Learning How to Die

[yankhotelfox]

I'm not about to get into a big thing here. For me its about the music, not the bullshit, especially on the eve of seeing the band in Florence tomorrow night. I feel sorry for you because you couldn't give it more than a paragraph before judging it. Just out of curiosity, what is your favorite book?

Edited July 16, 2006 by yankhotelfox

[aricandover]

I think like the Ryan Adams book that some dude wrote a few years ago, Wilco is too early in its history - to have a book written about them. I think Mr. Kot rushed that out so he could sell a lot of copies around the time of the film.

 

 

I agree with it being way too early for there to be a book about wilco. however, you're a bit off on your assumption that he was trying to sell a lot of copies around the time of the film.

 

 

I Am Trying to Break Your Heart (2002)

 

 

Wilco : Learning How to Die by Greg Kot (Paperback - Jun 15, 2004)

[wheelco]

I agree with it being way too early for there to be a book about wilco. however, you're a bit off on your assumption that he was trying to sell a lot of copies around the time of the film.

I Am Trying to Break Your Heart (2002)

 

 

Wilco : Learning How to Die by Greg Kot (Paperback - Jun 15, 2004)

details, details

 

minutiae

[kidsmoke]

I agree with it being way too early for there to be a book about wilco. however, you're a bit off on your assumption that he was trying to sell a lot of copies around the time of the film.

I Am Trying to Break Your Heart (2002)

 

 

Wilco : Learning How to Die by Greg Kot (Paperback - Jun 15, 2004)

 

 

details, details

 

minutiae

 

No, he's right though......the film and the book weren't particularly close together, and I don't think Kot was trying to ride Sam Jones's coattails....I think it just seemed to Kot that a book about Wilco had an audience at that time, since YHF had heightened their profile.

 

Kot is a fan and I think in that we were lucky, because he wasn't some "Tiger Beat" type outsider trying to make a quick buck...he was a genuine admirer trying to tell their story accurately.

[HighFives]

I'm not about to get into a big thing here. For me its about the music, not the bullshit, especially on the eve of seeing the band in Florence tomorrow night. I feel sorry for you because you couldn't give it more than a paragraph before judging it. Just out of curiosity, what is your favorite book?

Vampire Vultures by John Fahey.

 

 

p.s. I have not read Learning How To Die. not even the first paragraph.

[CalebMac]

Anyone know, rounghly, how many copies the book sold

[lost highway]

I thouroughly enjoyed it, but it is already out of date. Sure we have read interviews, but if Kot had to go around and talk to Leroy Bach, Jim O'Rourke, Mikael Jorgensen and of course Glenn and John the story of making AGIB would have a lot more flesh on it. Then it would also be interesting to see how the band took to, and socially interacts with the new addition of Nels and Pat. Then there is all the stuff to come, the next record. There really cant be a good book started until the bands end, but I do know the next one wont need to rehash Uncle Tupelo, Kot really dug as much up on that as he could.

[Spawn's dad]

I think the hallmark of a good rock and roll book is that it would hold some interest to people other than fans of the band. This is poorly written, poorly sequenced, and poorly fact checked. All in all a very sub par effort.

[caliber66]

Kot double (and in some cases triple) checked his facts.

 

This is the book in which he thinks the carousel in "If That's Alright" is a merry-go-round, right?

[aricandover]

This is the book in which he thinks the carousel in "If That's Alright" is a merry-go-round, right?

 

yes. what a moron.

[candyflosser]

I thought it was a pretty enjoyable read, but only for fans...not overly interesting if you didnt know the material.

 

It certainly encouraged me to seek out more of the Uncle Tupelo music.

[caliber66]

yes. what a moron.

 

Perhaps not a moron, but maybe not the best fact-checker.

[JUDE]

What's the name of this Ryan Adams book everyone keeps mentioning?

 

Also the best part of the Kot book is the part where Jeff gobbles up a bunch of pot brownies and hits on Jay's girlfriend, Jay is such a dickhead.

[caliber66]

Totally.

[ction]

So...when are they making this into a movie?

[Analogman]

What's the name of this Ryan Adams book everyone keeps mentioning?

 

Also the best part of the Kot book is the part where Jeff gobbles up a bunch of pot brownies and hits on Jay's girlfriend, Jay is such a dickhead.

 

Ryan Adams book

[JUDE]

Ryan Adams book

 

Thanks.

[bjorn_skurj]

Gotta watch it with the pot brownies. Hard to gauge their effects when one first ingests them.

[JMal]

I read this book when it first came out. I liked it. A bunch of stuff I didn't know and I thought the most interesting stuff was the uncle tupelo, cicero's days. I'm sure it's all a bit dramatized but, to me that's better than a really boring book.

[Atticus]

I just picked this up yesterday and got half way through it last night. Definitely some interesting background, and I enjoyed some uncle tupelo knowledge I didn't have beforehand, but, er...

 

did anyone else get the feeling that this book was in dire need of an editor? It just seems like on one page you get the most minute detail on what bar some distantly-related band used to play at, and then the next page we're leaping through a season or two of the band's (or band members') development... I don't know, just has a strange feel to it, as though perhaps the book should be about twice as long as it is and better put together.

 

kind of like this post really.

[LouieB]

I bought a copy and have never been able to read it. I like bios and autobios, but for some reason because I know Jeff a little bit, it is like being a voyeur and I just couldn't do it. Nice pics though. I did look at them.

 

LouieB

[welch79]

I enjoyed the book. I felt that Kot's writing wasn't the best; yeah, maybe he could've used an editor. Dramatized? Sure, a little. Interesting? Damn straight. I echo an earlier poster's sentiment: I want to know the current dynamic with the addition of Pat and Nels, the departure of Leroy and the recording process of AGIB.

 

I would recommend it to any Wilco fan.

[yankhotelfox]

I just picked this up yesterday and got half way through it last night. Definitely some interesting background, and I enjoyed some uncle tupelo knowledge I didn't have beforehand, but, er...

 

did anyone else get the feeling that this book was in dire need of an editor? It just seems like on one page you get the most minute detail on what bar some distantly-related band used to play at, and then the next page we're leaping through a season or two of the band's (or band members') development... I don't know, just has a strange feel to it, as though perhaps the book should be about twice as long as it is and better put together.

 

kind of like this post really.

 

I would sum it up by saying that it's an interesting read for any Wilco fan that wants some good background information. It will not win the Pulitzer and does not flow very well. It clearly needs some editing. I concur that more info about the current lineup would be great, however, in 2004 I don't think all that much info was available as to how the two new chaps would fit into Wilco's fabric.

[ction]

I'm reading it now for the second time (the first time is when it came out). I like it. As far as Kot's talent as an author, I have no idea. I do know that I've read some truly horrible books about rock music (a Gina Arnold book about punk rock might possibly be the most awful thing I've ever tried to read), and this is certainly not one of them.

[tugmoose]

Fun little thread going at the flaminglips.com started by Jim DeRogatis, author of Staring At Sound.

 

A while back -- I'm just catching up with reading the board -- the "So Kliph" Q&A thread included the following exchange:

 

 

quote:

Originally posted by The Softest Bullet Ever Shot:

I just finished reading Staring At Sound and I loved it. I couldn't put it down. I was wondering if you have read it or if you pretty much know all there is to know and if so what did you think? Is it correct or does it have a lot of errors?

 

KLIPH: I think it's okay. There are a lot of errors.

 

 

"A lot of errors"? Them's fightin' words, buddy! A search revealed that you made this charge a few other times, too, and it's just about the most insulting thing you could say to someone who takes writing, reporting, and research as seriously as I do, and who worked as hard as I did to do justice to my task as the Flaming Lips' biographer. On one occassion, you made this comment while admitting you'd only read a small portion of the book. That's like someone saying, "I hate the Lips" when all they've ever heard is "Hell's Angels Cracker Factory" (one of your favorite songs, I know -- NOT).

 

Listen: I've seen you and the boys in the band several times since the book was published, and I've asked all of you what you thought of it and if you found any inaccuracies. Some mistakes are, sadly, inevitable with any project that covers 23 years in the lives of four key players, involving interviews with more than 50 people, years of work on my part, and some 120,000 words. The errors that have been pointed out to me, by members of the band or others close to it, I have been happy to own up to and correct on the book's Web site, www.staringatsound.com; this list is in the "Errata" section under "About the Book," but I will include it below to make things even easier and clearer. If there are other mistakes, I am unaware of them, but if they are pointed out to me, and they are valid, I'll correct them, too, on the Web, and in future printings of STARING AT SOUND.

 

I'll add, on a personal note, that in addition to besmirching my reputation with the "lots of errors" charge, you hurt my feelings (boo hoo) -- STARING AT SOUND was a labor of love, which I worked as hard on as anything I've ever done in my life. I stand by every word, am very proud of the book, and will confidently assert that there is NO better recounting of the history, accomplishments, and fascinating personalities of this band. Period. All due respect to THE FEARLESS FREAKS, which is a great movie, but a film cannot possibly encompass 23 years of history, as STARING AT SOUND has done, or dig below the surface image that people chose to show on camera in order to get as close as possible to some version of "the truth" -- one of Wayne's favorite hobbies, as you know, and a pursuit he loves dearly in his inimitable "confronsational" style. Dig as hard as you can for what people really think, and who they really are -- that's Wayne's modus operandi, and he's been doing it, and excelling at it, for four decades. And so have I.

 

Perhaps, dear Kliph, you are confusing my occasional criticisms, opinions, or observations with factual errors or inaccuracies; the book, like any good biography, is a combination of reporting and criticism. Disagreeing with my personal opinions is something I have no problem with; I encourage every single reader of the book to form his or her own opinions and freely disagree with mine. (Some people love "Hell's Angels Cracker Factory," for example, but I am with you: I've never much cared for it.) Lips fans are some of the smartest and best people I have ever met in the music world, and after all, a major theme of the band's entire output is "Think for yourself," so I would expect no less of readers of the book. This business of factual errors, however, is seriously insulting to me, and I'm not letting you or anyone else get away with tossing that around lightly, especially when I have owned up to the handful of mistakes I made. And again, mistakes will ALWAYS happen: Such is life. There are numerous posts, for example, where you've admitted having an "off" show or a bad performance, like recording "War Pigs" at Trent Bell's studio. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone... etc., my friend.

 

In any event, here is the list of errors posted at staringatsound.com; the one thing I am not reprinting here is a letter posted on the Web from former Warner Bros. exec Jeff Gold, whom I characterized in the book (based on thorough reporting and three sources) as the Lips' biggest enemy at the label, someone who argued to drop the band several times. Jeff contacted me and disagreed strongly with that characterization, so in the interest of fairness, I've posted his missive on my site. Try to tell every side of the story -- that's basic journalism. But there ARE some facts that are just facts, some things where there simply aren't "two sides" to the story. Of my factual errors, the one I regret the most is not really a mistake as much as an omission -- it's the fact that I did not point out just how much bass Michael played in the studio on the later albums. This was because he and I spent hours (literally) talking about a subject that is very important to him, and which has been under-represented in all other writing about the band: Just how big a role he plays in co-engineering (and, really, co-producing) the recordings along with Dave Fridmann. In emphasizing his importance in the studio, I inadvertently shorted his contributions as a bassist; mea culpa, and I've pointed this out. Michael, in the end, seemed happy with the book, however (as were Wayne and Steven); I would refer you, in Michael's case, to an excellent (and rare, for the quiet Mr. Ivins) interview that is posted at http://www.looserecord.com/Interview_Indv/...dv.php?docid=67.

 

OK, here are the mistakes I am aware of, from my Web site:

 

As is perhaps inevitable with any project of the depth and length of Staring at Sound, I made a couple of regrettable mistakes, and I am man enough to admit them. The Flaming Lips never read a word of the book until it was in print, so the following errors in chronology, comprehension, or sheer bone-headedness are entirely my own fault. They will be corrected in future printings.