Toon_86 23.07.2015 06:39 |
Been watching a couple of documentaries lately, and Paul Gambaccini always seems to pop up talking about conversations with Freddie 'Fuck it I'm doing everything with everyone' when talking about Aids, or sitting in the opera when Freddie first saw Caballe. Is he a little full of it or are these stories true do you think? I've never heard either Freddie in interviews or since he passed, Peter Freestone ever mention this guy, but he seems to put himself across as a very important friend and confidante. My guess is he is way over playing his relationship with Freddie, but hey, I hope I'm wrong, hate to think he is making a living off interviews that can't be questioned. |
The Fairy King 23.07.2015 07:57 |
I've seen him in more documentaries as a pop-expert and DJ. link |
Costa86 23.07.2015 08:00 |
Interesting question. I think quite a lot of people who were not really very close to Freddie have appeared in interviews and given the impression, knowingly or unwittilingly, that they had some sort of special relationship with him. Being heavily involved with British radio, Gambaccini would have almost certainly known Freddie quite well professionally, and we are also made to believe that they had a friendship outside of work. I never got the impression that they were especially close though - just reasonably good friends. The remark on HIV could have just been something Freddie said in passing, but it left a mark on Gambaccini. In truth, however, anyone who knew Freddie or frequented largely the same circles, would realise that Freddie didn't change his ways in 1981, when stories about a mysterious illness started appearing in news reports. In 1983, he was still going full-swing too. So it was somewhat obvious that Freddie had a "fuck it" attitude - you could deduce that by just observing his behaviour from a distance. Regarding the Caballé episode, Phoebe might remember if Gambaccini really was there on the night Freddie first saw the opera singer - although, after all these years, I wouldn't be surprised if both Gambaccini and Phoebe's memories start playing tricks. When you have a person like Freddie, who is so famous and idolised, it's to be expected that those who knew him try to paint a picture of the degree to which they knew him which is not always factual. When it comes to the truth about Freddie, the sources I tend to respect most are Brian, Roger, and to a lesser extent Phoebe and Mary Austin (Mary would have been a phenomenal source since she knew him so well, but she does have a somewhat skewed idea of what happened in regards to the situation with Jim, Phoebe, etc). I also lost some respect for Phoebe when he appeared on that awful documentary 'Freddie's Loves'. |
Kuijpy 23.07.2015 08:15 |
He irritates me, annoying voice and the same stories on every fucking documentary |
antiden 23.07.2015 09:52 |
Kuijpy wrote: He irritates me, annoying voice and the same stories on every fucking documentary+1 |
The Fairy King 23.07.2015 10:24 |
antiden wrote:Really? I think Harvey Kubernik was the most annoying guy in any Queen documentary ever.Kuijpy wrote: He irritates me, annoying voice and the same stories on every fucking documentary+1 |
Stelios 23.07.2015 11:01 |
That was a quote remember reading "Paul Gambaccini- Dead stars best friend!" My guess is it was part of his job to come as close as possible to music celebrities. Apparently he gained their trust and perhaps respect. It was a win -win situation. Nothing bad about that. |
master marathon runner 23.07.2015 13:22 |
While I respect gambaccini as a dj, I was disappointed with his 'fuck it' anecdote, it was disloyal ( especially if he was a friend of Fred's), knowing that freddie's dear mum and sister would definitely see this interview. Imagine Jer, at her age and her cultural background , hearing that, it must have been like a knife to her heart. Bless her. |
cmsdrums 23.07.2015 15:25 |
master marathon runner wrote: While I respect gambaccini as a dj, I was disappointed with his 'fuck it' anecdote, it was disloyal ( especially if he was a friend of Fred's), knowing that freddie's dear mum and sister would definitely see this interview. Imagine Jer, at her age and her cultural background , hearing that, it must have been like a knife to her heart. Bless her.It may have been disloyal, but it was clearly probably true. As an aside, I sat opposite Gambacchini and his partner on the London Underground for about 15 minutes last year (ironically on the way to Kentish Town to see Extreme!) |
Costa86 23.07.2015 16:04 |
master marathon runner wrote: While I respect gambaccini as a dj, I was disappointed with his 'fuck it' anecdote, it was disloyal ( especially if he was a friend of Fred's), knowing that freddie's dear mum and sister would definitely see this interview. Imagine Jer, at her age and her cultural background , hearing that, it must have been like a knife to her heart. Bless her.I think Jer had to learn early on in Freddie's career that she shouldn't pay too much attention to what the press said about her son, who was very much a public person. What the tabloids wrote about him in the days and weeks preceding and following his death was much worse. Jim Hutton disclosed lurid crap in documentaries, such as Freddie asking him "how big is your cock" when they first met in a bar. I mean, why would Jim recount that? Why disclose that, when it involves a person you supposedly respect? |
mooghead 23.07.2015 16:11 |
Can't stand the bloke, pops up on every ones tribute programme when someone dies pretending they were great friends. The guy is a wanker. |
Nitroboy 23.07.2015 17:25 |
Costa86 wrote: Jim Hutton disclosed lurid crap in documentaries, such as Freddie asking him "how big is your cock" when they first met in a bar. I mean, why would Jim recount that? Why disclose that, when it involves a person you supposedly respect? Perhaps because Freddie was like that. Or that he knew Freddie wouldn't give a shit. Who knows. |
RafaelS 23.07.2015 21:42 |
mooghead wrote: The guy is a wanker.Like you. |
tomchristie22 23.07.2015 23:36 |
Nitroboy wrote:But Freddie tended to keep his public presentation of himself pretty dignified, even when hinting at his lifestyle in 80's interviews.Costa86 wrote: Jim Hutton disclosed lurid crap in documentaries, such as Freddie asking him "how big is your cock" when they first met in a bar. I mean, why would Jim recount that? Why disclose that, when it involves a person you supposedly respect?Perhaps because Freddie was like that. Or that he knew Freddie wouldn't give a shit. Who knows. |
stevelondon20 24.07.2015 01:04 |
mooghead wrote: Can't stand the bloke, pops up on every ones tribute programme when someone dies pretending they were great friends. The guy is a wanker.For once dude, I agree with you. |
Sebastian 24.07.2015 01:25 |
stevelondon20 wrote:That makes two of us.mooghead wrote: Can't stand the bloke, pops up on every ones tribute programme when someone dies pretending they were great friends. The guy is a wanker.For once dude, I agree with you. |
miraclesteinway 24.07.2015 13:10 |
It's likely that Paul Gambaccini did know Freddie, and did hang out with him in gay bars in the late 70s and early 80s. Given that they were both in to music it's likely that they did see each other in the Royal Opera House in '87, and it's likely that in a bar, in 1982, Freddie did say 'fuck it' to Paul. Let's put the AIDS thing in context - at the time, the disease didn't have a name, meaning it (the conversation) must have taken place before 1983 - and given that the first outbreak was in, well, about 1980 (I don't know the exact dates OK, I'm just brainstorming), it was probably seen more as a rumour than a fact that the infection was spread sexually. It was probably a little defiance on Freddie's part - that nothing would stop him from having a good time. The remark was probably so flippant, and I'll bet that Paul Gambaccini had a good giggle at the time too, and I'll bet that neither of them realised exactly what kind of outbreak it would be in 1980/81, and I'll also put a wager on Gambo saying that he got that 'sinking feeling', was probably something he felt in retrospect. It's easy to look back over the last 35 years and look at the destruction that HIV has done to our world. It wouldn't have been so easy to stand in 1980 and extrapolate unless you were a medical professional. It wasn't until the mid 80s was it, that the disease and how it was spread was identified properly. |
master marathon runner 24.07.2015 17:44 |
/ Yeah, interesting perspective. |
Mr.QueenFan 24.07.2015 19:51 |
miraclesteinway wrote: The remark was probably so flippant, and I'll bet that Paul Gambaccini had a good giggle at the time too, and I'll bet that neither of them realised exactly what kind of outbreak it would be in 1980/81, and I'll also put a wager on Gambo saying that he got that 'sinking feeling', was probably something he felt in retrospect. .Your post was very good! I just have to add something to this part. I'm pretty sure that Paul Gambaccini felt the "sinking feeling". Even if it was in the early days, people were very aware of the consequences. It was not good to watch the news and see people in the latest phase of the disease. I'm pretty sure that everybody surrounding Freddie - including Brian, Roger and John - knew that Freddie was an accident waiting to happen. How could they not sense that? That's why i believe - just my perception - that even though Brian, Roger and John loved Freddie, deep down there must have been (at least around 1988-1991) some resentful feelings towards Freddie and the careless way with which he handled himself. Not only did he died and suffered because of it, but he also made everybody around him suffer when they saw him that way. And in the end, that lifestyle put an end to Queen! Sometimes i get angry with Freddie because of this also. I love him unconditionally, but when i think of all the music that he would have written in the last 20 years with that beautiful voice ... oh man! But my angriness with Freddie lasts only a few seconds until i look at one of his pictures with that big smile on his face :-) One thing is you getting a disease that you cannot do anything to avoid. Another thing is you behaving like you want the fucking desease in your body. If you look at Freddie in Rock in Rio, he has that look in his eyes "I'm fucking untouchable". The power he had over 300.000 people must have been intoxicating. I wouldn't rule out that Freddie got so full of himself - because of the drugs - that he might have turned into one of the first persons with the bugchaser mentality. So, i believe everybody expected this to happen to Freddie. It was only a matter of when. |
matt z 25.07.2015 04:50 |
Mr.QueenFan wrote:Interesting post! Maybe so!miraclesteinway wrote: The remark was probably so flippant, and I'll bet that Paul Gambaccini had a good giggle at the time too, and I'll bet that neither of them realised exactly what kind of outbreak it would be in 1980/81, and I'll also put a wager on Gambo saying that he got that 'sinking feeling', was probably something he felt in retrospect. .Your post was very good! I just have to add something to this part. I'm pretty sure that Paul Gambaccini felt the "sinking feeling". Even if it was in the early days, people were very aware of the consequences. It was not good to watch the news and see people in the latest phase of the disease. I'm pretty sure that everybody surrounding Freddie - including Brian, Roger and John - new that Freddie was an accident waiting to happen. How could they not sense that? That's why i believe - just my perception - that even though Brian, Roger and John loved Freddie, deep down there must have been (at least around 1988-1991) some resentful feelings towards Freddie and the careless way with which he handled himself. Not only did he died and suffered because of it, but he also made everybody around him suffer when they saw him that way. And in the end, that lifestyle put an end to Queen! Sometimes i get angry with Freddie because of this also. I love him unconditionally, but when i think of all the music that he would have written in the last 20 years with that beautiful voice ... oh man! But my angriness with Freddie lasts only a few seconds until i look at one of his pictures with that big smile on his face :-) One thing is you getting a disease that you cannot do anything to avoid. Another thing is you behaving like you want the fucking desease in your body. If you look at Freddie in Rock in Rio, he has that look in his eyes "I'm fucking untouchable". The power he had over 300.000 people must have been intoxicating. I wouldn't rule out that Freddie got so full of himself - because of the drugs - that he might have turned into one of the first persons with the bugchaser mentality. So, i believe everybody expected this to happen to Freddie. It was only a matter of when. Just don't let the folks on Queenzone read it. |
Nitroboy 25.07.2015 12:50 |
Mr.QueenFan wrote: I'm pretty sure that everybody surrounding Freddie - including Brian, Roger and John - new that Freddie was an accident waiting to happen. How could they not sense that? That's why i believe - just my perception - that even though Brian, Roger and John loved Freddie, deep down there must have been (at least around 1988-1991) some resentful feelings towards Freddie and the careless way with which he handled himself. Not only did he died and suffered because of it, but he also made everybody around him suffer when they saw him that way. And in the end, that lifestyle put an end to Queen! Sometimes i get angry with Freddie because of this also. I love him unconditionally, but when i think of all the music that he would have written in the last 20 years with that beautiful voice ... oh man! But my angriness with Freddie lasts only a few seconds until i look at one of his pictures with that big smile on his face :-) One thing is you getting a disease that you cannot do anything to avoid. Another thing is you behaving like you want the fucking desease in your body. If you look at Freddie in Rock in Rio, he has that look in his eyes "I'm fucking untouchable". The power he had over 300.000 people must have been intoxicating. I wouldn't rule out that Freddie got so full of himself - because of the drugs - that he might have turned into one of the first persons with the bugchaser mentality. So, i believe everybody expected this to happen to Freddie. It was only a matter of when. Quite an ignorant point of view/opinion. You have to keep in mind that back when it all started, people didn't know better. It took some time before people knew what the hell it was and how the thing spread. You also have to keep in mind that even WITH the knowledge of HIV/AIDS, mistakes and accidents happen. This "he brought it upon himself" attitude is really ignorant. |
musicland munich 25.07.2015 16:54 |
I 'am not willing to jump on the HIV/AIDS debate in THIS topic...but face it, that dude is just another voice in the choir of people who shared details about Freddie's private life with the public. |
Mr.QueenFan 25.07.2015 18:32 |
Nitroboy wrote:No it's not, Nitroboy!Mr.QueenFan wrote: I'm pretty sure that everybody surrounding Freddie - including Brian, Roger and John - new that Freddie was an accident waiting to happen. How could they not sense that? (...)Quite an ignorant point of view/opinion. You have to keep in mind that back when it all started, people didn't know better. It took some time before people knew what the hell it was and how the thing spread. You also have to keep in mind that even WITH the knowledge of HIV/AIDS, mistakes and accidents happen. This "he brought it upon himself" attitude is really ignorant. Freddie wasn't ignorant! He was careless! He was the biggest rockstar of his time and he had the best doctors and people advising him. He knew about consequenses. You are right about mistakes. But Freddie didn't make mistakes! You cannot compare Freddie to the normal guy on the street. As an homosexual he was very aware of the "cancer of the gays" as it was called at the time. If you read his bios, like i did, his behaviour around 84-85 in Munich and Brazil is something that makes you wonder "how was that possible?" "What did he expected?" In Rock in Rio he was consuming drugs, staying at a different hotels from the rest of the band, and fucking around five male prostitutes a night in Brazil! Random guys his staff would pick up at gay bars or whathever. In Germany Barbara Valentin told the same thing about Freddie getting home with several guys at a time. I respect your opinion and you are generaly right about everything that you say about accidents and other things. But with somebody with this kind of behaviour it was expected what the end result would be. We may not want to accept it, but it was self destructive behaviour. Freddie was losing his voice big time. I doubt that he could have go on making tours even if he didn't got aids. His body was being pushed to the limit. But i will not turn this topic into another discussion about AIDS. I just don't appreciate you calling me an ignorant when all his bios state the same thing. I was talking about Freddie in particlar, not people in general! |
Chief Mouse 26.07.2015 04:32 |
He probably thought "Me sick? A disease? You must be kidding, dear. Everyone but me!". And that's all. I agree with MrQueenFan, it was a self-destructive behaviour. But at least it pulled him back into music. He shared some amazing things with the world by the end of his life which otherwise might not have happened. But even with that in mind, obviously I wish he hadn't caught that terrible disease :P |
BETA215 27.07.2015 05:13 |
BUMP. |
beemack74 27.07.2015 05:23 |
One thing that did stick in my mind concerning the Montserrat story was that Gambacinni gives the date as May 1983. Freestone, in his book, gives the date as January 1981. One would imagine that since it was Phoebe who purchased the tickets and probably bought a programme that he would have in his mind a fair idea when it occurred. I'm not suggesting that Gambacinni is fibbing but perhaps his memory is indeed muddled. |
Costa86 27.07.2015 06:16 |
Mr.QueenFan wrote:All this is a moot point - for one simple reason - when Freddie was in all likelihood infected, the existence of a mysterious illness hadn't yet been publicly noticed by scientists. So even if he had stopped sleeping around when the stories of a mysterious illness first emerged, in 1981, he'd most likely still have been doomed, because he probably was infected around 1979/80, when the disease was unknown, and you couldn't blame folks for sleeping around, because they didn't know they could catch something so deadly.Nitroboy wrote:No it's not, Nitroboy! Freddie wasn't ignorant! He was careless! He was the biggest rockstar of his time and he had the best doctors and people advising him. He knew about consequenses. You are right about mistakes. But Freddie didn't make mistakes! You cannot compare Freddie to the normal guy on the street. As an homosexual he was very aware of the "cancer of the gays" as it was called at the time. If you read his bios, like i did, his behaviour around 84-85 in Munich and Brazil is something that makes you wonder "how was that possible?" "What did he expected?" In Rock in Rio he was consuming drugs, staying at a different hotels from the rest of the band, and fucking around five male prostitutes a night in Brazil! Random guys his staff would pick up at gay bars or whathever. In Germany Barbara Valentin told the same thing about Freddie getting home with several guys at a time. I respect your opinion and you are generaly right about everything that you say about accidents and other things. But with somebody with this kind of behaviour it was expected what the end result would be. We may not want to accept it, but it was self destructive behaviour. Freddie was losing his voice big time. I doubt that he could have go on making tours even if he didn't got aids. His body was being pushed to the limit. But i will not turn this topic into another discussion about AIDS. I just don't appreciate you calling me an ignorant when all his bios state the same thing. I was talking about Freddie in particlar, not people in general!Mr.QueenFan wrote: I'm pretty sure that everybody surrounding Freddie - including Brian, Roger and John - new that Freddie was an accident waiting to happen. How could they not sense that? (...)Quite an ignorant point of view/opinion. You have to keep in mind that back when it all started, people didn't know better. It took some time before people knew what the hell it was and how the thing spread. You also have to keep in mind that even WITH the knowledge of HIV/AIDS, mistakes and accidents happen. This "he brought it upon himself" attitude is really ignorant. We can deduce this through the knowledge we have of the progression of HIV. Now, this said, there are cases when the virus takes a shorter or longer period to start showing symptoms in a person and to develop into AIDS. So for all we know, he might have got it in 1981, '82 or '83, in which case stopping the partying in '81 might have saved him. Also, there were strains of the disease, early mutations actually, which themselves had a shorter latency period, irregardless of the person they were inside (this was especially true of some strains of HIV which were going around in the 1970s in Africa, and could lead to AIDS in only a couple of years - scientists found this out in the 90s when they were tracking down the origins of HIV). But it is unlikely that any such strains were going around in North America and Europe in the early 80s - by then the average latency period of eight to ten years had already establised itself in the virus, and remains the same to this day. So it would have probably been useless if Freddie stopped the partying anyway. Probably, not certainly. Because, to compound matters even more, there is also something called HIV superinfection, when someone gets infected multiple times with different strains, and this might (depending on which study you subscribe to!) aggrevate the disease. I'd bet my packed lunch that Freddie was infected multiple times. Just a final comment: I don't think anyone should be angry at Freddie. Don't you think the poor man regretted his mistakes enough? I'm sure, when he found himself in that horrible state in 1990/91, he wished he had been more careful. I don't believe his 'no regrets' macho bullshit. He said that when he was healthy. He paid enough for his mistakes, and we shouldn't be commenting on how reckless he was. |
noorie 27.07.2015 09:47 |
^^^ Just wanted to add - almost every rock star lived the 'sex, drugs, and rock and roll' lifestyle to the max in those days (I am sure they do that today as well, but have better PR teams). Read an honest biography of just about any rock star - Keith Richards, Mick Jagger, David Bowie, Ozzy Osbourne, and just about everyone else, and this will be quite apparent. So Freddie was pretty much doing what everybody else was doing, except that he was doing it with men, not women - which put him at greater risk. And made him a bigger target for the press. |
miraclesteinway 27.07.2015 14:05 |
Whether Freddie really knew the risks or not is debatable. He obviously knew that there was that disease around, because the conversation would not have taken place otherwise. I'd like to offer another perspective: The gay community have long been the subject of abuse from the wider population. When they found a kind of safe place and scene where they could be themselves and party how they wanted to (were they so different to straight people? there have always been many promiscuous straight people), I think the attitude would have been one of nobody is going to spoil our lifestyle and our fun. In parts of the UK in the 1970s homosexuality was still illegal. If you moved from repressed Britain to liberated New York's gay scene at that time, and all of a sudden there was all this sex you could have, without consequence, well, perhaps in that time you'd think, I'm not going to let some illness that I may or may not catch prevent me from doing what I want. People would think about it more as a scare story, or scare tactic perhaps. It wasn't until events unfolded as time went on through the 1980s that people really started to get with the game. It wasn't until the mid to late 1980s that the health education plans went out in full force, by which time you're expecting a group of obstinate close to middle aged men used to getting what they want from curbing their behaviour? I say obstinate because when Freddie was 35 to 40 years old, he was really being a bit unkind due to the bad influences in his life that he allowed to take over. In fact in the UK, nobody really spoke about AIDS as a social issue until Freddie Mercury died. Before then it was something that happened, and it was a bad thing and a bit of a shame, and we were all a bit scared of it, and it was really just for "poofs". Now, although Freddie Mercury was gay, and we all knew it, his popularity transcended is sexuality meaning that many, many very straight and actually homophobic men were fans of Queen, so his death really did have a profound effect on the whole population. Of course there were many people who used it as an opportunity to condemn those terrible homosexuals and their wayward lifestyle, and isn't good that we're not like that..... (I have heard that before), and there were people in the UK saying that AIDS is of course God's punishment (which is outrageous on so many levels, not least because it presumes the accuser must be leading a life so perfect as to be above all reproach), but in the population at large, many people in that first year after Freddie died, felt it a great loss. Of course, in the subsequent years, between Freddie's death and 'Made In Heaven' being released, Freddie went back to being a figure of ridicule again, and homosexuality was once again, even in the mid 1990s, seen as something terrible. I strongly believe that had gay people actually been treated like real people from the start, rather than as the untermensch, then the whole AIDS thing would have been far less of a problem in that particular group at that particular time. Of course, what we mustn't forget is that, by 1976 or so, Africa was already so deep in the shit with AIDS with a pandemic being pretty much unavoidable for that continent. I suppose the positive outcome of the Western and Northern AIDS epidemic is that it pushed people to research a cure, or at least treatment which is sometimes being distributed to the poor in Africa. This is a whole different issue and it just shows how the Western White world really views people from other racial backgrounds, economic status and culture, and who used to be far enough away not to give a crap about. Terrible really. Oh I went all political there..... Anyway, yes, Gambo was probably a hanger on who spoke too much about Freddie, but what he said about Freddie in the documentaries was nothing compared to what some of the people closest to Freddie have said (Phoebe, Jim.... really guys I had expected better behaviour) |
noorie 27.07.2015 23:15 |
^^^ Excellent post! |
cmsdrums 28.07.2015 02:25 |
miraclesteinway wrote: In fact in the UK, nobody really spoke about AIDS as a social issue until Freddie Mercury died. Before then it was something that happened, and it was a bad thing and a bit of a shame, and we were all a bit scared of it, and it was really just for "poofs". Now, although Freddie Mercury was gay, and we all knew it, his popularity transcended is sexuality meaning that many, many very straight and actually homophobic men were fans of Queen, so his death really did have a profound effect on the whole population. Of course there were many people who used it as an opportunity to condemn those terrible homosexuals and their wayward lifestyle, and isn't good that we're not like that..... (I have heard that before), and there were people in the UK saying that AIDS is of course God's punishment (which is outrageous on so many levels, not least because it presumes the accuser must be leading a life so perfect as to be above all reproach), but in the population at large, many people in that first year after Freddie died, felt it a great loss. Of course, in the subsequent years, between Freddie's death and 'Made In Heaven' being released, Freddie went back to being a figure of ridicule again, and homosexuality was once again, even in the mid 1990s, seen as something terrible.Great post in total, and this part reminds me of the fact that the BBC wouldn't put a picture of Freddie on the cover of the Radio Times for the week of the Tribute Concert in '92 because 'it wouldn't be appropriate'. |
The Real Wizard 28.07.2015 04:58 |
Mr.QueenFan wrote: That's why i believe - just my perception - that even though Brian, Roger and John loved Freddie, deep down there must have been (at least around 1988-1991) some resentful feelings towards Freddie and the careless way with which he handled himself. Not only did he died and suffered because of it, but he also made everybody around him suffer when they saw him that way. And in the end, that lifestyle put an end to Queen!Killer Queen and Bohemian Rhapsody are about Freddie coming to grips with his sexuality. These are the songs that put Queen on the map. His sexuality led him to the abyss that ultimately took his life. All too often with artists the thing that that makes you great is also your greatest foe. |
Costa86 28.07.2015 05:11 |
miraclesteinway wrote: I strongly believe that had gay people actually been treated like real people from the start, rather than as the untermensch, then the whole AIDS thing would have been far less of a problem in that particular group at that particular time.This gay stigma thing, especially as it manifested itself in the first 60 or so years of the 20th century, is something very recent. In ancient Greece and Rome, gay people were treated as a normal part of society. miraclesteinway wrote: Of course, what we mustn't forget is that, by 1976 or so, Africa was already so deep in the shit with AIDS with a pandemic being pretty much unavoidable for that continent. I suppose the positive outcome of the Western and Northern AIDS epidemic is that it pushed people to research a cure, or at least treatment which is sometimes being distributed to the poor in Africa. This is a whole different issue and it just shows how the Western White world really views people from other racial backgrounds, economic status and culture, and who used to be far enough away not to give a crap about. Terrible really.The African AIDS problem has many, many facets. One of the very positive things which the Bush administration did, is that it allocated billions of USD to supply drugs to Africa. This has had a huge amount of benefit on the continent, and many people's lives have been saved. One of the main problems in Africa is supplying drugs to regions which many times lack any proper road infrastructure and health services. In some parts of Africa, some peope don't even keep time the same way as we do - how are they going to take their drug regiment at the specific times required? - this is very important to do if he drugs are to work. This is just an example of the issues. They can be overcome, but it's been a very difficult road. And I think this guilt complex which the Western world has towards Africa is to a large extent ridiculous, especially at this stage. Western countries have poured billions and billions into Africa, to try to prop it up. Where the money has gone is a matter for debate, but the fact is we tried. It is Africa which has to lift itself from the abyss it is in. The fact is Africa is descending into chaos. And everybody is leaving, coming to Europe. Huge parts of the continent are virtually empty. Is this the soltution - a mass movement of Africans to Europe? It is not the solution, but it is unstoppable now. African countries need to take responsibility for their mess, and Western countries have to let go of their idiotic guilt complex. We've paid for colonialism. |
The Real Wizard 28.07.2015 05:12 |
Excellent discussion, folks ! |
on my way up 28.07.2015 08:44 |
Costa86 wrote:As much as I love Freddie, it's so clear he had a very selfdestructive attitude in the early eighties. Even when the potential consequences of his behaviour were very well-known to every one, he didn't change his ways...Mr.QueenFan wrote:All this is a moot point - for one simple reason - when Freddie was in all likelihood infected, the existence of a mysterious illness hadn't yet been publicly noticed by scientists. So even if he had stopped sleeping around when the stories of a mysterious illness first emerged, in 1981, he'd most likely still have been doomed, because he probably was infected around 1979/80, when the disease was unknown, and you couldn't blame folks for sleeping around, because they didn't know they could catch something so deadly. We can deduce this through the knowledge we have of the progression of HIV. Now, this said, there are cases when the virus takes a shorter or longer period to start showing symptoms in a person and to develop into AIDS. So for all we know, he might have got it in 1981, '82 or '83, in which case stopping the partying in '81 might have saved him. Also, there were strains of the disease, early mutations actually, which themselves had a shorter latency period, irregardless of the person they were inside (this was especially true of some strains of HIV which were going around in the 1970s in Africa, and could lead to AIDS in only a couple of years - scientists found this out in the 90s when they were tracking down the origins of HIV). But it is unlikely that any such strains were going around in North America and Europe in the early 80s - by then the average latency period of eight to ten years had already establised itself in the virus, and remains the same to this day. So it would have probably been useless if Freddie stopped the partying anyway. Probably, not certainly. Because, to compound matters even more, there is also something called HIV superinfection, when someone gets infected multiple times with different strains, and this might (depending on which study you subscribe to!) aggrevate the disease. I'd bet my packed lunch that Freddie was infected multiple times. Just a final comment: I don't think anyone should be angry at Freddie. Don't you think the poor man regretted his mistakes enough? I'm sure, when he found himself in that horrible state in 1990/91, he wished he had been more careful. I don't believe his 'no regrets' macho bullshit. He said that when he was healthy. He paid enough for his mistakes, and we shouldn't be commenting on how reckless he was.Nitroboy wrote:No it's not, Nitroboy! Freddie wasn't ignorant! He was careless! He was the biggest rockstar of his time and he had the best doctors and people advising him. He knew about consequenses. You are right about mistakes. But Freddie didn't make mistakes! You cannot compare Freddie to the normal guy on the street. As an homosexual he was very aware of the "cancer of the gays" as it was called at the time. If you read his bios, like i did, his behaviour around 84-85 in Munich and Brazil is something that makes you wonder "how was that possible?" "What did he expected?" In Rock in Rio he was consuming drugs, staying at a different hotels from the rest of the band, and fucking around five male prostitutes a night in Brazil! Random guys his staff would pick up at gay bars or whathever. In Germany Barbara Valentin told the same thing about Freddie getting home with several guys at a time. I respect your opinion and you are generaly right about everything that you say about accidents and other things. But with somebody with this kind of behaviour it was expected what the end result would be. We may not want to accept it, but it was self destructive behaviour. Freddie was losing his voice big time. I doubt that he could have go on making tours even if he didn't got aids. His body was being pushed to the limit. But i will not turn this topic into another discussion about AIDS. I just don't appreciate you calling me an ignorant when all his bios state the same thing. I was talking about Freddie in particlar, not people in general!Mr.QueenFan wrote: I'm pretty sure that everybody surrounding Freddie - including Brian, Roger and John - new that Freddie was an accident waiting to happen. How could they not sense that? (...)Quite an ignorant point of view/opinion. You have to keep in mind that back when it all started, people didn't know better. It took some time before people knew what the hell it was and how the thing spread. You also have to keep in mind that even WITH the knowledge of HIV/AIDS, mistakes and accidents happen. This "he brought it upon himself" attitude is really ignorant. And then, by the mid-eighties, when most probably some of his friends started to get sick and die, he was poor in his judgment again. Instead of hoping to miraculously escape the illness he should have had proper screening. He waited and waited and just ignored the issue. I'm 100% sure that Freddie's immune system was already under very heavy attack in 1986 and during the Magic tour. Still he chose to look the other way until he was nearly death... Let's face it, by the time he got his diagnosis in 1987, he was already weakened to a great extent by the disease. The virus had already grown strong. Had he started a cure years earlier - while still in the HIV-status - his chances would have been far better to make it to the nineties and survive... All the above is of course said with a much better understanding of HIV/aids than what Freddie had to deal with it. There was even a time when doctors thought the treatment only needed to start when a patient started to show symptoms, which is entirely wrong. The earlier after the infection the better the drugs work and the easier it is to keep the immunesystem on a good level. But Freddie's life - the way it was lived and the way it ended and the music he produced along the way inspired by all the different experiences in his life (good and bad) - made him the legend he is today... Barcelona would never have been as epic had Freddie lived another 20 years... The show must go on would never have resonated "through the eons" as it does now, simply because all that stuff was grounded in what was happening to Freddie and the band. Their best stuff was produced when heavy emotions affected the personal lives of the band members (and when they were young and had to prove everything, that also evokes a certain dynamism of course) |
on my way up 28.07.2015 08:46 |
on my way up wrote:Costa86 wrote:As much as I love Freddie, it's so clear he had a very selfdestructive attitude in the early eighties. Even when the potential consequences of his behaviour were very well-known to every one, he didn't change his ways... And then, by the mid-eighties, when most probably some of his friends started to get sick and die, he was poor in his judgment again. Instead of hoping to miraculously escape the illness he should have had proper screening. He waited and waited and just ignored the issue. I'm 100% sure that Freddie's immune system was already under very heavy attack in 1986 and during the Magic tour. Still he chose to look the other way until he was nearly death... Let's face it, by the time he got his diagnosis in 1987, he was already weakened to a great extent by the disease. The virus had already grown strong. Had he started a cure years earlier - while still in the HIV-status - his chances would have been far better to make it to the nineties and survive... All the above - to Freddie's defense - is of course said with a much better understanding of HIV/aids than what Freddie had to deal with it. There was even a time when doctors thought the treatment only needed to start when a patient started to show symptoms, which is entirely wrong. The earlier after the infection the better the drugs work and the easier it is to keep the immunesystem on a good level. But Freddie's life - the way it was lived and the way it ended and the music he produced along the way inspired by all the different experiences in his life (good and bad) - made him the legend he is today... Barcelona would never have been as epic had Freddie lived another 20 years... The show must go on would never have resonated "through the eons" as it does now, simply because all that stuff was grounded in what was happening to Freddie and the band. Their best stuff was produced when heavy emotions affected the personal lives of the band members (and when they were young and had to prove everything, that also evokes a certain dynamism of course)Mr.QueenFan wrote:All this is a moot point - for one simple reason - when Freddie was in all likelihood infected, the existence of a mysterious illness hadn't yet been publicly noticed by scientists. So even if he had stopped sleeping around when the stories of a mysterious illness first emerged, in 1981, he'd most likely still have been doomed, because he probably was infected around 1979/80, when the disease was unknown, and you couldn't blame folks for sleeping around, because they didn't know they could catch something so deadly. We can deduce this through the knowledge we have of the progression of HIV. Now, this said, there are cases when the virus takes a shorter or longer period to start showing symptoms in a person and to develop into AIDS. So for all we know, he might have got it in 1981, '82 or '83, in which case stopping the partying in '81 might have saved him. Also, there were strains of the disease, early mutations actually, which themselves had a shorter latency period, irregardless of the person they were inside (this was especially true of some strains of HIV which were going around in the 1970s in Africa, and could lead to AIDS in only a couple of years - scientists found this out in the 90s when they were tracking down the origins of HIV). But it is unlikely that any such strains were going around in North America and Europe in the early 80s - by then the average latency period of eight to ten years had already establised itself in the virus, and remains the same to this day. So it would have probably been useless if Freddie stopped the partying anyway. Probably, not certainly. Because, to compound matters even more, there is also something called HIV superinfection, when someone gets infected multiple times with different strains, and this might (depending on which study you subscribe to!) aggrevate the disease. I'd bet my packed lunch that Freddie was infected multiple times. Just a final comment: I don't think anyone should be angry at Freddie. Don't you think the poor man regretted his mistakes enough? I'm sure, when he found himself in that horrible state in 1990/91, he wished he had been more careful. I don't believe his 'no regrets' macho bullshit. He said that when he was healthy. He paid enough for his mistakes, and we shouldn't be commenting on how reckless he was.Nitroboy wrote:No it's not, Nitroboy! Freddie wasn't ignorant! He was careless! He was the biggest rockstar of his time and he had the best doctors and people advising him. He knew about consequenses. You are right about mistakes. But Freddie didn't make mistakes! You cannot compare Freddie to the normal guy on the street. As an homosexual he was very aware of the "cancer of the gays" as it was called at the time. If you read his bios, like i did, his behaviour around 84-85 in Munich and Brazil is something that makes you wonder "how was that possible?" "What did he expected?" In Rock in Rio he was consuming drugs, staying at a different hotels from the rest of the band, and fucking around five male prostitutes a night in Brazil! Random guys his staff would pick up at gay bars or whathever. In Germany Barbara Valentin told the same thing about Freddie getting home with several guys at a time. I respect your opinion and you are generaly right about everything that you say about accidents and other things. But with somebody with this kind of behaviour it was expected what the end result would be. We may not want to accept it, but it was self destructive behaviour. Freddie was losing his voice big time. I doubt that he could have go on making tours even if he didn't got aids. His body was being pushed to the limit. But i will not turn this topic into another discussion about AIDS. I just don't appreciate you calling me an ignorant when all his bios state the same thing. I was talking about Freddie in particlar, not people in general!Mr.QueenFan wrote: I'm pretty sure that everybody surrounding Freddie - including Brian, Roger and John - new that Freddie was an accident waiting to happen. How could they not sense that? (...)Quite an ignorant point of view/opinion. You have to keep in mind that back when it all started, people didn't know better. It took some time before people knew what the hell it was and how the thing spread. You also have to keep in mind that even WITH the knowledge of HIV/AIDS, mistakes and accidents happen. This "he brought it upon himself" attitude is really ignorant. |
Costa86 28.07.2015 09:15 |
on my way up wrote:To be honest I don't think it would have made one iota of difference if Freddie found out about his HIV status earlier. This is because the only drug which had any efficacy, AZT, was only approved for HIV treatment in 1987 - which is the year Freddie started taking it. And AZT alone was never going to give him more than a few years of life at best, because the virus quickly became resistant to it through its very frequent mutations.Costa86 wrote:As much as I love Freddie, it's so clear he had a very selfdestructive attitude in the early eighties. Even when the potential consequences of his behaviour were very well-known to every one, he didn't change his ways... And then, by the mid-eighties, when most probably some of his friends started to get sick and die, he was poor in his judgment again. Instead of hoping to miraculously escape the illness he should have had proper screening. He waited and waited and just ignored the issue. I'm 100% sure that Freddie's immune system was already under very heavy attack in 1986 and during the Magic tour. Still he chose to look the other way until he was nearly death... Let's face it, by the time he got his diagnosis in 1987, he was already weakened to a great extent by the disease. The virus had already grown strong. Had he started a cure years earlier - while still in the HIV-status - his chances would have been far better to make it to the nineties and survive... All the above is of course said with a much better understanding of HIV/aids than what Freddie had to deal with it. There was even a time when doctors thought the treatment only needed to start when a patient started to show symptoms, which is entirely wrong. The earlier after the infection the better the drugs work and the easier it is to keep the immunesystem on a good level. But Freddie's life - the way it was lived and the way it ended and the music he produced along the way inspired by all the different experiences in his life (good and bad) - made him the legend he is today... Barcelona would never have been as epic had Freddie lived another 20 years... The show must go on would never have resonated "through the eons" as it does now, simply because all that stuff was grounded in what was happening to Freddie and the band. Their best stuff was produced when heavy emotions affected the personal lives of the band members (and when they were young and had to prove everything, that also evokes a certain dynamism of course)Mr.QueenFan wrote:All this is a moot point - for one simple reason - when Freddie was in all likelihood infected, the existence of a mysterious illness hadn't yet been publicly noticed by scientists. So even if he had stopped sleeping around when the stories of a mysterious illness first emerged, in 1981, he'd most likely still have been doomed, because he probably was infected around 1979/80, when the disease was unknown, and you couldn't blame folks for sleeping around, because they didn't know they could catch something so deadly. We can deduce this through the knowledge we have of the progression of HIV. Now, this said, there are cases when the virus takes a shorter or longer period to start showing symptoms in a person and to develop into AIDS. So for all we know, he might have got it in 1981, '82 or '83, in which case stopping the partying in '81 might have saved him. Also, there were strains of the disease, early mutations actually, which themselves had a shorter latency period, irregardless of the person they were inside (this was especially true of some strains of HIV which were going around in the 1970s in Africa, and could lead to AIDS in only a couple of years - scientists found this out in the 90s when they were tracking down the origins of HIV). But it is unlikely that any such strains were going around in North America and Europe in the early 80s - by then the average latency period of eight to ten years had already establised itself in the virus, and remains the same to this day. So it would have probably been useless if Freddie stopped the partying anyway. Probably, not certainly. Because, to compound matters even more, there is also something called HIV superinfection, when someone gets infected multiple times with different strains, and this might (depending on which study you subscribe to!) aggrevate the disease. I'd bet my packed lunch that Freddie was infected multiple times. Just a final comment: I don't think anyone should be angry at Freddie. Don't you think the poor man regretted his mistakes enough? I'm sure, when he found himself in that horrible state in 1990/91, he wished he had been more careful. I don't believe his 'no regrets' macho bullshit. He said that when he was healthy. He paid enough for his mistakes, and we shouldn't be commenting on how reckless he was.Nitroboy wrote:No it's not, Nitroboy! Freddie wasn't ignorant! He was careless! He was the biggest rockstar of his time and he had the best doctors and people advising him. He knew about consequenses. You are right about mistakes. But Freddie didn't make mistakes! You cannot compare Freddie to the normal guy on the street. As an homosexual he was very aware of the "cancer of the gays" as it was called at the time. If you read his bios, like i did, his behaviour around 84-85 in Munich and Brazil is something that makes you wonder "how was that possible?" "What did he expected?" In Rock in Rio he was consuming drugs, staying at a different hotels from the rest of the band, and fucking around five male prostitutes a night in Brazil! Random guys his staff would pick up at gay bars or whathever. In Germany Barbara Valentin told the same thing about Freddie getting home with several guys at a time. I respect your opinion and you are generaly right about everything that you say about accidents and other things. But with somebody with this kind of behaviour it was expected what the end result would be. We may not want to accept it, but it was self destructive behaviour. Freddie was losing his voice big time. I doubt that he could have go on making tours even if he didn't got aids. His body was being pushed to the limit. But i will not turn this topic into another discussion about AIDS. I just don't appreciate you calling me an ignorant when all his bios state the same thing. I was talking about Freddie in particlar, not people in general!Mr.QueenFan wrote: I'm pretty sure that everybody surrounding Freddie - including Brian, Roger and John - new that Freddie was an accident waiting to happen. How could they not sense that? (...)Quite an ignorant point of view/opinion. You have to keep in mind that back when it all started, people didn't know better. It took some time before people knew what the hell it was and how the thing spread. You also have to keep in mind that even WITH the knowledge of HIV/AIDS, mistakes and accidents happen. This "he brought it upon himself" attitude is really ignorant. Kenny Everett lived till 1995, but he still died too early to benefit from the 1996 advent of the HAART drugs. It's true that Freddie ran from it - but he did so because nothing he could have done before 1987 would have made much difference. And he knew he was positive in 1985 anyway. |
splicksplack 29.07.2015 11:28 |
For non-UK people, originally from NYC, PG is a well known DJ and rock historian in the UK. He aslo edited The Guinness Book of British Hit Singles and related titles. Here's some facts (rather than the usual Gambaccini is a wanker). Paul and Freddie were out on the London gay scene a lot in the 80's . They, as celebrities, would and did bump into each other a lot (for instance Heaven's Star Bar). I got to know PG when he was 'friendly' with Limahl (Kajagoogoo) and he was most certainly not a wanker. I was introduced through a friend and he was kind enough to take away one of my cassette demos, review it and post back. He was always charming and generous with his time. To abuse him on the basis that you don't like his voice or you 'suspect' he's bigging himself up is just ignorant. He was inducted into the Radio Academy Hall of Fame in 2005. |