[reply][reply]Or people who just happened to enjoy the book.
Exactly. So I’ll ask again…who are these people?[/reply]
I enjoyed the book.
I would give it 5 stars.
It’s an a-hole and vulgar thing to say about one’s ex-wife, but “tell all” autobiographies tend to go hand in hand with a-holism, so I don’t think that discounts the book itself.[/reply]
Right? It’s a rock biography. Cowboy up, ya nancys. Alice Cooper’s autobiography describes how he used to jack off into jelly donuts and feed them to his sister.
[reply]Or people who just happened to enjoy the book.
Exactly. So I’ll ask again…who are these people?[/reply]
I enjoyed it as well, i’d probably give it 5 stars but wouldn’t be arsed writing a review or posting it on Amazon to attract other people into reading it. I’m sure people give 5 stars to all sorts of books that aren’t exactly wholesome fun, biographies of dictators, accounts of survival of horrific events. You’ve got personal experience of the events in the book and of the subject of the book, so it’d be impossible for you to approach it in the same way as someone who’s just interested to read about Al’s life, i suppose… as made up as elements/major portions may be.
I was just looking for an entertaining read, an while he does and says some horrible stuff, i thought it was a good book. If someone wrote a book about their life that crossed over with my own experiences and told lies about it, then i’d be annoyed as well, definitely, but as a fan and casual observer i didn’t have any issue with his bullshit. I could just roll my eyes and move on.
[reply][reply][reply]Or people who just happened to enjoy the book.
Exactly. So I’ll ask again…who are these people?[/reply]
I enjoyed the book.
I would give it 5 stars.
It’s an a-hole and vulgar thing to say about one’s ex-wife, but “tell all” autobiographies tend to go hand in hand with a-holism, so I don’t think that discounts the book itself.[/reply]
Right? It’s a rock biography. Cowboy up, ya nancys. Alice Cooper’s autobiography describes how he used to jack off into jelly donuts and feed them to his sister.[/reply]
That’s not what I meant. I was referring to the fact that Neil Strauss has ghostwritten seamy memoirs and autobiographies for Marilyn Manson, Motley Crue, Dave Navarro, and Jenna Jameson. So, if someone really adores Neil Strauss’ ghostwriting, then I can see why they’d also love Al’s autobiography.
With FEW exceptions, all celebrity autobiographies are “ghost written”. Just because some chump writes songs about drugs or hits a baseball or played Jesus in a movie doesn’t mean he knows how to write and assemble a readable book (nor want to). The books are collaborations with skilled writers, editors, etc. and the actual “storyteller”.
Neil Strauss is one of the best at this and anyone immersed in the rock autobiography genre knows his stuff and probably admires it.
To say that you garnered some insight into who these reviewers are because one of them is a fan of Neil Strauss is about as relative as explaining why a bunch of people liked Fight Club because one of the reviewers was a big fan of Quentin Tarrantino.
Can you imagine if it wasn’t ghost-written? We’d get a book where the first 10 pages are in giant letters written in crayon and the remaining pages are either blank or speckled with blood, boogers, and/or feces.
Cowboy up, ya nancys. Alice Cooper’s autobiography describes how he used to jack off into jelly donuts and feed them to his sister.
The doughnut thing happened when Cooper was still a kid…not when he was a married adult. Allegedly.
As for ‘cowboying up’, as much as I detest that term…as if cowboys are more upstanding than anyone else…how about just speaking the truth and not embellishing it for the sake of selling more books. Gross exaggerations and lies are anything “cowboying up”.
With FEW exceptions, all celebrity autobiographies are “ghost written”. Just because some chump writes songs about drugs or hits a baseball or played Jesus in a movie doesn’t mean he knows how to write and assemble a readable book (nor want to). The books are collaborations with skilled writers, editors, etc. and the actual “storyteller”.
Neil Strauss is one of the best at this and anyone immersed in the rock autobiography genre knows his stuff and probably admires it.
To say that you garnered some insight into who these reviewers are because one of them is a fan of Neil Strauss is about as relative as explaining why a bunch of people liked Fight Club because one of the reviewers was a big fan of Quentin Tarrantino.
So, in your book, someone’s obvious enjoyment of tell-all rock memoirs doesn’t explain why they might like another tell-all rock memoir? Huh, OK.
I don’t understand what about it is full of “lies” maybe exaggeration’s and how would you know?I mean, I know you were in the band around cold life or whatever but that’s maybe one chapter n the book.and the thing about that not being his daughter she looks just like him circa ‘revenge’ video but you know,with boobs and 90’s piercings
I don’t understand what about it is full of “lies” maybe exaggeration’s and how would you know?I mean, I know you were in the band around cold life or whatever but that’s maybe one chapter n the book.and the thing about that not being his daughter she looks just like him circa ‘revenge’ video but you know,with boobs and 90’s piercings
It’s true that I wasn’t around after early '84 but nearly everything in the book that pertains to the time I was around is patently false. I must assume the rest of the book, based on what I and others know, follows suit. Throw in a few alien abductions, an anecdote about defecating in the fountain outside the Beverly Hilton, a fish story about running away and being at the Chicago Democratic Convention riots at the age of 9 and it’s obvious the rest of the book is nothing but a series of ridiculous tall-tales.
Entertaining? Kinda. Funny? Depends. Honest? Only a fool would think so.
It’s a fucking “rock-bio” about Al Jourgensen. If you butthurt hippies went into it thinking it was going to be full of ultra-PC nonsense that’s been watered down to not offend anyone you’re retarded.
I imagine some of you as those weird kids who at age 4 are still being breastfed. How do you make it through day to day life with how easily offended and outraged you are?
EDIT: And you’d have to be almost equally retarded if you believed everything in the book was true. It’s full of blatant, cringe-worthy bullshit.
Can you imagine if it wasn’t ghost-written? We’d get a book where the first 10 pages are in giant letters written in crayon and the remaining pages are either blank or speckled with blood, boogers, and/or feces.
“My name am AL me maked the rockn roll fuk all u mutherfuks n go on my dog’s spacebooks page!!! The end.”
It’s a fucking “rock-bio” about Al Jourgensen. If you butthurt hippies went into it thinking it was going to be full of ultra-PC nonsense that’s been watered down to not offend anyone you’re retarded.
I imagine some of you as those weird kids who at age 4 are still being breastfed. How do you make it through day to day life with how easily offended and outraged you are?
EDIT: And you’d have to be almost equally retarded if you believed everything in the book was true. It’s full of blatant, cringe-worthy bullshit.
I don’t think anyone is complaining about being offended, especially me. There was a lot of craziness that happened that I was party to myself. Honestly, Al was quite tame when I was associated with the band mostly because he kept bringing his girlfriends on tour with him and they kept him in line. Two other guys were married. Only Brad & I were single and unchaperoned, so to speak and nobody spent more time partying than he and I. Hell, I was a ex-sailor who’d been in bar fights from California to Italy before I ever met Al.
I’m only questioning the authenticity of the book. It would probably be a much better read if he’d actually just stuck to what really happened.
I’m only questioning the authenticity of the book. It would probably be a much better read if he’d actually just stuck to what really happened.
Yeah, and I think Atom’s point and that made by many of us who actually enjoyed the book is that . . . this is AL’S VERSION of what happened. He was effed up and on a billion drugs. He remembers what he wants to and probably conveniently forgot some other stuff. These things took place 30 years ago. I don’t trust my own memory from 5 years ago, let alone nitpicky details from 20-30 years back.
I have not heard from ANYONE who takes this book to be a reporting of “facts”. Everyone, even the most rabid Jourgephiles, takes it with a grain of salt and likes it for what it is.
People who feel misrepresented in the book would be well off to offer their time to be interviewed or write an article to “clear up” things from their side of the story instead of just saying how everything is all lies. Depending on the particular story of details, it’s possible no one would care, but at least it would be a more rational response to grievances stemming from misrepresentation.
[reply]I’m only questioning the authenticity of the book. It would probably be a much better read if he’d actually just stuck to what really happened.
Yeah, and I think Atom’s point and that made by many of us who actually enjoyed the book is that . . . this is AL’S VERSION of what happened. He was effed up and on a billion drugs. He remembers what he wants to and probably conveniently forgot some other stuff. These things took place 30 years ago. I don’t trust my own memory from 5 years ago, let alone nitpicky details from 20-30 years back.
I have not heard from ANYONE who takes this book to be a reporting of “facts”. Everyone, even the most rabid Jourgephiles, takes it with a grain of salt and likes it for what it is.
People who feel misrepresented in the book would be well off to offer their time to be interviewed or write an article to “clear up” things from their side of the story instead of just saying how everything is all lies. Depending on the particular story of details, it’s possible no one would care, but at least it would be a more rational response to grievances stemming from misrepresentation.[/reply]
Great points, Gunnar. Guess we’ll get some other POV’s when the Wax Trax! documentary comes out.
[reply]It’s a fucking “rock-bio” about Al Jourgensen. If you butthurt hippies went into it thinking it was going to be full of ultra-PC nonsense that’s been watered down to not offend anyone you’re retarded.
I imagine some of you as those weird kids who at age 4 are still being breastfed. How do you make it through day to day life with how easily offended and outraged you are?
EDIT: And you’d have to be almost equally retarded if you believed everything in the book was true. It’s full of blatant, cringe-worthy bullshit.
I don’t think anyone is complaining about being offended, especially me. There was a lot of craziness that happened that I was party to myself. Honestly, Al was quite tame when I was associated with the band mostly because he kept bringing his girlfriends on tour with him and they kept him in line. Two other guys were married. Only Brad & I were single and unchaperoned, so to speak and nobody spent more time partying than he and I. Hell, I was a ex-sailor who’d been in bar fights from California to Italy before I ever met Al.
I’m only questioning the authenticity of the book. It would probably be a much better read if he’d actually just stuck to what really happened.[/reply]
Wasn’t directed towards you. But some people do seem to be offended over the fact that Al came in his girlfriend’s mouth like 30+ years ago or that Al’s bio contains some of his offensive and often ridiculous opinions.
I don’t know what really went on and I don’t take this book as the absolute truth. I take it for what it is and in spite of that, or maybe even because of it, I really enjoyed it. It definitely exceeded my expectations. It’s the first thing he’s put his name on in years that I’ve liked. It’s entertaining. If I wanted something profound I sure as hell wouldn’t have picked up this book expecting it.
[reply]I’m only questioning the authenticity of the book. It would probably be a much better read if he’d actually just stuck to what really happened.
Yeah, and I think Atom’s point and that made by many of us who actually enjoyed the book is that . . . this is AL’S VERSION of what happened. He was effed up and on a billion drugs. He remembers what he wants to and probably conveniently forgot some other stuff. These things took place 30 years ago. I don’t trust my own memory from 5 years ago, let alone nitpicky details from 20-30 years back.
I have not heard from ANYONE who takes this book to be a reporting of “facts”. Everyone, even the most rabid Jourgephiles, takes it with a grain of salt and likes it for what it is.
People who feel misrepresented in the book would be well off to offer their time to be interviewed or write an article to “clear up” things from their side of the story instead of just saying how everything is all lies. Depending on the particular story of details, it’s possible no one would care, but at least it would be a more rational response to grievances stemming from misrepresentation.[/reply]
yeah, the book doesnt seem to be any more skewed or have any more bias than CC’s book, just in the other direction.