Danny Fields on Francie Schwartz
Nowhere Man
>
> Excerpted from Fields' new bio on Linda, due out next month:
>
> "When Paul returned to London, it was to a house recently vacated by
> Jane and
> with John and his new love, Yoko Ono, as semi-permanent guests. There
> was
> one other DE FACTO resident - American writer Francie Schwartz with whom
> Paul
> had been having a tempestuous sexual relationship.
>
> He was planning to invite Linda over to stay and had to ask Francie to
> leave.
> She was devastated. "He just looked at me as though he was
> embarrassed, and
> I got the hell out of there," she says."
>
> Later on Fields describes Francie as "volatile."
VERY interesting. Not having heard of this author (Danny Fields) can I
ask th more learned folks if he is well known/respected in journalistic
circles?
Willz
John Doe
"When Paul returned to London, it was to a house recently vacated by
Jane and
with John and his new love, Yoko Ono, as semi-permanent guests. There
was
one other DE FACTO resident - American writer Francie Schwartz with whom
Paul
had been having a tempestuous sexual relationship.
He was planning to invite Linda over to stay and had to ask Francie to
leave.
She was devastated. "He just looked at me as though he was
embarrassed, and
I got the hell out of there," she says."
Later on Fields describes Francie as "volatile."
Johnny Doe
fabella
In article <389EE4F1...@doe.none>, John Doe
knowledge of the
"DEFACTO" sentence, This is from the tabloid Daily Mail.
We are going to discuss it out of hearing range of rmb.
Johnny Doe? I gotcher Danny Fields swingin' - fuggeddaboudit.
Francie
http://sites.netscape.net/fabest/morequotes
<B>Old Brown Shoe Part 3</B> is up!
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Jennifer DeBernardis
Nowhere Man <w.mulholl...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:389DC8D9...@btinternet.com...
> VERY interesting. Not having heard of this author (Danny Fields) can I
> ask th more learned folks if he is well known/respected in journalistic
> circles?
Danny Fields was with magazines like Datebook and '16' back in the '60s and
befriended Linda after she successfully photographed the Rolling Stones
while he and his photographer missed the boat, so to speak. ;-) He has
authored/edited at least one book that I know of, "Who's Your Fave Rave?",
with Randi Reisfeld, a compilation of articles from '16' magazine. He
appears in the excellent portrait of Linda's photographic career, "Behind
the Lens", which has aired worldwide and currently appears in her travelling
"Sixties" exhibit. In addition to his work in rock journalism, Fields has
done some managing of groups, including Iggy Pop and The Ramones, if my
memory serves. He also sits on the voting/nomination committee for the Rock
and Roll Hall of Fame. A very longtime friend of Linda McCartney's, he was
one of the speakers at her New York memorial service in June, 1998.
This quote provided by John Doe comes from a serialization of his new Linda
McCartney bio running in the Daily Mail this week.
Jennifer
Mister Charlie
quite interesting, actually...when I was a kid I was stuck reading 16
magazine since there were no other 'respectable' music papers about
(this was pre-Rolling Stone, pre-Creem, etc.)...so I had a teenybopper
girls mag. But it had pictures (which went on my wall) and stuff about
the stars I took as gospel until I got a bit more discerning (last
year)....it would be intersting to see his compilation book. Ah
well...thanks....
--
--------------------------------------------
"...I've had a drink or two and I don't care..."
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
paramucho
>Johnny Doe
Welcome to RMB John Doe.
Ian
D 28IF
LOL! You're *so* damn entertaining!
Fields will tell you anything you want to hear to get you off the phone.
Assuming, of course, that what you say is correct to begin with.
So, missed the boat again, aye? *Still* not getting your rightful due, your
place in Beatles history as you see fit.
I'd say it's that damn McCartney's fault, but you've spent the last 6 months or
so going on and on about how Paul doesn't like Fields because the Linda bio
says things he doesn't like, including mentioning you, and he and Fields have
had a falling out over this. Course, you neglect to mention that Fields was
never a close friend of Paul's to begin with. Guess you've got to save face.
Good luck!
Tom
>>
>> Excerpted from Fields' new bio on Linda, due out next month:
>>
>> "When Paul returned to London, it was to a house recently vacated by
>> Jane and
>> with John and his new love, Yoko Ono, as semi-permanent guests. There
>> was
>> one other DE FACTO resident - American writer Francie Schwartz with whom
>> Paul
>> had been having a tempestuous sexual relationship.
>>
>> He was planning to invite Linda over to stay and had to ask Francie to
>> leave.
>> She was devastated. "He just looked at me as though he was
>> embarrassed, and
>> I got the hell out of there," she says."
>>
>> Later on Fields describes Francie as "volatile."
>
>
>
>VERY interesting. Not having heard of this author (Danny Fields) can I
>ask th more learned folks if he is well known/respected in journalistic
>circles?
He said we gotta go, gotta go to Idaho, but we can't go surfing cause it's
20 below.
The man also played a part in bringing the Stooges to the world.
Jennifer DeBernardis
Mister Charlie <cc...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> Thank you Jennifer for a very detailed bio on Danny Fields. That is
> quite interesting, actually...when I was a kid I was stuck reading 16
> magazine since there were no other 'respectable' music papers about
> (this was pre-Rolling Stone, pre-Creem, etc.)...so I had a teenybopper
> girls mag. But it had pictures (which went on my wall) and stuff about
> the stars I took as gospel until I got a bit more discerning (last
> year)....it would be intersting to see his compilation book. Ah
> well...thanks....
Mister C, I'd suggest you check out the book the next time you are in your
neighborhood bookstore. Sentimentality made me buy it, but it's very short
on Fab content, with only 4 pages, I think. Begins with Elvis and ends
with the likes of Scott Baio, Leif Garrett and John Travolta.
I wish I still had my old 16 magazines because some of the pictures I
remember from their Beatles' articles I've never seen anywhere
else--particularly pictures of J,P,G & R with Neil and Mal at different
touring locations.
Jennifer
afr
> >From: fabella waronsex...@yahoo.com.invalid
>
> >In article <389EE4F1...@doe.none>, John Doe
> ><jo...@doe.none> wrote:
> >>Excerpted from Fields' new bio on Linda, due out next month:
> >>
> >>"When Paul returned to London, it was to a house recently
> >vacated by
> >>Jane and
> >>with John and his new love, Yoko Ono, as semi-permanent guests.
> >There
> >>was
> >>one other DE FACTO resident - American writer Francie Schwartz
> >with whom
> >>Paul
> >>had been having a tempestuous sexual relationship.
> >>
> >>He was planning to invite Linda over to stay and had to ask
> >Francie to
> >>leave.
> >> She was devastated. "He just looked at me as though he was
> >>embarrassed, and
> >>I got the hell out of there," she says."
> >>
> >>Later on Fields describes Francie as "volatile."
> >>
> >>Johnny Doe
> >>
> >>
> >I just spoke to Danny on the phone this morning. He has no
> >knowledge of the
> >"DEFACTO" sentence, This is from the tabloid Daily Mail.
francie,
Just the one sentence?
thanks,
a.
Nowhere Man
> He said we gotta go, gotta go to Idaho, but we can't go surfing cause it's
> 20 below.
>
> The man also played a part in bringing the Stooges to the world.
seems cool to me, wheeeee.
Willz
Nowhere Man
>
> Nowhere Man <w.mulholl...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:389DC8D9...@btinternet.com...
>
> > ask th more learned folks if he is well known/respected in journalistic
> > circles?
>
> befriended Linda after she successfully photographed the Rolling Stones
> while he and his photographer missed the boat, so to speak. ;-) He has
> authored/edited at least one book that I know of, "Who's Your Fave Rave?",
> with Randi Reisfeld, a compilation of articles from '16' magazine. He
> appears in the excellent portrait of Linda's photographic career, "Behind
> the Lens", which has aired worldwide and currently appears in her travelling
> "Sixties" exhibit. In addition to his work in rock journalism, Fields has
> done some managing of groups, including Iggy Pop and The Ramones, if my
> memory serves. He also sits on the voting/nomination committee for the Rock
> and Roll Hall of Fame. A very longtime friend of Linda McCartney's, he was
> one of the speakers at her New York memorial service in June, 1998.
>
> This quote provided by John Doe comes from a serialization of his new Linda
> McCartney bio running in the Daily Mail this week.
Jennifer,
thanks for the above info.
I have since looked through my Daily Mail (I buy 3 or 4 newspapers each
day) to find the serialisation.....very interesting. Part 2 was in
today's paper, missed part one, must see when next segment is due.
All my best,
Will
Jennifer DeBernardis
Nowhere Man <w.mulh...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> I have since looked through my Daily Mail (I buy 3 or 4 newspapers each
> day) to find the serialisation.....very interesting. Part 2 was in
> today's paper, missed part one, must see when next segment is due.
Would you care to give us a few highlights of Part 2? Pretty please? :-)
Jennifer
Jamie
> Jennifer,
>
> thanks for the above info.
>
> I have since looked through my Daily Mail (I buy 3 or 4 newspapers each
> day) to find the serialisation.....very interesting. Part 2 was in
> today's paper, missed part one, must see when next segment is due.
Tomorrow. Or technically, today, as it's already Tuesday in Britain.
--
~Jamie
Jamie
> >Excerpted from Fields' new bio on Linda, due out next month:
> >
> >"When Paul returned to London, it was to a house recently vacated by
> >Jane and
> >with John and his new love, Yoko Ono, as semi-permanent guests. There
> >was
> >one other DE FACTO resident - American writer Francie Schwartz with whom
> >Paul
> >had been having a tempestuous sexual relationship.
> >
> >He was planning to invite Linda over to stay and had to ask Francie to
> >leave.
> > She was devastated. "He just looked at me as though he was
> >embarrassed, and
> >I got the hell out of there," she says."
> >
> >Later on Fields describes Francie as "volatile."
> >
> >Johnny Doe
>
> If I interpret this excerpt correctly then I read:
>
> John and Yoko were semi-permanent guests at Paul's house. Now, this would
> seem to confirm what Francie has been saying all along. Perhaps those who
> continue to maintain that John and Yoko stayed Paul's house for only three
> days will now send barrages of e-mail baiting Danny Fields instead.
How does Fields' words in any way change Yoko's quote? You callin' Yoko a liar,
Ian? I notice you never had a response to it: "Yes, John and I stayed at Paul's
place a couple of nights. We had fun." You say below that Fields wasn't there;
are you, as a "scholar," going to take Fields' words over Yoko's? Now that
would be very interesting.
> Fields also confirms that Francie was a de facto resident at Paul's house.
And Francie just denied that sentence here on this newsgroup.
> That provides further confirmation that Francie was more than just a girl
> friend, which some people out here seem to maintain, but was permanently at
> Paul's house. And this at the same time as John and Yoko were in residence.
You have a funny notion of "permanently." You also have a funny notion of
"girlfriend."
> Fields says that Francie had a tempestuous sexual relationship with Paul.
> Now, if that's true, then that confirms what Francie has said all along:
> that she supressed some of the detail and definitely did not want to write
> a book that relied principally on the sexual detail.
LOL, you slay me, Ian. Fields uses the term "tempestuous sexual relationship"
in passing, and you interpret that as Fields saying that Francie's book didn't
rely on sexual detail. I see you now don't even need someone to actually
mention a book to interpret their opinions on it!
> If Fields' claim is
> false, then I guess he's trying to beat up the salacious content his book.
> There are, I imagine, only two witnesses in this matter who can comment
> sensibly.
According to Francie, anything about her relationship with Paul was something
Fields got straight from her.
That's quite interesting, as Fields writes that Paul asked Francie to leave,
whereas Francie has always contended that
she left of her own accord.
> As to the conversation between McCartney and Schwartz at the end of their
> relationship, I would imagine only two people were present: McCartney and
> Schwartz. I'd wait for confirmation from McCartney before I made up my
> mind on this point.
Why start now?
--
~Jamie
afr
> According to Francie, anything about her relationship with Paul was something
> Fields got straight from her.
> That's quite interesting, as Fields writes that Paul asked Francie to
<snip>
can you believe we are actually arguing over this?!
any of us?
Modern technology has created a 21st century discourse/hobby that is
something between collaborative gossip columnist and Roman
(GRoman?) amphitheatre! WHO WILL CLEAN UP THE BRAIN ROT?! (GRrrrrroman,
will you? Get the bucket then!) The vortex is s u c k i n g u p o u r
g r e y m a t t e r.
.
a & r
Nowhere Man
I will save the copies this week of my Daily Mail and then hopefully
post a few choice selections at the end of week/weekend.......work is
hectic at present.
Best,
Will
Jennifer DeBernardis wrote:
>
> Nowhere Man <w.mulh...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> > I have since looked through my Daily Mail (I buy 3 or 4 newspapers each
> > day) to find the serialisation.....very interesting. Part 2 was in
> > today's paper, missed part one, must see when next segment is due.
>
sue
According to the Amazon book site, the book should be released here
(USA) on March 1.
Mister Charlie
Morrison. Plus I can't help but think some of the magazines now would
be worth a few bucks.
paramucho
>
>"When Paul returned to London, it was to a house recently vacated by
>Jane and
>with John and his new love, Yoko Ono, as semi-permanent guests. There
>was
>one other DE FACTO resident - American writer Francie Schwartz with whom
>Paul
>had been having a tempestuous sexual relationship.
>
>He was planning to invite Linda over to stay and had to ask Francie to
>leave.
> She was devastated. "He just looked at me as though he was
>embarrassed, and
>I got the hell out of there," she says."
>
>Later on Fields describes Francie as "volatile."
>
>Johnny Doe
If I interpret this excerpt correctly then I read:
John and Yoko were semi-permanent guests at Paul's house. Now, this would
seem to confirm what Francie has been saying all along. Perhaps those who
continue to maintain that John and Yoko stayed Paul's house for only three
days will now send barrages of e-mail baiting Danny Fields instead.
Fields also confirms that Francie was a de facto resident at Paul's house.
That provides further confirmation that Francie was more than just a girl
friend, which some people out here seem to maintain, but was permanently at
Paul's house. And this at the same time as John and Yoko were in residence.
Fields says that Francie had a tempestuous sexual relationship with Paul.
Now, if that's true, then that confirms what Francie has said all along:
that she supressed some of the detail and definitely did not want to write
a book that relied principally on the sexual detail. If Fields' claim is
false, then I guess he's trying to beat up the salacious content his book.
There are, I imagine, only two witnesses in this matter who can comment
sensibly.
As to the conversation between McCartney and Schwartz at the end of their
relationship, I would imagine only two people were present: McCartney and
Schwartz. I'd wait for confirmation from McCartney before I made up my
mind on this point. In any case, McCartney has a history of suppressing
details of his relationships before Linda came into his life.
Regarding the information that Francie is "volatile". Wow. What a shock
that was. I would never have guessed... A real revelation.
Ian
D 28IF
>
>If I interpret this excerpt correctly then I read:
>
>John and Yoko were semi-permanent guests at Paul's house. Now, this would
>seem to confirm what Francie has been saying all along. Perhaps those who
>continue to maintain that John and Yoko stayed Paul's house for only three
>days will now send barrages of e-mail baiting Danny Fields instead.
Actually, it seems to me it means Fields used Francie's word for how long John
& Yoko stayed. Hardly serves as confirmation.
Yoko is quoted as saying it was only a few days. Who you gonna believe -
Francie or Yoko? What a conundrum.
paramucho
If you think that's a conundrum, then I suggest you keep away from the
Beatle literature. It's full of apparently irreconcilable statements.
Hundreds of them.
These things can usually only be sorted out with a direct question to the
parties which notes the conflict. Usually some logical explanation is found.
Ian
D 28IF
>John
>>& Yoko stayed. Hardly serves as confirmation.
>>
>>Yoko is quoted as saying it was only a few days. Who you gonna believe -
>>Francie or Yoko? What a conundrum.
>
>If you think that's a conundrum, then I suggest you keep away from the
>Beatle literature. It's full of apparently irreconcilable statements.
>Hundreds of them.
Absolutely true, Ian.
>These things can usually only be sorted out with a direct question to the
>parties which notes the conflict. Usually some logical explanation is found.
>
>
>Ian
>
>
But as you've pointed out, you'll hold your opinion on who you believe for when
you hear Paul comment on it.
Also, I don't think a direct question to parties involved would answer it, as
we're witnessing with Derek, Jamie and others debating John & Paul's
songwriting credits.
d.
afr <a...@efn.org> wrote:
> Modern technology has created a 21st century discourse/hobby that is
> something between collaborative gossip columnist and Roman
> (GRoman?) amphitheatre! WHO WILL CLEAN UP THE BRAIN ROT?! (GRrrrrroman,
> will you? Get the bucket then!) The vortex is s u c k i n g u p o u r
> g r e y m a t t e r.
what are you on and where can i get some
--
"The wonder of it all, baby." - Paul McCartney
northcut at mindspring.com
Record Lady
> Paul had been having a tempestuous sexual relationship.
like, duh, what other kind is there? *flips hair* cuz ya wanna know why?
Diana
<snip>
>If I interpret this excerpt correctly then I read:
>John and Yoko were semi-permanent guests at Paul's house. Now,
> this would seem to confirm what Francie has been saying all along.
>Perhaps those who continue to maintain that John and Yoko
>stayed Paul's house for only three days will now send barrages
>of e-mail baiting Danny Fields instead.
Ian, I trust you will follow your own advice. Next time I quote firsthand
sources about Yoko, barrage Jack Douglas, Julian Lennon, Cynthia Lennon, Julia
Baird and the others with e-mail rather than argue with me about what firsthand
eyewitnesses have said.
- - - - -
"There is nothing to writing. All you do is sit down
at a typewriter and open a vein." - Red Smith
paramucho
>
><snip>
>
>>If I interpret this excerpt correctly then I read:
>
>>John and Yoko were semi-permanent guests at Paul's house. Now,
>> this would seem to confirm what Francie has been saying all along.
>>Perhaps those who continue to maintain that John and Yoko
>>stayed Paul's house for only three days will now send barrages
>>of e-mail baiting Danny Fields instead.
>
>Ian, I trust you will follow your own advice. Next time I quote firsthand
>sources about Yoko, barrage Jack Douglas, Julian Lennon, Cynthia Lennon, Julia
>Baird and the others with e-mail rather than argue with me about what firsthand
>eyewitnesses have said.
Have I argued with you over the content of what they've said?
Ian
Diana
>>sources about Yoko, barrage Jack Douglas, Julian Lennon, Cynthia Lennon,
>Julia
>>Baird and the others with e-mail rather than argue with me about what
>firsthand
>>eyewitnesses have said.
>
>Have I argued with you over the content of what they've said?
True. You never shared information or added anything constructive to the
conversation. You just argued with me for daring to post direct quotes from
firsthand sources.
paramucho
>>>sources about Yoko, barrage Jack Douglas, Julian Lennon, Cynthia Lennon,
>>Julia
>>>Baird and the others with e-mail rather than argue with me about what
>>firsthand
>>>eyewitnesses have said.
>>
>>Have I argued with you over the content of what they've said?
>
>True. You never shared information or added anything constructive to the
>conversation. You just argued with me for daring to post direct quotes from
>firsthand sources.
To say I *never* shared information or added anything constructive is an
obvious exaggeration. I'm not sure why you wish to raise this subject again,
but your description of my POV is simplistic in the extreme and does not
even come close to representing my position. I think we can spare RMB yet
another round on that subject. It's in Nowhere Land.
The point I was trying to make was that I have rarely raised the actual
testimony of the witnesses you have reported in posts and I certainly haven't
"barraged" you with comments regarding the actual testimony of those witnesses.
You seem to have now accepted that.
Ian
fabella
In article <87natk$lcu$1...@bob.news.rcn.net>, "Jennifer
DeBernardis" <jenn...@erols.com> wrote:
>
>Nowhere Man <w.mulholl...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>news:389DC8D9...@btinternet.com...
>
>> VERY interesting. Not having heard of this author (Danny
Fields) can I
>> ask th more learned folks if he is well known/respected in
journalistic
>> circles?
Danny is not a part of journalistic circles: He is known in
publicity circles. Respect is reserved for people who have
written books or
held jobs with publications such as newspapers and general
interest magazines. He is primarily a publicist.
>
>Danny Fields was with magazines like Datebook and '16' back in
the '60s and
>befriended Linda after she successfully photographed the
Rolling Stones
>while he and his photographer missed the boat, so to speak. ;-)
He has
>authored/edited at least one book that I know of, "Who's Your
Fave Rave?",
>with Randi Reisfeld, a compilation of articles from '16'
magazine.
Jennifer, with all due respect, Danny Fields is *listed as a
co-author* on
WYFR because he wrote many *teen dream* articles which were used
as
promotional items generated by the "launching" of these teen
idols by
record companies, who paid the majority of advertising costs.
Danny himself
has never claimed to be a writer... not in the journalistic
sense.
He
>appears in the excellent portrait of Linda's photographic
career, "Behind
>the Lens", which has aired worldwide and currently appears in
her travelling
>"Sixties" exhibit. In addition to his work in rock journalism,
>
>
>
Having your pitcher taken with a rock star's wife? This *must*
prove the depth
of one's close close friendship... NOT.
Danny Fields has never been published in Rolling Stone. Not as a
writer.
He worked for A&M Records in p.r. in the early 70's -- his desk
was right across
from my sister, who also spent some time in the record business.
Jennifer, this is fascinating. Six months ago, you counted
yourself among
the skeptics as to Danny Fields motivation for making the deal
to write an
authorized "bio" [sic] - and when the press release about his
newly signed
deal for a miniseries set off a week of debate in the Paul
lists. Haven't heard
about that miniseries again, now have you?
Then some of the members began to accuse me of passing their
posts on
to Danny, who was genuinely confused by the extreme conflicts in
the various
stories. Funniest of all, members actually believed their
"information and
ideas" might be used by Danny, quoted without permission. Boo,
Francie! The
"virus" I think CarolJ called me...
As soon as the tabloid serialization started, you write about
the guy as if
he were a candidate for the Pulitzer prize.
Could this possibly have anything to do with the fact that he
leads with the
spicy little item describing my breakup with Paul? He "had to
ask" me to
leave because he'd invited Linda? Gee, I thought you had my
suitcase being
tossed over the front wall... oh, excuse me, no. That was the
renowned Paul
photog, Jorie Gracen.
I think you will find Part 2 singularly lacking in news value.
Nothing more
about your favorite target.
A highlight in Tuesday's piece is Danny's anecdote about Linda
and Paul
asking him for cab fare when they came to visit in New York. An
illustration
of - what? He told me this same anecdote in our taped phone
conversation
of March 3, 1999.
Danny may not be responsible for the exact wording used by the
Mail,
just as Chet Flippo can make a reasonable claim that he is not
responsible
for the STAR's editing of BODY COUNT''s infamous Chapter 8,
which he
plagiarized in 1988 for his unauthorized biog (that's right, a
*bio* is not
how "those who know" refer to a memorialization of a friendship
- a bio
is a record company form) of Paul.
So here we go again. But this time I am ready - thanks to the
baptism of
fire known as Usenet and the lists.
Don't you think you ought to reposition yourself a bit where the
biography
of Lady Linda is concerned?
"Linda was happiest in the kitchen."
Doesn't this bother you a teensy bit? If I were Linda, I might
think of other
rooms in which I might just be a teensy bit happier.
Just a few thoughts. Good morning, Jennifer.
Francie
http://sites.netscape.net/fabest
"Remember."
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
CaroJ11
>"virus" I think CarolJ called me...
I said no such thing; such confusion exists due to internal flaws such as
"such-and-such wrote..." --CarolJ
d.
<waronsex...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
> "Linda was happiest in the kitchen."
>
> Doesn't this bother you a teensy bit? If I were Linda, I might
> think of other rooms in which I might just be a teensy bit happier.
My god, Francie.
Your life must really empty, for you to write something like this.
Mister Charlie
something
> > Fields got straight from her.
> > That's quite interesting, as Fields writes that Paul asked Francie
to
>
> <snip>
>
> can you believe we are actually arguing over this?!
>
> any of us?
>
> something between collaborative gossip columnist and Roman
> (GRoman?) amphitheatre! WHO WILL CLEAN UP THE BRAIN ROT?!
(GRrrrrroman,
> will you? Get the bucket then!) The vortex is s u c k i n g u p o u
r
> g r e y m a t t e r.
>
> a & r
>
>
LOL a&r...right on....we should be using this magnificent technology
for far loftier goals!
so, who do you think was better, Shemp or Curly?
--
--------------------------------------------
"...I've had a stooge or two and I don't care..."
fabella
In article <northcut-36CA21...@news.mindspring.com>,
"d." <nort...@seesig.mindspring.com> wrote:
>In article <02d7e702...@usw-ex0102-013.remarq.com>,
fabella
><waronsex...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> "Linda was happiest in the kitchen."
>>
>> Doesn't this bother you a teensy bit? If I were Linda, I might
>> think of other rooms in which I might just be a teensy bit
happier.
>
>
>My god, Francie.
>
>Your life must really empty, for you to write something like
this.
>
>
>
failure to capitalize "god" tells everyone that she is referring
to Sir
Paul, and not God.
Actually, I believe that those who truly respect Linda for who
she was would say that she was happy in *every room* of the
house.
Of course, we are talking about the very beginning of the
marriage that rocked the world. But even in 1968, I think Linda
might
have been even *happier* in the bedroom or the darkroom or the
living room -- or the bathroom of "She Came In Through The
Bathroom Window" --
Which Linda do you prefer? I think I know.
Francie
http://sites.netscape.net/memoreez
"It's been real." (Ernie Kovacs)
JrnyIfintY
these people don't know you, to bad for them ha ha.
Pretty cool. I like the personal acount I get though. Keep
setting the record stright.
fabella
In article <1d2c5c70...@usw-ex0104-031.remarq.com>,
JrnyIfintY <jrnyifint...@aol.com.invalid> wrote:
>Hey girl I can't belive the shit you have to go through! I guess
>these people don't know you, to bad for them ha ha.
> Pretty cool. I like the personal acount I get though. Keep
>setting the record stright.
>
>
I earned my thick skin in Macca-L, ya know. When I left they
shut down the entire list for a couple days.
My fault, of course. I rilly rocked their world!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA
francie
"It's been real." (Ernie Kovas)
d.northcutt
waronsex...@yahoo.com.invalid wrote on 2/8/00 9:31 AM:
> Fascinating post, from a woman who doesn't realize that her
> failure to capitalize "god" tells everyone that she is referring
> to Sir Paul, and not God.
*eyes to the ceiling*
I do not believe in the Judeo/Christian or any other god, and therefore am
not obligated to capitalize the word "god". Nor am I the one who wrote a
book referring to Paul McCartney as "Him" with a capital "H". You, on the
other hand ...
> Actually, I believe that those who truly respect Linda for who
> she was would say that she was happy in *every room* of the
> house.
That's something you'll have to take up with Mr. Fields then, if his wording
bothers you so much. Note he didn't say she was unhappy in any other room.
That's a projection that *you* made.
> Of course, we are talking about the very beginning of the
> marriage that rocked the world. But even in 1968, I think Linda
> might
> have been even *happier* in the bedroom or the darkroom or the
> living room -- or the bathroom of "She Came In Through The
> Bathroom Window" --
See my comments above. I don't think you even know what could make *you*
happy, let alone Linda, me or anyone else in the world.
> Which Linda do you prefer? I think I know.
The Linda that was alive and vibrant. Which one do you prefer?
- d.
Francie
Everything that happens to anyone who is remotely related to any
Beatle does not also happen to you, d.
I prefer the woman of independent means whose accomplishments
outstripped her attackers efforts to trash her.
Francie
PS Not that there's anything wrong with wanting to be a good cook,
mother, wife, backup, air vocalist keyboard-playing woman with good
pot connections.
--
http://sites.netscape.net/fabest/timemap
If you meet a madman who says that he is a fish
and that we are all fishes, do you take off your
clothes to show him that you do not have fins?
--Milan Kundera, Risibles Amours, 1984
Strabbo
<cc...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>
>LOL a&r...right on....we should be using this magnificent
technology
>for far loftier goals!
>
>
>so, who do you think was better, Shemp or Curly?
>
Come on, Charlie! What could be loftier than listening to people
debate Sir Paul's 30-year-old love life? I'm just facinated by
the folks who won't rest until they get Francie to admit that
she was forcibly ejected from Paul's house in 1968. Come on,
Francie! Just tell them, "Yes, he released the hounds, I was
chased away while he and Linda laughed and threw old pickles at
me." It's not true, but it will give them what they want.
We need to get everyone here in tune with the REAl proper uses
of the Internet, like mp3 trading and pornography!
Oh, and I'd take Curly over Shemp anyday.
MS
Mister Charlie
paramucho
>
>
>> According to Francie, anything about her relationship with Paul was something
>> Fields got straight from her.
>> That's quite interesting, as Fields writes that Paul asked Francie to
>
><snip>
>
>can you believe we are actually arguing over this?!
>
>any of us?
>
>Modern technology has created a 21st century discourse/hobby that is
>something between collaborative gossip columnist and Roman
>(GRoman?) amphitheatre! WHO WILL CLEAN UP THE BRAIN ROT?! (GRrrrrroman,
>will you? Get the bucket then!) The vortex is s u c k i n g u p o u r
>g r e y m a t t e r.
>.
>
>a & r
Leave before it is too late and you too are consumed by this rot
Look on me, with pity, and know, I was once a normal functioning human
just like you....
Ian
d.northcutt
2/8/00 2:22 PM:
> I prefer the woman of independent means whose accomplishments
> outstripped her attackers efforts to trash her.
We agree on that, at least!
> PS Not that there's anything wrong with wanting to be a good cook,
> mother, wife, backup, air vocalist keyboard-playing woman with good
> pot connections.
Quite right! In fact, that sounds like a damned good life to me.
- d.
afr
> Leave before it is too late and you too are consumed by this rot
>
> Look on me, with pity, and know, I was once a normal functioning human
> just like you....
RL LOL!
fabella
In article <B4C5D992.1D89%nort...@spambgone.mindspring.com>,
"d.northcutt" <nort...@spambgone.mindspring.com>
wrote:
My liking what I sensed about Linda, intuitively,
had nothing to do with her marrying the Cute Beatle.
I had a better preview of her marriage than anyone
else but Jane. I didn't want the job he was offering
I rebelled at home and at work and so the morning
after he promised to take me to Scotland as soon as
they finished the lp, he asked me when I was leaving.
I left the following morning all by myself.
I tell ya, d., I am 90% sure that I could have written
a better biography of Linda. In fact, I'll go so far as to
say I would not even have to resort to "Never before
seen interviews with Linda and Paul." to get people
to buy it.
I see a long hard road to self-realization and then death.
Yes it was a great life. Please pay attention. I think
Linda gave 110% and she wouldn't trade her life with
any anonymous wife-mother... ?
There is something respectable in her old-fashioned
values, after a wild wild decade of, well- you know...
Francie
Don Rife
"paramucho" <i...@hammo.com> wrote in message
news:38a279f7...@news.remarq.com...> ><snip>
> >
> >Modern technology has created a 21st century discourse/hobby that is
> >something between collaborative gossip columnist and Roman
> >(GRoman?) amphitheatre! WHO WILL CLEAN UP THE BRAIN ROT?! (GRrrrrroman,
> >will you? Get the bucket then!) The vortex is s u c k i n g u p o u r
> >g r e y m a t t e r.
> >.
> >
> >a & r
>
>
> Look on me, with pity, and know, I was once a normal functioning human
> just like you....
>
>
>
>
It's too late already. afr has been here for 2 or 3 years already.
Don
paramucho
>> mother, wife, backup, air vocalist keyboard-playing woman with good
>> pot connections.
>
>Quite right! In fact, that sounds like a damned good life to me.
And it's a damned good life
to have a wife like...
Honeycomb (woncha be my baby).
Ian
Jennifer DeBernardis
> Jennifer,
>
> I will save the copies this week of my Daily Mail and then hopefully
> post a few choice selections at the end of week/weekend.......work is
> hectic at present.
Thanks all the same, Will, but it's now been transcribed by others and I've
had an opportunity to read it. While I'm sure others would be interested in
reading whatever you are willing to type, please don't bother on my account.
Jennifer
moondog
> > Paul had been having a tempestuous sexual relationship.
>
> like, duh, what other kind is there? *flips hair* cuz ya wanna know why?
You must be one of them "Bad Girls".....my momma done told me bout gurls lahk
yew....
lennon fan
fact that he was A&R man at Elektra Records in the late 60's, and
introduced Jim Morrison to Nico. Jim taught Nico how to write songs, and
these appear on her only Elektra outing, THE MARBLE INDEX (1968) and
Danny is credited on the cover. He also speaks at length about Nico in
NICO-ICON, a wonderful documentary.
fabella
In article
<28383-38...@storefull-248.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
matchmaker, though...
PLEASE NOTE: Jennifer is not desirous of having Tuesday's
serialization piece
posted here. She knows it's a howler. I already posted the
anecdote about Paul/Linda
asking Fields for cab fare... and that's the highlight!
Jennifer DeBernardis
fabella <waronsex...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:02d7e702...@usw-ex0102-013.remarq.com...
> Danny is not a part of journalistic circles: He is known in
> publicity circles. Respect is reserved for people who have
> written books or
> held jobs with publications such as newspapers and general
> interest magazines. He is primarily a publicist.
Will's original question asked if he was highly regarded in journalistic
circles, and I don't think I really answered that one, although I disagree
with you that respect is reserved for ALL people who have written books or
held jobs with publications and newspapers. Some books are trashy and
poorly written and some newspapers aren't fit to use when the toilet paper
runs out. As you go on to say later in your post, Fields did write for
Datebook and '16' and for that reason, deserves some credit for his writing
about pop culture. Many of us grew up with this stuff (heck, even Mr. C
owned up to it!) and remember it fondly.
> Jennifer, with all due respect, Danny Fields is *listed as a
> co-author* on
> WYFR because he wrote many *teen dream* articles which were used
> as
> promotional items generated by the "launching" of these teen
> idols by
> record companies, who paid the majority of advertising costs.
> Danny himself
> has never claimed to be a writer... not in the journalistic
> sense.
I don't get your point, Francie. He's just written his second book, at
least. I think he can list "writer" among his credits if he chooses.
I wrote:
> He
> >appears in the excellent portrait of Linda's photographic
> career, "Behind
> >the Lens", which has aired worldwide and currently appears in
> her travelling
> >"Sixties" exhibit. In addition to his work in rock journalism,
Francie wrote:
> Having your pitcher taken with a rock star's wife? This *must*
> prove the depth
> of one's close close friendship... NOT.
Hmmmm....Did you misinterpret my comment about appearing in "the excellent
portrait "Behind The Lens" to mean that he was in a photo with Linda? No,
he was interviewed as part of a documentary about Linda's career and told
the story of how they first met and developed a friendship. Other people
interviewed in the same documentary include Hazel Archer and Brian Clarke,
who were also counted among Linda's close friends.
Not knowing either Fields or McCartney personally, I can't attest to the
closeness of their friendship other than what I've heard over the years and
interviews like the one mentioned above. I *do* know that Fields spoke at
her NYC memorial service in 1998, and I would imagine that honor was
reserved for people who were either treasured friends and family or pivotal
influences in her life, or both. That's good enough for me in counting him
amongst her close friends. Your mileage may vary.
Danny Fields has never been published in Rolling Stone. Not as a
> writer.
I don't remember writing (or reading anyone else write) that he was
published in Rolling Stone.
> He worked for A&M Records in p.r. in the early 70's
Thanks. That's a professional credit I left out.
> Jennifer, this is fascinating. Six months ago, you counted
> yourself among
> the skeptics as to Danny Fields motivation for making the deal
> to write an
> authorized "bio" [sic] - and when the press release about his
> newly signed
> deal for a miniseries set off a week of debate in the Paul
> lists. Haven't heard
> about that miniseries again, now have you?
Actually, I am waiting to read the book before passing judgement on it. I
don't remember having any comment on the miniseries deal. *You* have been
the one intimating that Paul would not be happy with the portrait of the
McCartney marriage Fields would be painting. Since *you* are the
self-proclaimed insider, I'll be interested to see if your prediction is
correct.
>
> Then some of the members began to accuse me of passing their
> posts on
> to Danny, who was genuinely confused by the extreme conflicts in
> the various
> stories. Funniest of all, members actually believed their
> "information and
> ideas" might be used by Danny, quoted without permission. Boo,
> Francie! The
> "virus" I think CarolJ called me...
You can *definitely* be assured that I was not one of these people. The
only interest I would have regarding you forwarding posts to someone outside
Macca-L or Linda-L (whatever it's called) would be whether or not it would
be tolerated by the moderators, one of whom expelled me from Linda's list
for protecting the name of a record producer who had forwarded one of my
posts directly to MPL. I'm in total agreement with you that Fields wouldn't
need information from a fan list to write a biography about or eulogize
Linda McCartney. If he was interested in reading how her life had impacted
fans, he could easily have subbed to the list himself or read any number of
tribute pages put up in her honor at the time of her death, most requiring
no password to access. ;-)
>
> As soon as the tabloid serialization started, you write about
> the guy as if
> he were a candidate for the Pulitzer prize.
A question was posed regarding who he was and I answered it with information
both straightforward and factual. Is there some professional jealousy
between you and Fields for you to be so offended by his resume?
>
> Could this possibly have anything to do with the fact that he
> leads with the
> spicy little item describing my breakup with Paul? He "had to
> ask" me to
> leave because he'd invited Linda? Gee, I thought you had my
> suitcase being
> tossed over the front wall... oh, excuse me, no. That was the
> renowned Paul
> photog, Jorie Gracen.
Thanks for clarifying for the readers of r.m.b. that I have never had your
suitcase being tossed over any walls. I believe the person who wrote about
suitcases and the walls of Cavendish Avenue was Barry Miles.
I am interested in Fields' book, and the Mail's serialization of it (since
that's all that's available at the moment), not because of the one or two
sentences about *you*, Francie, but because of the 56 years that comprised
the life of Linda McCartney. I found her to be an interesting and
exceptional woman who lived a life outside the mold of the rock star
wife/celebrity and followed her heart when raising her family and standing
up for the causes she believed in. I'm not expecting the portrait of a
saint, but a portrait of one woman who worked in small ways to do great
things.
> I think you will find Part 2 singularly lacking in news value.
Wrong. I enjoyed Part 2, and Part 3. Didn't miss the mention of your name
one bit.
> Danny may not be responsible for the exact wording used by the
> Mail,
> just as Chet Flippo can make a reasonable claim that he is not
> responsible
> for the STAR's editing of BODY COUNT''s infamous Chapter 8,
> which he
> plagiarized in 1988 for his unauthorized biog (that's right, a
> *bio* is not
> how "those who know" refer to a memorialization of a friendship
> - a bio
> is a record company form) of Paul.
Why is it that whatever is being discussed, it always comes back to you?
What on God's green Earth does Fields' book about Linda have to do with
Flippo plagarizing your "Body Count" chapter? Last I heard, you opened your
Beatlefan article in June with excerpts of your interview with Fields. You
seemed proud to be associated with him. Why the sudden change of heart?
> Don't you think you ought to reposition yourself a bit where the
> biography
> of Lady Linda is concerned?
No, I don't. I was anticipating it then, and I'm anticipating it now. I
don't know whether to pre-order from Amazon or camp out at the bookstore on
the 1st.
>
> "Linda was happiest in the kitchen."
>
> Doesn't this bother you a teensy bit? If I were Linda, I might
> think of other
> rooms in which I might just be a teensy bit happier.
Again, Francie, this isn't about YOU or me, it's about Linda, and where she
was happy. I think it makes a wonderful statement about her and her
personal values. Here was a woman who came from a well to do family and
married one of the world's most sought after men and stepped back into as
ordinary and private a family life as possible and did it all successfully.
After all was said and done, she had raised four children who she counted as
her best friends. The longevity of her marriage was admirable by any
standards, much less the standards of show business. If she had done
nothing else, I would consider that a fine accomplishment, but she also
published her photography books, her cookbooks, and dedicated a good
portion of her life to animal rights and vegetarian activism. While many
people criticized her foray into music with her husband and their various
bands, despite the critics, she stood at his side and lent something to the
recordings that I miss now that she is no longer here.
Jennifer
Jennifer DeBernardis
fabella <waronsex...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote in message
> PLEASE NOTE: Jennifer is not desirous of having Tuesday's
> serialization piece
> posted here. She knows it's a howler. I already posted the
> anecdote about Paul/Linda
> asking Fields for cab fare... and that's the highlight!
Hey, anyone who so desires can take all the time to transcribe Part 2 that
they want. I was just telling Will he didn't have to do it for me, as I've
had an opportunity to read it, which I hadn't when I made the request.
Please don't put words in my keyboard, Francie. I am quite capable of
speaking for myself.
The whole book will be a highlight for me. I have been looking forward to
it for months.
Jennifer
D 28IF
>serialization piece
>posted here. She knows it's a howler. I already posted the
>anecdote about Paul/Linda
>asking Fields for cab fare... and that's the highlight!
>
Actually, she said no such thing.
Jennifer wrote to Will that he needn't post the article for her sake, as she
has already read it.
Spin spin spin
d.northcutt
waronsex...@yahoo.com.invalid wrote on 2/8/00 3:42 PM:
> See? You thought I hated Linda or was jealous?
No, not exactly. Life is more complex than that and so are human emotions.
[snip]
> I tell ya, d., I am 90% sure that I could have written
> a better biography of Linda. In fact, I'll go so far as to
> say I would not even have to resort to "Never before
> seen interviews with Linda and Paul." to get people
> to buy it.
Well, I'm going to withhold judgement till I actually read it. The portions
excerpted in the Mail - the bits I've seen, anyway - seem *extremely*
abridged, and frankly, the info presented could have been written by any
reasonably knowledgeable fan. So I'm assuming that the excerpts are nothing
more than a sort of teaser. I hope, anyway! I was looking forward to a
good read presenting a lesser-known aspect of the old story.
> I see a long hard road to self-realization and then death.
It's like that for all of us.
> Yes it was a great life. Please pay attention. I think
> Linda gave 110% and she wouldn't trade her life with
> any anonymous wife-mother... ?
She certainly stuck with him, that's for sure.
- d.
fabella
There is competition, most of it friendly, among all journalists
and author/contemporaries.
Danny is not currently writing "his" second book. He is about to
see his first book come out,
and he has chosen to serialize the book in a British tabloid in
advance.
I did not publish anything from the interview Danny conducted
with me. I quoted a very friendly
exchange from the introduction to a two hour phone conversation.
I repeat, it was Jorie Gracen who suggested that the groupie
referred to in MYFN was me.
No one else.
My change of heart is based on the clearly tabloid quality of
the "research" and violation
of my confidence and trust. Danny has been calling on me for
help frequently - not for my
recollections, but for information any amateur researcher or fan
could reasonably be expected
to do in the first and probably last biography authorized by
Paul McCartney in advance.
Danny told me that he was "tolerated" as a speaker at the New
York memorial. He was eager
to giggle about the fact that at the London memorial, Linda's
favorite horse was also in attendance
at Paul's request. He told me the identical anecdote last March
as appeared in Part 2 of the tab series.
I thought he was a friend. I was wrong about that.
No one is going to convince me that kitsch teen mag articles are
"writing about pop culture." If they
had that kind of value, you would have kept your 16's and Tiger
Beats for 35 years. lol
Jennifer, I'm looking through you...
saki
> No one is going to convince me that kitsch teen mag articles are
> "writing about pop culture." If they had that kind of value, you would have > kept your 16's and Tiger Beats for 35 years....
I may not be able to convince *any*one of the value of
incipient pop journalism, but I'll have a bash.
In one of my closets is a near-complete three-year run
of a newspaper put out by Beat Publications. As
franchised (apparently) by two west-coast radio
stations, it appeared from April 1965 through late
summer 1968 as the KRLA Beat (in Southern California) or
as the KYA Beat (in the SF area). Both radio stations
were AM; FM had not yet become popular.
Unlike "teen" magazines, which were outgrowths of the
various movie-fanzine mags from the nineteen-twenties to
the nineteen fifties (heavily dependent upon film star
photos as well), the weekly Beat tended to rely more on
journalistic-styled reporting rather than "Win Your
Dream Date With Dave Clark!" and the like, with regular
reporters who ferreted out stories as well as wrote
music-opinion columns. Many of them were fairly
articulate too; I've often wondered where they ended up.
As a category, the Beat had antecedents in Bill Harry's
Mersey Beat, but it was probably closer to a
proto-Rolling Stone magazine, even exhibiting the same
kind of tab/newspaper format that RS used a few years
later in its debut. The Beat ran press releases about
all the major rock-and-roll music trends of the day. The
Beatles predominated, as you can well imagine, but were
also heavily accompanied by British Invasion groups and
current news about same, as well as American groups
whose songs had hit the charts.
And unlike the fanzines, the Beat tended to report on
music trends, LP releases, reviews, concert
updates---much more news-y than the alternative. There
was the occasional fashion-oriented silliness or
virulent radio-station promotion, but on the whole the
Beat was a breath of fresh air.
Some of the Beat's best work included interviews with
bands such as the Stones, the Kinks, the Animals and
similar groups caught between west-coast appearances.
Much more candid than the precrafted answers usually
available elsewhere, these interviews give a real sense
of how the musicians regarded their work and how they
wrote their material, not to mention how they approached
the music business as a whole.
They were hardly as cheeky as the Maureen Cleave series
for the Evening Standard or as volatile as Dylan was
when he talked to Newsweek...but they're a fascinating
counterpoint to what was otherwise available at the
time.
What the Beat also shows is how the music business
subtlely changed during those pivotal three years of its
existence; particularly of interest is the way the
journalistic end of AM pop radio anticipated the
emergence of "underground" FM (note to our international
readers: AM = MW).
You can virtually see how editorial opinion reshapes
itself into accommodating less mainstream developments
like those from Cream, the Doors, the Jefferson Airplane
and a host of novelties associated with those times. Two
well-regarded comedy acts of the later sixties---The
Firesign Theatre and the Credibility Gap---both had
their beginnings on the air at KRLA, and were duly
promoted in the pages of the Beat. All this was new to
AM radio and the way AM usually promoted itself. Top-40
wasn't entirely abandoned, but the folks who inhabited
those charts certainly made waves worth watching, and
the Beat evolved with them, for a time.
The Beat also provides an interesting bridge between
underground journalism (The Los Angeles Free Press and a
host of similar publications) and its eventual evolution
into more mainstream music press, like Rolling Stone and
its ilk.
This is one cache of old newsprint I'm glad I kept!
I wonder if the Smithsonian would be interested? :-)
--
"Once my home was a Texas plain, now I
swing my lasso on an alien terrain...."
---------------------------------------
sa...@ucla.edu
Jennifer DeBernardis
fabella <waronsex...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote in message
> Jennifer: What's the name of this thread?
Yeah, yeah, yeah. As so many threads do on this newsgroup, it went off on a
tangent and became about Fields and his professional credits. That's the
part I was involved in, at least.
>
> There is competition, most of it friendly, among all journalists
> and author/contemporaries.
> Danny is not currently writing "his" second book. He is about to
> see his first book come out,
> and he has chosen to serialize the book in a British tabloid in
> advance.
Again, I'll remind you of "Who's Your Fave Rave?" No matter what part he
did or didn't contribute, and you admitted yourself that he had authored
many of those articles, he's listed as a co-author. This Linda McCartney
biography is at least his second book. If there are others, I'm not aware
of them.
> I repeat, it was Jorie Gracen who suggested that the groupie
> referred to in MYFN was me.
> No one else.
Do you recall her statement that she got the info from Barry Miles at
Beatlefest?
>
> My change of heart is based on the clearly tabloid quality of
> the "research" and violation
> of my confidence and trust.
I agree that the serialization was sensational, as the serialization of
Miles' book was several years ago in another UK paper. I don't think that
necessarily reflects on the complete book, though, as the idea is always to
sell to the masses, is it not?
I find it interesting that you feel your confidence and trust were betrayed
by the author, since from the time of the interview, you stated that you
were being interviewed as part of his research for the book. It's not like
you spoke to Fields off the record and then he published your comments.
What part of those two comments about you feels like a betrayal?
> Danny told me that he was "tolerated" as a speaker at the New
> York memorial.
Perhaps, as another poster suggested, you were just being told what he
thought you wanted to hear. I doubt very seriously that among speakers such
as Linda's brother and two sisters, Twiggy, and other friends, Danny Fields
would have just been tolerated. It wasn't an impromptu, "If you have
anything to share about Linda, please stand up" kind of thing. He's listed
in the order of service, and probably spoke by invitation. *If* he was only
tolerated by Paul as a longtime friend of Linda's, at least his place in her
life was honored by her husband and children by this invitation to speak.
He was eager
> to giggle about the fact that at the London memorial, Linda's
> favorite horse was also in attendance
> at Paul's request.
Actually, two miniature horses, Shnoo and Tinsel, Christmas gifts from Paul
to Linda, were part of the London service, while a prize Appaloosa was
brought in for the NYC service. While this may seem strange to some people,
it seemed a perfectly fitting, if somewhat eccentric, tribute to Linda's
love of horses
> I thought he was a friend. I was wrong about that.
I'm sincerely sorry for you, Francie. I suspected as much, to be honest, as
the stories you were telling about him just didn't ring true to my ears.
>
> No one is going to convince me that kitsch teen mag articles are
> "writing about pop culture." If they
> had that kind of value, you would have kept your 16's and Tiger
> Beats for 35 years. lol
Alas, I chopped mine up for scrapbooks. Who knew all those years ago that
the Beatles would be the lasting phenomenon they turned out to be? I
couldn't comprehend life past my next teen club dance. ;-) At the time,
those publications were all that we had about the Beatles, and the Beatles
were as much a part of pop culture as anyone, so I stand by my statement.
> Jennifer, I'm looking through you...
Francie, you've said worse things to me. I suspect I'll survive. ;-)
Jennifer
fabella
journalist (such as you ascribe to Danny Fields - and no one but
you has asserted that Danny was "writing about pop culture" when
he plinked his way through an "editorial" about the flavor of the
month among 12 year old girls) you accord courtesy and respect.
When Danny was hanging out with the Girl Gang in New York during
the middle to late Sixties (I won't list their names, because you
don't think I know what I'm talking about) I was a rising star
in the creative advertising agency business. In 1969, I wrote
the cover
story of Rolling Stone (November 15) and you claimed that you
didn't know about it when you listed all the Beatle cover
stories ever
to appear in that publication.
No matter how you try to stretch it, Jennifer, you're
underestimating your target with me.
I agree that Linda McCartney was very very strong and a fine
mother to her three children sired by Sir Paul and to her
daughter
Heather, whom Paul adopted proudly.
I strongly disagree with the idea that it is necessary for Danny
Fields to defame me to write a good biography of the woman.
The relation between Chet Flippo's plagiarism and Fields's
reductionism and dismissal of the book Rolling Stone published
in 1972
is that Fields is not the first to use my writings and
experience to juice up the sleaze value of his own poorly
researched and puffily
written memoriam to a woman who deserves much better. As do I
from *you*, Miss Thing.
Don't pay retail, Jennifer.
Francie
--
http://sites.netscape.net/fabest/memoreez
See Paul's handwritten invitation on this page!
d.
<waronsex...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
> I strongly disagree with the idea that it is necessary for Danny
> Fields to defame me to write a good biography of the woman.
How did he defame you? This is a serious question in search of a
serious answer. And were you told that you were "off-the-record" when
you spoke to him of these things? If so, I can understand and
sympathize with your frustration.
--
"The wonder of it all, baby." - Paul McCartney
northcut at mindspring.com
Francie
I am as easy to fool as the next person.
I was wrong about the Doors book - that was Danny Sugarman,
Fields explained to me. No one thinks of Danny as a biographer
or a memoirist, least of all Danny.
He certainly took me in, and gave me lots of unpublishable
stories to tell. But I will never tell those stories.
As I said to one of your alters, I am nobody's doormat,
and when my child is dissed, I speak out.
The rest is private.
So get your panties out of the twist they've been in since
I joined macca-l. I don't need to save my outgoing email
because when you tell the truth, you need no backup files
to cover yourself.
I have never seen such pettiness and such incredible
lack of style or originality as I've seen coming from "you."
I'm the most interesting thing in this newsgroup or you
wouldn't keep up this shit.
Francie
afr
> > Look on me, with pity, and know, I was once a normal functioning human
> > just like you....
> >
> It's too late already. afr has been here for 2 or 3 years already.
Actually, if you count time off for normal behavior, it's closer to 6.
a
Nowhere Man
> I'm the most interesting thing in this newsgroup
who has the plump head nowest.
Nowhere Man
> would that the masses leave me alone and let it
> be.
this sounds like the constant rhyme from another poster in rmb.
Nowhere Man
> I don't suppose you know *which* sex act Linda happened to be
> performing at the moment Heather walked in the unlocked
> bedroom door,
do YOU?
> I feel dirty when I think of being walked in on by my toddler,
> who doesn't know who her father is, and whose mother doesn't
> think about taking care of anyone but that drunken slut Jim Morrison.
I am forever grateful that Paul made the right choices in that summer of
1968.
He found a kind soul - a kindred spirit - who was to make him so very
happy.
Will
Laura Dever
"job"? You seem condescending when you talk about Linda being old fashioned and
putting her family first. Did you ever even meet by the way?
Listen To What The Man Said,
Laura D.
fabella wrote:
> See? You thought I hated Linda or was jealous?
>
> My liking what I sensed about Linda, intuitively,
> had nothing to do with her marrying the Cute Beatle.
> I had a better preview of her marriage than anyone
> else but Jane. I didn't want the job he was offering
> I rebelled at home and at work and so the morning
> after he promised to take me to Scotland as soon as
> they finished the lp, he asked me when I was leaving.
> I left the following morning all by myself.
>
> I tell ya, d., I am 90% sure that I could have written
> a better biography of Linda. In fact, I'll go so far as to
> say I would not even have to resort to "Never before
> seen interviews with Linda and Paul." to get people
> to buy it.
>
> I see a long hard road to self-realization and then death.
> Yes it was a great life. Please pay attention. I think
> Linda gave 110% and she wouldn't trade her life with
> any anonymous wife-mother... ?
>
> There is something respectable in her old-fashioned
> values, after a wild wild decade of, well- you know...
>
> Francie
>
paramucho
>Why is it that whatever is being discussed, it always comes back to you?
Check the title of this thread Jennifer: "Danny Fields on Francie Schwartz".
It's amazing but true: Most of the focus on Francie's space in RMB is provided
by the self-proclaimed protectors of McCartney.
Ian
ron...@my-deja.com
some excerpts from his book have been made public, and Ms. Schwartz
seems to not have recieved the respect she feels she deserves.
But there was a time when she was happily aligning herself with Mr.
Fields.
Here are some excerpts from posts Francie Schartz made in some Paul
McCartney mailing lists.
3/1/99 - Francie writes that she is preparing for an interview with
Danny Fields, "dear friend" of Linda McCartney.
3/3/99 - Francie tells of having spoken with Danny, "Linda's official
biographer" on 3/2, for two hours. They both "talked and listened and
shared."
When criticized by people on a private mailing list for her
characterizations of Paul McCartney in the present-day, Ms. Schwartz
says she spent a total of four hours on the phone with two people who
are experts on "Paul 1999," one of them being Danny Fields.
"...and Danny especially confirmed my instinctive guesses in several
areas."
7/13/99 - When asked how she thought Fields' biography would turn out,
Ms. Schartz writes that she couldn't say, since she couldn't tell how
her own books would turn out, "much less how a new-ish friend's
remembrance of a woman I didn't know is going to turn out."
When asked why she was interviewed for a Linda biography, Francie
explained that Paul gave the original book proposal his blessing, but
he may now regret that.
"Going by what Danny told me during our taped telephone interview
(March 3rd), Paul may not feel the same about Danny's having the
assignment as he did originally, but it's too late now!"
When telling how the phone interviews with Fields went, Francie
wrote "Yeah, we traded stories, we gossiped (that was the fun part)
about a lot of people, but I don't think any of that will end up in the
book. He's a pro. He's going to try to do Linda justice."
More comments on Fields - "...he loved her [Linda], he liked her, and
he really knew her well. She confided in him about a lot of things,
but he also found out a lot from me because he asked me about things
that Linda's friends (or ex-friends) had told me. Amazing how much
crap was said about her, behind her back, amazing how she was misquoted
by women who were once her friends."
When specifically asked for her opinion of Fields, Ms. Schwartz
wrote, "I've never met Danny face to face, but we've talked on the
phone and emailed each other etc since March. He seems to be a great
guy, in fact, after I saw the E! special, I thought Lin was lucky to
have him for a friend, and I told him so at the top of our phone
interview...I feel close to him in spite of the newness of the
friendship (and yeah, we do share certain thoughts about JPM) and I
wish him the best. Of course I could be all wrong, he may turn out to
be a total slime, but I sincerely doubt it."
7/14/99 - addressing fans' apprehension about the Fields' book -
"Ahem. Allow me to reiterate. <smirk, smirk> JPM may not be pleased
about Danny having this plum of an assignment a year after signing off
on the book deal. Danny loved *Lin* - not her hubby - I got the
distinct impression (during the two hour interview/call) that Paul
merely tolerated Danny (for 30 years!) because Lin had *her* friend,
regardless of what Paul may have thought of him. By the time Paul
realized he would not have any control over who Danny would be talking
to or what sources of information he might utilize, it was too late.
"I'm not going to speculate about the form, style or content of the
book itself (I haven't read any of Danny's stuff except for the Doors
book, and that was many moons ago, I don't remember it - he hadn't read
BC when we did the interview, but I sent him a copy; he made me 'tell'
him a lot of what was in BC probably because he 'hears' people better
than he 'reads') but I'll say this much: One probable reason Danny & I
hit it off instantly was our mutual recognition of the fact that Paul
has always had major control issues (Quoth the Danny: "The Big C.")"
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
paramucho
This would seem to be your sixth posting to RMB (and one you've
put quite a bit of effort into). And all of your posts have been
to Francie (exvept for one Tom, about Francie).
Say what you will, Ms Schwartz has certainly been effective at
attracting new members to the group.
Ian
Linda
>I'm the most interesting thing in this newsgroup or you
>wouldn't keep up this shit.
>
Inflated, obsessive, self-absorbed, conceited, boastful and arrogant, maybe.
But *interesting*? Bwhahahahaha!
I'm sure if a vote could be taken, you wouldn't make the Top 100. But that
sentence pretty much tells your story as you see it, doesn't it?.
LSH
Mister Charlie
mannered, civil, and focused on the points at hand. I
appreciate the posters keeping it factual and not (generally)
too personal.
(I know, I know, who gives a flying fig?)
And though I copped to reading 16, you'd never catch me with a
Tiger Beat in my hand!!! LOL
fabella
Fields reduces me to a sex thing, he includes a description of
Linda's daughter Heather (by a prior husband) walking in on Paul
and Linda having sex (sorry, I don't think Fields specifies what
sex act), whereupon Linda addresses her daughter to say "Mommy
is busy right now, but she'll be with you shortly." Is this what
one's closest friend chooses to throw out into the world just
prior to release of a book version?
Frankly, I think most fans of Linda will not be pleased to have
this tidbit as part of their reminiscences.
But in this forum, one never knows who or what is posting these
days, so I could be wrong. I do know one long-standing member of
macca--l found it disgusting and wrote to me saying "Some
friend!"
So I'm not alone here... and I feel like getting into the
jacuzzi and bubbling that image right out of my mind.
Francie
"It's been real." (Ernie Kovacs)
Strabbo
who start threads about Francie / mention her in unrelated
threads before she even speaks up / Jump all over her words when
she does.
Sounds like a lot of people find the uninteresting worth talking
about.
I think (and excuse me for presuming) that her intent was not to
glorify herself as genuinely the most interesting thing in this
newsgroup, but more to sarcastically come back at Ronkass'
beginning of yet another Discredit Francie thread, of which
there have been many.
I think the most interesting thing on this newsgroup is the
Beatles and the times the discussions actually are about their
music.
jess...@my-deja.com
but please, Francie, check with your source. Either you didn´t
read/listen carefully enough or he/she told you something wrong. It
wasn´t Paul in that "scene". The long standing member of macca-l with
whom you claim to correspond should know better.
Jesse
In article <074bfaa0...@usw-ex0105-040.remarq.com>,
fabella <waronsex...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
> Question: In the same "excerpt" from the Daily Mail tabloid as
> Fields reduces me to a sex thing, he includes a description of
> Linda's daughter Heather (by a prior husband) walking in on Paul
> and Linda having sex (sorry, I don't think Fields specifies what
> sex act), whereupon Linda addresses her daughter to say "Mommy
> is busy right now, but she'll be with you shortly." Is this what
> one's closest friend chooses to throw out into the world just
> prior to release of a book version?
>
> Frankly, I think most fans of Linda will not be pleased to have
> this tidbit as part of their reminiscences.
>
> But in this forum, one never knows who or what is posting these
> days, so I could be wrong. I do know one long-standing member of
> macca--l found it disgusting and wrote to me saying "Some
> friend!"
>
> So I'm not alone here... and I feel like getting into the
> jacuzzi and bubbling that image right out of my mind.
>
> Francie
>
> "It's been real." (Ernie Kovacs)
>
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion
Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet -
Free!
>
>
fabella
In article <0dc93c20...@usw-ex0101-006.remarq.com>,
Strabbo <martins...@compusmart.com.invalid> wrote:
>Geez, for being so uninteresting, there sure are a lot of people
>who start threads about Francie / mention her in unrelated
>threads before she even speaks up / Jump all over her words when
>she does.
>
>Sounds like a lot of people find the uninteresting worth talking
>about.
>
>I think (and excuse me for presuming) that her intent was not to
>glorify herself as genuinely the most interesting thing in this
>newsgroup, but more to sarcastically come back at Ronkass'
>beginning of yet another Discredit Francie thread, of which
>there have been many.
>
>I think the most interesting thing on this newsgroup is the
>Beatles and the times the discussions actually are about their
>music.
>
>
be.
Trouble is, being a Beatles fan of the first generation, I'm not
satisfied
("Everything i've tried I don't like the way life has been
abusing me" -
(from "I'm Not Satisfied", Frank Zappa and the Mothers of
Invention,
"FREAK OUT") with the uninteresting history written for mere
fans.
I prefer "The Beatles Illustrated" to any other book, and I
bought it
before I went to England with my first film treatment. I also
prefer
the first pressing vinyl lp, even to the flawless airless Past
Masters
Vol. 2 version of "Hey Jude"/"Revolution" (too icy and without
scratches
takes the old patina right off!).
The Girl Can't Help It
Frannie
JLW44
>Fields reduces me to a sex thing, he includes a description of
>Linda's daughter Heather (by a prior husband) walking in on Paul
>and Linda having sex (sorry, I don't think Fields specifies what
>sex act), whereupon Linda addresses her daughter to say "Mommy
>is busy right now, but she'll be with you shortly." Is this what
>one's closest friend chooses to throw out into the world just
>prior to release of a book version?
>
>Frankly, I think most fans of Linda will not be pleased to have
>this tidbit as part of their reminiscences.
>
>But in this forum, one never knows who or what is posting these
>days, so I could be wrong. I do know one long-standing member of
>macca--l found it disgusting and wrote to me saying "Some
>friend!"
>
>So I'm not alone here... and I feel like getting into the
>jacuzzi and bubbling that image right out of my mind.
>
>Francie
>
and Jim Morrison. I'm just so shocked to learn that Linda wasn't a saint. The
bubble has been burst. If this is all the info Mr. Fields has to offer this
book is going to be one dull affair.
d.northcutt
waronsex...@yahoo.com.invalid wrote on 2/9/00 10:19 AM:
> Question: In the same "excerpt" from the Daily Mail tabloid as
> Fields reduces me to a sex thing, he includes a description of
> Linda's daughter Heather (by a prior husband) walking in on Paul
> and Linda having sex (sorry, I don't think Fields specifies what
> sex act), whereupon Linda addresses her daughter to say "Mommy
> is busy right now, but she'll be with you shortly." Is this what
> one's closest friend chooses to throw out into the world just
> prior to release of a book version?
>
> Frankly, I think most fans of Linda will not be pleased to have
> this tidbit as part of their reminiscences.
Naaaaaaaaah. Anyone who has spent time with small children knows that they
universally wander in at inopportune moments. It's something a lot of folks
can relate to, I would imagine. Sounds to me like Linda handled it well,
without making it into a big deal or something shameful. Unless, of course,
you are one of those people who think sex *is* shameful.
And anyway, lord knows there are many, *much* worse things for a child to
see.
> But in this forum, one never knows who or what is posting these
> days, so I could be wrong. I do know one long-standing member of
> macca--l found it disgusting and wrote to me saying "Some
> friend!"
That's a rather Victorian attitude, don't you think? ;-)
> So I'm not alone here... and I feel like getting into the
> jacuzzi and bubbling that image right out of my mind.
That's kind of how I felt when I read your description of a certain
automobile trip to Liverpool. ;-)
- d.
Mister Charlie
the press conference I was at (Christ...can't believe it was over ten
years ago already)he was asked if he preferred CD's clean sound to the
vinyl. He told a very amusing story (and the only 'unscripted' answer
he gave the whole time)about his sister in law. He took the (then) new
Sgt Pepper CD to her to play it. She said 'well, what's the
difference?'...Paul said 'well, you know that swishing noise between
the songs? CD's don't have it' (I'm paraphrasing here). She said 'oh,
but I kind of LIKED that swishing noise'...and he concluded that yes,
he did too...
--
--------------------------------------------
"...I've had a scratch or two and I skip
skip skip skip skip skip skip don't care..."
fabella
I don't think we're in Kansas any more.
I don't suppose you know *which* sex act Linda happened to be
performing at the moment Heather walked in the unlocked
bedroom door, but I do know some people who think the friendly
bj is quite exciting and fun - but think about your fatherless
daughter and remember to lock the door for God's sake.
She was no Jewish mother, not by a long shot.
So you would feel dirty about a bj in the Aston, I didn't. We
had no children to consider.
I feel dirty when I think of being walked in on by my toddler,
who doesn't know who her father is, and whose mother doesn't
think
about taking care of anyone but that drunken slut Jim Morrison.
What values are being taught to this little girl here?
Feh.
Francie
Walter Shorts
FEH???
First of all : A gesheft hob ich and
A ritch in Kop lol
Azoy gait es
If it were me and I could I would and being Jewish has nothing to do with it I
know I am.
Sheryl
jess...@my-deja.com
Dear Dorothy
I don't think we're in Kansas any more.
I don't suppose you know *which* sex act Linda happened to be
performing at the moment Heather walked in the unlocked
bedroom door, but I do know some people who think the friendly
bj is quite exciting and fun - but think about your fatherless
daughter and remember to lock the door for God's sake.
She was no Jewish mother, not by a long shot.
So you would feel dirty about a bj in the Aston, I didn't. We
had no children to consider.
I feel dirty when I think of being walked in on by my toddler,
who doesn't know who her father is, and whose mother doesn't
think
about taking care of anyone but that drunken slut Jim Morrison.
What values are being taught to this little girl here?
So you have now shifted your criticism from Mr. Fields to Linda ? At
first you just seemed to be annoyed at him for publishing this story.
Now it愀 Linda because she let it happen in the first place.
Interesting. Could this have anything to do with d. reminding you
of your own accounts in BC? Just wondering.....
And you obviously still haven愒 read that excerpt yourself. Maybe you
should refrain from discussing the details until you know them.
Jesse
PS: What makes you think Heather didn愒 know who her father was, and
even if that愀
true - what has it got to do with this?
Mister Charlie
fabella <waronsex...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
> Dear Dorothy
>
> I don't think we're in Kansas any more.
>
> I don't suppose you know *which* sex act Linda happened to be
> performing at the moment Heather walked in the unlocked
> bedroom door, but I do know some people who think the friendly
> bj is quite exciting and fun - but think about your fatherless
> daughter and remember to lock the door for God's sake.
>
> She was no Jewish mother, not by a long shot.
>
> So you would feel dirty about a bj in the Aston, I didn't. We
> had no children to consider.
>
> I feel dirty when I think of being walked in on by my toddler,
> who doesn't know who her father is, and whose mother doesn't
> think
> about taking care of anyone but that drunken slut Jim Morrison.
> What values are being taught to this little girl here?
>
>
> Francie
>
Personally, I have ALWAYS thought of bj's as friendly. That is,
when I could find one. :)
--
--------------------------------------------
"...I've had a drink or two and I don't care..."
JLW44
>who doesn't know who her father is, and whose mother doesn't
>think
>about taking care of anyone but that drunken slut Jim Morrison.
>What values are being taught to this little girl here?
>
>Feh.
>
>Francie
>
A lesson in morals and child rearing from Francie. Now I think I've truly heard
everything!!!
Peace and Love Marek
>> would that the masses leave me alone and let it
>> be.
>
>
And sadly, nobody, including the asswipe Will Mullholland, can seem to do so...
Hey! Will! Does the following sound familiar, like maybe someone you retch
at in the mirror every morning?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Where are the diaries Fred?
Oh, and Will, thanks to you, and Davis, and interstate, and that Jesus freak
Beatles10, I think I'm going to stay here permanently, responding to every post
I can. :)
Peace and Love Marek
>
>> I'm the most interesting thing in this newsgroup
>
Please Francie, you aren't even CLOSE to me in that regard as best I see. but
maybe you're right. To prove it, try the following: Do not post here for
three months. If in that time, they are STILL talking about you, STILL
obsessing over you, STILL seeing you in every other new poster who comes to
this forum, then maybe, just maybe, you have a case.
Until then, don't even try.
Lizz Holmans
>I feel dirty when I think of being walked in on by my toddler,
>who doesn't know who her father is, and whose mother doesn't
>think
>about taking care of anyone but that drunken slut Jim Morrison.
>What values are being taught to this little girl here?
If the child was a toddler, she would have no idea about the concept of
fatherhood, and have no idea who the hell Jim Morrison was. I'll bet my
hat against the hole in a doughnut that Heather doesn't even remember
the incident. It doesn't matter who it was with, or what act was being
performed. All the embarrassment is on the side of the adults', not the
child's. I know I've been walked in on more than once (and bedroom locks
are often either absent or imperfect, as I found from my experience),
but none of my children have grown up scarred by what they saw.
Since in your own book you don't mind the entire world knowing that you
performed blow jobs on a number of people, what gives you the right to
criticize Linda about this?
You are making a Big Deal out of a relatively trivial incident that
happens frequently to anyone who has children. Your unveiled insult to
Linda's morals don't make yours look any better.
Lizz 'But making Big Deals about trivialities is rather your speciality,
isn't it, Ms. Body Count?' Holmans
--
Lizz Holmans
Peace and Love Marek
>>who doesn't know who her father is, and whose mother doesn't
>>think
>>about taking care of anyone but that drunken slut Jim Morrison.
>>What values are being taught to this little girl here?
>
>If the child was a toddler, she would have no idea about the concept of
>fatherhood, and have no idea who the hell Jim Morrison was. I'll bet my
>hat against the hole in a doughnut that Heather doesn't even remember
>the incident. It doesn't matter who it was with, or what act was being
>performed. All the embarrassment is on the side of the adults', not the
>child's. I know I've been walked in on more than once (and bedroom locks
>are often either absent or imperfect, as I found from my experience),
>but none of my children have grown up scarred by what they saw.
>
>Since in your own book you don't mind the entire world knowing that you
>performed blow jobs on a number of people, what gives you the right to
>criticize Linda about this?
>
>You are making a Big Deal out of a relatively trivial incident that
>happens frequently to anyone who has children. Your unveiled insult to
>Linda's morals don't make yours look any better.
Doesn't matter, francie's morals are pretty clear, I think, to anyone who has
been reading her posts. She is nothing but a bitter woman, rapidly aging,
determined to hurt the man who hurt her. She won't accomplish much though,
being the fringe character she is, and RMB is hardly a forum that many take
seriously.
Your 15 minutes are up Francie, get over it. Sheesh.
>
>Lizz 'But making Big Deals about trivialities is rather your speciality,
>isn't it, Ms. Body Count?' Holmans
>
LOL
fabella
The point is not what Linda was doing with whom.
The point is this book is supposed to be a memoriam by the
woman's best friend.
I couldn't care less about the mythical presentation of Linda
pre-Paul.
But this is not my idea of the best book that could be written
about a woman who made something of herself before she died.
This is my idea of the cheapening of the marriage, reducing it
to tabloid sleaze.
But then again, this ain't 16 mag, either. It's not a press kit
bio or an event press release. Not something a daughter would
keep
precious.
I hope Linda haunts Danny Fields for the rest of his life. I
know if I'd done this disservice to Linda, I'd be ashamed to
come out of my
house onto the streets of New York. He may make a lot of money,
thanks to clown brigade types, but he will never be a writer. And
I will do what I have to do to keep the truth up front.
d.northcutt
waronsex...@yahoo.com.invalid wrote on 2/9/00 3:31 PM:
> Dear Dorothy
>
> I don't think we're in Kansas any more.
Will you ask me to surrender next? ;-) I think you pulled that one out of
the hat way back when, but of course that doesn't mean you won't do it
again.
> I don't suppose you know *which* sex act Linda happened to be
> performing at the moment Heather walked in the unlocked
> bedroom door, but I do know some people who think the friendly
> bj is quite exciting and fun - but think about your fatherless
> daughter and remember to lock the door for God's sake.
> She was no Jewish mother, not by a long shot.
>
> So you would feel dirty about a bj in the Aston,
No, not by a long shot. I and a certain ex probably hold the land speed
record for that particular activity. It's only out of fear of having a
"garp" happen that I wouldn't do it again.
> I didn't. We
> had no children to consider.
>
> I feel dirty when I think of being walked in on by my toddler,
> who doesn't know who her father is, and whose mother doesn't
> think
> about taking care of anyone but that drunken slut Jim Morrison.
> What values are being taught to this little girl here?
OK, so who are you attacking here, Linda for doing it or Danny F. for
writing about it? Both? Cutting to the chase, I agree with you. In the
post before I was trolling with the idea of making a larger point a little
further down the line, or trying to. (Doesn't look like it worked.) I
really don't think it's too cool to bring men home like that when you've got
kids around. If you gotta screw around with a rock star, make 'im get you a
room - he'll have the money for it. I also agree that it was unnecessary
for Fields to write about it. However I don't agree that there's any
difference between Fields writing about something like that and you writing
some of the stuff you did in "Body Count." You sit here and bitch about
people's privacy being invaded, and yet you wrote some pretty touchy things
about Paul and Jane's sex life, yourself. Everything you say comes down to
one thing: it's OK and allowed for you to do it, but if someone else does,
they're damned. That's my point Francie. Look somewhere else besides the
mirror sometime, willya?
- d.
d.northcutt
waronsex...@yahoo.com.invalid wrote on 2/9/00 5:14 PM:
> As usual, Mizz Holman completely whiffs...
>
> The point is not what Linda was doing with whom.
>
> The point is this book is supposed to be a memoriam by the
> woman's best friend.
>
> I couldn't care less about the mythical presentation of Linda
> pre-Paul.
>
> But this is not my idea of the best book that could be written
> about a woman who made something of herself before she died.
>
> This is my idea of the cheapening of the marriage, reducing it
> to tabloid sleaze.
Oh, c'mon, Francie. Admit it. There's no nobility behind this reaction.
You're simply pissed because DF wrote things that you didn't expect him to.
If he had written it how you wanted, you wouldn't have given a damn whether
he wrote about Linda and Jim Morrison or whoever. In fact, your earlier
comments on the subject suggested that you had an idea his book would
contain some gossip like this and that you were looking forward to gloating
over Paul's reaction.
- d.
Jamie
> fabella schrieb:
>
> Dear Dorothy
>
> I don't think we're in Kansas any more.
>
> I don't suppose you know *which* sex act Linda happened to be
> performing at the moment Heather walked in the unlocked
> bedroom door, but I do know some people who think the friendly
> bj is quite exciting and fun - but think about your fatherless
> daughter and remember to lock the door for God's sake.
>
> She was no Jewish mother, not by a long shot.
>
> So you would feel dirty about a bj in the Aston, I didn't. We
> had no children to consider.
>
> I feel dirty when I think of being walked in on by my toddler,
> who doesn't know who her father is, and whose mother doesn't
> think
> about taking care of anyone but that drunken slut Jim Morrison.
> What values are being taught to this little girl here?
>
> So you have now shifted your criticism from Mr. Fields to Linda ?
Yep. As someone once said, there's nothing funnier than a non-parent
telling parents how to raise their kids. We'd better put out an APB for
all parents who've had toddlers accidentally walk in on them while in a
compromising positition.
> At
> first you just seemed to be annoyed at him for publishing this story.
> Now it´s Linda because she let it happen in the first place.
> Interesting. Could this have anything to do with d. reminding you
> of your own accounts in BC? Just wondering.....
>
> And you obviously still haven´t read that excerpt yourself. Maybe you
> should refrain from discussing the details until you know them.
>
> Jesse
>
> PS: What makes you think Heather didn´t know who her father was, and
> even if that´s
> true - what has it got to do with this?
Francie has a problem with facts, Jesse. Heather was never "fatherless."
I suggest reading the article Heather wrote last year. Linda and
Heather's biological father were married, and according to Heather, he
continued to be an influence on her life and she visited him several
times. However, Heather pointed out that despite the good relationship
she has with her biological father, she considers Paul McCartney her true
father, the one who has always been there for her and has taken
responsibility for her. Heather said that her mother was a fantastic
single mom, always making sure she was taken care of, etc.
And no matter what Francie claims, she's not God, and thus not fit to
deem who is or is not allowed to be Jewish.
--
~Jamie
afr
> > She was no Jewish mother, not by a long shot.
> And no matter what Francie claims, she's not God, and thus not fit to
> deem who is or is not allowed to be Jewish.
I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding here, in terms of the
connotation of "Jewish mother." It's a figurative expression that means a
mother who was very involved, always putting the child's needs before the
parent's etc. (It doesn't literally mean not Jewish.)
a.
fabella
1. I am not dead.
2. Body Count was not a memoriam.
3. Tabloid excerpts represent an inauspicious debut for this
book so many of you have been looking forward to.
4. I'm not trying to be noble. The fact is I respected Linda for
the job she did. Danny has betrayed Linda far more egregiously
than he did me. Linda herself said she would never write about
her sex life in Rolling Stone. So why is it okay to have her
"best
friend do that for her?
5. I am alive and doing something about it. I know who my
friends are -- and they're real.
Francie
"Love without truth is sentimentality;
Truth without love is brutality."
-- Anne S. (cofounder of Alanon)
afr
> If one believes the Seinfeldian (and other pop-culture) definition, a "Jewish
> mother" is one who is chronically involved in their child's life, even when
> they're an adult, who nags, is obsessed with marrying their children off to
> have kids, etc. I don't happen to believe in that sitcom stereotype, but if
> you want to, more power to you.
I was merely pointing out that your interpretation of the use of "jewish
mother" _as quoted_ from the prior text, was a misinterpretation of its
use in that quoted text.
a.
ron...@my-deja.com
> fabella wrote:
>My liking what I sensed about Linda, intuitively, had nothing to do
with her marrying the Cute Beatle. I had a better preview of her
marriage than anyone else but Jane. I didn't want the job he was
offering...>
But you were never offered anything. He never offered the job, as you
call it, to you.
>...In the same "excerpt" from the Daily Mail tabloid as Fields reduces
me to a sex thing...>
Still smarting over not getting your props, right? It's a bitch when
you try and hitch your wagon to someone who doesn't come through for
you.
>...he includes a description of Linda's daughter Heather (by a prior
husband) walking in on Paul and Linda having sex (sorry, I don't think
Fields specifides what sex act)...>
As has been pointed out, you've got it wrong. What a surprise. It
wasn't Paul, but rather Jim Morrison, Linda was with at the time of
this story.
And I suppose you've never heard of children accidentally walking in on
their parents having sex in their bedroom. Yes, certainly scars them
for life.
>...whereupon Linda addresses her daughter to say "Mommy is busy right
now, but she'll be with you shortly." Is this what one's closest
friend chooses to throw out into the world just prior to release of a
book version?>
Just as you were wrong with the Morrison story, you are wrong here, as
well. Upon being found by Heather, Linda does not brush her daughter
off. According to Morrison, Linda's first words were "You OK?"
Shows a trifle more concern than the scenario you try to portray.
>I don't suppose you know *which* sex act Linda happened to be
performing at the moment Heather walked in the unlocked bedroom door...>
No one but you has asked that. Yet you're the one who has accused many
of being interested in nothing but the salacious aspects of your story.
Guess when it's not yours, it's ok to ask.
>...but think about your fatherless daughter and remember to lock the
door for God's sake.>
>...I feel dirty when I think of being walked in on by my toddler who
doesn't know who her father is...>
Fatherless? Heather had a father. Her birth father remained a part of
her life, even after he allowed McCartney to adopt Heather. This from
Mr. See's own lips.
Please, when you want to make innuendos and paint someone in a bad
light, it would help your story if you got the facts straight, first.
>But this is not my idea of the best book that could be written about a
woman who made something of herself before she died.
This is my idea of the cheapening of the marriage, reducing it to
tabloid sleaze.>
I reiterate a questioned I've asked at least twice - do you actually
read what you write before hitting "Send"?
You put Linda down and then try and make it appear you thought well of
her. Your flip-flopping on the subject is cause for whiplash.
As for cheapening any image, why is this any worse than you cheapening
the relationship of Paul and Jane with remarks you have written?
When you're doing the sleazing, it's ok? When it's coming from your pen
it's your comment on society? But when someone else does it, you feign
concern for the image of Paul and Linda's marriage? I don't think you
have concern for anything to do with Paul. You use this to make you
appear decent. Unfortunately for you, it's offset by your other
ramblings. Or is that rumblings?
Your remark about you thinking you are the most interesting thing on
rmb showed everyone what you're truly about. You and nothing else. That
sentence revealed more about yourself than any description of a blow
job you gave this person or that ever could.
KC762
(such as you ascribe to Danny Fields - and no one but you has asserted that
Danny was "writing about pop culture" when
he plinked his way through an "editorial" about the flavor of the month among
12 year old girls) you accord courtesy and respect.>>
Just curious: if an "editorial" about the flavor of the month among the 12-year
old age group doesn't constitute writing about pop culture, (then OR now), when
what does, in your opinion? Seems to me that's one of the most blatant and
obvious (albeit narrow) "versions" of pop culture that's come down the pike
over the last 30 years...(but then that's just my .02 worth.)
KC
I Pray Ole
>
>> And no matter what Francie claims, she's not God, and thus not fit to
>> deem who is or is not allowed to be Jewish.
Ahh, ok. I guess that makes it alright then. Is it ok to use terms like "don't
jew me out" as well? How about "nigger rich"? If not, then forgive me for
asking such a gay question. And yes... the above statement was pure sarcasm.
Cheers,
Justin
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If you kick out your devils, your angels might escape"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
paramucho
>You put Linda down and then try and make it appear you thought well of
>her. Your flip-flopping on the subject is cause for whiplash.
Francie has been consistently positive about Linda here in RMB.
>Your remark about you thinking you are the most interesting thing on
>rmb showed everyone what you're truly about. You and nothing else.
I guess that was Francie's "more popular than Jesus" statement. The attitude
is no doubt driven by posters such as yourself who arrive at RMB *only* to
post to or about Francie. Like moths to the light. Ironic, but true: you're
one of the best proofs of Francie's statement.
> That
>sentence revealed more about yourself than any description of a blow
>job you gave this person or that ever could.
This sentence of yours tells us a great deal about yourself.
Ian
Jamie
> >You put Linda down and then try and make it appear you thought well of
> >her. Your flip-flopping on the subject is cause for whiplash.
>
> Francie has been consistently positive about Linda here in RMB.
Yeah right. Pull the other one, Ian.
--
~Jamie
paramucho
>>From: Francie fab...@best1.net
>
>>I'm the most interesting thing in this newsgroup or you
>>wouldn't keep up this shit.
>>
>
>Inflated, obsessive, self-absorbed, conceited, boastful and arrogant, maybe.
>But *interesting*? Bwhahahahaha!
>
>I'm sure if a vote could be taken, you wouldn't make the Top 100. But that
>sentence pretty much tells your story as you see it, doesn't it?.
They do these analyses of newsgroup threads to see who generates the
most conversation. That's the measure of Usenet "interestingness". I
think it's a fact that Francie has generated more thread activity than
anyone else here in the past couple of months. If not, then she's
certainly "up there".
A lot of what she has posted as has also been interesting on-topic
data regarding the Beatles. Something that's been pretty rare around
here recently.
Ian (still waiting for the check Francie!)
Mister Charlie
ipra...@aol.com (I Pray Ole) wrote:
.
>
> Ahh, ok. I guess that makes it alright then. Is it ok to use terms
like "don't
> jew me out" as well? How about "nigger rich"? If not, then forgive me
for
> asking such a gay question. And yes... the above statement was pure
sarcasm.
>
> Cheers,
> Justin
>
--
--------------------------------------------
"...I've had an insult or two and I don't care..."