| YourValentine 26.09.2006 09:16 |
I just received the new book and I had a quick look at it. It's printed on good paper and has some nice photographs, most of them have been published elsewhere already but probably there are not many unpublished photos left. The book is divided into 20 chapters, for example one about Freddie and Mary (it's not a joke), one about Live Aid, one about Making Video, one about Writing Songs etc. In each chapter quotes by Freddie himself are written with no hint about the when and where. There are just these quotes following each other and you just have no idea where they come from - and at which point in life Freddie said what has been printed there. The book says that the quotes were compiled and "edited" by Greg Brooks, but there is never the slightest hint if and where something was edited. There is also no list of sources to show which interviews or other sources where used to extract these quotes. At some points the well informed fan sees that the quotes were re-written, that is to say when we own the interview on audio and video we see where they were changed. It makes me think that the interviews were changed whenever the authors thought it was a good idea and I think they should not call it "In His Own Words" Actually, it's utterly useless. |
| Maz 26.09.2006 10:48 |
YourValentine wrote: The book says that the quotes were compiled and "edited" by Greg Brooks, but there is never the slightest hint if and where something was edited. ..... At some points the well informed fan sees that the quotes were re-written, that is to say when we own the interview on audio and video we see where they were changed.That's the editing that Greg did. |
| Lester Burnham 26.09.2006 11:10 |
Heh, I'll start the countdown until Greg flies in here, his feathers all a-ruffled. |
| Jjeroen 26.09.2006 12:10 |
YourValentine wrote: At some points the well informed fan sees that the quotes were re-written, that is to say when we own the interview on audio and video we see where they were changed. It makes me think that the interviews were changed whenever the authors thought it was a good idea and I think they should not call it "In His Own Words" Actually, it's utterly useless.Hm... I already noticed that only by reading the Record Collector article... It's very common practice when writing out an interview that the writer modifies the language where needed. If the actual meaning of the words remain in tact. But if there are EDITS in a quaote, it's BAD if they don't acknowledge where things have been edited because it's an attack to the right understanding of the context. They should have used (...) or similar, official annotations. So there are no sources mentioned for any of the words?? That's not only bad but could also be regarded as violation of copyright law or intellectual property! Let's hope Greg made some agreements with the inital interviewers... Still waiting for the book to arrive, myself btw |
| Fireplace 26.09.2006 12:14 |
YourValentine wrote: The book says that the quotes were compiled and "edited" by Greg Brooks, but there is never the slightest hint if and where something was edited. There is also no list of sources to show which interviews or other sources where used to extract these quotes.If Freddie uses the word "Moanzone" in a quote, it was probably edited by GB. |
| YourValentine 26.09.2006 12:49 |
Very true, Fireplace:) To answer your question, Jeroen, under "Acknowledgements "David Wigg" is mentioned (among Jim Beach, John Libson and other people who definitely never made an interview with Freddie) but at no point any of the quotes is allocated to a David Wigg interview. None of David Wigg's interviews is mentioned or listed. Under "Credits" there are some newspapers mentioned like The Sun, NME, Melody Maker and others but there is no issue, year, title of an interview or anything that would enable the reader to find the source of ANY of Freddie's words unless the reader happens to own the specific newspaper issue or audio or video of the interviews. It would not have been much work to at least add a year in brackets to each quote because it makes quite a difference if Freddie talks about "Bohemian Rhapsody" in 1975 or 1985. As it is, it does not make any sense to me. If I don't know the context of a quote and if I have no clue which part of the quote was edited or not, it could be just as well be written by anyone else. but Freddie. It does not give me much insight in the thoughts and opinions - not even the published thoughts and opinions - of Freddie Mercury. If they had only published one complete and unedited interview with Freddie (for example the 1985 David Wigg interview) on the Double DVD instead of this book which is as random as it gets. |
| Deacon Fan 26.09.2006 14:45 |
What I've read of the book so far has been enjoyable and I think it reads quite well. An interesting idea in my opinion. And many of the pictures are new to me. I like the section with Freddie along with various other artists, like Meat Loaf. Having said that, along with the fact that it's a beautifully made book (btw, under the jacket is the dark version of the artwork, as seen on the DVD cover, which I like much better than the white).. It's taking me awhile to read because it doesn't hold my attention, perhaps because I recognize so much of it, I dunno. And the fact that I can't for the life of me order a Freddie product without it arriving damaged (corners crushed, booklets jammed into tray hinges, cases cracked) is making me anxious to just get rid of the fucking thing when I'm done with it. |
| Ray Pugh 27.09.2006 16:14 |
Hey there YourValentine. SOUR GRAPES or what! You dont like GB because he upset you once on this site. Thats no excuse to misrepresent his book, just because YOU have issues with him. Your critique is a joke, and it is unbalanced as everyone can see. You are still smarting from GB having a go at you, which you deserved, and you havent forgot it, and you are very obviously envious. That shouldnot have been allowed to influence your comments on his book. You dislike Greg and so, really childish, you are now having an insult at his book just because of that. Your comments are tainted and biased, not constructive or fair. You have axe to grind with Greg Brooks and there so would have said negative things whatever he did. Did you point out one single thing that you did like? No you did not, not one thing at all. You are very transparent. What's the matter with you, with so much nastyness? A simple case of BIG BIG sour grapes. You got it bad. There must have been things you like about the book because you are a Freddie fan, some things you read which youd not seen before, which you liked. But even so you failed to mention anything. You should be ashamed of your conduct you jealous person. This is 100% SOUR GRAPES. Shame on you YV. Why cannot you be constructive for once? Would you have said such things if Brian May had offered the same book? Or anyone other than Greg? No way. Because its Greg you came on here and got all personal and most people will see this bad aspect of you, even when you cannot. Good job you don't work for The Guardian paper or Independent or ITV or BBC, because you don't know what impartial and unbiassed means. You are resentful envious woman and it shows much in your unbalanced unfair 'summary'. Everyone can see it. Greg has at least give fans something new and fresh. It's like GB said to you last time, what the hell have YOU ever done? Other than insult someone else's work, what have you written about Queen? You have chip on BOTH shoulders, so you well balanced in that poor aspect, but only this. Beyond that you dont understand concept of being balanced and not personal. I bet you are moody dragon to live with when someone else does something you think you could have done better, but which you never actually got off your fat arse and did. People like you get irritated at others who get out there and create. Good or bad, or "utterly useless", as you call it, Greg at least did something, while you did nothing. Are you so lazy you can write no book or magazine things? I got Greg's book today. It's good. It is not FANTASTIC, but it's a well conceived and thought out and put together book well. The covers are both nice, its got great chapter titles, mostly, good text, and its well edited... whether you can see it or admit it or not. Do not pollute all people with your clear bitterness. Give it a proper review if you must review it at all. Review it impartially. Greg's book is funny and amusing, sad and seamlessly presented in paragraphs that go well together in this seqence. I been a fan only since 1989 so lots of stuff is new to me. I think its good and funny so keep your envious comments to yourself. He did a better job that YOU could ever do, YV, because he at least makes an effort, and you don't... you lazy, bad tempered, miserable bat. = |
| Crezchi 27.09.2006 17:18 |
Ray Pugh wrote: Hey there YourValentine. SOUR GRAPES or what! You dont like GB because he upset you once on this site. Thats no excuse to misrepresent his book, just because YOU have issues with him. Your critique is a joke, and it is unbalanced as everyone can see. You are still smarting from GB having a go at you, which you deserved, and you havent forgot it, and you are very obviously envious. That shouldnot have been allowed to influence your comments on his book. You dislike Greg and so, really childish, you are now having an insult at his book just because of that. Your comments are tainted and biased, not constructive or fair. You have axe to grind with Greg Brooks and there so would have said negative things whatever he did. Did you point out one single thing that you did like? No you did not, not one thing at all. You are very transparent. What's the matter with you, with so much nastyness? A simple case of BIG BIG sour grapes. You got it bad. There must have been things you like about the book because you are a Freddie fan, some things you read which youd not seen before, which you liked. But even so you failed to mention anything. You should be ashamed of your conduct you jealous person. This is 100% SOUR GRAPES. Shame on you YV. Why cannot you be constructive for once? Would you have said such things if Brian May had offered the same book? Or anyone other than Greg? No way. Because its Greg you came on here and got all personal and most people will see this bad aspect of you, even when you cannot. Good job you don't work for The Guardian paper or Independent or ITV or BBC, because you don't know what impartial and unbiassed means. You are resentful envious woman and it shows much in your unbalanced unfair 'summary'. Everyone can see it. Greg has at least give fans something new and fresh. It's like GB said to you last time, what the hell have YOU ever done? Other than insult someone else's work, what have you written about Queen? You have chip on BOTH shoulders, so you well balanced in that poor aspect, but only this. Beyond that you dont understand concept of being balanced and not personal. I bet you are moody dragon to live with when someone else does something you think you could have done better, but which you never actually got off your fat arse and did. People like you get irritated at others who get out there and create. Good or bad, or "utterly useless", as you call it, Greg at least did something, while you did nothing. Are you so lazy you can write no book or magazine things? I got Greg's book today. It's good. It is not FANTASTIC, but it's a well conceived and thought out and put together book well. The covers are both nice, its got great chapter titles, mostly, good text, and its well edited... whether you can see it or admit it or not. Do not pollute all people with your clear bitterness. Give it a proper review if you must review it at all. Review it impartially. Greg's book is funny and amusing, sad and seamlessly presented in paragraphs that go well together in this seqence. I been a fan only since 1989 so lots of stuff is new to me. I think its good and funny so keep your envious comments to yourself. He did a better job that YOU could ever do, YV, because he at least makes an effort, and you don't... you lazy, bad tempered, miserable bat. =Dude don't start on YV! It's not just her, it is about 80% of this site. It isn't just because we don't agree with him. When someone writes a book with 3 errors on each page about Queen, and says that Queen performed a certain song 2 years before another musician even had written it, then we have every right to bitch at him, and then when he comes to our home (QZ) he does nothing but bitch at us and call us Moanzoners, and he hasn't given even the slightest insight on anything Queen related since he became of here on QZ. Calling YV lazy, right, you are pretty stup |
| Crezchi 27.09.2006 17:26 |
BTW, Barb, where can i purchase this new book? |
| rocks. 27.09.2006 17:46 |
Lester Burnham wrote: Heh, I'll start the countdown until Greg flies in here, his feathers all a-ruffled.Oh dear, lets not go back there, its been so peaceful around here...I enjoy it! :D |
| pma 27.09.2006 17:48 |
<font color=?B2F><b>Crezchi wrote:Ray Pugh wrote: Hey there YourValentine. SOUR GRAPES or what! You dont like GB because he upset you once on this site. Thats no excuse to misrepresent his book, just because YOU have issues with him. Your critique is a joke, and it is unbalanced as everyone can see. You are still smarting from GB having a go at you, which you deserved, and you havent forgot it, and you are very obviously envious. That shouldnot have been allowed to influence your comments on his book. You dislike Greg and so, really childish, you are now having an insult at his book just because of that. Your comments are tainted and biased, not constructive or fair. You have axe to grind with Greg Brooks and there so would have said negative things whatever he did. Did you point out one single thing that you did like? No you did not, not one thing at all. You are very transparent. What's the matter with you, with so much nastyness? A simple case of BIG BIG sour grapes. You got it bad. There must have been things you like about the book because you are a Freddie fan, some things you read which youd not seen before, which you liked. But even so you failed to mention anything. You should be ashamed of your conduct you jealous person. This is 100% SOUR GRAPES. Shame on you YV. Why cannot you be constructive for once? Would you have said such things if Brian May had offered the same book? Or anyone other than Greg? No way. Because its Greg you came on here and got all personal and most people will see this bad aspect of you, even when you cannot. Good job you don't work for The Guardian paper or Independent or ITV or BBC, because you don't know what impartial and unbiassed means. You are resentful envious woman and it shows much in your unbalanced unfair 'summary'. Everyone can see it. Greg has at least give fans something new and fresh. It's like GB said to you last time, what the hell have YOU ever done? Other than insult someone else's work, what have you written about Queen? You have chip on BOTH shoulders, so you well balanced in that poor aspect, but only this. Beyond that you dont understand concept of being balanced and not personal. I bet you are moody dragon to live with when someone else does something you think you could have done better, but which you never actually got off your fat arse and did. People like you get irritated at others who get out there and create. Good or bad, or "utterly useless", as you call it, Greg at least did something, while you did nothing. Are you so lazy you can write no book or magazine things? I got Greg's book today. It's good. It is not FANTASTIC, but it's a well conceived and thought out and put together book well. The covers are both nice, its got great chapter titles, mostly, good text, and its well edited... whether you can see it or admit it or not. Do not pollute all people with your clear bitterness. Give it a proper review if you must review it at all. Review it impartially. Greg's book is funny and amusing, sad and seamlessly presented in paragraphs that go well together in this seqence. I been a fan only since 1989 so lots of stuff is new to me. I think its good and funny so keep your envious comments to yourself. He did a better job that YOU could ever do, YV, because he at least makes an effort, and you don't... you lazy, bad tempered, miserable bat. =Dude don't start on YV! It's not just her, it is about 80% of this site. It isn't just because we don't agree with him. When someone writes a book with 3 errors on each page about Queen, and says that Queen performed a certain song 2 years before another musician even had written it, then we have every right to bitch at him, and then when he comes to our home (QZ) he does nothing but bitch at us and call us Moanzoners, and he hasn't given even the slightest insight on anything Queen relate |
| magicalfreddiemercury 27.09.2006 17:56 |
Ray Pugh wrote: Hey there YourValentine. SOUR GRAPES or what!Could it be? Ray Pugh = Gregg Brooks? Sure seems like it. |
| Micrówave 27.09.2006 18:28 |
Yes, and if it is, shame on you Greg. That's NOT a funny user name. You all get it, right? As in I'd like to.... |
| Deacon Fan 27.09.2006 19:39 |
hehe yeah, I just now got it since you pointed it out. Good one :-P Rather than think it's Greg, I'd guess it's someone else wanting to make people think it's Greg. |
| YourValentine 27.09.2006 19:48 |
You are repeating yourself, Greg. Sour Grapes.. jealous.. envious.... plus a couple of personal insults. Very predictable, really - your standard answer to any kind of criticism. Apparently, you think that nobody has the right to criticise your book because you are the only one who wrote it. That is a somewhat unusual idea. Just to let you know - I always speak my mind, no matter if it's you, Brian May or anybody else. Re-reading my comments I stand by every word and I don't see at which point I described the book wrong or said anything untrue. |
| Bohardy 27.09.2006 19:55 |
Clearly Ray Pugh is Greg. That was obvious to me from the first couple of lines. Further proof can be provided be looking at the three other posts 'Ray' has made; all in topics about Greg, and all in a very similar vein. |
| Lester Burnham 28.09.2006 11:17 |
Oh, I so called it. Only took him 28 hours to respond, but he must've been busy. Or maybe he was taking his time to concentrate on not messing up his typing and write a cohesive rant instead. |
| Polar_Bear 29.09.2006 05:08 |
To be perfectly honest I don't know what problem you all have with Greg Brooks. I've always found him to be a friendly and helpful guy and never too busy to make time to answer fans questions. It seems the only people that have a problem with him are people who criticise his work and use this site for personal attacks. That is not to say that Greg's books are 100% accurate - but who are you lot to point the finger and slag off his work when you offer nothing yourselves. Why don't some of you take 5 or 6 years out of your life to write a book about Queen if you are the experts? Then maybe we can sit on here and slag your effort off when we find a mistake here and there. If you had offered something better than Greg's books I would have not replied to this ....but until that day comes when your books are published I think you should all keep your mouths firmly shut!!!! |
| YourValentine 29.09.2006 05:39 |
Welcome to the notice board, Polar_Bear. Nice to have you, we needed to be told to keep our mouths shut and we do appreciate you registered just to tell us. Maybe you should make use of your stay and learn something basic: When you write a book or release a record or publish anything else, your work will be criticised. It's called a free society and freedom of speech. It's nothing personal. I did not call Greg Brooks or Simon Lupton any names. I did not say they are lazy, jealous, bitter or speculate about their state of mind in any other way. I just said what I don't like about the book and who are you to tell me to shut up? If you like the book, you can post your opinion but do not tell me I can't. And do not tell me about my alleged motives, you don't even know me. |
| Crezchi 29.09.2006 05:39 |
Polar_Bear wrote: To be perfectly honest I don't know what problem you all have with Greg Brooks. I've always found him to be a friendly and helpful guy and never too busy to make time to answer fans questions. It seems the only people that have a problem with him are people who criticise his work and use this site for personal attacks. That is not to say that Greg's books are 100% accurate - but who are you lot to point the finger and slag off his work when you offer nothing yourselves. Why don't some of you take 5 or 6 years out of your life to write a book about Queen if you are the experts? Then maybe we can sit on here and slag your effort off when we find a mistake here and there. If you had offered something better than Greg's books I would have not replied to this ....but until that day comes when your books are published I think you should all keep your mouths firmly shut!!!!Oh please! When has Greg been a nice guy who has answered the FANS questions? lmfao that is the funniest load of shit i have heard for a long time. Dude, no offence, but this is FAR from a Greg Brooks fan site, so you don't like it, go join Greg in the place where nothing gets done, the Queen vault. |
| TheGame 29.09.2006 06:01 |
Just because i'm curious: Is Ray Pugh our beloved Greg for sure? I mean, he always claim to use his proper name when he post here...... btw: haven't bought the book yet, but perhaps i should to understand what you all are talking about. |
| Togg 29.09.2006 08:16 |
I looked at this book some time ago and wondered why it was produced at all, I didn't realise it was Greg and now I understand. As for comments the YV made, I think she is spot on there, (no big surprise I'm sure) but Greg has yet to produce any quality work of his own and his attention to detail is shameful or at least has been to date in everything I've seen that he has produced so no surprise it's been edited in this way. More to the point how about producing something original??? If all you can think of is to document time and time again someones life then the possibilities of something genuinely interesting coming out will soon wear rather thin. Oh and Greg's new user name... well speaks for itself doesn't it, once again we see where his mind is! |
| great king rat 1138 29.09.2006 08:45 |
YourValentine wrote: Welcome to the notice board, Polar_Bear. Nice to have you, we needed to be told to keep our mouths shut and we do appreciate you registered just to tell us. Maybe you should make use of your stay and learn something basic: When you write a book or release a record or publish anything else, your work will be criticised. It's called a free society and freedom of speech. It's nothing personal. I did not call Greg Brooks or Simon Lupton any names. I did not say they are lazy, jealous, bitter or speculate about their state of mind in any other way. I just said what I don't like about the book and who are you to tell me to shut up? If you like the book, you can post your opinion but do not tell me I can't. And do not tell me about my alleged motives, you don't even know me.Go Barb! If someone is going to do a cut-and-paste book from bits of interviews, they need to take the time to do it properly, as was the case with the Beatles Anthology book. Each section is lovingly annotated with extensive footnotes detailing sources. A truly wonderful piece of work. |
| Maz 29.09.2006 15:51 |
If the only defense against inaccuracy is "at least I tried," then GB needs to re-evaluate what he does. As someone who has published research material in the past, I would lose any prospects of a good job by using that asinine excuse. GB has been asked point blank as to why his other book, Queen Live, did not fix several errors between the first and second editions, yet his only defense is "what have you written." This solves nothing and only brings on further criticism. I don't blame GB necessarily for this last book, but based on YV's legitimate comments, I don't think I'll buy it, either. Finally, if that is GB posting as Ray Pugh, then that is by far the most insulting thing I've seen him do on the board. Whoever posts as that name is just stupid enough to think I'm overreacting. But it's clear that they cannot debate YV on the issue and have to lower themselves to some attack on female sexuality. What a waste of sperm that man is. |
| Killer Queenie 29.09.2006 16:13 |
I was tempted to get that but I was running out of money. Plus I can get it another time, and I really wanna read it too. Is it a good book? |
| Fireplace 29.09.2006 16:19 |
Polar_Bear wrote: To be perfectly honest I don't know what problem you all have with Greg Brooks. I've always found him to be a friendly and helpful guy and never too busy to make time to answer fans questions. It seems the only people that have a problem with him are people who criticise his work and use this site for personal attacks. That is not to say that Greg's books are 100% accurate - but who are you lot to point the finger and slag off his work when you offer nothing yourselves. Why don't some of you take 5 or 6 years out of your life to write a book about Queen if you are the experts? Then maybe we can sit on here and slag your effort off when we find a mistake here and there. If you had offered something better than Greg's books I would have not replied to this ....but until that day comes when your books are published I think you should all keep your mouths firmly shut!!!!Not again, Greg. This is getting old! |
| TRS-Romania 29.09.2006 17:57 |
YV made some very constructive comments! But our beloved GB probably is close to a mental breakdown ... (Greg: check your medicines first before you post a message... by the way: valium might help you to get over your psychological problems!) Perhaps some bad childhood memories are re-appearing in your dreams from time to time. Please cope with them, and visit your local GP ... I wish I still had Greg's phonenumber so I could oficially tell him that "IF" this user "Ray Pugh" is Greg Brooks he'd better watch out at the next convention in case the majority of Queen fans would probably want to punch him REAL hard in the face ... not to mention user "Polar_bear" which is Greg as well .. unless user GB or user Queen Archivist is/was a scam from the beginning anyway... which doesnt seem to be the case I am deeply offended and ashamed that IF all these users are indeed one person being Greg Brooks, I would not hesitate to take further action ... whatever that means is up to the "real" mr GB regarding future posts on this forum... And yes Greg, if you ARE the one you are pretending to be on this site, I will come over to meet you in person. And be sure it's not going to be a very nice meeting Stefan |
| Wilki Amieva 30.09.2006 13:38 |
Perhaps this book does not have quote references because it was not meant to be a mere collection of quotes, but has a kind of an every-chapter-tells-a-story approach instead. It was intended for a wider public and not with 'academic' concerns in mind. We should also remember that this book will have its audio counterpart: link On the other hand, even the wide-appeal Omnibus Press "In Their Own Words" series have references after most of the quotes. |
| TRS-Romania 30.09.2006 17:33 |
Greg has a problem which is: Dissocial-Narcistic-Paranoid- Antisocial Personality Disorder Personality disorder, usually coming to attention because of a gross disparity between behaviour and the prevailing social norms, and characterized by - very low tolerance to frustration and a low threshold for discharge of aggression - callous unconcern for the feelings of others - gross and persistent attitude of irresponsi- bility and disregard for social norms, rules and obligations - persistently bears grudges, i.e., is unforgiving of insults, injuries, or slights - perceives attacks on his or her character and is quick to react angrily or to counterattack - displays rapidly shifting and shallow expression of emotions - shows self-dramatization, theatricality, and exaggerated _expression of emotion - shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes - markedly dysharmonious attitudes and behaviour, involving usually several areas of functioning, e.g. affectivity, arousal, impulse control, ways of perceiving and thinking, and style of relating to others |