Why Axl Rose Still Rocks .... Mick Wall's latest blog in GQ

[madison]

I realize a lot of people here aren't big fans of Mick Mall, and the "sheep" just bash him no matter what he writes. I've never really understood this because much of what Mick writes is true, whether people like the truth or not. 

Anyway, his latest blog is actually quite positive about Axl - and thought you might find it an interesting read.

Why Axl Rose still rocks
By Mick Wall 

Guns N' Roses singer W. Axl Rose once said to me, "We're not like those other bands." He was referring to the kind of manufactured outfits that dominated the rock scene in the late-1980s - your Bon Jovis and your Poisons. But what Axl was saying could equally apply now - perhaps that's why they've been booked to headline the Reading and Leeds Festival 2010.

I mean, come on, who is there in 2010 that can summon up even a fraction of the electrifying vibe the original Guns N' Roses of the late-80s took for granted? They may still mix sex and drugs with their rock'n'roll, but how many only turn up to play when the singer feels like it, leaving audiences waiting often until the early hours before they even show their faces at the venue, the way Axl Rose has always done?

How many carry guns, ride around in gold-plated limos and pay to have the backstage area done up as ancient Rome, replete with orgies, caged lions and toga-wearing bodyguards, as Guns N' Roses reputedly did in the early 90s? How many have taken 12 years and spent nearly $15 million to make an album then released only one single from it, refused to make a video to promote it, or even tour the damn thing, as Guns N' Roses did with their 2008 opus, Chinese Democracy? Answer: none.

Which is why Guns N' Roses remain something to see - if you can. Yes, it would be better if Slash was still with them (and don't rule it out happening again, not with several hundred million bucks on the table waiting for them to do it) but in Axl Rose they still possess the authentic voice of rock'n'roll as it was originally conceived: brutal, bad-ass, and utterly unapologetic.

How will Leeds and Reading live up to these legendary GN'R Gigs?

Hammersmith Odeon, London, October 1987.
The band's first major headlining show in London, their reputation had preceded them and expectation's were high, but they delivered; a shirtless, sweating Axl swaying like a cobra ready to strike; Slash, his face hidden by the hat and the hair, resting one heavy boot on the monitors. Suddenly every other band of the era looked safe as granny's milk.

Castle Donington Monsters of Rock Festival, England, August 1988.
Booked low on the bill earlier in the year, by the time the band got there they were bigger than headliners Iron Maiden. Hence, the huge audience surge for the stage when they came on, resulting in two fans being trampled to death. Nobody knew till it was over, at which point Axl's parting shot to the crowd, "Don't kill yourselves!" rang particularly hollow.

Coliseum, Los Angeles, November 1989.
Opening this stadium show for the Rolling Stones should have been the band's coming of age. Instead, Axl stopped the show halfway through to explain how he would be leaving if "certain members of the band" didn't stop "dancing with Mr Brownstone!" - a thinly-veiled reference to the ongoing heroin addictions of Slash, fellow guitarist Izzy Stradin and drummer Steve Adler.

Hammersmith Apollo, London, June 2006.
Scene of their 1987 UK triumph, now the moment of their long (long) awaited return to the London stage, cue: utter pandemonium. Axl refuses to come onstage till nearly midnight, the crowd threatens to riot, many leaving, bitterly unhappy, to catch buses and trains home, followed by the best rock show anywhere in town that year, Axl in his sewn-on dreadlocks and botoxed features still aflame with angry passion.

Guns 'N Roses play   Reading Festival on 27 August and Leeds Festival on 29 August, Mick Wall's new book Appetite for Destruction (Orion, £14.99) is out now.
[/i]

http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/comment/articles/2010-03/30/gq-music-why-axl-rose-still-rocks

[2NaFish]

its snidey at best and anything positive he says is cloaked in condescension his 'praise' for guns growing less as the years go by to the point that he's almost mocking. The only reason guns appear good in this is in comparison with bands in this post-nirvana world of ours where opulence is frowned upon.

I find it strange that you categorize anything wall writes as 'truth' when its just an opinion piece. Its the truth as he sees it; which doesnt mean very much.

[madison]

its snidey at best and anything positive he says is cloaked in condescension his 'praise' for guns growing less as the years go by to the point that he's almost mocking....

 Well, 2Na - I guess you're one of those people who will pointlessly bash Mick no matter what he writes.  This article was positive: Mick urges people to see GNR and says Axl still has "the authentic voice of rock'n'roll as it was originally conceived: brutal, bad-ass, and utterly unapologetic." ..... It doesn't get any more positive than that.  So, I'm not sure why you have your panties in a bunch and insist on trashing Mick.  But hey - whatever turns you on, I guess.  *shrugs*

[2NaFish]

Well, 2Na - I guess you're one of those people who will pointlessly bash Mick no matter what he writes.  This article was positive: Mick urges people to see GNR and says Axl still has "the authentic voice of rock'n'roll as it was originally conceived: brutal, bad-ass, and utterly unapologetic." ..... It doesn't get any more positive than that.  So, I'm not sure why you have your panties in a bunch and insist on trashing Mick.  But hey - whatever turns you on, I guess.  *shrugs*

i'm not bashing mick. i'm assessing his article. i've never met the man and couldnt make a judgement on him.

I admitted it was in parts positive; i dont see why you need to emphasise that, i never said it wasnt. I said it was condescending and snide, which it clearly is. And yet you decided not to comment on that part of my post. From that i'd guess you're one of those people who only argues against what they want to without actually interacting with someone.

Feel free to prove me wrong. But if all you're going to do is continue to create a wickerman argument then i'd ask you not to bother.

[Kov]

Wether or not the article is condescending and snide, he manages to hit the nail on the head this time.

The interesting thing is that all the negative stuff he lists in the second and third paragraph turns to praise in the context of speaking of GNR.  It's not "who did all that shit" - it's "who can get away with them".

[MrSnake]

Drumming up interest for his new book. Build 'em up and knock 'em down. Classic Birtish journalism.

[deadxsouth]

Stopped readin the second he mentioned not ruling out the possibility of a reunion.. Some people just dont get the fact that its not about the money for Axl at this point, and I guess they never will

[dman1991]

Madison, you know we can agree with what Mick Wall says yet still hate him at the same time?

[madison]

Madison, you know we can agree with what Mick Wall says yet still hate him at the same time?

But why would you “hate” Mick?  Do you know him?  What did he do to you personally? 

Oh wait – that’s right, you don't know him.   You “hate” him solely because you think Axl doesn’t like him – based on GITR.  And in your world, if Axl says the sky is purple, then the sky must be purple, and you mustn't offer an objective opinion. Afterall, if you dared express an original thought that – heaven forbid – didn’t mesh with Axl’s opinion, then you just wouldn’t be a real fan, right? ....*sigh* ..  It’s a shame there are fans that think this way.  Believe it or not – you can disagree with Axl’s views once in a while and still be a fan.

In this article, Mick was very positive toward Axl.  Yet, some people refuse to acknowledge it and continue to paint him as the “evil journalist.”  It’s kind of sad.   

[axlrose4eva]

Well, 2Na - I guess you're one of those people who will pointlessly bash Mick no matter what he writes.  This article was positive: Mick urges people to see GNR and says Axl still has "the authentic voice of rock'n'roll as it was originally conceived: brutal, bad-ass, and utterly unapologetic." ..... It doesn't get any more positive than that.  So, I'm not sure why you have your panties in a bunch and insist on trashing Mick.  But hey - whatever turns you on, I guess.  *shrugs*

Oh please tell me this isnt Madison from mygnr.... please please.. I would die of laughter if its her. Axls rant on her is seriously the funniest thing do happen on  a gnr forum. Carma is a mother fucker!

[Tronx]

Oh please tell me this isnt Madison from mygnr.... please please.. I would die of laughter if its her. Axls rant on her is seriously the funniest thing do happen on  a gnr forum. Carma is a mother fucker!

 

[dman1991]

But why would you “hate” Mick?  Do you know him?  What did he do to you personally? 

Oh wait – that’s right, you don't know him.   You “hate” him solely because you think Axl doesn’t like him – based on GITR.  And in your world, if Axl says the sky is purple, then the sky must be purple, and you mustn't offer an objective opinion. Afterall, if you dared express an original thought that – heaven forbid – didn’t mesh with Axl’s opinion, then you just wouldn’t be a real fan, right? ....*sigh* ..  It’s a shame there are fans that think this way.  Believe it or not – you can disagree with Axl’s views once in a while and still be a fan.

In this article, Mick was very positive toward Axl.  Yet, some people refuse to acknowledge it and continue to paint him as the “evil journalist.”  It’s kind of sad.   

But I dont understand, If I like everything about Axl, and am so pro Axl, shouldnt I like Mick Wall for being pro Axl? Cant I agree with him yet still not be a fan of his work, or how he writes? WTF does me knowing him have to do with anything?

Please dont try and tell me how I think, I've offered my fair deal of con Axl points, I've been banned from HTGTH for it, and I know he is not perfect. I dont come here to bitch about him or try to uncover little insignificant bullshit that really doesnt mean shit in my own life and reality. I like coming here to talk about setlists, make fun of Horsey, debate in the green room, and give as many hits to this site in helping them and my favorite band gain popularity. If I wanna hear unfounded speculative bullshit drivel (referring to your opinion, or "educated observations" on Axl's status with a ticketmaster/livenation tour) I will go to your alma mater.
 
You seem to love every aspect of the business but the music itself, and its really sad. Honestly, if Axl tried ban the word Slash from the english dictionary, I could give a shit less, that is between them. I will still enjoy what they both have to offer.

And a BIG

[dman1991]

Like honestly, WTF were you trying to do with that whole T-shirt thing? You say you are a fan, yet defend work that only damages the band, the people who love band, and fuels the already negative image the general public has of the demented and crazy Axl Rose. On top of this, the "digging" (by digging i mean talking to people on the internet) you did uncovered irrelevant bullshit that is not able to be verified, put peoples jobs in jeopardy, as well as give people the perception that Axl Rose kicks slash fans out of concerts, though he has probably played over a hundred concerts without the rule you speak of. Is it not the right of security to remove anyone from the venue who has plans to disrupt the performance?

Please keep your bullshit out of here, the people here are not here because CD.com was the first thing to pop up in their google search.

[zombux]

Oh please tell me this isnt Madison from mygnr.... please please.. I would die of laughter if its her. Axls rant on her is seriously the funniest thing do happen on  a gnr forum. Carma is a mother fucker!