Guns n Roses: Critical Rehab

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1013 of them)

Honestly I hear more punk and glam in Poison, more country in Bon Jovi, more disco in Loverboy, more experimentation in Def Leppard's Hysteria, more pathos in Cinderella

My response was going to be something like "?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?" but I think I'll just stick with what you said: I don't hear it, but if you do, more power to you. (I guess.)

(More PUNK in POISON????)

― Jody Beth Rosen, Saturday, 31 August 2002 21:29 (10 years ago) Permalink

Sundar=100% OTM

Axl's junkie-for-the-camera schtick sucks all the fun right out of the junkie-rock-star pose -- all that's less is dull romanticization of a figure that's only romantic in the hands of a really capable actor like Reed, or Thunders, or whoever else. Whereas Skid Row had all their ducks lined up. "Youth Gone Wild" sounds better now than most anything outta the GnR catalogue, and Sebastian Bach is a way funnier stage name than "Axl Rose." To say nothing of "W. Axl Rose," yeesh.

PS what does this "method not implemented" screen that comes up every so often when trying to post?

― J0hn Darn1elle, Saturday, 31 August 2002 21:32 (10 years ago) Permalink

"Youth Gone Wild" sounds better now than most anything outta the GnR catalogue

"Youth Gone Wild" is OK. It's the Steve Forbert of that sorta thing. It doesn't really do much musically; it's loud but kinda flaccid.

― Jody Beth Rosen, Saturday, 31 August 2002 21:42 (10 years ago) Permalink

More PUNK in POISON????

In "Talk Dirty To Me" alone, if nothing else. Unless you buy into punk being about a spirit instead of a sound or something like that. And even then, why G'n'R instead of Poison? [OT: What is this spirit that punk is always supposed to be about? Any time I hear it explained it always just sounds like basic principles of self-assertiveness that institutional authority figures prescribe to you when you're 10. Or else petty childish selfishness. Or some hybrid of the two. It's more interesting if it's a specific approach to sound.]

I don't think the Bon Jovi/country, Loverboy/disco, or Hysteria/experimentation connections really need explanation beyond a quick listen to side 2 of New Jersey, "Turn Me Loose", or "Rocket". Most of these bands weren't necessarily worth all that much (I don't intend to sit through a whole Poison album anytime soon) but neither was G'n'R AFAIC.

― sundar subramanian, Sunday, 1 September 2002 01:41 (10 years ago) Permalink

In "Talk Dirty To Me" alone, if nothing else.

Welllllllllllllllllllllllllllll, it sorta sounds like it could be a Dictators song, albeit not a very good one. Most of the music historically defined as "punk" was not that sexist, though, unless we're talking about crap like Hatebreed.

― Jody Beth Rosen, Sunday, 1 September 2002 02:00 (10 years ago) Permalink

completely unrelated, but I've wondered what makes these dumm misogynist hair-metal clowns more convincing lovers than their supersensitive emo counterparts.

"You know I call you, I call you on the telephone
I'm only hopin' that you're home
So I can hear you
When you say those words to me
And whisper so softly
I've gotta hear you
Cause baby we'll be..."

that's the real shit!

― Aaron A., Sunday, 1 September 2002 02:12 (10 years ago) Permalink

I'll look thick for a minute. It's entirely possible that I'm not attuned enough but I just looked up the words to "Talk Dirty To Me" - What do you find sexist about it?

― sundar subramanian, Sunday, 1 September 2002 02:32 (10 years ago) Permalink

Hatebreed are one of the most asexual bands I can think of, how in the world are they sexist?

― Kris (aqueduct), Sunday, 1 September 2002 03:04 (10 years ago) Permalink

I'll look thick for a minute. It's entirely possible that I'm not attuned enough but I just looked up the words to "Talk Dirty To Me" - What do you find sexist about it?

"You never act the way you should" -- Bret Michaels likes his girls slutty, but he knows that it's not the way they should act.

If some guy told me I wasn't acting the way I should, I'd fucking smack him. But it's entirely possible I'm not attuned enough.

― Jody Beth Rosen, Sunday, 1 September 2002 03:11 (10 years ago) Permalink

Hatebreed are one of the most asexual bands I can think of, how in the world are they sexist?

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that I consider fag-bashing a sexist act -- against men not acting the way they should.

― Jody Beth Rosen, Sunday, 1 September 2002 03:13 (10 years ago) Permalink

Punks liked bad girls too. But then punk lyrics were impressively asexual. "I don't wanna grow up" was a brilliant song for punks to cover, but only because it wasn't written by a punk group. dig?

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Sunday, 1 September 2002 03:18 (10 years ago) Permalink

"you never act the way you should," as in the way your parents want you to. wink, wink.

― Aaron A., Sunday, 1 September 2002 03:56 (10 years ago) Permalink

sexy/sexist vs. rocking/rockist fite!

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Sunday, 1 September 2002 04:02 (10 years ago) Permalink

"you never act the way you should," as in the way your parents want you to.

Ah, but he doesn't say that!

― Jody Beth Rosen, Sunday, 1 September 2002 04:07 (10 years ago) Permalink

Oh, and I just wanna stress that although I do love Guns 'n' Roses, I don't love the sexism in Axl's lyrics.

― Jody Beth Rosen, Sunday, 1 September 2002 04:16 (10 years ago) Permalink

I always heard "You never act the way you should" Aaron's way.

(I meant no sarcasm with "It's entirely possible I'm not attuned enough" BTW.)

― sundar subramanian, Sunday, 1 September 2002 11:38 (10 years ago) Permalink

Not to say that you're necessarily wrong - you raise an interesting point I hadn't thought of - but that it seems at least open to the different interpretations (especially since it's followed by "but I like it"). I dunno, it still seems more innocent to me than a lot of punk lyrics. Given the rest of the song's lyrics, it doesn't seem obvious to me that it's a Snoop-style "I like fucking you but I have no respect for you (because you fuck me)" comment. They're clearly teenagers ("in the old man's Ford") who are breaking rules.

― sundar subramanian, Sunday, 1 September 2002 12:27 (10 years ago) Permalink

Back to the topic at hand...

So how come the critical makeover stateside?

I always remember them being somewhat critically acclaimed back in the late-80's, early 90's (positive comparisions to the Stones and Dolls, Slash as a highly praised guitarist, considered to have made a "credible" power ballad, etc.), so I don't see this critical "makeover" yr talking aboot. The only reason they lost their critical backing after UYI was because Nevermind came out the next week. If anything, I think they've fallen out of favour with critics over the last 12 years because of Axl's Hughes-like disappearence for years, and Shields-like inability to create a follow-up album.

― Vic Funk, Sunday, 1 September 2002 12:43 (10 years ago) Permalink

well, that isn't ture in the States, Vic. magazines regularly talk about how great they were/allegedly might still be. that's the entire point of this discussion.

― M Matos (M Matos), Sunday, 1 September 2002 13:30 (10 years ago) Permalink

Count me as one ov the hataz. I thought they were absolute horrible ugly bloody rubbish when they first came out, and I still get thee shudders when I hear one of their numbers. Ugh.

― N0RM4N PH4Y, Sunday, 1 September 2002 15:23 (10 years ago) Permalink

I think the whole question of sexism in Poison's lyrics is influenced by the fact that music video work was a big part of how bands were received at that time. (I'd venture to say moreso than today, considering MTV is no longer really an outlet for music videos last time I heard.) As I remember it, Poison's videos utilized scantily-clad women as window-dressing/meat/object-to-be-acted-upon as much or more than any of their peers'.

What I mean is that even if you can argue for more blatant examples like the Crue's "Girls Girls Girls" as not having explicitly sexist content within the lyrics themselves, mentally it's hard to separate the song from the images of going-to-seed Vince Neil ogling chicks doused in water.

But charges of sexism may be disingenuous coming from a man, so I'll say no more on the subject. Just throwing the idea out there.

More importantly, whatever your feelings about GnR's style/songs/media profile, the problem with comparing them to Bon Jovi, Loverboy and Poison is that those bands didn't/couldn't rock, and Guns 'N' Roses, at least on Appetite, did.

― wl, Sunday, 1 September 2002 15:53 (10 years ago) Permalink

If you're talking about Spin, no revision was necessary. Appetite For Destruction was greeted as a masterpiece at the time.

I remember GnR having a near universal appeal in 1988: Jane's Addiction fans, pop heads, Nietzsche-reading hipsters all loved them. As a highschool senior, I remember seeing a GnR tee shirt (on a metal girl in Madison, Wisconsin) that made me shudder: an illustration of a woman who's just been gang-raped (wasn't this the original cover art for Appetite?). But by the time I was a college freshman in D.C. the same year, I was having long drunk argumenents with new friends about which was better: Appetite or It Takes a Nation of Millions. Both were consensus picks in dorm rooms across the country.

― Pete Scholtes, Sunday, 1 September 2002 16:05 (10 years ago) Permalink

an illustration of a woman who's just been gang-raped

I don't know that this is a defense of GnR using that image, but I'm almost completely sure it was a pre-existing work of art by Robert Williams that Axl picked for the album insert. I'm no expert, but a lot of Williams' stuff is similarly ugly in theme. There was contraversy at the time, and the image was pulled from subsequent pressings, I belive.

― wl, Sunday, 1 September 2002 16:19 (10 years ago) Permalink

I don't want to completely derail this thread but what does Hatebreed have to do with "fagbashing"?

― Kris (aqueduct), Sunday, 1 September 2002 17:13 (10 years ago) Permalink

Wow, I love Robert Williams. And sheesh, now that I see that image again, I don't know what to think...

This may betray some of my cultural prejudices at the time, but the painting just screamed YAY RAPE! to me when I saw it connected to a heavy metal band. Now I don't know what it screams. I do remember being turned on by the metal girl wearing it...

― Pete Scholtes, Sunday, 1 September 2002 17:22 (10 years ago) Permalink

Even if I liked Appetite I couldn't imagine being so rockist as to put it in the same class as Nation Of Millions. (Where would you place Led Zeppelin or Deep Purple albums? Or was Appetite a greater achievement, as I'm sure I will be told now?)

Of the bands I listed BOC's the only one I really care about so I won't press the comparisons. (And Agents Of Fortune blows away Appetite while getting 17% of the press IMO - Does it rock as much? I don't know and don't know that I care.) All I wanted to say was that I don't think Guns'n'Roses was unique for an 80s hard rock band in terms of the breadth of their influences. I don't hear much other than bad Aerosmith.

― sundar subramanian, Monday, 2 September 2002 05:43 (10 years ago) Permalink

I don't want to completely derail this thread but what does Hatebreed have to do with "fagbashing"?

Read this.

― Jody Beth Rosen, Monday, 2 September 2002 06:07 (10 years ago) Permalink

The singer of STRETCH ARMSTRONG physically stepped in between to prevent one of the HATEBREEDERS from attacking me with his giant neck.

this is even funnier that that recording guy's journals! (except i guess it's not)

― ron (ron), Monday, 2 September 2002 06:25 (10 years ago) Permalink

I'm still waiting to see where the "revisionism" has been documented. SPIN liked GnR circa Appetite, Rolling Stone gave it a 5 star review. Even Xgau gave it a B-, which is hardly putting it in the ranks of suckdom. The Musichound guidebook refers to Appetite as a "landmark album". Clearly, at least in the mainstream, Appetite was very well received both crictically and commercially.

Granted, the tide of good press retreated almost as soon as Axl put out an album with bigoted lyrics, though the Use Your Illusion albums got pretty good reviews and sold well.

Again, where's the revisionism? There is definitely interest by the mainstream press to cover a band that sold tens of millions of records ten years ago, but that's a perfectly legitimate story when the context of what has happened publically to the band. Just giving this incarnation of GnR a lot of press is NOT revising the critical assessment of their music. If that's being done, I haven't seen it.

― Don Weiner, Monday, 2 September 2002 10:14 (10 years ago) Permalink

Brett Anderson bigged up GnR in one of his first NME interviews. Cue much chin stoking from floppy haired hipsters......

― adam b (adam b), Monday, 2 September 2002 12:21 (10 years ago) Permalink

well, that isn't ture in the States, Vic. magazines regularly talk about how great they were/allegedly might still be.
that's the entire point of this discussion.

(I live in Montreal, and am from Boston, so I'm not coming at this from a European sensibility). All the coverage I see of them this in this day is how Axl has a band together made up of various odd parts, and he doesn't quite know what he wants to do with it (Industrial? Moby producing?). And before he did those live New Year's shows a few years back, all the talk was "Does he still have it? Is he really fat and bald now?" I don't think this is critical rehab (unless you consider 1993-now critical rehab for Michael Jackson).

I'm saying this from the topic question "So how come the critical makeover stateside?" doesn't make any sense, because they were always held pretty high in the press ("Sure Axl comes to the stage three hours late, but is there a better album intro than 'Welcome To The Jungle'?"), and someone else, since I posted, put up examples showing this.

― Vic Funk, Monday, 2 September 2002 12:36 (10 years ago) Permalink

Of the bands I listed BOC's the only one I really care about so I won't press the comparisons. (And Agents Of Fortune blows away Appetite while getting 17% of the press IMO - Does it rock as much? I don't know and don't know that I care.) All I wanted to say was that I don't think Guns'n'Roses was unique for an 80s hard rock band in terms of the breadth of their influences. I don't hear much other than bad Aerosmith

Point taken, and I wasn't trying to confuse things. My statement just came from the fact that I personally don't see "GnR as genre synthesis" among their main strengths, although others have furthered that argument. I'd agree at best their style is largely a straight Aerosmith rip, maybe bringing in the Stones and Zep (the two bands Aerosmith was a rip of anyway).

I was trying to shift things toward "rock bands are supposed to rock; that's what GnR did and did well." It's fine to like the lite-weights you mentioned better, but there's a category in which they can't even compete with GnR. BOC did rock. I've not heard Agents (perhaps I'll have to pick it up), but as you've admitted you're comparing very different bands from different eras. Not that one can't do that; BOC just seems to be a random choice that doesn't really get to the heart of whatever's at issue here.

― wl, Monday, 2 September 2002 14:47 (10 years ago) Permalink

GET IN THE RING MUTHAFUCKAS AND I'LL KICK YOUR PUNY LITTLE ASSES

― Queen I drank Axl's Piss Muthafuckin G, Monday, 2 September 2002 17:44 (10 years ago) Permalink

I think anything below a B+ in the Consumer Guide places it in Christgau's realm of suckdom.

Side note: I came down on the side of "It Takes a Nation" in the "Appetite" vs. "It Takes a Nation" debate. Keep in mind, I had all sorts of weird debates in college, especially with the AV guys who listened to Bill Laswell nonstop and filed pot under "p" in the office. They hated L.L. Cool J's "Radio," the first CD I ever bought. Too minimal.

― Pete Scholtes, Monday, 2 September 2002 19:41 (10 years ago) Permalink

FWIW Pete, Xgau gave The Spaghetti Incident an A-. So I guess maybe Xgau was unsure of the GnR suckdom overall. Maybe the "Christgau realm of suckdom" is another thread entirely.

PS I see Steve Perry is coming back to the CP. I always liked him.

― Don Weiner, Monday, 2 September 2002 20:06 (10 years ago) Permalink

Jody thanks for posting that link, that was pretty hilarious!

― Kris (aqueduct), Monday, 2 September 2002 21:39 (10 years ago) Permalink

When I was younger I refused to listen to Guns in Roses because I thought Axl Rose was a wank. Then I borrowed a copy of 'Appetite for Destruction' from a friend out of boredom.

While I wasn't too impressed it did have 'Sweet Child of Mine' which in my opinion is classic.

― Rich (fractal), Tuesday, 3 September 2002 00:21 (10 years ago) Permalink

An exhausted (after driving all day not after discussing shitty old rock bands) thought: Maybe those other bands seem to not rock as hard because they attempted genre synthesis? Making a claim like "rock bands should rock - G'n'R rocked" - that's basically asking for a certain degree of genre purity and conservatism, isn't it? Like how hard can an album rock if it's 50% country ballads? If Guns 'n' Roses actually did go as far into disco and new wave as Loverboy did on their first album would you still hear them as rocking appropriately hard? (Rock guitars and - sexually ambiguous at the same time - words over a disco beat, synths, and female backup singers - now that's genre sythesis.) Or would they become pop lite-weights? Pyromania probably rocks harder than Hysteria and it's because it's less experimental in production, has less synths, and includes fewer forays into pop balladry - it's purer, more classically rock. In fact, I remember that was why a lot of the acclaim for G'n'R was there in the first place (or at least it seemed that way to my preteen self) - that they were a resurgence of 'real' classic-style hard rock after years of faggy faux-metal glam bands with synths and pop harmonies and - worst of all - overproduced ballads. Finally, someone who knew how to really rock! If you closed your eyes and didn't listen to the words, you could almost pretend it was Aerosmith circa 1976. (OK, I added that bit myself.) The more hard-rocking - and more critically respected - bands who were more comparable to G'n'R, like Motley Crue or Cinderella, were the most conservative bands of the era.

BOC was chosen just because they strike me as a more interesting band in hard rock history who don't get nearly the same level of attention. That it seems like a random choice is part of the point.

― sundar subramanian, Tuesday, 3 September 2002 01:08 (10 years ago) Permalink

Yeah, CP loses Keith Harris and gains Steve Perry in the same week. The lord giveth...

― Pete Scholtes, Tuesday, 3 September 2002 02:05 (10 years ago) Permalink

Maybe those other bands seem to not rock as hard because they attempted genre synthesis?

I agree with you that GnR probably appealed to people's rock-conservative/ traditionalist instincts.

On the other hand, as much as I honestly don't want to prolong this, and I'm sure I'll be pushing my ILM cred into the negative numbers (oaf! rockist!)...

Genre synthesis has nothing to do with it. In no way are the two things mutually exclusive. Bon Jovi, Loverboy or Poison could not possibly rock. Not even in their dreams.

And country or pretty much any other pre- or non-rock genre, if pitched correctly and played by musicians with any sense of rhythmic interplay and proclivity for the hard stuff, can be integrated and made to, um, rock.

Hold on, examples: How about Fugazi's integration of dub and Gang of Four-derived funk? I'll probably get hanged for this (and their shtick certainly got old/repetitive quick), but how about Rage Against the Machine's integration of hip hop into Sab-style classic rock riffing? Dare I mention Soul Coughing smushing jazz, hip hop and avant material into music that definitely rocked? Can we go back and count Buffalo Springfield and its spinoffs as successful and rocking integration of country?

(I know these examples are all over the place.)

However dreadful you find the music any of the above-mentioned (I don't), in the physical/ rhythmic sense they all tear the roof off the mother.

― wl, Tuesday, 3 September 2002 04:31 (10 years ago) Permalink

I first heard Guns and Roses when I was fifteen. Before the record was released they played a whole GnR gig on Radio With Pictures, a late night TV show that featured 'alternative' music. So they were considered 'alternative.'

Later I was on the school bus and a metaller recommended a tape to me - it was a bootleg of the Guns and Roses tape not yet released in New Zealand - with a label printed on orange tape from a labelling gun. Everybody thought they were fantastic - fantastic enough to make and distribute bootlegs of their tapes, which was very rare.

I saw the video for 'Sweet Child O' Mine' on TV yesterday. Axl Rose looked cool - it was before he ever wore bike shorts, obviously - and Izzy Stradlin definitely looked Johnny Thunders. I suppose you could say Keith Richards but that would be giving in to him. He was wearing a black jacket with thin lapels, dark aviator glasses, good cheekbones, and had longish black hair cut in the European style.

― maryann, Tuesday, 3 September 2002 08:06 (10 years ago) Permalink

I'd like to add to my already too-long previous post that I feel that I've painted myself into a corner. I've defended GnR as a rockin' band, when I know there are plenty of rockin' bands I myself don't want to listen to if I can help it. Must admit that even for a "rockist"(?) sometimes rockin' just isn't enough.

Numbers:

1) It just pains my Inner Hesher to hear a Loverboy>GnR formulation.

2) Either praise or attack on GnR based on their ability to combine genres seems beside the point to me.

3) "Genre synthesis," as I clumsily put it, does not preclude physically compelling music.

And with that I shut up. Please hold your applause.

― wl, Tuesday, 3 September 2002 14:05 (10 years ago) Permalink

it wasn't just brett anderson.
they were the manics' 2nd fave
band after p.e. for all their
early nme/mm/etc interviews.

didn't they cover it's so easy ?
can't remember.

― piscesboy, Wednesday, 4 September 2002 20:49 (10 years ago) Permalink

7 months pass...

Speaking of rehabilitation, anyone else heard about this?:
http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/news/shownews.php?newsid=674
How would this rehabilitate the group? Or sully it?

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Wednesday, 23 April 2003 02:06 (10 years ago) Permalink

yeah I saw something about that, between those two I guess I hope they pick Bach.

― James Blount (James Blount), Wednesday, 23 April 2003 02:09 (10 years ago) Permalink

Ooh! I can't decide between Weiland, who I legitimately like and who could use a chance to RAWK, and the campy fun that is Sebastian Bach!

― Jordan (Jordan), Wednesday, 23 April 2003 02:17 (10 years ago) Permalink

Wait a minute; I haven't even finished reading the article yet, but GUEST VOCALIST GINA GERSHON??? WOW!!

― Sean (Sean), Wednesday, 23 April 2003 02:44 (10 years ago) Permalink

Good thread to revive, sez me.

"My Michelle" and "Mr Brownstone"...good heavens, those are dreadful songs

I think so, too, but not in the way you mean. They actually cause dread in me. I recoil in horror at the blatant misogyny, the filth. But isn't that what they want me to do? I don't mean to excuse it as morally acceptable, but it's emotionally affecting as hell. Appetite may not be a great record, and I'm not especially interested in the technique of the playing on it, but it's an honest record. It's honestly fucked up, and a little disturbing. It's not just a show. Axl comes off as a real person on that record -- not a pleasant one, but a real one all the same. And it's really something.

― Kenan Hebert (kenan), Wednesday, 23 April 2003 02:45 (10 years ago) Permalink

GINA GERSHON!!!

― Sean (Sean), Wednesday, 23 April 2003 02:49 (10 years ago) Permalink

3 months pass...

I've gotten over most of my GnR issues though I still think they're probably overrated. Dunno if I'd rate them higher than Loverboy still but whatever. Maybe.

― sundar subramanian (sundar), Tuesday, 29 July 2003 19:52 (9 years ago) Permalink

Skipping 913 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

izzy's got one of those voices where he sounded like a 50 year old at 30, so yeah good on you for sounding the same when it's age appropriate haha

― The Doc Morbama (some dude), Monday, 26 November 2012 22:40 (6 months ago) Permalink

lol

― set the controls for the heart of the sun (VegemiteGrrl), Monday, 26 November 2012 22:43 (6 months ago) Permalink

izzy's still one cool motherfucker

14 years, huh. this song could actually be about the making of Chinese Democracy.

― charlie h, Tuesday, 27 November 2012 00:16 (5 months ago) Permalink

we need to get word to izzy to stage a coup, oust axl and all those plastic-faced weirdos and bring back slash and duff

― set the controls for the heart of the sun (VegemiteGrrl), Tuesday, 27 November 2012 00:19 (5 months ago) Permalink

14 years, huh. this song could actually be about the making of Chinese Democracy.

― charlie h, Tuesday, November 27, 2012 12:16 AM (8 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

it is pretty funny: a song izzy wrote about 14 years of friendship when they were 28, and there were 14 years between GNR's last official release and Chinese Democracy. And the lyrics are pretty apt.

― Matt Armstrong, Tuesday, 27 November 2012 00:27 (5 months ago) Permalink

we need to get word to izzy to stage a coup, oust axl and all those plastic-faced weirdos and bring back slash and duff

― set the controls for the heart of the sun (VegemiteGrrl), Tuesday, November 27, 2012 12:19 AM (8 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Axl-Izzy sideproject would be the best imo

― Matt Armstrong, Tuesday, 27 November 2012 00:28 (5 months ago) Permalink

yeah that's true

songwriting-wise, definitely

― set the controls for the heart of the sun (VegemiteGrrl), Tuesday, 27 November 2012 00:33 (5 months ago) Permalink

they recorded one Izzy song for CD, probably the unreleased song I most want to hear

― Matt Armstrong, Tuesday, 27 November 2012 00:39 (5 months ago) Permalink

really? i didn't know that

― set the controls for the heart of the sun (VegemiteGrrl), Tuesday, 27 November 2012 00:47 (5 months ago) Permalink

I'm glad he's still on ok terms with axl - I dunno why but it gives me hope, lol

― set the controls for the heart of the sun (VegemiteGrrl), Tuesday, 27 November 2012 00:47 (5 months ago) Permalink

Izzy's early exit is prob why he's the only member of the classic lineup who seems to be cool w/ everyone -- he saw where things were headed and got out peacefully before it got ugly

― The Doc Morbama (some dude), Tuesday, 27 November 2012 00:49 (5 months ago) Permalink

3 weeks pass...

― small-scale fux with (Spottie_Ottie_Dope), Sunday, 23 December 2012 05:11 (5 months ago) Permalink

i posted that on the "welcome to the jungle" thread a few days ago.

― gimme some reggae! (get bent), Sunday, 23 December 2012 05:14 (5 months ago) Permalink

Oh. Should be posted in every thread prolly.

― small-scale fux with (Spottie_Ottie_Dope), Sunday, 23 December 2012 05:15 (5 months ago) Permalink

believe me, i've thought about doing that

― fanute me or shoot me (some dude), Sunday, 23 December 2012 05:50 (5 months ago) Permalink

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.