer.

[Velocitygirl]

Originally Posted by theplague

So this is the cover artwork for the book and Rachel wants to reclaim her brother’s rep/legacy from the rock roll mythology, and is angry at the band for “exploitng” it(is this verified in any way at all? That she’s angry for that reason?)
She really can’t be feeling well herself. Understandable, but so out of touch with things.

To be fair, the cover image is not chosen by the author. It's chosen by the publishing company. The same goes for the blurb (in which he's called "Richey Manic").

[Velocitygirl]

Originally Posted by Bryter Layter

Right?! Hopefully they'll cite their sources for this info, but it's strange that no one has ever mentioned he had company in his room that evening. Perhaps it was a rumour started by some of the fans. I remember at the time that there were a lot of fans coming forward claiming to have had an encounter with him just before he split and a few days after. Some were probably legit while others were likely hoaxes.

Yeah, exactly. The first I read of "Vivian" was in the articles I read yesterday. There also seems to be a new sighting of Richey on the footpath of the Severn Bridge. I'm not at all familiar with that part of Britain, so I don't know the logistics. But it seemed this sighting came several years later. I don't know what to make of that.

Around 2009, someone popped up on this forum claiming to be Rachel and writing really nasty things about the band in reference to them using his lyrics for JFPL. At the time I think we all assumed this person was full of shit, but now, I'm not so sure. From what I remember of that member's rant, it sounded like they were accusing the band of pressuring the father into allowing the use of the lyrics. Still, I think her issues with them go back earlier than that though. If you read the Times review of the book, they even mention that she indeed has issues with them and those issues seem to stem from a few things including them not doing enough when he first went missing. Probably blames them for not doing enough for him when he was ill too.

I remember that person! I didn't post back to them as I've been a steady lurker since I first joined this site back in 03, but I do remember that person. I'm still not convinced it was Rachel, since that poster also had some weird, fangirling FB page dedicated to Richey. Would Rachel do that?

However, I did have a bit of a run-in with the one of the authors of the book on here. She was having a right old go at anyone who didn't believe her "Richey was murdered" theory. Rather than try to expand on the theory, she just resorted to calling us all dumb.

Based on what I've read elsewhere about this book, that seems to be a bone of contention among a lot of fans. Not only calling him "Richey Manic", but also the photo they've chosen to use. I guess, even when you have the best of intentions, you still realize that his mythology is what is going to sell the book at the end of the day.

In all fairness, the cover and blurb is soley down to the publishing company rather than the authors. If they are trying to reclaim Richey to humanise him, I would imagine they're fairly pissed about this themselves.