#1 of 12 - Rutles - full true story (very long!)
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
The Full True Story
(A Nasty Tale....)
Part 1 of 12
The Rutles is the legendary band initially created as a spoof of The
Beatles. To legions of devoted fans around the world - it has become a
cult band in its own right. To those followers - The Rutles are the
Beatles of a parallel universe...
Most of the world first became aware of The Rutles in 1978 - with the
premiere of a TV special called "All You Need Is Cash" - a spoof
documentary about a mythical ‘60’s band called The Rutles - whose story
had uncanny parallels with The Beatles. The special was shown here in
the USA on NBC. It was on BBC in the UK and on other major networks
throughout the world.
The project was created by two veterans of comedy and music - Eric Idle
and Neil Innes.
Eric Idle was one of the founding members of Monty Python. Neil Innes
was one of the founding members of cult comedy-rock group - The Bonzo
Dog Band (picked by The Beatles to appear in their 1967 film "Magical
Mystery Tour"). Innes subsequently became the ‘seventh Python’ -
providing and performing comedic music for the troupe.
Together they created the mythical Rutles as a device to parody the
Beatles story. Innes wrote, recorded and produced all the music - witty
pastiches of a broad range of Beatles songs. Idle wrote and co-directed
the spoof documentary film which lampooned the Beatles legend.
Innes and Idle also acted in the special - becoming respectively Ron
Nasty (the John Lennon character) and Dirk McQuickly (the Paul McCartney
role.)
Two musician friends were recruited to portray the other two Rutles.
Ricky Fataar (a top session musician and ‘70’s-era Beach Boy) played
Stig O’Hara (the George Harrison character) and British drummer John
Halsey became the Rutles version of Ringo Starr - Barry Wom.
All of the Rutles music seen in the film and heard on the soundtrack
album - was sung and played by the three musicians in the on-screen
Rutles - Neil Innes, Ricky Fataar and John Halsey - together with a
fourth musician - Ollie Halsall - who did not perform on film as a
Rutle. Not being a musician, Eric Idle - who played the ‘fourth Rutle’
on-screen - did not actually sing or play on the soundtrack or album.
He merely mimed all his parts in the film.
(The real ‘fourth Rutle’ - in musical terms - thus was the late Ollie
Halsall, a very talented British guitarist/singer friend of Neil Innes
and John Halsey. Halsall - who died tragically in 1992 at the age of 43
- contributed distinctive vocals and guitar on the soundtrack album.)
The distinctive Beatle-esque musical arrangements were arranged and
conducted by film composer John Altman (who subsequently composed and
arranged "Always Look On The Bright Side Of Life" from "Life Of Brian.")
The TV special was executive-produced by "Saturday Night Live" producer
- Lorne Michaels - for his Broadway Video production company. It
received mixed reviews at the time. Some loved the film. Others - such
as Time Magazine did not appreciate it at all. (Its cult status came
much later - with the passage of time and its eventual release on home
video.) It was certainly not a ratings success. In fact in America it
was the least watched TV show of the week!
The soundtrack album - also called "All You Need Is Cash" - was released
worldwide by Warner Bros. Records - and contained 14 of the 20 songs
featured in the film. (Rhino Records’ 1991 CD release in the US -
included as bonus tracks the 6 songs omitted from the original
album.) The album was Grammy-nominated for Best Comedy Recording and
received much acclaim for its witty pastiches in the writing, arranging,
performing and production. The songs encompassed all phases of Beatles
music.
Many of the top comedians of the day had cameos in the film. These
included fellow Python Michael Palin, and several players from the
original "Saturday Night Live" cast - including John Belushi, Bill
Murray, Dan Aykroyd and Gilda Radner.
Two top rock stars also had cameos, playing themselves. Mick Jagger and
Paul Simon gave interviews discussing their memories and feelings about
the mythical Rutles. Other cameos featured Rolling Stone Ron Wood and
Bianca Jagger.
Last, and certainly not least, George Harrison (a longtime friend of
Innes - and at that time recently be-friended by Idle) made a memorable
appearance as a TV interviewer. The presence of a Beatle in the TV
special confirmed the affectionate nature of the spoof.
The film was a big hit with Beatles fans around the world, Many Beatles
fans became enthusiastic Rutles fans and eventually Rutles memorabilia
started to show up at Beatles fan conventions alongside the traditional
Beatles colllectibles.
When the "All You Need Is Cash" film was eventually released on home
video, its stature as a cult classic - which had been considerably
enhanced by the success of the soundtrack album - grew still further -
and a Rutles cult following blossomed. Often cited as the definitive
rock music parody, it certainly influenced later projects such as
"Spinal Tap." In 1996 the film was reissued in America by Rhino Home
Video.
This was #1 of 12. Please go to #2 of 12 next. Thanks.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
>
THE RUTLES
The Full True Story
(A Nasty Tale....)
Part 2 of 12
THE BIRTH OF THE RUTLES
The Rutles story actually started long before 1978. Ten years earlier -
two of Britain’s leading young comedic talents met for the first time
while working on a kids comedy-skit show for British TV.
In 1968 Paul McCartney produced Neil Innes’ song "I’m The Urban
Spaceman" as a single for his group The Bonzo Dog Band - under the
pseudonym Apollo C. Vermouth (!) The record was a top ten hit in
England. The band was then booked to be the resident band on a British
comedy TV show for kids called "Do Not Adjust Your Set." The program -
which was one of the antecedents of Monty Python - had a cast of
writer-performers which included future Python members Michael Palin,
Terry Jones, Terry Gilliam - and Eric Idle.
Eric Idle and Neil Innes became friends. Seven years later they would
collaborate on The Rutles.
When Monty Python became successful in the UK in early 1970’s - the
Python members who had worked on "Do Not Adjust Your Set" recalled
Innes’ talents as a writer and performer of comedic music - and Innes
rapidly became an indispensable additional member of the Python troupe.
He wrote and performed songs for their stage shows ("How Sweet To Be An
Idiot") movies (songs for "Holy Grail") and records - and was
frequently seen in cameo roles (eg the minstrel in "Holy Grail.")
In 1975, Eric Idle was given his own sketch comedy series by BBC TV in
the UK. Idle was to write and appear in all the shows. He invited Neil
Innes to write and perform all the music for the series. And also to be
one of the regular comedic actors in the skits. The show was titled
"Rutland Weekend TV." (The name was a humorous amalgam of "Rutland" -
the name of England’s smallest county and "London Weekend TV" - the name
of the real TV station servicing London’s TV viewers just on weekends.)
The premise was simple. The TV network of the title was the world’s
smallest TV station - working on a shoestring - and all the sketches
played off this comedic device. Sort of similar to what SCTV later did.
In his role as the program’s musical creator - Innes would devise
musical skits for the show. One idea he had was for the fictional
network to produce its own (obviously cheesy) low-budget spoof of
Richard Lester’s Beatles film "A Hard Day’s Night." So Innes developed
a skit with a Beatle-esque band performing a song within the framework
of such a movie - and he wrote and recorded a song called "I Must Be In
Love" for this particular skit. He presented a demo version of his
intentionally Beatle-esque song to Idle along with his idea.
Idle liked the idea - and he linked Innes’ idea with a notion he
separately developed for a spoof on TV documentaries and their earnest
narrators. Thus was born the idea for a mini-documentary about a
Beatle-esque band.
Innes had not yet named his mock Beatle band - and it was Idle who
"conceived and created" the name The Rutles - a play on the "Rutland" of
the TV show title and the Beatles’ name. Innes later ruefully conceded
that at first he was not in favor of the name. However Idle sought his
permission to name Innes’ creation "The Rutles" - and Innes agreed.
Idle also "conceived and created" the names of the four characters - Ron
Nasty, Dirk McQuickly, Stig O’Hara and Barry Wom.
(These facts became crucial to a dispute which arose between Idle and
Innes in 1996.)
Innes’ recollection of the sequence of the creative genesis of the skit
is crystal-clear. However he has never attempted to claim SOLE credit
for the origin of the Rutles. And he has always been swift to credit
Idle as the co-creator - saying that while he had had the initial
concept of a spoof Beatlesque band from a parallel universe - it took
Idle’s enthusiasm and additional ideas to develop what would have
otherwise been a one-off skit into a gag which had longevity.
"If Eric hadn’t come up with the ‘Rutles’ names and the idea of spoofing
pompous TV documentaries - then I’d have almost certainly dropped the
idea after we did it the first time. So Eric must be credited with
developing the original idea."
Innes has been telling the identical story to interviewers and pals
since 1975. And the key facts of his story have also been confirmed by
the memories of Rutles drummer John Halsey and the TV show’s producer -
Ian Keill of the BBC.
This was #2 of 12. Please go to #3 of 12 next. Thanks.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
>
>
THE RUTLES
The Full True Story
(A Nasty Tale....)
Part 3 of 12
Surprisingly however, Eric Idle - who has been rightly cherished all
these years by us Monty Python fans for the brilliance of his writing
and his performances in the Python TV shows and movies - is considerably
less gracious towards his creative partner. When, in January 1997,
circumstances caused Eric Idle to come up with his own written history
of the project’s conception - he was nowhere near as generous in his
sharing of credit. Recalling on paper for the first time events that had
occurred some 22 years earlier - in his version Neil Innes’ role in the
birth of the Rutles was rather diminished and almost incidental. He was
described as being merely the show’s songwriter who had given Eric a
demo of some songs for possible inclusion in the program. Idle then
described how he was lounging around his French villa one summer day in
1975 listening to the demos when he apparently heard a Beatlesque song
which very suddenly inspired him. In his own words:
"One of the songs sounded so very like the Beatles of "A Hard Days
Night" era that it came to me in a flash: we should do it as The Rutles,
and at the same time I got this gag of a TV interviewer walking....."
A remarkably inspiring moment... It’s almost as the idea came to him
from a man on a flaming pie!!!
Neil Innes describes Idle’s history as "deeply personal" - adding dryly:
"That sounds much better than self-aggrandizing, doesn't it?"
Friends who know both Idle and Innes point out that the contradictions
between Innes’ recollections (which have been confirmed by others) and
Idle’s uncorroborated perspective may have a lot to do with their
previous and subsequent work methods. For example Innes has a long
record of creative collaborations ranging from his memberships in the
Bonzo Dog Band, comedic music-poetry ensemble GRIMMS and of course his
work as an ‘associate’ Python. In these capacities Innes has always
been an enthusiastic team player - understanding and respecting the
collaborative nature of the creative process.
Idle however, has always been a ‘loner.’ Even within the Pythons he was
a ‘solo’ writer. While John Cleese and Graham Chapman formed one
writing partnership - and Michael Palin and Terry Jones formed another -
Idle was always the loner. The George Harrison... the Roger
Waters.... the John Entwistle of the team. And after so many years as a
solo writer within a group - he has developed a rather ‘possessive’
attitude towards everything he has ever worked on. Sharing credit comes
harder to him.
In any event - the skit was shot in November 1975. It was just one of
many skits for the program - which ran on the BBC for two short series -
each of 6 shows in 1975 and 1976. The Rutles skit was shown in the
second series in 1976. It was well-received - but it did not excite any
special attention in Britain. BBC’s experiment with giving Eric Idle his
own TV show ceased production after just 12 episodes. ("Monty
Python’s Flying Circus" had run for 45 episodes plus 2 specials.)
In 1976 BBC Records issued an album of songs from the TV series - and
this included Neil Innes’ Rutles song "I Must Be In Love" and also a
prototype second Rutles song by Innes - "The Children Of Rock ‘n’ Roll"
- which subsequently became "Good Times Roll." There was also a Rutland
Weekend TV comedy book which included a few Rutles jokes - and this
further perpetuated the gag.
In October 1976, Idle, who of course had achieved fame as a member of
Monty Python, was invited to New York to host an edition of NBC’s
"Saturday Night Live." To help fill up his hosting slots, Idle took
several video extracts from "Rutland Weekend TV" with him to play on the
show. The Rutles skit attracted a good reaction - and SNL executive
producer Lorne Michaels suggested that the idea might be expanded to
make a TV special - a full-length spoof documentary about the mythical
group.
Idle agreed that it might be a good idea - and immediately contacted his
Rutles co-creator Neil Innes. Central to any attempt to make a TV
special was whether Innes could write sufficient songs. Writing a
series of gags spoofing the Beatles story was one thing. But to fulfill
the concept of a full documentary it was essential to have songs that
covered every stage of the Beatles musical evolution. The songs would
have to span the entire career of the fictional Rutles - and be as
deliciously apt and enjoyable as "I Must be In Love."
It was a mammoth task. The Beatles had embraced so many musical styles
and gone through so many changes in their 7 short years as a recording
band. Writing and recording 20 completely new songs that would distill
the essence of the band - and at the same time be witty pastiches of the
Beatles - was a gargantuan creative undertaking. It meant that Innes had
to write songs that would spoof the entire Beatles songbook - ranging
from the simplicity of 1962 to the sophistication and artistic heights
of the late 60’s.
Innes thought about it - and then accepted the challenge. Secure in
knowing that Innes would provide the central backbone to the documentary
- Idle was then able to accept Lorne Michaels’ offer - and he turned his
attention to writing a script.
So in January 1977, Innes settled down in the depths of a very bleak
British winter and started to write the songs and recruite the musicians
to play them. Meanwhile Idle - flush with the profits of his membership
of Monty Python - drew the grim assignment of living in a villa in
Barbados for several weeks in early 1977 while writing the script!
This was #3 of 12. Please go to #4 of 12 next. Thanks.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
>
>
THE RUTLES
The Full True Story
(A Nasty Tale....)
Part 4 of 12
In the original casting Eric Idle was set to play the documentary
narrator in the film. Discussions were then held on who would portray
the members of the Rutles.
Neil Innes - who in the original TV skit had played the John Lennon/Ron
Nasty character - and drummer John Halsey - who had played the Ringo
Starr/Barry Wom character - were asked to reprise their roles.
A South African musician acquaintance of Idle - Ricky Fataar - was
invited to play the George Harrison/Stig O’Hara character - a part which
had actually been portrayed by Idle in the TV show.
In the original skit, the Paul McCartney/Dirk McQuickly character had
been played by a cast member of the TV show named David Batley. While a
likable actor - he wasn’t thought to be ideal for the film. So a search
was undertaken for a more suitable ‘Dirk.’
It has never before been known that the first choice for the role was
NOT Eric Idle. It was in fact the musician Innes, Halsey and Fataar had
already invited to be the ‘fourth Rutle’ on record - Ollie Halsall.
Halsall - a longtime bandmate of John Halsey - was widely regarded by
his fellow musicians as one of Britain’s best ‘undiscovered’ talents.
Halsall was a superb guitarist and vocalist - always on the edge of
stardom. Halsall was duly cast as ‘Dirk’ - and the four Rutles settled
down to rehearse and record the twenty new songs Innes had created for
the soundtrack.
Idle meanwhile left Barbados and settled down in a New York apartment to
complete the script and spend time with Lorne Michaels. Shortly after
this, Innes and his three fellow Rutles received some news. The word
came from ‘America’ that the show would be more appealing to American
television viewers if they could see more of the well-known ex-Python -
Eric Idle in the special. At that point Idle was due to play just the
part of the narrator (and another cameo as a drugged-up musicologist.)
Idle was thus selected to play the Paul McCartney character - and Ollie
Halsall was dropped from his on-screen role. His friend John Halsey
recalls Halsall being very disappointed by the decision - but stoic in
continuing to be the real ‘fourth Rutle’ in musical terms - including
providing the ‘Dirk’ voice which Idle would mime to in the special.
As a footnote - the real ‘fourth Rutle’ was glimpsed fleetingly in the
film. When the script called for a photograph of The Rutles in their
Hamburg days - with a fifth member (recalling The Beatles with Stu
Sutcliffe) Innes and Halsey insisted on Halsall being in the shot -
posing as "Leppo" - the ‘fifth Rutle.’
The filming of the TV special was fairly enjoyable for the cast. Lorne
Michaels had engaged one of his favorite SNL discoveries - Gary Weis -
to direct the special. Weis was known for his very funny short films
shown regularly on SNL - a filmmaking role he had taken over from Albert
Brooks. Idle had also been keen to try and become a director so - as a
compromise - he was allowed to co-direct with Weis.
(Idle incidentally claims to have written some of the short films which
Weis directed for SNL - though a careful examination of all the SNL
credits and Writers Guild archives reveals no such activity. Idle later
explained that he hadn’t received credit because of "budgets and Writers
Guild requirements")
Weis believed in fostering a collaborative spirit among the cast and
Idle (who had written the shooting script) took this to heart by
encouraging his fellow cast members to ad-lib and contribute improvised
moments during the filming. Many of these lines and visual gags were
used in the finished special. However Idle took the sole credit as the
film’s writer - and none of the other cast members received any credit
for their improvised comedic contributions. (This was presumably due to
"budgets and Writers Guild requirements.")
The TV show received its premiere in America - as a prime-time special
on NBC in the spring of 1978. While it was a critical success with some
reviewers (and subsequently has become a cult classic through the
success of the music and the film’s later distribution on home video) -
ironically in view of the reasons for the late casting change in the
show - the program did NOT have a large viewership. In fact it had the
distinction of ranking 65th out of 65 shows that week - and it ranks as
one of the all-time lowest-rated prime-time network TV shows of that
era! An unfortunate verdict on the drawing-power of Eric Idle’s name
and face with the American public!
However - the soundtrack album featuring Neil Innes’ Rutles music was
much better received - and sold well throughout the world. It was also
nominated for a Grammy.
Despite the success of the album -The Rutles never appeared as a group
in concert or on TV (other than in the original TV special.)
There was just one TV performance in April 1977 on NBC’s "Saturday
Night Live" by Neil Innes previewing his role as Ron Nasty. (This was
before the film had been shot.) On the show, ‘Ron Nasty’ debuted one of
his new Rutles songs - the soon-to-be-a-classic "Cheese And Onions."
(A few years later, this performance turned up on a Beatles bootleg
album - presented as though it was a rare John Lennon recording!) On
the same show - performing as himself - Innes also sang an early version
of a song called "Shangri-La" - which 19 years later he would revamp and
Rutle-ize for the "Archaeology" album.
For 16 long years after the film’s TV premiere there was no further
activity on the Rutles front. However - with the release of the film on
video and the US re-release of the album on CD, the stature of the
Rutles continued to grow. In 1990 an American ‘indie’ label even
released an album ("Rutle Highway Revisited") devoted entirely to covers
of Rutles songs by hip, alternative rock artists - such as Syd Straw!
This was #4 of 12. Please go to #5 of 12 next. Thanks.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
>
>
THE RUTLES
The Full True Story
(A Nasty Tale....)
Part 5 of 12
THE RE-BIRTH OF THE RUTLES
The seeds of the 1996 Rutles reunion were sewn in 1994.
The idea arose out of some appearances Neil Innes made at Beatlefest in
1994. American-based British humorist/producer Martin Lewis - who had
been co-hosting Beatlefest in L.A.and NY since the early 90’s - proposed
his old friend Neil Innes as a guest. Neil was booked to appear at all
three Beatlefests that year.
(Lewis and Innes had been friends since 1976 when Lewis had produced a
London benefit show featuring Innes, called "A Poke In The Eye" - the
first of what subsequently became the "Secret Policeman’s Ball" series
of benefits for Amnesty International.)
Innes’ appearances at the NY and Chicago Beatlefests (in March and
August respectively) were a great success. As a guest, Innes spoke of
his Beatles-related history - including appearing in "Magical Mystery
Tour" and his band being produced by Paul McCartney. But to his
surprise and pleasure he discovered that Beatles fans were even keener
to hear him talking about his musical creation - the Rutles - and to
hear him perform Rutles songs. What really delighted Innes was the fact
that at least half of the Beatlefest attendees were aged 25 and under.
And yet these fans were knowledgeable and enthusiastic about a project
that had happened back in 1978 - spoofing a band from a time before they
were born!
Fans especially loved hearing Innes perform his Rutles songs - which he
did using Beatlefest house band Liverpool.
Later in 1994, Lewis - who produced all the "Secret Policeman’s Ball"
shows, movies and albums which over the course of the series had starred
all of the Pythons (with the rather curious exception of Eric Idle)
created, produced and hosted a 6-day film and TV festival in Los Angeles
called "Monty Python: Lust For Glory" - as part of the official Monty
Python 25th Anniversary celebrations.
(Incidentally - it has never been established why - while all the other
five members of Monty Python have been very generous and consistent
supporters of Amnesty International since 1976 - donating performing,
writing and directing services to numerous benefits - Idle has never
participated in a single show. One benefit even featured an officially
billed Monty Python including ‘associate’ members Neil Innes and Carol
Cleveland - performing Python material. Though Idle was in the same
city - he still did not appear or perform - and his place was taken on
that occasion by British comedic icon, the late Peter Cook. It is still
not known why Idle is the only Monty Python member never to have to
contributed his services in support of the Nobel Peace prize-winning
human rights organization.)
Presented in September 1994 - the 25th anniversary festival included the
presentation of not just official Python projects - but also various
Python solo and spin-off projects - including the Rutles film. In
addition to the presence of Python members Eric Idle, Terry Jones and
Terry Gilliam (and long-distance support from Michael Palin and John
Cleese) - Lewis arranged for longtime Python associates Carol Cleveland
and Neil Innes to attend the festival as speaking guests.
Lewis also suggested that - as an adjunct to the Python festival - Neil
Innes perform a show of Rutles music - in character as Ron Nasty.
Producing the event - Lewis teamed up Innes with a local Beatles tribute
band The MopTops - and the concert was jokingly billed as a performance
by "Ron Nasty & The NEW Rutles." (Innes and Lewis were satirizing how
cheesy concert promoters sometimes bill solo shows by ex-members of
famous long-disintegrated bands.)
The show - held at the legendary Troubadour Club in Los Angeles - was an
immediate sell-out, and a second show was added - which also sold out.
The first show was especially notable in that Innes and Lewis secured
the services of movie composer John Altman (who had arranged and
conducted the orchestral backing on the Rutles album) to assemble and
conduct "The Rutland Symphony Orchestra" - eight tuxedo-clad, top
classical musicians - who provided orchestral accompaniment for the
late-60’s era symphonic Rutles tunes!
Among stars in attendance at the shows were Beatles reunion producer
Jeff Lynne, Julian Lennon, Spinal Tap member Harry Shearer and British
musician Seal.
In addition to the Python members - other Python associates and pals of
Eric Idle in L.A. for the festival. included "Python Girl" Carol
Cleveland - and two composers associated with Python and solo Python
movies - John Du Prez (various songs from "Meaning Of Life") and the
aforementioned John Altman - both of whom had worked closely with Eric
Idle on Python and solo projects.
Critical and public reaction was glowing - and was a major factor in
inspiring the reunion of the original performing Rutles. (The Los
Angeles Times review of the show raved: "Fabulous! Beatles music from
a parallel universe!")
Longtime Neil Innes friend and Rutles fan George Harrison was unable to
attend the shows - but sent a special greeting for Innes - to be read to
the audiences at both shows - and he insisted on Innes giving him a
first-hand account of the shows when he returned to England.
Ironically - and unbeknown to Innes - all of this public appreciation of
Innes was sowing the seeds of a rift between Innes and Idle.
This was #5 of 12. Please go to #6 of 12 next. Thanks.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
THE RUTLES
The Full True Story
(A Nasty Tale....)
Part 6 of 12
Much to the surprise of his fellow Pythons, who were very happy that
their pal - the very under-sung Innes was at last receiving a little
public appreciation for his work - and much to the disappointment of the
public, Idle pointedly refused to attend either of the two Rutles gigs -
which took place just 10 minutes from his L.A. home. He rebuffed Innes’
invitations to attend in any capacity.
Innes was mystified and hurt by Idle’s attitude. Lewis - a pal of Innes
since 1976 - who was (and remains) close to several of the Pythons - but
not Idle - stayed loyal to Innes during this situation and this
apparently incurred Idle’s wrath. As Lewis later found out.
Though Innes was mystified by Idle’s attitude, two people who were pals
and work colleagues of Idle - and who were well aware of the background
of the Rutles project - tried to explain Idle’s hostility. They were
not attempting to justify his behavior. They were merely trying to
place it in context and explain WHY Idle seemed so distant and cold
towards Innes.
They explained that in Britain (where Innes was better known) most fans
were aware that the Rutles was truly an equal collaboration between two
very talented people. It was a product of Neil’s brilliant music and
his Ron Nasty portrayal. And it was equally a product of Eric’s
skillful script and his professional turns as the narrator and Dirk
McQuickly.
But they pointed out that in America in 1978, Innes had only a fraction
of the recognizability that Idle had owing to his Python work.
Accordingly Idle had naturally received the bulk of the media and public
credit in America for the Rutles project.
(In fairness to Idle - it should be noted that it is very common for
entertainment industry publicists to latch on to the most familiar name
in a project and use that as the device to secure media attention. As a
member of the beloved Monty Python, Idle’s name had some recognition
value. An examination of publicity materials distributed by NBC in 1978
presents Idle as though he was the sole creator of the Rutles. Innes’
name - on the rare occasions it was even mentioned - was simply the guy
who did the music and played one of the characters. This could have
just been the pragmatic actions of network publicists looking for the
easiest way to sell the project. This writer has not discovered any
evidence that the emphasis on promoting Idle was at his personal
insistence - though it is plausible that as the sole billed star this
approach had his blessing or - at the very least - his acquiescence.)
In any event - for 16 years the Rutles had been perceived in America not
as an equal collaboration between Idle and Innes - but as the sole
brainchild of Idle - with "music by some guy called Neil Innes."
Now Idle was living in Hollywood - in the heart of the entertainment
community. And - apart from his Monty Python work in 1969-1975 and the
"Life Of Brian" and "Meaning of Life" films - none of his solo work had
been successful either critically or commercially. His recent solo film
"Splitting Heirs" had been savaged by the critics and had died at the
box office. He was earning money not from his writing - but from his
character acting roles as a stock comedic Englishman in
middle-of-the-road films such as "Nuns On The Run" and "Casper The
Friendly Ghost" He was no longer the young comedic genius... the next
Charlie Chaplin or Robin Williams. That potential had sadly not
materialized. He had turned into a latter-day Terry-Thomas (the
respected but unspectacular middle-aged comedic English actor of the
50’s and 60’s - seen in movies such as "Those Magnificent Men In Their
Flying Machines.")
The reputation of The Rutles as a cult success was thus his only success
(in America) outside of the Pythons in a 28 year career. And, by design
or default - he had enjoyed SOLE credit for that project in America for
16 years.
Now there was a plethora of media and public acclaim that was belatedly
shining a spotlight on Neil Innes’ music and showing that it was just as
important a part of the Rutles as the film script. Idle was of course
the worthy CO-creator of the project. But he was NOT after all, the
sole creator of his one solo (critical) success. And Idle was intensely
uncomfortable with this fact emerging.
Well - that is the theory of two of Idle’s own pals... They plead for
understanding of Idle’s position. It was only human they say, that
faced with this sudden and unexpected emergence of praise for Neil Innes
and articles recalling Innes’ role in Rutles history - a story that by
its very nature contradicted the popularly-held misconceptions about
Idle having been the sole creator of the Rutles - that Idle might panic.
They use the analogy of the embarassment of the US military leader who
had many legitimate medals honoring his valor and courage but who had
been erroneously awarded a medal for his brave conduct in Viet Nam.
Unlikely to be challenged for it, he hadn’t been able to resist the
temptation to wear it alongside his honestly-earned awards. When his
dishonesty was revealed in an article in Newsweek magazine - his shame
was so intense that he took his own life.
The discrepancy here of course was much smaller. The difference between
having taken sole credit rather than shared credit. But the principle
they say is the same. The person caught out in a lie has feelings of
embarrassment and humiliation. Some turn repentant or remorseful. And
try to graciously repair the damage done as an act of contrition.
Others react violently - denying the truth that has emerged - and
attacking the ‘villains’ who have exposed the lie. Idle has many
qualities - but he never been accused of being the touchy-feely type who
seeks forgiveness for his sins.
So - with great irony, a real life John vs Paul rift was developing
between the Ron Nasty "John" character (Innes) and the Dirk McQuickly
“Paul” character(Idle).
How savage this would become - and the "How Do You Sleep?" style swipe
that Innes would subsequently make at Idle - was all in the future....
This was #6 of 12. Please go to #7 of 12 next. Thanks.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
pblu...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <7fdoq6$u37$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
>
THE RUTLES
The Full True Story
(A Nasty Tale....)
Part 7 of 12
Later in 1994, Lewis (who started his career in 1971 working as a
publicist under the post-Beatles Derek Taylor) was reunited working with
Taylor (albeit by the phone and fax lines connecting London and L.A.)
when he was hired as special consultant to Capitol Records on the
marketing of the “Live At The BBC” and “Anthology” projects. After the
success of Innes’ Beatlefest appearances and the L.A. Troubadour shows -
and knowing what was in the pipeline from the Beatles - Lewis proposed
to Innes that he should record and release a Rutles parody of the
forthcoming “Anthology” project. Innes took time to consider the idea.
He liked the idea - but he wanted to wait a while before making a
decision.
Lewis and Innes stayed in contact discussing the idea throughout 1995.
Innes continued to be open to the idea - but decided that he didn’t want
to bring out a Rutles album at the same time as the first volume of
“Anthology.”
In November 1995 Lewis spent a little time in London with his mentor and
old friend Derek Taylor. Lewis interviewed him for his “Re-Meet the
Beatles” E! TV special about the “Anthology.” Taylor had been a Vice
President of Warner Bros. Records in L.A. during the era of the Rutles
album in 1978 and had been the project’s strongest proponent at the
label. Now he had been lured back to Apple to direct the worldwide
marketing of “Anthology.”
Lewis was keen to hear what Taylor would think about Innes doing a spoof
of the “Anthology.” To his delight, Taylor agreed that it was an
excellent idea. Taylor was a neighbor of Innes and a great fan of his
work. He also knew how much George Harrison cherished his friendship
with Neil and his creativity. Having worked so closely with the Rutles
in 1977 - he also had no illusions as to who had actually created the
Rutles’ music. Lewis relayed news of Taylor’s positive attitude to
Innes - who was pleased that Taylor was so supportive.
By Christmas 1995, after seeing the immense attention paid to the
“Anthology” TV shows and the first album - Innes was almost ready to
bring back the Rutles and he and Lewis had further extensive
conversations about the project.
Before finally making up his mind, Innes consulted with his pal George
Harrison - who regularly made joking references to the Beatles as being
the Rutles. How would George feel if Neil made a Rutles album spoofing
the “Anthology” ? George gave him his blessing with the simple answer:
“Why not? It’s all part of the soup.” ie - the Rutles had become part
of the glorious melange of Beatledom.
The encouragement of George Harrison and Derek Taylor certainly touched
Innes. He decided to proceed with making an album - and asked Lewis to
executive produce the reunion project.
Innes would be responsible for writing, performing and producing all the
music. Lewis would take responsibility for securing the necessary
record and publishing agreements. And subsequently for devising and
coordinating all the publicity and marketing strategies for the project.
Innes settled down to write new material for the album, to comb his real
Rutles archives for any actual ‘Anthology’ - type unreleased recordings
- and to see if any of his own existing compositions would be suitable
candidates for Rutle-ization.
Central to his plans, was his desire to make the project a genuine
reunion of the musical team who had made the first Rutles album. He
drew together drummer John Halsey (who had retired from music to rub a
pub in the English countryside!); Ricky Fataar (who as a top
multi-instrumental session musician was drumming for artists such as
Bonnie Raitt and Boz Scaggs on the road and in the studios); however the
reunion could not be entirely complete because guitarist/singer Ollie
Halsall had sadly passed on in 1992.
“We weren’t interested in doing a parody of the Beatles any more as such
- as just doing a Rutles album and if Ollie Halsall hadn’t died he would
have been there. It’s just bizarre that there is also only three of
us.” said Innes.
(Second part of #7 to follow)
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
pblu...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <7fdq0u$uvt$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
There was an eerie and bittersweet echo of the Beatles “Anthology” in
that Innes discovered rehearsal tapes from 1977 of three songs that were
not used in the original film or album. And those three tracks of
course featured Ollie Halsall. Innes made a point of incorporating all
three on to the “Archaeology” album. Two of those tracks were fairly
complete. The third track (which became “Unfinished Words” was actually
just a very sparse 1977 backing track featuring Ollie Halsall - on which
the three surviving Rutles were able to add new music to make a song.
Unplanned shades of “Free As A Bird” and “Real Love.” And - for the
three Rutles - every bit as poignant.
Also from the team that made the first album, Innes brought back
arranger/composer John Altman to arrange and conduct the orchestral
sessions and engineer Steve James to engineer and co-produce the new
album with him.
Now at this time he did not anticipate a close collaboration with Idle.
He was only intending to make an album - not a film. And of course
though it was not widely known by the public, a careful reading of the
credits of the original album confirms that Eric Idle actually had
absolutely no involvement whatsoever in the original “All You Need Is
Cash” album - other than writing the liner notes and appearing in the
photos with the real musicians.
Neil Innes had written and produced the whole album and soundtrack.
Innes, drummer John Halsey, multi-instrumentalist Ricky Fataar and
guitarist Ollie Halsall (in musical terms the actual fourth Rutle) had
provided all the vocals. Idle’s singing voice did not sound remotely
like McCartney’s voice - and he had been politely but firmly dissuaded
from trying to sing on the album. He just mimed the Dirk vocals in the
film. In a very real sense - Eric had been the Milli Vanilli of the
Rutles! (This fact had irked “Dirk” - and the ‘slight’ as he perceived
it - had kept him secretly angry at Innes for 16 years! As will be
seen...)
Despite the fact that there was no creative need to involve Idle in a
MUSICAL project - as a courtesy to his friend and former collaborator,
Innes contacted Idle to inform him of his plans and he warmly invited
him to participate in any way he might like. Perhaps to direct or
appear in a music video or write liner notes. Anything he wanted.
"We asked Eric if he wanted to get involved and he declined. But it's
understandable because Eric really didn't have anything to do with the
music the first time
around." said Innes at the time of the album’s release.
In fact Idle had replied very coldly that he didn’t want to be involved
and that Innes should simply take care of any legal permissions
required.
He did however remind Innes that he considered himself the SOLE creator
of the Rutles (an arrogant attitude that saddened and disappointed
Innes.)
When Innes was writing the lyrics for a new song on the album
(“Unfinished Words”) - he used it as a way to comment on Idle’s strange
posture.
(This action of course mirrored the way that Lennon and McCartney would
incorporate jibes to each other in their solo work in the early 70’s.)
Referring to the fact that his longtime friend Idle was now implying
that Innes couldn’t even pretend to be Ron Nasty (who was of course just
pretending to be John Lennon) without Idle’s permission - Innes inserted
a very cutting reference to Idle and the situation in a special
spoken-word sequence in the song:
“I can't pretend to be
Someone who pretends to be
Someone else
Or so my ‘pretend’ friend tells me...”
‘Pretend’ friend.... Ouch!!!! Shades of “How Do You Sleep?” !!!
This was #7 of 12. Please go to #8 of 12 next. Thanks.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
pblu...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <7fe2n2$61b$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
THE RUTLES
The Full True Story
(A Nasty Tale....)
Part 8 of 12
When the original Rutles film and album were made in 1978 - all the
rights including the Rutles name and the name of all the Rutles
characters naturally became the copyright of the film’s production
company - Lorne Michaels’ company Broadway Video.
Lewis met with them in New York to inform them of Innes’ desire to do a
new album. Broadway Video couldn’t have been more pleased. Sales of
the film (which had not been a commercial hit in 1978) had tailed off to
less than a trickle. And apart from the reissue of the original album
in the USA by Rhino Records - album income was also minimal.
So the prospect of a new Rutles album was great news. Obviously
Broadway Video as owners of the film and original album would make a lot
of money re-selling TV and home video rights to the film - and
encouraging reissues of the album outside America.
Broadway Video and Eric Idle as the major profit-participants in the
original project were certain to reap a financial windfall - without
doing a thing - or risking a penny.
All because Neil Innes was prepared to work hard and create a whole new
album of Rutles music.
Broadway Video (though technically owners of the word "Rutles") never
even thought to ask Neil Innes to pay them an override or percentage of
the new album in return for the use of the word "Rutles" on the new
album cover. There was no need to. It would have been ungracious and
ungentlemanly in the extreme. It would have been to do to an artist
what the rip-off merchants of the industry do to vulnerable or naive
artists. And Broadway Video and Lorne Michaels prided themselves on
having an enlightened, caring attitude to artists.
(Certain prominent performers - eg Harry Shearer - are on public record
questioning the validity of this reputation. But Innes had only ever had
cordial relations with Lorne Michaels and Broadway Video - and had no
reason to imagine anything to the contrary.)
The music of the Rutles had always been Innes’ sole terrain. And now
his creativity was going to reactivate their moribund property and
single-handedly generate unexpected new profits for Broadway Video and
Eric Idle.
So Innes and Lewis ploughed ahead with their plans.
In the spirit of the very friendly cooperation between Innes/Lewis and
Broadway Video - Lewis even paved the way for a substantial deal between
Broadway Video and VH1. Lewis pumped up VH1 to re-license the US TV
rights to the original film - so that it could be shown in conjunction
with the release of the new album. With all the excitement Innes’ new
album was generating VH1 coughed up a license fee of $35,000 - a very
hefty sum for an 18-year old film that was a ratings disaster when it
was originally shown on NBC - and which had performed very badly in
recent years when it had been shown on Comedy Central.
Clearly the key to all the interest and new revenue for Broadway Video
and Eric Idle was Neil Innes’ new album. Innes and Lewis neither asked
for - nor received a penny of commission for this valuable sales work -
nor did they expect to. It was all part of the mutual cooperation
between two parties who were helping each other out.
And if you think that Broadway Video and Eric Idle were thrilled with
all this. Well - you’d only be half-right. Broadway Video was very
happy. Lots of money coming its way. With no work, no investment and
no risk.
But Eric Idle had a different cause for concern. As Idle’s pals had
shrewdly observed in 1994 - Neil Innes was about to get a little
publicity and credit for his part in the Rutles story. And that posed a
couple of problems....
This was #8 of 12. Please go to #9 of 12 next. Thanks.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
pblu...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <7fe37p$6fl$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
THE RUTLES
The Full True Story
(A Nasty Tale....)
Part 9 of 12
One of the other reasons that Idle had rejected Innes’ invitation to be
involved in any capacity he chose in the new Rutles album was that he
was convinced that it would be a massive failure. And he wasn’t shy in
telling this to his pals. After all - what was a Rutles project without
Eric Idle? Who would want to issue a Rutles album without Eric Idle’s
face on the cover? What celebrities would want to appear as special
guests in a Rutles music video in which Eric was absent?
The answers had became apparent. And to his shock and horror - they
were the exact opposite of Idle’s assumptions.
A Rutles album without Eric Idle was exactly the same as the
Grammy-nominated 1978 Rutles album without Eric Idle. i.e. a total
delight to fans of the Beatles, Bonzos and fun music.
Virgin Records - home to Janet Jackson, the Rolling Stones, Smashing
Pumpkins and the Spice Girls had won the chase to sign Innes - and had
made a deal to issue the new Rutles album worldwide. They were very
excited about the project. The U.S. company’s President had even made
an appearance at the label’s annual national sales conference - in front
of thousands of employees of EMI-Virgin - dressed as a Rutle! This was
to signify how important a project this was to Virgin Records.
Massive Polygram Music had fought off various other publishers to win
the right to publish the new Rutles songs.
And a slew of major musicians, comedians and camp 60’s personalities had
responded to Martin Lewis’ personal invitation to appear in the music
video for the Rutles song "Shangri-La" - as part of a "We Are The World"
meets "Hey Jude" style singalong chorus,
These stars ranged from Peter Gabriel, Cyndi Lauper, Graham Nash and
Slash - to Ben E. King, Richie Havens and Gloria Gaynor - to Nancy
Sinatra, Pat Boone and Eartha Kitt - to Bill Maher, Janeane Garofalo and
Richard Belzer. An exceptionally impressive and eclectic mix for one
music video.
Stars who were unable to attend but who supported the project - ranged
from David Bowie, Don Henley ("I love Neil Innes! I’ve loved him from
the Bonzo days!" he told Lewis) and Sheryl Crow to Meg Ryan, Michael J.
Fox and Jane Fonda!
And these stars knew that Eric Idle was not a part of the project. Eric
Idle had completely underestimated the appreciation for Neil Innes and
his Rutles music.
Not only was Neil Innes about to get a long-delayed brief moment in the
sun - but a Rutles project WITHOUT the ‘irreplaceable’ Eric Idle was
apparently poised for success.
Idle decided to act. And what he did was devastating.
This was #9 of 12. Please go to #10 of 12 next. Thanks.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
Part 10 of 12
In September 1996 - in the crucial month before the “Archaeology” album
was released, Idle suddenly pressurized Broadway Video into putting
massive legal pressure on Innes to give Idle a big financial cut of the
“Archaeology” album (on which Idle had not written, played or sung a
single note) in return for the use of the word “Rutles” on the album
cover.
All the money that the new album had already generated for Idle as a
major profit-participant in the original project - counted for nothing.
And though the lawyers’ demands were primarily a request for financial
compensation in return for the permission to use the word “Rutles” -
there were also a slew of other demands about the use of Idle’s name and
likeness. This wasn’t just about money. In reality it was also a very
cunningly-planned wrecking ball.
For example photographs and video images from the original Rutles album
jacket and film (which Broadway Video and Rhino Records & Home Video had
given permission to be used as ‘flashback’ material in the new album
packaging and in the new music video which Virgin was making - now had
to be free of anything which was an identifiable likeness of Eric Idle.
This caused massive problems with the already-shot music video and the
already-completed CD packaging.
The CD packaging was hastily redesigned at great expense. Only two
vintage Rutles photos were now used. One spoofing the “Sgt. Pepper”
cover was trimmed to exclude the faces - so that Idle’s face was not
seen. The other photo however was shown in full. It was the photo of
the Rutles spoofing the “I Am The Walrus” sequence from “Magical Mystery
Tour.” The Rutles version of course had been called “Piggy In The
Middle.”
The record company felt safe in using this image because in the photo
Idle’s real face was covered with a pig’s head mask! It was felt that if
Idle wished to claim that this photo of him was clearly identifiable -
that this would make for a fascinating legal claim!
The art department were irritated at the last minute changes that Idle’s
demands caused. A ditty parodying Lennon’s “Glass Onion” lyric (“And
here’s another clue for you all... The walrus was Paul”) started
circulating. “And here’s another clue you can’t shirk.... The piggy
was Dirk!”)
Some of Idle’s initial demands had horrified Broadway Video. He had even
wanted to prevent Innes performing his Rutles music on TV. It had to be
explained to Idle that we Americans have a First Amendment right of free
expression - and that that right extended to his fellow Englishman Neil
Innes. That demand was dropped.
(Part 2 of #10 to follow)
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
pblu...@my-dejanews.com wrote:(part 2 of #10)
But every technical loophole was exploited - and very heavy legal
pressure was applied. Broadway Video privately let Lewis and Innes know
that they did not agree with Idle’s stance. But Idle was a “star” (or
once had been) and he was making a fuss. No one in the entertainment
world wants to piss off a star. Even a former star. Just in case he
ever makes a comeback...
(Had Broadway Video been able to foresee how big a disaster Eric Idle’s
next starring movie project would be - the dire “Burn Hollywood Burn”
which was awarded a “Razzie” for the worst film of 1998 - perhaps
Broadway would have stood up to the once and former Python star.)
But Broadway Video’s ostensible concerns were all expressed in terms of
concern not to abrogate Idle’s rights as an artist. Apparently the
legitimate rights of the four artists who had created the Rutles music -
Neil Innes, Ricky Fataar, John Halsey and the late Ollie Halsall -
didn’t count as much as those of the faded star who might one day make a
come-back.
Innes and Lewis were incensed but they were totally screwed. Facing a
threatened injunction against the album that would have prevented its
release - (yes Idle went that far) Innes very reluctantly gave in and
agreed to give Idle a large chunk of any profits of the new album - and
the album was finally released without a lawsuit being filed.
But Idle’s last-minute attack unnerved Virgin Records. It had suspended
all promotion plans and spending during the month-long legal battle.
By the time the dispute was settled - four weeks of essential
promotional work had been lost. Having missed setting up a slew of the
promotional events that Lewis had created - Virgin panicked and just
dumped the album with a token campaign. The hard-working publicity team
at Virgin was aghast. But once a record company panics on an album that
needs special handling - it’s dead. It is (to borrow from the Pythons)
an ex-project.
Part of the settlement that Idle forced on Innes demanded that Idle now
officially receive sole credit for the conception and creation of the
Rutles - which in truth had been a joint creation by Idle and Innes.
Hence the bizarre credit placed on the “Archaeology” album - “The Rutles
were conceived and created by Eric Idle.”
This was ridiculous not least because, as Innes pointed out - the
original conception and creation was by The Beatles. Innes had then
devised a witty parody of that creation. And Idle had then come up with
a whimsical name for THAT creation. Idle’s credit should have read:
“The Rutles’ name was conceived and created by Eric Idle - based on a
cross between the name of The Beatles and the name of the British county
of Rutland.”
Idle’s obsession with awarding himself this unjustified credit explains
two further credits and dedications that Innes then decided to put on
the album.
At the conclusion of the Rutles’ message to fans in the liner notes -
there were the following words:
“While we’d like to make the most of it and take all the credit - we
would like to thank four other guys without whom....”
This was a clear dig at Idle’s decision to take “all the credit” for the
creation of the Rutles.
And the list of special thanks for the album concludes with a simple
message from the four musicians who created the Rutles music - to four
fellow musicians:
“This album is dedicated to John, Paul, George & Ringo with love from
Neil, Ricky, John & Ollie.”
This was a reminder that the Rutles’ MUSIC was created by four musicians
who cherished the four musicians in the Beatles. Not by someone who
came up with a cutesy name for the musicians’ affectionate parody of the
Beatles’ music.
Idle hadn’t finished yet.....
This was #10 of 12. Please go to #11 of 12 next. Thanks.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
THE RUTLES
The Full True Story
(A Nasty Tale....)
Part 11 of 12
A very longtime mutual pal of Idle and Innes had attended the music
video filming and was writing about the project for a British
newspaper. She placed a friendly call to Idle while in the U.S. to say
hello. She knew about the violent legal battle raging - and she
considered it a terrible shame that Idle was causing Innes such pain.
In her heart she hoped that she could use her long friendship with Idle
to soothe whatever demons were driving him to attack Innes. She
couldn’t believe that her old friend was really behaving as badly as
she’d heard from so many of their mutual friends.
She decided to tell him how very proud he should be that something he
had created with Neil so many years before - still had a life - albeit
in a new incarnation. She wanted to tell him how cool it was that the
Rutles had attracted such wonderfully diverse folks as Peter Gabriel,
Cyndi Lauper, Ben E. King, Richie Havens, Janeane Garofalo, Richard
Belzer and Eartha Kitt to participate in the music video. She had barely
started when Idle went into a 20-minute rampage - screaming abuse and
vitriol at her for her betrayal in even being with Innes at the event.
This included calling her the worst words a man can utter to us women.
Yes, sad to report - but Idle told his dear old friend that she was "a
f*cking c*nt.")
The friend - who had provided emotional support to Idle in past years
when he had been going through troubled times - after his first wife had
left him - was horrified by his behavior and driven to tears. Devastated
- she telephoned a few of her closest pals - who comforted her and
expressed their sympathy for the unconscionable attack on her. Since she
moved in a very similar social circle to Idle - it wasn’t long before a
certain couple who had been fabulous friends to them both, heard
directly from her how she’d been blown away and caused pain by Idle. It
certainly was a pity and it certainly was a shame.
Many of Idle’s friends and colleagues were now commenting on his
bizarre, sociopathic rages. Some had seen it all before. Despite his
talents - and his incredible charm in the presence of the Hollywood
celebrities whose social approbation he appears to crave (apparently as
a validation of his star status) - Idle had always had a very dark
side. In England apparently, he had a longstanding reputation for
irrational behavior and for being ungracious.
He even thrived on it. His own biography proudly proclaims him as the
"sixth nicest" of the six Pythons. "What’s so great about being nice
anyway?" he jibes in his bio. "Many fine people have lived richly
fulfilling lives without having to worry about being nice. In fact many
great artists weren't very nice at all." The jokey words betray a real
attitude.
The other Pythons have become accustomed to this attitude over the last
30 years - and because they have continuing business interests in common
- have to tolerate it. Living 6,000 miles away from him and seing him
only very occasionally helps.
But they are unsparing about him behind his back. "Eric Idle gives
selfishness a bad name" is John Cleese’s openly-expressed and
widely-repeated description of his former colleague.
This is still a little surprising for us Python fans to hear. Eric Idle
has always had our affection because he is so funny and talented. We
have always known and appreciated that he had a very scarcastic approach
to life. But to our eyes, that has always been directed at targets
worthy of satirical attack. Somehow it doesn’t seem right or fair that
he would use that talent against his own friends. The existence of a
dark personal side has not been widely discussed in public. However,
among Idle’s friends and colleagues, it has been an open secret for the
past 30 years.
One former colleague who has known him since 1971 said: "This isn’t to
take away from his early talent. But he really does have major emotional
problems. Part of him can be utterly charming - especially if you’re
famous or can be useful to him. But another part of him can stab an old
pal in the back without a second thought. But he gets away with it
because he’s ‘Eric Idle of Monty Python.’ And he’s traded very
skillfully and successfully on that for 30 years. It’s a currency that
works especially well for him in Hollywood. He also has a very wicked
tongue - and no one wants to get on the wrong side of it. But it’s
rather like the Emperor’s New Clothes. One day - someone in Hollywood
is going to ask "what precisely has Eric Idle actually created lately on
his own that has had any critical, public or commercial success?" And
the true answer is that he hasn’t done anything of real note since the
disco era... " He’s like one of those old members of a band that was big
for a while in the 70’s. He’s a useful party guest because everyone
knows his face. It’s like having one of REO Speedwagon in your house.
But not a serious, respected player."
Anne James found that out the hard way. She was the loyal manager who
had supervised all the Python’s business dealings since the early 70’s -
including all the licensing and merchandising of the old product that
continues to fund them to this day In 1998 - Idle suddenly developed a
violent disliking for her - and he lobbied and pressurized his fellow
ex-Pythons into supporting him in terminating her contract. After over
25 years loyal service - she was suddenly history. In the light of that
- the irrational act that happened next can be understood more
clearly....
This was #11 of 12. Please go to #12 of 12 (the final segment) next.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
THE RUTLES
The Full True Story
(A Nasty Tale....)
Part 12 of 12 (The conclusion)
Even though he now stood to receive a sizable percentage of the profits
of the "Archaeology" album just for the use of the word "Rutles" on the
CD cover - Idle demonstrated that his real goal had not been to make
more money - but to sabotage any chance of success for Neil Innes or the
new Rutles album.
Despite the fact that Innes, his fellow Rutles and Lewis had all
exercised considerable restraint in all their media interviews in
September and October 1996 - and had never once voiced their private
anger at Idle’s blackmail tactics which had destroyed the album’s
chances - Idle was not so gracious.
He used the Python’s own website to attack a fellow ‘associate’ Python.
He slammed Innes for even recording a sequel to the album that had been
Innes’ sole creation - saying that he felt he had been "intellectually
raped." He also attacked Lewis. Though only seen by a limited number
of people, this sort of public smearing of the project on the official
Python website was the final straw.
Three years in the planning and making... An album that media and fans
alike were enjoying.... But a record company that had been scared out of
supporting the album for fear of what the next ‘snort’ from Eric Idle
might yield... The new album was now utterly dead. Innes was
heart-broken....
Though deeply disappointed with the results - and the financial damage
both of them suffered - Lewis and Innes seem to have stayed friends.
When Lewis revealed his tongue-in-cheek Beatles song hoax in January
1999 - Innes (who apparently knew of the hoax many years earlier) was
quoted in the New York Post saying: "God bless Martin for being able to
carry it off for 28 years. It was good fun."
But last year Innes paid the final toll of the enormous damage done by
Idle to the "Archaeology" album. Having sunk all his money into the
"Archaeology" project - which because of Idle’s legal threats was
stillborn on release - and faced with massive legal bills as a result of
his lawyers having to combat Idle - he went broke. He was forced to sell
the home he had been living in with his family for over 20 years.
Meanwhile - his ‘pretend’ friend of 31 years - Eric Idle - continues to
live in a multi-million dollar mansion in the Hollywood Hills. (Among
his other homes.)
Of the three surviving Rutles who created all the music - John Halsey
has returned to running a pub. Ricky Fataar is back on the road as a
touring musician. And after a distinguished 33 year career, Innes is
adjusting to poverty and is trying to rebuild his life.
Idle and Innes have not spoken or met for a long time. Lewis is still
livid at what Idle did to Innes - who had ostensibly been Idle’s friend
since 1968. Eric Idle says he refuses to speak to Lewis ever again.
Lewis says that for him that would be far too soon.
The Rutles’ "Archaeology" album title was chosen as a very loose spoof
of "Anthology." In the light of Eric Idle’s appalling betrayal of Neil
Innes perhaps Innes’ original title for the project would have been more
suitable. Innes had wanted to call the album "The Rutles: A Nasty
Business...."
This was #12 of 12. The End. Thank you for reading this.
CynLennin
>This was #12 of 12. The End. Thank you for reading this.
>
Thank you for posting this.
Wonderful and highly informative.
Even a good read. :)
Cyn
Go n-ithe an cat thú is go n-ithe an diabhal an cat.
Bernard1965
ISN'T ERIC IDLE A TWAT
Anyone know his e-mail address or website so I can tell him myself???
CynLennin <cynl...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990418234417...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
"Bernard1965" <Berna...@breathemail.net> wrote:
> EXCELLENT READ>>>>I LOVED IT
>
> ISN'T ERIC IDLE A TWAT
>
> Anyone know his e-mail address or website so I can tell him myself???
Thanks very much for the appreciative posts. It's gratifying that
people care about this. It makes me feel that it was worthwhile doing
all the research and interviews.
As to those who want to express their anger towards Eric Idle - this is
my view.
I don't believe that people are inherently evil or cruel. I think that
most times when people behave cruelly - they're acting out of their own
paranoia or selfishness. I don't think he woke up one morning and said
- "I'm going to screw Neil Innes." I think his behavior probably stems
from whatever unhappy emotional baggage he carries with him. I feel
sorry that someone so talented is so clearly screwed up.
I got the the impression that those his actions hurt are trying to move
on with their lives. Those people aren't seeking revenge. Eric Idle
probably needs help more than anything.
If he gains the wisdom to deal with his problems - then the world will
be a better place. If he doesn't - then perhaps it should just be left
to Karma (Instant or otherwise.) It gets everybody in the end.
Personally, I don't think challenging him directly or telling him what
we think would solve anything. It kind of reinforces all the negative
energy.
I think the best thing that could come out of this sad affair would be
if people start checking out the other great work that Neil Innes has
done. Maybe if record companies and TV stations etc. see and hear that
there is a demand for his albums with the Bonzos and his solo work -
then there'll be a deserved renewal of interest in this very talented
man.
And we as Rutles fans will be putting back some positive energy into the
world.
Peace.
Jeff U
<pblu...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
news:7fe83n$aem$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com...
> In article <7fe7ft$9ut$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
>
> This was #12 of 12. The End. Thank you for reading this.
>
>
Wonderful! Thank you for the article. I'll never be able to see Eric Idle
in the same light again. Too bad. Is there a Pyton newsgroup? You should
post the article there as well.
Jeff U.
moondog
pblu...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <7fe7ft$9ut$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
>
> THE RUTLES
> The Full True Story
> (A Nasty Tale....)
>
> This was #12 of 12. The End. Thank you for reading this.
Thank *you* for writing and posting it!
I've long admired Idle's python work, but would prefer to have a beer with
Palin...your article confirms why! :-)
Could you please cite your sources/references?
Thanks again for an interesting and well-written read.
Beatleboot
>Night Live" by Neil Innes previewing his role as Ron Nasty. (This was
>before the film had been shot.) On the show, ‘Ron Nasty’ debuted one of
>his new Rutles songs - the soon-to-be-a-classic "Cheese And Onions."
>(A few years later, this performance turned up on a Beatles bootleg
>album - presented as though it was a rare John Lennon recording!) On
>the same show - performing as himself - Innes also sang an early version
>of a song called "Shangri-La" - which 19 years later he would revamp and
>Rutle-ize for the "Archaeology" album.
I HAVE THIS!!! IT IS GREAT TO SEE NEIL DOING THIS ARCHAEOLOGY TRACK YEARS
BEFORE IT BECAME RUTLFIED!
Beatleboot
shared friendly conversation with him. He struck as a very charming and down
to earth gentleman. Is there any way that we can contact him to offer kind
words of support? If so, please let me know.
@vdijasi
<Osbo...@Sydney.BTAP.BT.com> wrote:
> pblu...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > In article <7fe7ft$9ut$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> >
> > THE RUTLES
> > The Full True Story
> > (A Nasty Tale....)
> >
> > This was #12 of 12. The End. Thank you for reading this.
>
> Thank *you* for writing and posting it!
>
> I've long admired Idle's python work, but would prefer to have a beer with
> Palin...your article confirms why! :-)
>
> Could you please cite your sources/references?
>
> Thanks again for an interesting and well-written read.
And good luck if Idle is anywhere near as litigious as you make him out to be!
I had the pleasure of chatting Neil up when Archaeology came out and he
certainly painted a less bitter picture (being the gentle soul he is),
citing some legitimate reasons for anxiety on Idle's part, like that since
Eric's part in the Rutles was comedy-based and since John Lennon's tragic
death has put something of a wet rag on Beatles parody since then, Eric
thought the Rutles reunion was a very bad idea. Neil, of course, always
intended for the reunion to be about the music, but the difference of
opinion is understandable.
Ah, well, if what you say is true and Neil is close to living in the
streets (I thought he had a new children's TV show in the UK - did that
fall apart?), then best of luck to him and Eric be damned. However, you'll
pardon me if I prefer to live in the fantasyland where (to paraphrase Neil
paraphrasing George Harrison) "the Beatles and the Rutles and the Pythons
all put aside their petty squabbles and kept performing - together!"
ali assa seen
Dave Haber
>you'll
>pardon me if I prefer to live in the fantasyland where (to paraphrase Neil
>paraphrasing George Harrison) "the Beatles and the Rutles and the Pythons
>all put aside their petty squabbles and kept performing - together!"
I think that all of the surviving Rutles (Mr. Idle not included) agree with
you. For them, it's all nice memories in the past, and they've
moved on. Unfortunately, for us Rutles fans, that means that Archaeology is
*it*. That's all she wrote and there aint no more.
Thanks, Eric!
-Dave
------------------------------------------------------------------------
bea...@getback.org (Dave Haber)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Internet Beatles Album - http://www.getback.org/
The Rutles Tragical History Tour - http://www.getback.org/rutles/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Nowhere you can be that isn't where you're meant to be" - John Lennon
"Love is the meaning of life, life is the meaning of love" - Ron Nasty
------------------------------------------------------------------------
xerxes
Jeff U wrote:
> <pblu...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
> news:7fe83n$aem$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com...
> > In article <7fe7ft$9ut$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
>
> >
> > This was #12 of 12. The End. Thank you for reading this.
> >
> >
>
> Wonderful! Thank you for the article. I'll never be able to see Eric Idle
> in the same light again. Too bad. Is there a Pyton newsgroup? You should
> post the article there as well.
>
> Jeff U.
Excellent article! Thank you very much for posting it. I agree with you that it
is a real shame that someone (Idle) can be so charming and talented in public,
and be so emotionally disturbed as well. Best wishes to Neil Innes.
--
"Come on is such a joy..."
Hey Jude Beatles Site
http://webhome.idirect.com/~jbikas/heyjudebeatles/
Susan Lawrence
I have read in a long time.
Was truly astonished, have been a fan
of Idle's for a long time. You mentioned
his biography, what is the title?
Thanks,
Sue
William Just
dave:
i seemed to have missed out on this 12 part article. would you be kind
enough to forward me the chapters or point me to a site where i could
read them. if not possible, thanks anyway...
In a previous article, bea...@getback.org (Dave Haber) says:
>
>From: bea...@getback.org (Dave Haber)
>Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
>Subject: Re: #12 of 12 - Rutles - full true story (very long!)
>Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 19:33:55 GMT
>X-ELN-Insert-Date: Tue Apr 20 12:35:11 1999
>References: <7fdirl$ped$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7fdkj1$qpu$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7fdm2j$rs9$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7fdnce$t38$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7fdoq6$u37$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7fdq0u$uvt$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7fe2n2$61b$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7fe
3
>7p$6fl$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7fe3nc$6ni$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7fe477$75r$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7fe6f8$90u$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7fe6r6$9f3$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7fe7ft$9ut$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7fe83n$aem$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <371BAE0D.5AFC36A3@Sy
d
>ney.BTAP.BT.com> <vndslvnksbv-20...@ip43.auschron.com>
>X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.01
>Organization: getback.org
>X-Posted-Path-Was: dave
>Lines: 25
>NNTP-Posting-Host: pool478-cvx.ds61-ca-us.dialup.earthlink.net
>X-ELN-Date: 20 Apr 1999 19:33:56 GMT
>Message-ID: <7fikr4$832$1...@oak.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
--
one love
rasta4I
jah bill
Dave Haber
>i seemed to have missed out on this 12 part article. would you be kind
>enough to forward me the chapters or point me to a site where i could
>read them. if not possible, thanks anyway...
Search for "rutles" on dejanews. That's how I got it all.
Douglas North
There is a Python NG, alt.fan.monty-python. I think they should read
this.
Douglas
"My natural exuberence spills out all over the place"
-Neil Innes
Dauber
>is a real shame that someone (Idle) can be so charming and talented in
>public, and be so emotionally disturbed as well. Best wishes to Neil Innes.
I haven't read the multi-post article yet, so I don't know what I'm missing...
ANYway...I'm jealous of my friend Robin. She has met all four Rutles --
three at Beatlefest in '97 [when I too met them], and Eric Idle a few years
before. She was at O'Hare Airport, and she bent over to pick up her
luggage...when she straightened up she saw that Eric Idle was in front of
her! She quietly thanked him for the years of laughter, and Eric
acknowledged her thanks, and added a quiet request to sort of keep it quiet
that he was there...
Could you imagine? A whole crowd at the world's busiest airport noticing
Eric Idle and just gathering around him?? I can just see Eric now:
"Uhhhhhh.........and now for something completely different??????"
[crowd goes wild...]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Dauber * ICQ: 28677921 | Probable mucosal damage may contraindicate
dau...@wallnet.com | the use of gastric lavage.
Ocean Grove, New Jersey | http://www.wallnet.com/~dauber
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Michelle, ma belle, Sunday monkey won't play piano song, play piano song.%
Maccadobi
Wonderful post. Thank you for getting the whole story out. And YES!
There is a Python NG, alt.fan.monty-python. I think they should read
this.
I heartily agree. I think all the Monty Python fans should know the real story
about what happened. The reason why I'm saying this is a few months ago I
posted a message to that newsgroup regarding Martin Lewis' website because in
my naivete about the Archaeology situation I thought people there would
recognize his name from his work with the Pythons and would want to sign the
Brian Epstein petition. Well, let's just say I was laughed at and Martin isn't
too popular over there. And later on I read a post from someone regarding why
Eric Idle didn't participate in the project, stating something to the effect
that Eric didn't like how Martin "muscled his way into the project" and decided
not to participate. So either the fans there don't know the real story, or this
is an example of Eric talking negatively about the project on the web site
(like what was written in the Rutles story).
So in a very personal way, I am very glad this story was posted because now I
know why the fans there replied to my post on the newsgroup the way they did.
Like I said, I learn something new all the time.
-Debbie
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
That is how everyone describes Neil Innes. I believe Neil is aware of
the warm feelings that you and so many others have expressed. Thank
you for your kind words.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
bea...@getback.org (Dave Haber) wrote:
> In article <vndslvnksbv-20...@ip43.auschron.com>, vndsl...@wnkwgnho.com (@vdijasi) wrote:
> >you'll
> >pardon me if I prefer to live in the fantasyland where (to paraphrase Neil
> >paraphrasing George Harrison) "the Beatles and the Rutles and the Pythons
> >all put aside their petty squabbles and kept performing - together!"
> I think that all of the surviving Rutles (Mr. Idle not included) agree with
> you. For them, it's all nice memories in the past, and they've
> moved on. Unfortunately, for us Rutles fans, that means that Archaeology is
> *it*. That's all she wrote and there aint no more.
>
> Thanks, Eric!
>
> -Dave
Fortunately we have two fine albums to remember them by. And to thank
them for.
Your post makes very clear what we have to thank Eric for...
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
I too was astonished as I discovered more and more details of the full
story.
When I heard things from one or two people - I was initially a little
skeptical.
By the time I was able to corroborate information with some of Idle's
friends
I realized that it was sadly true. BTW his friends are very loyal to
him.
They like him despite his behavior. They were at great pains to stress
that he
can't help his actions. They say that he's not a bad person. He just
has demons
which cause him to lash out irrationally on occasion. I guess it
depends whether
you accept the concept of emotional disorder excusing all bad actions.
Or whether
you think that adults who are able to function in society should accept
responsibility
for their bad actions - even if it was because "mommy didn't love me
enough when I was 3"
The Idle "biography" I referred to is his entertainment industry 'bio'
made available
to journalists. A short news release - not a book.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
>
> Thank *you* for writing and posting it!
>
> I've long admired Idle's python work, but would prefer to have a beer with
> Palin...your article confirms why! :-)
>
> Could you please cite your sources/references?
>
> Thanks again for an interesting and well-written read.
>
>
Thank you. First of all I researched to find every article I could
about the Rutles.
I found articles from the 70's all the way through to interviews from
the
release of "Archaeology." The New York Public Library is superb!
I also found several useful pieces on the Internet. A friend in England
found
many invaluable press clips. I then set about speaking to a large
number of people who
were close to those in the story. On a trip I made to L.A. I was able to
speak
to people who attended the Neil Innes Troubadour gigs and also some of
Eric Idle's
own friends. I'm a journalist by profession and I have learned never to
accept any
story without being able to get a second person's corroboration. An old
boyfriend
was able to get me access to some old publicity files at NBC and gave me
a lot of
insight into how TV publicists work. This is why I was reluctant to
state that
Idle had initiated the 'sole credit' aspect of the story in the 70's.
It is possible that Idle
simply went along with what someone else decided for pragmatic marketing
reasons.
In which case the theory of his friends does make sense. The "Boorda"
theory - ie
like the military hero Boorda who got caught out wearing a medal that
he had been
erroneously given but had no right to wear. In other words Idle may not
have initiated
the misperception - but he went along with it - and was then embarrassed
to be caught out.
The big difference of course it that Boorda's shame turned into violence
against himself.
Idle appears to have directed his shame into rage against others. My
husband's cousin is
one of the top psychologists in her field - and she gave me valuable
insight into what the behavior patterns described by Idle's own friends
could mean.
This is why I try to have some understanding for Idle even though I
think he betrayed his
friend. If what his friends say is true - he needs serious psychiatric
treatment for his pathological
condition.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
Fortunately the laws protect those telling a factual story.
> I had the pleasure of chatting Neil up when Archaeology came out and he
> certainly painted a less bitter picture (being the gentle soul he is),
> citing some legitimate reasons for anxiety on Idle's part, like that since
> Eric's part in the Rutles was comedy-based and since John Lennon's tragic
> death has put something of a wet rag on Beatles parody since then, Eric
> thought the Rutles reunion was a very bad idea. Neil, of course, always
> intended for the reunion to be about the music, but the difference of
> opinion is understandable.
>
This was the agreed 'official' position that Lewis apparently had
recommended Innes
and the others take. At the time they were still living in fear that
Idle would find further ways
to attack the project. Also Innes and Lewis were still hoping to do a
live Rutles tour. They felt that
the real truth was too ugly - and would further inflame Idle if it
became public. Innes himself
was very sensitive to the change in the Rutles dynamic after Lennon's
murder - and concentrated
just on the music. Idle never cited Lennon's death as a reason for
non-involvement. It was
offered by Innes as a 'plausible' excuse to avoid embarrassing Idle.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
cynl...@aol.com (CynLennin) wrote:
>
> Thank you for posting this.
> Wonderful and highly informative.
> Even a good read. :)
>
> Cyn
Thank you. I'm pleased you like it.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
xerxes <xer...@idirect.ca> wrote:
>Excellent article! Thank you very much for posting it. I agree with you that it
>is a real shame that someone (Idle) can be so charming and talented in public,
>and be so emotionally disturbed as well. Best wishes to Neil Innes.
According to my husband's cousin - who is one of the top psychologists
in the field -
that behavior is characteristic of a sociopath. As a longtime fan of
Eric Idle's work I hope
he gets the psychiatric help that some of his friends feel he needs. As
a fan of Neil Innes
I totally endorse your wishes.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
"Bernard1965" <Berna...@breathemail.net> wrote:
> EXCELLENT READ>>>>I LOVED IT
>
> ISN'T ERIC IDLE A TWAT
>
> Anyone know his e-mail address or website so I can tell him myself??
>
Thank you for your appreciation of my writing. BTW I know you didn't
mean to - but use of the word "twat' actually offends some of us women -
so perhaps you could find another word! But I know what you mean. As
to informing Idle what he is? I'm sure he already knows... Actually -
he is obviously somewhat
disturbed.
The nice thing to do is pray that he gets professional help for his
problems.
MrPither12
agenda, and that you aren't trying to slam Eric Idle - yet you have 2 posts
here doing just that. You are not only spreading lies, you are turning people
against a man you don't know based on a story you only half know. You are a
dangerous person.
<<Subject: Re: #12 of 12 - Rutles - full true story (very long!)
From: pblu...@my-dejanews.com
Date: Mon, Apr 26, 1999 4:38 PM
Message-id: <7g30uo$gb0$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
Lizz Holmans
>
>
>Thank you for your appreciation of my writing. BTW I know you didn't
>mean to - but use of the word "twat' actually offends some of us women -
>so perhaps you could find another word!
TWIAVBP. 'Twat' is not a terribly offensive word in the UKoGBaNI, even
to women. It's pronounced with the a as in 'hat'. I didn't even
recognize it as the same word when I heard it the first time.
Is it acceptable to call a man you don't like a 'dick'? 'Prick' is
pretty commonly used as an insult, too. 'Dork' is pretty main-stream and
childish now, but it originally meant the male genital member as well. I
see these words thrown around here constantly, but no one says a thing.
I don't understand why the nicknames for the reproductive organs are
used as insults anyway--I like mine, I like TMIL's, I'm sure you like
yours--perhaps these words should be used as terms of affection.
> But I know what you mean. As
>to informing Idle what he is? I'm sure he already knows... Actually -
>he is obviously somewhat
>disturbed.
>The nice thing to do is pray that he gets professional help for his
>problems.
Diagnosing mental illness in someone you don't know and haven't met is
extremely difficult. I don't feel confident in doing so, and I'm a
health care professional with psychiatric experience.
You must remember that, in the 'full true story', we only got half the
story. Until a writer decides to give us Eric Idle's version of the
events in question, we still only have one side of the story. Perhaps
the 'nice thing to do' is to suspend judgement until more information is
forthcoming--or suspend judgement completely, as it really doesn't
affect most of us in the least, and isn't our business.
Most show biz personalities got where they are by being brutally
ambitious and self-absorbed. The competition is fierce out there in star
land, and no one is going to watch out for your interests as vigilantly
as you will. The image of 'nice guy/great gal' is carefully cultivated;
it may even be true in non-performing circumstances--but when you live
on the fruits of your creativity, you have to tend the orchard very
carefully.
Lizz 'every party has a pooper and that's why you invited me' Holmans
--
Visit http://www.urbanlegends.com
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
mrpit...@aol.com (MrPither12) wrote:
> PBluther, you are so much the liar. First you claim not to have a hidden
> agenda, and that you aren't trying to slam Eric Idle - yet you have 2 posts
> here doing just that. You are not only spreading lies, you are turning people
> against a man you don't know based on a story you only half know. You are a
> dangerous person.
>
I am always saddened when a person who is not winning an argument
resorts to insults and ad hominem attacks. I have praised your courage
in admitting that you have a bee in your bonnet about Neil Innes. Maybe
even a justifiable one. If you can’t accord me the respect that I’ve
shown you - perhaps you could at least try and refrain from making
personal attacks on me.
I repeat. I have no hidden agenda. I am not trying to slam Eric Idle.
I carefully researched a story that caught my interest. And that seems
to be of interest to a lot of folks. I heard the stories of many
people with first-hand knowledge of the situation. Some had an agenda.
Some had no agenda. The longtime friends of his whose stories i heard
DID have an agenda, They like him very much - and wish that he would
not let his occasional demons get in the way of his considerable talent
and personal qualities. I checked all the facts. I reached a
conclusion. I presented it.
You are entitled to disagree. And since you allege that Neil Innes is
currently doing something to you that is troubling I could understand
why you are wary of accepting the facts as I discovered them.
I am full of admiration for the fact that you are maintaining the
wonderful legacy of Graham Chapman.
It must be very difficult for you to read unpleasant facts about Eric
Idle when it is clearly (and quite understandably) useful for you to
maintain a decent working relationship with him - for the sake of your
work.
So your pragmatism in defending him is quite easily understood. Frankly
- if it makes your job in maintaining the memory of Graham Chapman
easier - I’m all in favor of you saying whatever you need to. Like
millions of Python fans I adored Graham Chapman.
The facts are that the Pythons themselves (who have known Eric Idle
rather longer than you) are not quite so charitable. And several of his
friends who still admire him - wish that he would seek help for his
rages and unfair tirades against old pals like Neil Innes.
All three surviving members of the Rutles (the ones who actually made
the music) feel the same way. Do the opinions of Ricky Fataar and John
Halsey count for nothing?
What was the crime of Neil Innes, Ricky Fataar and John Halsey in
wanting to make an album of music for us fans? They made the first one
(with Ollie Halsall.) Eric’s sole involvement in the content of that
first album was the excellent liner notes - and his face in the photos.
He had absiolutely NOTHING to do with any other aspect of it. Not a
note of music. Not a song title . Not a syllable of lyric. (We
know that a man who insists on a credit claiming that he "created" the
Rutles would not be too shy to accept a credit for writing, arranging,
producing, singing, or playing on the album if he had.)
So when Neil, Ricky and John wanted to share a little bit of the musical
magic again with us fans - what was the big deal? Fleetwood Mac
reformed. The Eagles reformed (without hell freezing over!) Even our
precious Beatles buried their great differences and recorded two ‘new’
songs.
If Eric Idle didn’t like the idea - would it have been the end of
civilization if he had shrugged his shoulders and said "Well guys - I’m
not wildly in favor of it. But if you’re just doing another album - and
aren’t trying to remake the movie I wrote - go for it. Have fun guys.
If I’m not too busy i might even do a cameo in the music video and write
some more liner notes...."
Would it have spoiled some vast eternal plan.... If he’d been a gracious
man?
I don’t think I’m a dangerous woman. I’m just a Beatles fan who wishes
that other Beatles fans (including all the Rutles) would try a little
harder to live up to Beatle beliefs and be kinder to each other. They
owe it to themselves, to the fans and to the Beatles.
Despite your personal insults on me, I wish you no ill. And I genuinely
hope your dispute with Neil Innes is resolved amicably.
Peace.
DigiBanana
I was curious if you knew:
Did Dirk release"Sweet Rutles Tracks to try to hurt the Archeology sales?
..or was this possibly a "Martin Lewis stunt" trying to help soldify the Rutles
legend.
Interesting possiblity either way.
-Christopher
Florida
DigiB...@aol.com
April 28, 1999
(Also posted to RMB)
Barb Alan Atkinson
yelling,
"I'll finish you all off!"
Of course I felt really badly when I heard that Barry admitted to having mis-heard
Dirk and that he actually said,
" I'm Finnish, are you off?"
tani...@hotmail.com
b...@webzone.net wrote:
> All I know is I lost a lot of respect for Dirk when he threw Barry out of his house
> yelling,
> "I'll finish you all off!"
> Of course I felt really badly when I heard that Barry admitted to having mis-heard
> Dirk and that he actually said,
> " I'm Finnish, are you off?"
>
arb Alan Atkinson <b...@webzone.net> says
>All I know is I lost a lot of respect for Dirk when he threw Barry out of his house
>yelling,
>"I'll finish you all off!"
> Of course I felt really badly when I heard that Barry admitted to having mis-heard
>Dirk and that he actually said,
>" I'm Finnish, are you off?"
i dont beleeve that story. That makes it sound as if Barry wuz hard of
hearing, wrong rutle
if you remeber when the archeolgy cd came out there wuz a rumor going
round (think it was on rmb or maybee on another ng) that said the
reason dirk wasnt in the band anymore was becuz Dirk was DEAF The guy
proved it too, was very funny. all the clues. photos of dirk holding
hand up to his ear on hard days rut album cover, explained evrything.,
they substituted a new dirk after he went deaf., the one in the film
who did the scen with bianca couldnt sing etc etc so he wuz droopped
from the runion,does anyone remember thatrumor?
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
digib...@aol.com (DigiBanana) wrote:
> Pbluther,
>
> I was curious if you knew:
>
> Did Dirk release"Sweet Rutles Tracks to try to hurt the Archeology sales?
>
> ..or was this possibly a "Martin Lewis stunt" trying to help soldify the Rutles
> legend.
>
> Interesting possiblity either way.
>
> -Christopher
> Florida
> DigiB...@aol.com
> April 28, 1999
>
> (Also posted to RMB)
>
There was a pirate release that surprised and irritated Innes and
Lewis. I heard that they spent some time trying to hunt down the
source. Apparently some tapes seemed to have been removed from a studio
in England. Innes was upset because there were some tracks from his own
home demos. Dirk was not a suspect!
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk.DELETE> wrote:
In article on 1999/04/27 Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk>
wrote:
>'Twat' is not a terribly offensive word in the UKoGBaNI, even
>to women. It's pronounced with the a as in 'hat'. I didn't even
>recognize it as the same word when I heard it the first time.
You British women are so much more liberated than us American gals!
>I don't understand why the nicknames for the reproductive organs are
>used as insults anyway--I like mine, I like TMIL's, I'm sure you like
>yours--perhaps these words should be used as terms of affection.
I agree! It seems such a shame to use slang words for parts of the body
that give us pleasure - as insults.
>Is it acceptable to call a man you don't like a 'dick'? 'Prick' is
>pretty commonly used as an insult, too. 'Dork' is pretty main-stream
>and childish now, but it originally meant the male genital member as
>well.
Good point. Maybe we should come up with a new term of insult for men
who are obnoxious. How about "DIRK" ?!
Right on sister!
PBLuther
Lizz Holmans
>
>You British women are so much more liberated than us American gals!
Trouble is, I'm not British. I'm American, living in London.
>I agree! It seems such a shame to use slang words for parts of the body
>that give us pleasure - as insults.
Then quit being offended by them and start concentrating on the gist of
the argument.
>
>Good point. Maybe we should come up with a new term of insult for men
>who are obnoxious. How about "DIRK" ?!
Again with the insults to Eric Idle. Your account was biased, inaccurate
(see the post from the person who keeps an Eric Idle page--you
attributed a quote to Eric Idle that she made herself), and completely
ignored Mr. Idle's views on the subject. This is bad journalism. It
isn't news, it's polemic.
>
>Right on sister!
I'm *not* your sister. I'm a first-generation feminist of the Second
Wave, but that doesn't mean I have to feel sisterhood with someone who
prints personal opinion about the mental state of someone she has never
even met.
Lizz 'Have you considered a career with Weekly World News? They'd *love*
your style' Holmans
--
Visit http://www.urbanlegends.com
CarnyDC
>Again with the insults to Eric Idle. Your account was biased, inaccurate
>(see the post from the person who keeps an Eric Idle page--you
>attributed a quote to Eric Idle that she made herself), and completely
>ignored Mr. Idle's views on the subject. This is bad journalism. It
>isn't news, it's polemic.
>
>>
>>Right on sister!
>
>I'm *not* your sister. I'm a first-generation feminist of the Second
>Wave, but that doesn't mean I have to feel sisterhood with someone who
>prints personal opinion about the mental state of someone she has never
>even met.
>
>Lizz 'Have you considered a career with Weekly World News? They'd *love*
>your style' Holmans
Great post Lizz; though I often thought past discussions in here about the
accuracy of Beatle books went a little too far in one direction for my liking,
we must all clearly recognize that one sided accounts such as the one presented
here about the Rutles have to be taken with a MAJOR grain of salt. Journalists
and witnesses have their own agendas, forgetfulness and misinterpretations, and
its a ways from that to obtaining the 'absolute truth'. And this given
accounting of Rutle history did seem quite far from objective or trying to be
fair to both sides.
*
I'd be afraid of these kids if I was a parent. I wouldn't go, "Hey, kids, what
are you going to do for Hitler's birthday?" You know, I mean, that's--[
Laughter ] I'd be scared crazy.
-NMcD
*
Carny's Rapture CountDown: http://members.aol.com/carnydc
Justyn910
Yeah. And one thing that came to my mind, while the author kept harping on Eric
Idle being the 'outsider' of the Pythons, the one who's stubborn and keeps
refusing to do anything with the other guys, is that Idle, of all the former
Pythons, seems to be the one most interested in the group today. He was
responsible for the CD-ROMs, I believe - and anyway, John Cleese has refused a
lot more Python-related things than Idle ever did.
-J
Aren't you all glad.....I finally changed my sig!
na
Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:KyyQuDA3...@jackalope.demon.co.uk...
> I'm *not* your sister. I'm a first-generation feminist of the Second
> Wave,
if you dont mind!
:)
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk.DELETE> wrote:
While we have not yet had a full explanation or justification for his
behavior during the reunion album period - Eric Idle made his views
about it very clear to those from the media who spoke to him.
And in respect of the creation of the Rutles, the movie and the first
album - which were indisputably the source of all the battles about the
reunion album - a writer has given us “Eric Idle’s version of the events
in question.” Eric Idle himself. (see my post of today’s date.)
>Perhaps the 'nice thing to do' is to suspend judgement until more >information is forthcoming
I agree with you. That’s certainly what I did. I don’t know how much
more information there could be about the fundamental aspects of this
story. All three Rutles - and many others - told an identical tale. Do
we think that every one of those people is wrong and/or lying - and Idle
is the only person telling “the truth” ? Do we think there is a massive
conspiracy involving all these disparate people to hurt Eric Idle? It’s
sometimes hard to accept unpalatable things about people we admire.
Even when the facts are supported by so many people....
>Most show biz personalities got where they are by being brutally
>ambitious and self-absorbed. The competition is fierce out there in star
>land, and no one is going to watch out for your interests as vigilantly
>as you will. The image of 'nice guy/great gal' is carefully cultivated;
>it may even be true in non-performing circumstances--but when you >live on the fruits of your creativity, you have to tend the orchard very
>carefully.
This is a very thoughtful and perceptive statement - and among the best
responses I’ve read.
I think you’re right. Idle who is clearly very talented, may well have
had to fight extra hard to get his way in the entertainment business.
Several books about the Pythons refer to the fact that - as the Roger
Waters-type loner within the group - he had a harder time getting his
work performed by the group than the pre-existing Cleese-Chapman and the
Palin-Jones writing teams which had double the strength in pushing for
their work. You could even make an analogy with the tough time George
Harrison had getting his songs on to Beatles albums. The tough
pushiness needed by a loner to succeed within a group certainly makes it
harder for such an individual to subsequently become a relaxed
collaborator - generously sharing credit with other artists.
It’s a great shame and pity that Idle doesn’t seem to be able to
empathize with the difficulties of fellow artists (including one pal
from 30 years earlier) struggling to achieve something.
This is why - despite what I believe to be his callous treatment of
Innes, Fataar and Halsey - I still urge people to have some sympathetic
understanding for Idle. No one who has done what he has done to three
pals can be truly happy inside. I would not be surprised if deep inside
he feels guilt and remorse. Let us hope that he can move beyond his
reflexive feelings of rage and denial to a gracious spirit of kindness
towards his former friends. With that greater understanding will come
inner peace.
Innes - who is certainly no less talented in his way - seems to have
lacked the attributes of what you rightly call the “brutally ambitious
and self-absorbed” - which propelled Idle higher in the showbiz
stratosphere than Innes.
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
CarnyDC
>Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk.DELETE> wrote:
>>in the 'full true story', we only got half the story. Until a writer decides
>to >give us Eric Idle's version of the events in question, we still only have
>>one side of the story.
>
>While we have not yet had a full explanation or justification for his
>behavior during the reunion album period - Eric Idle made his views
>about it very clear to those from the media who spoke to him.
I would definitely recommend suspending judgement on many events, if not
the conclusions made from the sum of presented events as well, where we have as
so far only heard one side of the story. For instance, I remember in your
original posting on this you wrote about a phone call Eric Idle made to a
friend of his, where he called her a cunt or something like that. Has Eric
Idle ever commented on that event specifically? As long as this event is
presented in a one-sided way, its hard to accurately gauge what the truth in
that instance might be. The same for many other events which you wrote about,
where we don't yet appear to have information as to Eric's side of the story.
>And in respect of the creation of the Rutles, the movie and the first
>album - which were indisputably the source of all the battles about the
>reunion album - a writer has given us “Eric Idle’s version of the events
>in question.” Eric Idle himself. (see my post of today’s date.)
It appears that Eric has commented on elements of what you presented, but it
also appears he has not commented on a significant number of events and
instances you describe, which do contribute toward making general conclusions
here and so far remain presented in a one-sided manner.
>>Perhaps the 'nice thing to do' is to suspend judgement until more
>>information is forthcoming
>
>I agree with you. That’s certainly what I did. I don’t know how much
>more information there could be about the fundamental aspects of this
>story.
It does appear that there could be more information coming out from the
other side as to many aspects of the story, which all build together toward the
conclusions one would reach.
>All three Rutles - and many others - told an identical tale. Do
>we think that every one of those people is wrong and/or lying - and Idle
>is the only person telling “the truth” ? Do we think there is a massive
>conspiracy involving all these disparate people to hurt Eric Idle?
>It’s
>sometimes hard to accept unpalatable things about people we admire.
>Even when the facts are supported by so many people....
Many people who are on one side of a given story with their own inherent
biases and agendas and access to information, and whose stories are then
interpreted and presented by another party, being yourself with whatever agenda
you might bring to it. I would be incredibly interested to read a response to
this Rutles story by someone in the know who has an opposing view to see their
version of events to balance the overall picture more.
And we certainly should not view people who prefer to suspend judgement on a
given set of facts when they do not have a balanced set of information as
somehow automatically finding it "hard to accept unpalatable things about
people we admire", nor as simply being biased toward Eric Idle in general.
Obviously his version of events has its own bias, agenda and access to
information, as the side presented here does. I personally would certainly
accept a negative story about Eric Idle if I was able to look at a balanced set
of information about it. But I find a considerable amount of the information
presented here to have been done so in a clearly one-sided way, and do not have
information from the other side and thus at this time will not form a
conclusion based upon that presented material.
Mr mmBongo
and wrongly said it was a quote from Neil-- please check your dejanews email!
Bonnie
neilinnes.org
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
<di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk.DELETE> wrote:
http://x8.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=475866636&CONTEXT=926285709.514850819&hit
num=8pbl...@my-dejanews.com
>Trouble is, I'm not British. I'm American, living in London.
My apologies.
>>I agree! It seems such a shame to use slang words for parts of
>>the body that give us pleasure - as insults.
>Then quit being offended by them and start concentrating on the
>gist of the argument.
I was agreeing with your earlier position. I’m bemused that you now
think that a euphemism for a vagina is a word that can be merrily used
as an insult without a woman at least politely pointing out that it
might not be the most gracious use of the English language. I like the
post of the gentleman who suggested that it was a typo for TWIT. He
seemed to have a sense of humor rather than uptightness.
>>Good point. Maybe we should come up with a new term of
>>insult for men who are obnoxious. How about "DIRK" ?!
>Again with the insults to Eric Idle.
Thank you for not spotting an obviously throwaway joke. Your post was
all about the words Dick and Dork. What true Beatle and John Lennon fan
wouldn’t make an immediate wordplay association to Dirk? How many
years have you lived in England? You must have learned something in
....
>Your account was biased, inaccurate
>(see the post from the person who keeps an Eric Idle page--you
>attributed a quote to Eric Idle that she made herself), and
>completely ignored Mr. Idle's views on the subject. This is bad >journalism. It isn't news, it's polemic.
Well... who would have thought that you would make such a good argument
against yourself?!
#1 I’ve dealt with that issue in a separate post. The matter is
explained there.
#2 You accuse me of being a bad journalist - and in the same sentence
get ALL the facts of your accusation WRONG!!!
A The person in question doesn’t keeps an IDLE site - she keeps an INNES
site - on which she has a LINK to an IDLE page
B The attribution was NOT to an IDLE quote but to an INNES quote.
C I did NOT ignore Idle’s views on the subject. I quoted extensively
from his writings. And from some of his friends.
Apart from those three facts everything else you said in that paragraph
was correct. (I know you only gave three facts. That’s called irony.)
Anyway - you’re forgiven your mistakes. All of us make them from time
to time. I’ve apologized for mine....
>>Right on sister!
>I'm *not* your sister. I'm a first-generation feminist of the Second
>Wave,
Whatever THAT means! Presumably somewhere between Chrissie Hynde and
Fiona Apple. Or between Amelia Earhart and Pamela Anderson. Among my
pals we don’t draw those distinctions. We’re proud to offer friendship
to other women who are open and not hostile.
>but that doesn't mean I have to feel sisterhood with
>someone who prints personal opinion about the mental state of
>someone she has never even met.
So sorry! So you wouldn’t feel sisterhood with any of the myriad
number of great female writers and biographers who conduct in-depth
studies of people they never meet - including hearing from eminent
psychologists who proffer an opinion about someone’s behavior?
That’s not a catch question. No obligation. I graciously withdraw my
apparently unwelcome gesture of feminine friendship.
>Lizz 'Have you considered a career with Weekly World News? >They'd *love* your style' Holmans
Given what seems to be your far superior skill at making the most
elementary of errors and your combative writing style - I would
hesitate to challenge you for such a position.
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
Lizz Holmans
>
>I was agreeing with your earlier position. I’m bemused that you now
>think that a euphemism for a vagina is a word that can be merrily used
>as an insult without a woman at least politely pointing out that it
>might not be the most gracious use of the English language. I like the
>post of the gentleman who suggested that it was a typo for TWIT. He
>seemed to have a sense of humor rather than uptightness.
Once again you miss the point. I was speaking for British English, which
is a different language than American English. 'Twat' (rhymes with hat,
not hot) is simply not an unacceptable word here. It has divorced itself
from all sexual meaning. If you want to talk about cunts, say cunt. Or
fanny (which means cunt over here). Or vulva, as most folks misuse the
word 'vagina' to mean the entire female sexual organ.
>
>Thank you for not spotting an obviously throwaway joke. Your post was
>all about the words Dick and Dork. What true Beatle and John Lennon fan
>wouldn’t make an immediate wordplay association to Dirk? How many
>years have you lived in England? You must have learned something in
>....
I've learned a lot from this exchange. For instance, you can't argue the
argument, so you argue the person.
>
>#1 I’ve dealt with that issue in a separate post. The matter is
>explained there.
It must have missed my server. It's the plugs, you know.
>
>#2 You accuse me of being a bad journalist - and in the same sentence
>get ALL the facts of your accusation WRONG!!!
No, I didn't get ALL my facts WRONG!!! I mistyped a name.
>C I did NOT ignore Idle’s views on the subject. I quoted extensively
>from his writings. And from some of his friends.
I reiterate: did you interview any of the former Pythons? Did you
interview Neil Innes? Or did you just review the literature?
>Whatever THAT means! Presumably somewhere between Chrissie Hynde and
>Fiona Apple. Or between Amelia Earhart and Pamela Anderson. Among my
>pals we don’t draw those distinctions. We’re proud to offer friendship
>to other women who are open and not hostile.
It means I've been a feminist since before you were born. I have
original first-edition copies of 'The Feminine Mystique', 'Sisterhood is
Powerful', all of Kate Millet's books, books by Shulamith Firestone, and
many, many more. It means I went on protest marches, occupations, and
other forms of civil disobedience.
And I still don't have to claim you as a 'sister'. You and your pals can
do what you like. Calling each other 'sister' does not mean diddley.
What have *you* done lately?
>
>So sorry! So you wouldn’t feel sisterhood with any of the myriad
>number of great female writers and biographers who conduct in-depth
>studies of people they never meet - including hearing from eminent
>psychologists who proffer an opinion about someone’s behavior?
I find them tenuous at best.
>
>That’s not a catch question. No obligation. I graciously withdraw my
>apparently unwelcome gesture of feminine friendship.
I would much rather you became a sensible journalist than claim any
spurious friendship with me.
You will notice that, in previous posts, I have said very little about
you personally. I like to argue the argument.
>
>Given what seems to be your far superior skill at making the most
>elementary of errors and your combative writing style - I would
>hesitate to challenge you for such a position.
If mistyping a name bars me forever from journalism, that's the breaks.
That's why everyone needs an editor--including me. And if you think my
'combative style' is bad, wait till you meet a *real* editor.
Lizz 'I suggest you apply to Ben Bradlee first thing this morning'
pblu...@my-dejanews.com
Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk.DELETE> wrote:
pblu...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>I’m bemused that you now think that a euphemism for a vagina is a word that can be
>merrily used as an insult without a woman at least politely pointing out that it might not be
>the most gracious use of the English language.>
Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>Once again you miss the point. I was speaking for British English, which is a different
>>language than American English. 'Twat' (rhymes with hat, not hot) is simply not an
>>unacceptable word here.
And once again you were the (I’m sure unwitting) cause of any
‘point-missing.’ Doubtlessly you will be the first to admit that you
didn’t specify that you were speaking about British English in your
previous post.
Just another minor mistake - for which you are forgiven. I’m happy to
forgive you YOUR little mistakes. Do you feel you can possibly be as
forgiving of the minor human errors of others in return?
Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>It has divorced itself from all sexual meaning. If you want to talk about cunts, say cunt. Or
>>fanny (which means cunt over here). Or vulva, as most folks misuse the word 'vagina' to
>>mean the entire female sexual organ.
You may have forgotten that what is common parlance in the UK is not
always the same here in the USA. I was just trying to be sensitive to
some of MY sisters here in the States. We’re clearly not as liberated as
women in Britain. But then we deal with intense misogyny here - such as
Howard Stern and Rush Limbaugh every day and night.
>Thank you for not spotting an obviously throwaway joke. <snip> How many
>years have you lived in England? You must have learned something in....
>> I've learned a lot from this exchange. For instance, you can't argue the argument, so you
>>argue the person.
We are SO alike! You took the words right out of my PC...
>#2 You accuse me of being a bad journalist - and in the same
sentence
>get ALL the facts of your accusation WRONG!!!
>>No, I didn't get ALL my facts WRONG!!! I mistyped a name.
Twice. About two separate actions. Completely changing the meaning of
what you wrote. Plus the accusation that I hadn’t represented Idle’s
views - even though I HAD provided several direct quotes from him.
I ACCEPT that those were honest errors on your part. So IF I made any
mistakes - am I not entitled to reciprocal courtesy? Or is that a
one-way street where you live?
To get back on topic - though some people have written nasty posts about
Idle and called him names - I have consistently said that I don’t think
people who make mistakes or who do some bad things are wholly bad. I’d
rather pray for Idle to understand that he may have hurt Innes, Fataar
and Halsey (it’s 3 people - not just Neil Innes) and for them all to
make up.
(I hope my praying doesn’t offend you. I was raised to believe in the
power of redemption. Though I know being a Christian is not very
fashionable.)
>>I reiterate: did you interview any of the former Pythons? Did you interview Neil Innes?
>>Or did you just review the literature?
See my previous post on 4/26/99 responding to a similar query
http://x46.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=471189797&CONTEXT=926347120.770900054&hitnum=137
>>I've been a feminist since before you were born. I have original first-edition copies of 'The
>>Feminine Mystique', 'Sisterhood is Powerful', all of Kate Millet's books, books by
>>Shulamith Firestone, and many, many more. It means I went on protest
>>marches,occupations, and other forms of civil disobedience.
We’re very grateful for your politically-correct book purchases and
political walking on our behalf. And for either being a feminist from
before it was named that or making me a much younger woman than I am.
>>And I still don't have to claim you as a 'sister'. You and your pals can do what you like.
>>Calling each other 'sister' does not mean diddley. What have *you*
done lately?
“In my experience women only call each other ‘sister’ after they’ve
called each other a lot other things first” - Oscar Wilde - “The
Importance Of Being Earnest”
How right Oscar Wilde was! He certainly understood the nature of
certain women! If memory serves he was particularly acute on the topic
of American women living in England! All that 100 years ago!!! (I hope
you won't accuse Oscar Wilde of name-calling!) It seems I was way too
premature in offering you sistership. My apologies.
>>You will notice that, in previous posts, I have said very little about you personally. I like to
>>argue the argument.
Sorry. I must re-read. I took all those snide remarks as being your
hostility.
>>If mistyping a name bars me forever from journalism, that's the breaks. That's why
>>everyone needs an editor--including me. And if you think my 'combative style' is bad, wait
>>till you meet a *real* editor.
I’m sure you mean well. I wish you better.
Lizz Holmans
>
>And once again you were the (I’m sure unwitting) cause of any
>‘point-missing.’ Doubtlessly you will be the first to admit that you
>didn’t specify that you were speaking about British English in your
>previous post.
But you thought I was British until I informed you otherwise. Your
internal logic circuits need a little work.
>
>Just another minor mistake - for which you are forgiven. I’m happy to
>forgive you YOUR little mistakes. Do you feel you can possibly be as
>forgiving of the minor human errors of others in return?
Of course I can. I've been married four times.
I am not discussing mistakes in this series of posts. I'm discussing bad
reportage masquerading as journalism.
>
>You may have forgotten that what is common parlance in the UK is not
>always the same here in the USA. I was just trying to be sensitive to
>some of MY sisters here in the States. We’re clearly not as liberated as
>women in Britain. But then we deal with intense misogyny here - such as
>Howard Stern and Rush Limbaugh every day and night.
You ain't seen misogyny until you've been to the UKoGBaNI. I was
shocked--shocked. But most language doesn't bother me. As the line in a
recent West End production said, 'I'm an adult. Cunt away, if you like.'
>
>
>We are SO alike! You took the words right out of my PC...
You wouldn't like being me, trust me. I prefer to hear both sides of a
story before I write it.
>
>I ACCEPT that those were honest errors on your part. So IF I made any
>mistakes - am I not entitled to reciprocal courtesy? Or is that a
>one-way street where you live?
You get the respect you earn. It can't be demanded.
>
>(I hope my praying doesn’t offend you. I was raised to believe in the
>power of redemption. Though I know being a Christian is not very
>fashionable.)
Praying doesn't offend me; I'm a Quaker, and we pray a lot. What I do
object to is a disingenuous plea for prayer when its subtext is 'This
man is nuts, and I say so.'
>
>See my previous post on 4/26/99 responding to a similar query
>
>http://x46.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=471189797&CONTEXT=926347120.77090005
>4&hitnum=137
I did. There is no indication in that post or any other that describes
your research methods. Did you personally interview these people or not?
>We’re very grateful for your politically-correct book purchases and
>political walking on our behalf. And for either being a feminist from
>before it was named that or making me a much younger woman than I am.
Feminism as a definable term was beginning to be used by the beginning
of the 20th century--and I suppose both of us are younger than that. The
agitation for women's votes and the end to discriminatory legal
practices started even before that. That's why I said I was a first
generation feminist of the Second Wave--the one that started in the late
50s-early 60s (the first wave being, of course, the cause for women's
suffrage). If you have to have this explained to you, you are younger
than I am.
And what the devil does PC have to do with it? 'PC' has become the most
popular catch-phrase amongst people who want to reclaim their privilege
of despising and verbally abusing folks with impunity.
>
>“In my experience women only call each other ‘sister’ after they’ve
>called each other a lot other things first” - Oscar Wilde - “The
>Importance Of Being Earnest”
>
>How right Oscar Wilde was! He certainly understood the nature of
>certain women! If memory serves he was particularly acute on the topic
>of American women living in England! All that 100 years ago!!! (I hope
>you won't accuse Oscar Wilde of name-calling!) It seems I was way too
>premature in offering you sistership. My apologies.
The only real characters that Oscar Wilde wrote were all in 'The Picture
of Dorian Gray'. His plays were written to be popular with the vast
majority of folks that liked to see their stereotypes untinged by
reality.
>
>Sorry. I must re-read. I took all those snide remarks as being your
>hostility.
Then your hostil-o-meter needs a real good tuning. I don't know you well
enough to be truly hostile to you. Or is every criticism for your
article 'hostile'?
>
>I’m sure you mean well. I wish you better.
You could do better if you had some of Mr. Bradlee's tutelage. You know,
little reliance on unattributed quotations, each fact having to be
verified by the sources involved at least twice, and *no personal
feelings at the newsdesk.
I *am* better, thank you. Being a writer is poorly-paid, but I have
love, passion, contentment, and a spouse strong enough to support me in
every way. What could be better?
Lizz 'every day and every way' Holmans
--
'You're a mean spirited bitch *all* the time.' interstate5
Tom
>>Just another minor mistake - for which you are forgiven. I’m happy to
>>forgive you YOUR little mistakes. Do you feel you can possibly be as
>>forgiving of the minor human errors of others in return?
>
>Of course I can. I've been married four times.
>
Surely those were errors on your part, not on the part of spouses 1-3.
>The only real characters that Oscar Wilde wrote were all in 'The Picture
>of Dorian Gray'. His plays were written to be popular with the vast
>majority of folks that liked to see their stereotypes untinged by
>reality.
>
I always thought the short stories were the best work he ever did, heavy
handed religious parables and all.
Lizz Holmans
>Surely those were errors on your part, not on the part of spouses 1-3.
Don't be too sure. I warned each and every one of them. But it wasn't
too awful--I got The Mutant by the second one, and the Imps of Satan by
the third, and TMIL is still around. In my family we marry like folks
vote in a Texas election--early and often.
>>
>I always thought the short stories were the best work he ever did, heavy
>handed religious parables and all.
Short stories aren't my thing--don't like to read 'em or write 'em. But
some of his poetry is divine.
ObBeatles: I have it on good authority that the Beatles were pretty
Wilde in their younger days.
Lizz 'Oscar Wilde: the part Stephen Fry was born to play' Holmans
--
Visit http://www.urbanlegends.com
AmySolo
>Wave,
Lizz,
You gave pbluther a hard time for not knowing what this meant.Well,I'm a 58
year old woman and I had NO CLUE what this meant.Would it not have sufficed to
just call yourself a feminist?I think it's so arrogant of you to try and
distinguish yourself as more of a feminist than anyone else.BTW thankyou for
your marches etc.but the truth is they did precious little for us.
Getback910
Lizz H. wrote:
>I'm *not* your sister.I'm a first-generation
feminist of the Second Wave>
Translation#2....One of those pain in the ass women that give women a bad name
and actually stiffle the progress of the women's movement.
Getback910
>
>>Surely those were errors on your part, not on the part of spouses 1-3.
>
>
Divorced multiple times huh?
>Don't be too sure. I warned each and every one of them. But it wasn't
>too awful--I got The Mutant by the second one, and the Imps of Satan by
>the third, and TMIL is still around.
Translation #2 wins.I rest my case!
AmySolo
>
>
>
>>Excellent article! Thank you very much for posting it. I agree with you that
>it
>
>>is a real shame that someone (Idle) can be so charming and talented in
>public,
>>and be so emotionally disturbed as well. Best wishes to Neil Innes.
>
>
I agree with you completely!!! Thanks pbluther for posting your wonderful
article.
My husband is a lawyer for a record
company,and we have had the opportunity
to meet several celebs including Mr.Idle.
Needless to say,I am not suprised by what
you reveal in your article.We have many acquaintainces who say exactly what you
do about his mental state.Personally,I know nothing about that,but I do know
this.When my 16 year old niece asked him (very nicely I might add) for his
autograph,he said"I DON"T HAVE TIME FOR THIS!" Needless to say,she was
crushed.So my vote for bastard of the year is Eric Idle.Best wishes to Neil
Innes!
Amy Soloman
Lizz Holmans
>
>Divorced multiple times huh?
Yup, I've been divorced three times. So?
>
>
>>Don't be too sure. I warned each and every one of them. But it wasn't
>>too awful--I got The Mutant by the second one, and the Imps of Satan by
>>the third, and TMIL is still around.
>
>Translation #2 wins.I rest my case!
Balderdash.
I have made no assumptions about your sexual orientation, relationships
with your significant others, or your ability to play well with others.
I find it hard to understand that, without any real information about
me, you have found it necessary to do so.
Lizz 'I really don't recommend you run with scissors' Holmans
--
Visit http://www.urbanlegends.com
Lizz Holmans
>
>Lizz,
>You gave pbluther a hard time for not knowing what this meant.Well,I'm a 58
>year old woman and I had NO CLUE what this meant.Would it not have sufficed to
>just call yourself a feminist?I think it's so arrogant of you to try and
>distinguish yourself as more of a feminist than anyone else.BTW thankyou for
>your marches etc.but the truth is they did precious little for us.
Well, if you seriously believe that women are treated less fairly in the
courts, education, industry, religion and society in general, I can make
an educated guess that I am more of a feminist that you are.
I didn't bring up feminism at all until the person I was writing to
called me 'sister.' Since we are definitely not related by blood, one
could safely assume she was trying to claim some political/sociological
relationship with me. In a later post, she showed no knowledge of the
history of the word 'feminism', let alone knowledge of the actual
history of the women's movement. I tried to fill her in on some of the
broad history of women's rights in the 20th century. Her reply? More ad
feminam argument, and no answers to the questions I've asked at least
three times:
1) Did she actually interview all these people she claims as sources?
When? Where? Are her notes available?
2) Or did she simply do a review of the literature, and cocked some of
that up?
Them's the facts. I can't help it.
Lizz 'facts are *such* inconvenient things, aren't they?' Holmans
--
Visit http://www.urbanlegends.com
Tom
>Lizz 'Oscar Wilde: the part Stephen Fry was born to play' Holmans
Have you read Fry's novels? He seems to think so too.
AmySolo
>courts, education, industry, religion and society in general, I can make
>an educated guess that I am more of a feminist that you are.
What happened to equal pay for equal work?
We still don't have that,which I believe is one of the most important things we
should be concerned about. Maybe you could work on that for us.Thanks.
Now back to the Beatles!
Michael P Patrick
>>I'm *not* your sister. I'm a first-generation feminist of the Second
>>Wave,
>
>Lizz,
>You gave pbluther a hard time for not knowing what this meant.Well,I'm a 58
>year old woman and I had NO CLUE what this meant.Would it not have sufficed to
>just call yourself a feminist?I think it's so arrogant of you to try and
>distinguish yourself as more of a feminist than anyone else.BTW thankyou for
>your marches etc.but the truth is they did precious little for us.
Jesus, Lizz, with people posting irrelevant and insulting crap like this
(loosely translates to "Screw you and the marches you marched in, too,
eh???"), I wonder how you can find the energy to fight another day, sometimes.
PS Hey, Amy, who is this 'us' that Lizz somehow failed to help with her
feminist activity? I look around, and I see a lot of 58 year old women who
just never had a clue - but they've benefitted tremendously from the changes
in recent decades, just as we all have here in these united states. [and,
ahem, let's leave my mother out of this :) ]
PPS Sorry that Mr Idle wouldn't sign that autograph. Because of that you drop
in and nominate him for 'bastard of the year'? Yeah, right.
PPPS Sorry to have gone off like this - that anti-feminist crack just got to
me!!! I guess that makes me 'touchy bastard of the thread'...
Mike Patrick
Getback910
>with your significant others, or your ability to play well with others.
>I find it hard to understand that, without any real information about
>me, you have found it necessary to do so.
Oh please.Why are you so uptight?JEEEZ
lighten up.>
>Yup, I've been divorced three times. So?
So you don't see anything wrong with this?
Anyone can make a mistake once or even twice,but after that,the blame lies with
you.
Just like I thought...one of those pain in the ass
feminist - all men are evil-boo hooing-non-armpit shaving types!
Goodbye L-O-S-E-R (No offense)
Laughing is good Lizz...try it sometime!
Lizz Holmans
>
>Jesus, Lizz, with people posting irrelevant and insulting crap like this
>(loosely translates to "Screw you and the marches you marched in, too,
>eh???"), I wonder how you can find the energy to fight another day, sometimes.
In my years as a civil rights worker, anti-war activist, feminist
activist, and general hell-raiser, I've learnt to let these things
slide. They aren't important, anyway. People like that don't like
change, so they pretend they never happened.
ObBeatles: The Beatles were also in favor of civil rights, against the
war in Vietnam, and were general hell-raisers of a sort I could never
aspire to.
Lizz 'too much arthritis in the hips' Holmans
--
Visit http://www.urbanlegends.com
Lizz Holmans
>You don't think women are treated less fairly?
Why yes, I do. The Federal government seems to agree with me--we are
much closer to wage equality than we were in 1970. No, women are not in
parity...yet. It's still being worked on.
>What happened to equal pay for equal work?
If you're not getting equal pay for equal work, take yourself down the
Equal Opportunities Employment Commission, or your Union Representative,
and raise hell. It is against the law to fail to pay female workers the
same as male workers for the same job.
This didn't used to be true, you know. There was frequently no recourse
for the poorly-paid women. Now we have state agencies, national
agencies, and even local agencies that handle just those sorts of cases.
>We still don't have that,which I believe is one of the most important things we
>should be concerned about. Maybe you could work on that for us.Thanks.
I do work on it.I write articles about it. I communicate with various
members of the Liberal Democrat Party, Members of Parliament, and the
occasional Peer of the Realm. What I don't do is sit on my arse waiting
for someone to do it for me.
>Now back to the Beatles!
I'm in favor of that.
Lizz 'The Beatles are equal to no one' Holmans
--
Visit http://www.urbanlegends.com
AmySolo
>>>Wave,
Lizz started all of this with this hostile statement!
>Jesus, Lizz, with people posting irrelevant and insulting crap like this
>(loosely translates to "Screw you and the marches you marched in, too,
>eh???"), I wonder how you can find the energy to fight another day,
>sometimes.
I never said screw you or meant any disrespect.I was just saying that I thought
all the marches had done very little when you look at the big picture.Just my
humble opinion.
" I said what I said and it was wrong,or it was taken wrong.And now there's all
this!"(JL)
I appreciate ALL WORK women and men have done to further the cause!
>PPS Sorry that Mr Idle wouldn't sign that autograph. Because of that you
>drop
>in and nominate him for 'bastard of the year'? Yeah, right.
Okay,so I exaggerated a bit.Do you always take things so seriously?(yes,you are
a bit touchy)Maybe I should have said...He had my vote for bastard of that
particular moment! My niece was really devastated.It just goes to show you how
different celebs can be when there are no
cameras around.I'm a fan of Eric's work,but I
can't help being disappointed in him as a person
Thankyou for your time!.
AmySolo
>>What happened to equal pay for equal work?
>we are
>much closer to wage equality than we were in 1970. No, women are not in
>parity...yet. It's still being worked on.
Sorry for my ignorance.Wage equality is what
I was speaking about.
>What I don't do is sit on my arse waiting
>for someone to do it for me.
If I knew what do do,maybe I would get involved.Right now,I work 60 hours a
week
take care of 2 kids and a husband,help take care of my invalid mother,volunteer
at a local abused womens shelter,and volunteer at my kids school.If there is
something I could to help the womens movement(ie.writing letters,making phone
calls etc.) I would be more than willing to give up my half-hour of ME time to
help.Tell me how I can help.
Sincerely,
Amy Soloman
Lizz Holmans
>Oh please.Why are you so uptight?JEEEZ
>lighten up.>
Why is it that when the party of the first part insults the party of the
second part, then the party of the second part defends hirself, the
party of the first part always says 'Lighten up'? (1)
>
>>Yup, I've been divorced three times. So?
>
>So you don't see anything wrong with this?
>Anyone can make a mistake once or even twice,but after that,the blame lies with
>you.
It's really awfully nice of you to explain my marital past to me. Why, I
had *no* idea that I might carry some responsibility. Do you do marital
counselling often with people you've never met?
>Just like I thought...one of those pain in the ass
>feminist - all men are evil-boo hooing-non-armpit shaving types!
If I think men are evil, why do I keep marrying them, and why do they
keep marrying me?
>Goodbye L-O-S-E-R (No offense)
Explain to me how this is not offensive.
>Laughing is good Lizz...try it sometime!
Say something funny sometime.
Lizz 'There ain't no sanity clause' Holmans
(1) Freely adapted from one of my favorite movies, 'The Texas Chainsaw
Massacre'.
--
Visit http://www.urbanlegends.com
Lizz Holmans
>
>If I knew what do do,maybe I would get involved.Right now,I work 60 hours a
>week
>take care of 2 kids and a husband,help take care of my invalid mother,volunteer
>at a local abused womens shelter,and volunteer at my kids school.If there is
>something I could to help the womens movement(ie.writing letters,making phone
>calls etc.) I would be more than willing to give up my half-hour of ME time to
>help.Tell me how I can help.
If you are raising kids, helping your mother, volunteering at an abused
women's shelter, and volunteering for at your kids' school, then you are
already doing feminist work. As the old slogan says, 'All mothers are
working mothers.'
For the sake of your peace of mind, though, don't move to the UKoGBaNI.
It is perfectly legal to discriminate in employment against older
people. A recent study in the Guardian noted that, equal job to equal
job, women in academia are paid thousands less than their male
counterparts. The emotional gap between men and women is almost
unfathomable. And this is the 'cradle of democracy.' Feh.
If you really want to get involved, read the newspapers daily; find an
article about some shenanigan the city council, county commissioners, or
your state legislature is trying to pull. If it makes you mad, write and
tell 'em so. Attend as many local governmental open meetings you can
find time for. You have a ton of issues you could work on--increased
funding and respite care for home-carers; school funding and inequity;
and equal treatment under the law for battered women.
Go for it, girlfriend. All you'd be out is a few stamps, and the
victories are sublime.
Lizz 'card-carrying member of the ACLU, National Organization for Women,
National Women's Political Caucus, and the Pimlico Public Library'
na
Lizz Holmans <di...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:pPGIhKAo...@jackalope.demon.co.uk...
> If you are raising kids, helping your mother, volunteering at an abused
> women's shelter, and volunteering for at your kids' school, then you are
> already doing feminist work. As the old slogan says, 'All mothers are
> working mothers.'
hey lizz, i'm a feminist and i don't do any of those things above. i just
try to treat everyone i meet the same way, man , woman or child.
>
> For the sake of your peace of mind, though, don't move to the UKoGBaNI.
> It is perfectly legal to discriminate in employment against older
> people. A recent study in the Guardian noted that, equal job to equal
> job, women in academia are paid thousands less than their male
> counterparts. The emotional gap between men and women is almost
> unfathomable. And this is the 'cradle of democracy.' Feh.
ahem, actually that is not the cradle of civilisation. that place has been
raped, pillaged, bent, folded, spindeld and mutilated by countless hordes or
marauding no good men........:)
mesopotamia and greece are the cradle of democracy and civilisation, such as
they are.
>
> Lizz 'card-carrying member of the ACLU, National Organization for Women,
> National Women's Political Caucus, and the Pimlico Public Library'
> Holmans
are men allowed in those organisations?
yes nick, the library!
Lizz Holmans
>hey lizz, i'm a feminist and i don't do any of those things above. i just
>try to treat everyone i meet the same way, man , woman or child.
As do most feminists. Remember, whoever gets to the door first, opens it
for the others.
>
>mesopotamia and greece are the cradle of democracy and civilisation, such as
>they are.
In Ancient Greece, only citizens could vote--which meant no women, no
foreigners, no metics, and no slaves. I don't call that democracy, even
if they did.
The best country to live in BCE was Egypt. At least women could own
their own property, make wills, and their children belonged to them.
>>
>> Lizz 'card-carrying member of the ACLU, National Organization for Women,
>> National Women's Political Caucus, and the Pimlico Public Library'
>> Holmans
>
>are men allowed in those organisations?
Of course. But you'd have to live over here to get a Pimlico library
card. They're very exclusive, you know.
Lizz 'Besides, all the Austrians flock to Earl's Court' Holmans
--
Visit http://www.urbanlegends.com