1peterd
A Number and a Name
Posts: 34
|
Post by 1peterd on Sept 15, 2013 11:45:45 GMT -5
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Jim Fisher Sunday, September 15, 2013
Autobiographies by rock stars Linda Ronstadt and Graham Nash are less than stellar
Ronstadt reveals very little of her personal life in 'Simple Dreams,' while Nash, in 'Wild Tales,' tells a story that's already been told.
After all the songs have been sung, the stories behind them should be told.
More and more book publishers seem to agree. They’ve created a virtual boom in boomer-age, pop star autobiographies. Ever since Keith Richards’ 500-page tome became a runaway hit two years ago, editors have been signing up every brand-name rock star of a certain age to commit their highflying lives to print. In the last two years, we’ve seen best-selling self-revelations from Eric Clapton, Pete Townshend, Neil Young, Rod Stewart, Gregg Allman, Carole King and more.
This week, two more singers will add "author" to their résumé: Graham Nash (in a work he promisingly titles “Wild Tales” from Crown, $28) and Linda Ronstadt (with the serene-sounding “Simple Dreams,” via Simon & Schuster, $26).
Unfortunately, both works have serious limitations. But at least they turn out to be telling ones. Each raises broad, and essential, questions about all these pop star bios. They include high-minded ones like, “What does an author owe their public to reveal?” and “What do they owe themselves to conceal?”
They raise low ones, too, like: “What can you tell fans they don’t already know?”
Ronstadt’s work begs that first question right in its subtitle. She calls this “a musical memoir” and she’s being quite literal about that. Every word focuses on things like, what influences informed Ronstadt’s broad style, how songs came to be arranged and recorded, and the thought process behind the sudden left turns in her career that put her finances and popularity at risk.
It’s an interesting story — but one she felt so controlling of, she insisted on penning it in her own pedestrian style rather than hiring a livelier, or more probing, ghost writer. Ronstadt also made the decision to give nearly every detail of her personal life the Kremlin treatment. And that has serious consequences for the resonance of her writing and the relatability of her tale.
In a book of 208 pages, there’s not a single mention of sex — an interesting decision from a woman considered one of the sex symbols of the ’70s. Of course, Ronstadt famously hated that role, but the banishing of all eros, along with most mentions of romance, eliminates from her story key human desires. It also cuts her off from the yearning that fired her singing. When Ronstadt does deign to allude to famous boyfriends (like Jerry Brown or Pete Hamill), she writes only that she was “spending a lot of time with” them. Because she mentions sex directly only when it’s an ugly come-on from a lout on the road, she winds up sounding censorious and scolding.
Ronstadt likewise drew a red pen through all references to drugs, even though in a recent interview she spoke about needing two nasal procedures to correct the ravages of her cocaine use. (Ronstadt doesn’t mention her Parkinson’s disease only because her diagnosis came after the book went to print.)
The desire to read about more personal things isn’t prurient. It’s necessary to get a fuller, more emotive vision of the author — not to mention to make the story make sense. When, toward the book's close, the singer fitfully alludes to having two children, we have no idea how they got there. By taking so aloof an approach, Ronstadt may think she’s striking a blow for feminism, as well keeping the voyeurs of gossip at bay. But the result just renders her cold and unknowable.
Nash’s book suffers from a far simpler problem: It’s late to its own party. The stories of Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young have already been told, exhaustively, in a book by Neil Young, two by David Crosby, and three on Laurel Canyon, including part of David Browne’s excellent work, “Fire and Rain.” While it’s great to read the first third of Nash’s book, which centers on his time with his underreported band the Hollies, by the time he gets to 1969, we know every story. It doesn’t help that Nash hasn’t made much music of worth since the early ’70s. Neither does it elevate matters that he is being sadly accurate when he describes himself as “a simple man.”
The story of Nash’s life, like Ronstadt’s, holds some real fascination. But, as these autobios prove, the stars themselves might not be the best ones to tell it.
|
|
|
Post by erik on Sept 15, 2013 12:35:19 GMT -5
Well, it's as Rick Nelson once sang: "You can't please everyone, so you've got to please yourself."
Now I know there are those out there who will argue, perhaps rightly, for more details on something more than just the music all by itself. But even though Linda was a sex symbol in her day (thus a target for the tabloids), and even though she did admit to using drugs, none of this stuff was ever on the level of some of her contemporaries who didn't even make it past 40, let alone to 67. So much of the stuff is exaggerated, if not outright fabricated, that I don't think it would do any good to go over it again. Fans knew about a lot of that stuff anyway; those who never were fans to begin with, and never understood her back in the day, are never going to "get" her appeal now. It's like George Klein said of his friend Elvis: "If you're a fan, no explanation is necessary. If you're not, no explanation is possible." End of story.
|
|
|
Post by fabtastique on Sept 15, 2013 13:30:25 GMT -5
People expecting a book filled with sensationalism are going to be disappointed .... It wasn't written to be that
|
|
1peterd
A Number and a Name
Posts: 34
|
Post by 1peterd on Sept 15, 2013 13:37:49 GMT -5
Entertainmento Weekly Book Review
Simple Dreams (2013)
Linda Ronstadt Reviewed by Clark Collis on Sep 11, 2013
Simple Dreams was practically at the printers when Ronstadt was diagnosed with Parkinson's disease, although her decision not to include any mention of that here probably had less to do with publishing deadlines than her very private nature. While the chanteuse writes evocatively about growing up in the Arizona desert and her musical collaborations, this is a largely scuttlebutt-free zone. That's her right, but the few tales of excessive behavior by the likes of Jim Morrison and Gram Parsons do leave you wanting more.
|
|
|
Post by charlotte on Sept 15, 2013 13:52:50 GMT -5
Jim Farber is an old hack. There are plenty of glowing and positive reviews. Look at goodreads.com So I wouldn't want the naysayers here. I have read it. Engaging and beautifully written. Leaves you wanting more. Linda Ronstadt pulled ths veil on her sex life a long long time ago.
|
|
|
Post by erik on Sept 15, 2013 13:56:59 GMT -5
Quote from Entertainment Weekly review cited by 1peterd:
What more could she possibly have put in there, then? I think you can read about Jimbo's and Gram's excesses in any book detailing the Los Angeles rock music scene of the 1960s and 1970s, of which there are several out there. In the case of Gram, I think it's clear that Linda did admire Gram for what he was trying to do in getting people to "get" country music; she just thought the way he lived his life was irresponsible (which it was, and fatally so).
|
|
|
Post by Partridge on Sept 15, 2013 14:31:21 GMT -5
Although the Daily News review is not ecstatic, I think it is not an unfair review. I like where she blasts Jack Nietzche! Too bad she didn't let Jann Wenner have it too. And who knew Linda had been arrested?!! Although I enjoyed the book very much, and I consider it the best Linda Ronstadt book so far by a mile, she had left enough out to leave me wanting another volume. Some events in her life I wanted more of the details.
If optioned for a movie, I'm sure the sex and salaciousness will be stepped up a bit.
|
|
|
Post by Dianna on Sept 15, 2013 14:39:04 GMT -5
I'm fine with a no tell all.. The only thing I have an issue with is how her stories are sometimes conflicting. One minute she swears to no drug use.. then I hear she did have her nose cauterized due to cocaine usage.. so it wasn't a rumor? . Another interview at Grace Cathedral, she says her publishing company wanted more personal stuff.. she says.. all she did was sing. This last interview with Sawyer, she claimed to be very busy with lots of boyfriends. lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2013 15:47:52 GMT -5
I wouldn't use that paper to wrap garbage in..
|
|
|
Post by Dianna on Sept 15, 2013 16:35:09 GMT -5
Although the Daily News review is not ecstatic, I think it is not an unfair review. I like where she blasts Jack Nietzche! Too bad she didn't let Jann Wenner have it too. And who knew Linda had been arrested?!! Although I enjoyed the book very much, and I consider it the best Linda Ronstadt book so far by a mile, she had left enough out to leave me wanting another volume. Some events in her life I wanted more of the details. If optioned for a movie, I'm sure the sex and salaciousness will be stepped up a bit. In the rolling stone article, snow white in south africa.. Didn't she mention going to jail for a day for something she didn't do. She didn't go in to detail tho.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Sept 15, 2013 16:46:20 GMT -5
What more could she possibly have put in there, then? I think you can read about Jimbo's and Gram's excesses in any book detailing the Los Angeles rock music scene of the 1960s and 1970s, of which there are several out there. In the case of Gram, I think it's clear that Linda did admire Gram for what he was trying to do in getting people to "get" country music; she just thought the way he lived his life was irresponsible (which it was, and fatally so). Maybe she could've put in a whole lot more than she could have and did put in, and probably should have...I don't know. Linda has a Garboesque air about her. It's a mysterious air because she values her privacy and I think any negative criticism about her book (such as in this case) is because maybe the critic wanted to know what Linda was and is like as a person. Instead of revealing the whole of herself, she revealed just part of herself and I think the critic was wanting more than what Linda gave. Given the era she debuted in, and the eras in which she was on top of the world, and the other performers she knew, whether they were life long friends or casual acquaintances, perhaps they wanted stories about them, and whether they were for real or put on a lot of airs. Maybe they wanted her to say, "I liked this person or hated person," rather than just focusing on the music. Maybe they assumed she was a social butterfly who hung out with everyone and is selfishly holding out on those stories - never mind that she had consistently said that away from the limelight, she was a homebody more than anything else. But, who knows, she could do another auto-bio book someday where it's more of a serious tell all and then her critics will harp about the lack of references to music. I doubt that's something she will do as I still see her being a Garbo type to the end of her days. But, I have no doubt that a biography written by a biographer will write a book on Linda with more details. Just hope it wouldn't be someone who has no qualms about writing a salacious and less than than flattering book. More than likely, that kind of book would come long after Linda had passed and could not rebut what was written.
|
|
|
Post by FEDUPSTADT on Sept 15, 2013 19:30:53 GMT -5
Re: "Jim Farber is an old hack. There are plenty of glowing and positive reviews. Look at goodreads.com So I wouldn't want the naysayers here. I have read it. Engaging and beautifully written. Leaves you wanting more. Linda Ronstadt pulled ths veil on her sex life a long long time ago."
Unless I am missing something, when you say Jim Farber are you referring to the author of the NY Daily News review? It says "Jim Fisher", not "Jim Farber". Jim Farber gave Linda an outstanding review when she performed at Radio City Music Hall in 1995 so I find him to be fair.
|
|
|
Post by Robert Morse on Sept 15, 2013 22:31:23 GMT -5
Linda has spent her life keeping her private life private. She never enjoyed the gossip about her. It would smack of a lack of integrity for her to write a book full of personal details about other people.
|
|
|
Post by erik on Sept 16, 2013 9:03:01 GMT -5
Quote by rob:
Which is why I wouldn't expect the book to be chock full of that stuff; she wrote a musical memoir, not something even remotely approaching Fifty Shades Of Grey territory.
I've said from the very moment we heard that she was writing this memoir that the primary interest I had in it was knowing how she related musically to the people she worked with, and whatever memories about them that she wanted to share with us was entirely up to her. I guess I'll find out tomorrow afternoon, when I get my copy.
|
|
|
Post by jhar26 on Sept 16, 2013 12:34:57 GMT -5
Well, if Linda had said that this would be a standard autobiography as in "this is the story of my life" mr.Fisher would have a point. But I think that Linda had made it clear that she hadn't the intention to write such a book. It's a musical memoir.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2013 12:40:12 GMT -5
On the other hand, the Washington Post had a very prominent and very positive review in Sunday's edition, written by Pulitzer Prize-winning book critic Jonathan Yardley.
|
|
|
Post by the Scribe on Sept 16, 2013 13:11:15 GMT -5
Well, if Linda had said that this would be a standard autobiography as in "this is the story of my life" mr.Fisher would have a point. But I think that Linda had made it clear that she hadn't the intention to write such a book. It's a musical memoir. Ha...this is just like the confusion about her concerts!
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Sept 16, 2013 13:58:46 GMT -5
Well, if Linda had said that this would be a standard autobiography as in "this is the story of my life" mr.Fisher would have a point. But I think that Linda had made it clear that she hadn't the intention to write such a book. It's a musical memoir. I think the impression was pre-publication that it was going to be an autobiography, and then when S&S realized what they got or were getting, they had to build the promotion around what they had. The problem here is - if it's a problem - is what the general public expects out of such a "musical memoir." Linda can't write or shouldn't write to please herself, not if she's hoping her book becomes a hot seller. Linda's fans? Well, like any other artist's fandom, there are any number of fans who will like everything she does regardless of how good or how bad it is. And who will question how much of a loyal fan another fan can be if they criticize. I think Linda could've written a whole lot more than what she did write, but we have what we have and I'm looking forward to reading what she did write.
|
|
|
Post by Dianna on Sept 16, 2013 14:07:04 GMT -5
well, I'm looking forward to it too. I think music lovers or anybody who has a curious mind about music will appreciate the book.. Who knows it could be used in colleges for music students. Also on a separate note I ordered my book and received tracking notice this weekend it will be in hands by this time tomorrow. !!!
|
|
1peterd
A Number and a Name
Posts: 34
|
Post by 1peterd on Sept 16, 2013 14:51:16 GMT -5
On the other hand, the Washington Post had a very prominent and very positive review in Sunday's edition, written by Pulitzer Prize-winning book critic Jonathan Yardley. SIMPLE DREAMS Linda Ronstadt, Simon & Schuster Reviewed by Jonathan Yardley Washington Post "Just about everything in Linda Ronstadt's "Musical Memoir" is engaging and interesting, but the best part comes first:" "It brought her full circle back to the music of her childhood and allows her to end this entirely winning book - which apparently she wrote herself, sans ghost - on a singularly happy note."
The entire review is at the link below. The balance is a lot of outtakes with out reviewer opinion. Interesting, but nothing reviewed there. www.arcamax.com/entertainment/bookreviews/s-1389847
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Sept 16, 2013 14:59:30 GMT -5
I'm hoping there will be more good reviews than bad reviews although with the critics, that may be asking a bit much. Too much. Based on the samples I've seen, I'm pretty sure I'm going to like reading the rest of the book, though I may find some things to complain about. As a fan, I don't expect Linda's book to be perfect but unlike the NY Daily News critic who complained about Linda not having a ghost writer, I'd rather hear Linda in her own words, unfiltered, no second writer interpreting what she wrote.
I went the slow route on my copies of the book, 5-8 days, so the two books I ordered (one for me, one for my younger sister) will be in after the September 17th release date. Curiously, I had ordered a Bee Gees biography at the same time (March of this year) and received that book two weeks before it was released to the stores. I was kind of hoping for the same on Linda's book but no such luck! So, it'll be here after ny birthday (which was yesterday) and before my sister's birthday (in October) and I'm a patient man. I can wait it out.
|
|
|
Post by Dianna on Sept 16, 2013 15:19:19 GMT -5
Happy Birthday Slide!!! Yeah, I changed my amazon order.. I wanted to make sure I got it on the day of it's release. We don't have big bookstores out here and not sure if Fred Meyer's would carry it and didn't want to chance it. The pains of living in a small town.vs back in so ca.
|
|
|
Post by sliderocker on Sept 16, 2013 16:43:18 GMT -5
Happy Birthday Slide!!! Yeah, I changed my amazon order.. I wanted to make sure I got it on the day of it's release. We don't have big bookstores out here and not sure if Fred Meyer's would carry it and didn't want to chance it. The pains of living in a small town.vs back in so ca. Thanks for the birthday wishes, Dianna. I thought about putting the rush on the books to get them delivered on the 17th, but I'd hate to think I spent the extra bucks for the rush delivery and it would've been at my door on the day of release without having to pay for the rush-delivery option. I once shipped a book to Australia to a friend there, slowest possible delivery - parcel post (by land and ocean - guaranteed to make it there in about a month) and she got the book in three days! That just blew my mind. I sometimes get cynical about paying extra because I think the company just wants to make a little extra money. Once it's in the mail, it shouldn't really take 5-8 days to arrive. I can't tell you how many books and cds I've ordered online or by mail order that had the same promise of delivery, and the delivery occurred in less than five days. So, I save the money and don't put on the rush delivery. If it's there tomorrow, great, if not, well, I'll read the reviews of those who have read it until my copy comes in.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2013 10:37:07 GMT -5
Hey all.. I am an early riser, so I was delighted to see the ebook downloaded on my kindle by 5 am today.. also transferred it to a tablet Looking forward to reading it, anyone else get the ebook?
R
|
|
|
Post by julianpineirua on Sept 17, 2013 11:18:46 GMT -5
I have it via kindle and transfered to my e-book sony PRS-650 Reading it now!. Very entertained by now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2013 11:48:25 GMT -5
I have it via kindle and transfered to my e-book sony PRS-650 Reading it now!. Very entertained by now. I had that model too... really enjoying it so far..
|
|
|
Post by fabtastique on Sept 17, 2013 12:16:24 GMT -5
i bought the ebook from Apple today ... I am off on holiday in 4 weeks so wanted to save it for then .... not sure I can wait. There is no sign of the audiobook on UK iTunes, is it available elsewhere??
|
|
|
Post by erik on Oct 9, 2013 8:50:55 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2013 9:49:02 GMT -5
How odd.. the author did not give a clear recommendation or thumbs down on the book. A lot of detail, but a very hazy article...
|
|
|
Post by Richard W on Oct 9, 2013 9:51:47 GMT -5
Thanks, Erik.
I agree about the reviewer having pre-conceived notions about Linda, to say nothing of LA rock. Like many music critics (I have to wonder if this guy is actually a musician or is strictly a critic), he calls Linda and her LA cohorts to task for the sheer professionalism of their art (quote: The singer specialized in mellifluity, the kind of music that lives entombed in the phrase “adult contemporary"), yet seems in awe of Paul Simon whose "'Bridge Over Troubled Waters” supposedly required an epic amount of time to perfect.'" He seemingly doesn't grasp that Paul Simon is as much, if not more, of a staple in "adult contemporary" playlists as Linda.
And what the hell is "adult contemporary" anyway? It's a meaningless label, one most often retroactively slapped on music that has grown familiar over the years. I mean, Fleetwood Mac's "Go Your Own Way" is often grouped with and played on adult contemporary stations, but in its own time it was anything but.
And, of course, there's the tired whites singing black music trope: "Ronstadt attempted to redo great songs from black singers and smooth them out for white audiences (often the way when white singers reinterpret black pop music). She usually got unappealing results. Songs like “Dark End Of The Street” and “Rescue Me” need voices with different powers than hers."
Well.
I'd argue that Linda did no such thing. Her versions are no smoother than any of the originals. The author promotes yet another tired trope that white singers can't sing black songs with conviction. Really, is Robinson's version of "Tracks of My Tears" any less smooth than Linda's?
And while I'll agree that "Rescue Me" isn't a success, it's not so much the fault of Linda's singing as it is the rather loosey-goosey arrangement and the vagaries of a live performance. I've always thought Linda could have done that one better; the difference between me and the author is that I know she has the power to do it while he evidently doesn't. Anyone who can do what she did with "You're No Good" has the goods. (And YNG must be one of the exceptions that fall outside of the "usually unappealing results." Too bad he didn't mention a few more of those exceptions; but then, it would weaken his own argument.)
But, hey, back off dude! -- you will not -- I repeat, will not -- besmirch "Dark End of the Street." I do not need to defend Linda's version here. That song is an unqualified masterpiece. Period. (But I have to wonder if he praises her "Willin'" at the expense of "Dark End of the Street" because the former was written by a white guy.)
And I didn't at all get the "two Linda Ronstadts" theme from the book that he did. Likewise, Linda as the little lamb surrounded by wolves. In fact, quite the opposite. I'd estimate that 95% of her interactions with male musicians depicted in the book are not of the wolves-devouring-lamb variety, but ones of mutual respect and friendship forged in music.
In the end, the author is a cherry-picker picking fruit that neatly fills his agenda pie. (I know, that's just a gawd-awful metaphor!)
|
|