Dennis Dunaway's Book

A_MichaelUK · Post by **A_MichaelUK** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 10:41 am

> it aided the flow of the narrative, rather then mention every little thing seperately.

Exactly. We did a little of that (actually, maybe quite a bit) in the documentary.

> so who's to say there weren`t chickens at both shows and both stories are partially true?

I know for a fact they were at more than one concert. I and at least two other people here have the photographs to prove it.

Si · Post by Si » Mon Jul 04, 2011 12:36 pm

A_MichaelUK wrote: > so who's to say there weren`t chickens at both shows and
>both stories are partially true?

I know for a fact they were at more than one concert. I and at least two other people here have the photographs to prove it.

Oh of course we know they were at more then one, what I meant was who's to say they weren`t at both these specific events, rather then random other shows of the period.

A_MichaelUK · Post by **A_MichaelUK** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 1:08 pm

> what I meant was who's to say they weren`t at both these specific events, rather then random other shows of the period.

I agree.

DIMMA · Post by **DIMMA** » Mon Jul 04, 2011 1:34 pm

Jason wrote: "I would love to read Dennis Dunaway's book! If Neal Smith was to write one, I'd love to read that as well."

Neal Smith has been working on his book for years as well.

Si wrote:
"Research has shown that the show with the "criples" in the front five rows was is fact a different show a couple of weeks later, also in Canada if I recall. Alice has combined the two stories to make a more entertaining single story."

That is correct.

I would also like to add that, as a close friend of Dennis, Michael and Neal for over 13 years, and having met and talked with Alice on many an occasion, I can honestly say that Alice´s anecdotes and stories of the early days are for the most part immensely accurate and just as valid as the others.

Ingo

tommystooge · Post by **tommystooge** » Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:33 am

DIMMA wrote:Jason wrote: "I would love to read Dennis Dunaway's book! If Neal Smith was to write one, I'd love to read that as well."

Neal Smith has been working on his book for years as well.

Si wrote:
"Research has shown that the show with the "criples" in the front five rows was is fact a different show a couple of weeks later, also in Canada if I recall. Alice has combined the two stories to make a more entertaining single story."

That is correct.

I would also like to add that, as a close friend of Dennis, Michael and Neal for over 13 years, and having met and talked with Alice on many an occasion, I can honestly say that Alice´s anecdotes and stories of the early days are for the most part immensely accurate and just as valid as the others.

Ingo

I agree, having spoke with Alice and Mike over the years, I agree that Alice's stories are accurate at the core, it just makes me a little crazy when he starts to embellish them to beyond ridiculous sometimes, reason I say that is I would like to hear the story as accurate as possible. I know he does it for the general population, cuz if you aren't familiar with his history they are funny stories...and on many occasions he has said he lies...which is all fine...but as a long time fan it would be great to get the straight story...which I know will never happen as there is an image to uphold, which I get, it's like any other band...Kiss for one...

tommystooge · Post by **tommystooge** » Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:37 am

A_MichaelUK wrote:> it aided the flow of the narrative, rather then mention every little thing seperately.

Exactly. We did a little of that (actually, maybe quite a bit) in the documentary.

> so who's to say there weren`t chickens at both shows and both stories are partially true?

>I know for a fact they were at more than one concert. I and at least two other people here have the photographs to prove it.

I also have photographs as well...

tommystooge · Post by **tommystooge** » Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:43 am

>It's worth getting if you're interested in someone else's point of view, other than Alice's. And it correctly credits Cindy Smith (Dunaway) as introducing the band to Shep Gordon and Joe Greenburg. I never fell for the Jimi story! I'll take truth over embellished entertaining myths any day! Although, Alice tells a great story!

I agree with this 100% I too will take true over embellished entertaining myths any day as well...

>Everybody is going to have a different view on things. It's natural. There were times and incidents where not all 5 members were present and even if they were, everybody will percieve things in their own way.

Agreed, that's why it would be great to hear from everyone involved

>I never read things and put them against each other, thinking about who's account is right or wrong or which one is more valid, credible and accurate. None of us were there, how would we know? So, who are we to say. I just look at it as more information on a band I love.

Yes, as much info on the band I love would be most welcomed

>Either way, I hope Dennis finds the right publisher.[/quote]

Me too

A_MichaelUK · Post by **A_MichaelUK** » Wed Jul 06, 2011 9:09 am

>say that is I would like to hear the story as accurate as possible.

It can sometimes be less interesting, though (although I see you also make that point in a subsequent post).

Robbie · Post by **Robbie** » Wed Jul 06, 2011 5:30 pm

I refer to a thread I started some time ago where I said I believe a definitive history of Alice Cooper, both band and solo written by a third party is long overdue (along the lines of "Strange Fascination" about Bowie or "England's Dreaming" about the Sex Pistols) The author would assess all the differing views and draw it together in a credible historical narrative. It is perfectly normal for five people to view the same event in five dfferent ways; the only reality for the indvidual involved is their perception.It's also perfectly normal for there to be some bitterness-it would actually be more surprising if there wasn't! A good author draws his conclusions from the available evidence and the reader has the pleasure of agreeing or disagreeing with the interpretation!

GNDM · Post by **GNDM** » Wed Jul 06, 2011 6:08 pm

An authorized biography done with the band's assistance....or an historical work based upon material already available to anyone? As a person with a degree in American history, I can tell you that a study of any historical topic can give you far ranging views and conclusions. There is no such animal as a "definitive history". Even good writers come into a work with biases, and/or they develop them during their research. Take Bob Greene's book for example.
There would be no problem with a "date" biography (the band did this and then they did that)....but I think you are seeking a book that reaches into points of view and opinions, and "final conclusions". Then you are back to dealing with one point of view - the authors.

Jason · Post by **Jason** » Wed Jul 06, 2011 9:20 pm

GNDM wrote:An authorized biography done with the band's assistance....or an historical work based upon material already available to anyone? As a person with a degree in American history, I can tell you that a study of any historical topic can give you far ranging views and conclusions. There is no such animal as a "definitive history". Even good writers come into a work with biases, and/or they develop them during their research. Take Bob Greene's book for example.
There would be no problem with a "date" biography (the band did this and then they did that)....but I think you are seeking a book that reaches into points of view and opinions, and "final conclusions". Then you are back to dealing with one point of view - the authors.

Well said!

tommystooge · Post by **tommystooge** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 12:35 am

A_MichaelUK wrote:>say that is I would like to hear the story as accurate as possible.

It can sometimes be less interesting, though (although I see you also make that point in a subsequent post).

Your rebuttals are so lame and make no point or sense...who cares if they are less interesting, that is the point, knowing the actual fact, not the silly embellished stories I've heard a 1000 times...get it?

tommystooge · Post by **tommystooge** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 12:46 am

Robbie wrote:I refer to a thread I started some time ago where I said I believe a definitive history of Alice Cooper, both band and solo written by a third party is long overdue (along the lines of "Strange Fascination" about Bowie or "England's Dreaming" about the Sex Pistols) The author would assess all the differing views and draw it together in a credible historical narrative. It is perfectly normal for five people to view the same event in five dfferent ways; the only reality for the indvidual involved is their perception.It's also perfectly normal for there to be some bitterness-it would actually be more surprising if there wasn't! A good author draws his conclusions from the available evidence and the reader has the pleasure of agreeing or disagreeing with the interpretation!

BINGO !!! Robbie, you hit the nail on the head, that is exactly what needs to happen.

The perfect person would be Paul Trynka, he wrote a great book on Iggy Pop, open Up and Bleed, very accurate with great detail. He just finished a Bowie book 'Starman' which I'm sure is just as detailed and accurate as Iggy's.

By the way in Iggy's book, guitarist James Williamson was at an Alice Cooper listening party and cut his hand, there isn't much info in the book, so I talked with James and this is what he told me happened:

"Yes, it was a stupid thing really. I attended a playback party for one of Alice's records which had just been recorded. The party was at the Record Plant in LA.

I had probably had a couple of beers too many, and as I exited the door one of the roadies or bouncers got into an argument with me and pushed me with beer in hand at which time I fell and the bottle broke in my right hand, making a deep cut into the tendion on my right pinkie finger....I lay there bleeding on the Record Plant's pool table for a very long time before an ambulance was finally called to take me to the hospital where I required surgury to mend the cut pinkie....I was in a cast for quite awhile after that.

Anyway, none of this was Alice's fault and in fact I'm doing an interview for his radio show tomorrow. And no, I didn't play on any of his stuff ever."

tommystooge · Post by **tommystooge** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 1:00 am

GNDM wrote:An authorized biography done with the band's assistance....or an historical work based upon material already available to anyone? As a person with a degree in American history, I can tell you that a study of any historical topic can give you far ranging views and conclusions. There is no such animal as a "definitive history". Even good writers come into a work with biases, and/or they develop them during their research. Take Bob Greene's book for example.
There would be no problem with a "date" biography (the band did this and then they did that)....but I think you are seeking a book that reaches into points of view and opinions, and "final conclusions". Then you are back to dealing with one point of view - the authors.

Ya, well said. The point of having the authors point of view is correct, although as an intelligent reader one has to sift through the material and sort out the information...example, Bob Greene's book, an excellent writer, but naive at what he witnessed, you have to take that information and surmise what is really happening within what is written...For instance, some of the quotes, say, Mike makes in Greene's book may be accurate, but his summation of Glen seems to be off the mark. So as an educated reader you have to weed through the information and take what you believe to be on the mark...So any book written by a 3rd party would be great, and it can't be by an Alice fan, who is going to regurgitate the same stories we've heard 1000 times.

GNDM · Post by **GNDM** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 1:34 am

-The point of having the authors point of view is correct, although as an intelligent reader one has to sift through the material and sort out the information…..

You are assuming:
1. that all readers are intelligent and WILLING to sift through the info
2. that the author makes an even and honest approach to all views and facts they include (or omit)in the work.
3. that many readers have the fore-knowledge to eliminate incorrect facts or stilted views.

-you have to take that information and surmise what is really happening within what is written ….

So AGAIN, the reader is free to select, or omit, the views he/she wants. So we are back to square one. Are the views and information selected by the reader the correct ones. They will be no consensus of opinion, as different readers will see information differently.

-So as an educated reader you have to weed through the information and take what you believe to be on the mark.

Many readers will take whatever is said, in a book, as being gospel. If they are unsure, they will lean towards those facts which are dramatic, or controversial. Not unlike supermarket tabloids.

I am not saying a book about the band's history should not be done...I just doubt it would lead to one totally approved version on many topics related to Alice Cooper history. (Is there is even a market for such a book? I don't know?)

tommystooge · Post by **tommystooge** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 3:18 am

-The point of having the authors point of view is correct, although as an intelligent reader one has to sift through the material and sort out the information…..[/quote]

You are assuming:
1. that all readers are intelligent and WILLING to sift through the info
2. that the author makes an even and honest approach to all views and facts they include (or omit)in the work.
3. that many readers have the fore-knowledge to eliminate incorrect facts or stilted views.

-you have to take that information and surmise what is really happening within what is written ….

So AGAIN, the reader is free to select, or omit, the views he/she wants. So we are back to square one. Are the views and information selected by the reader the correct ones. They will be no consensus of opinion, as different readers will see information differently.

-So as an educated reader you have to weed through the information and take what you believe to be on the mark.

Many readers will take whatever is said, in a book, as being gospel. If they are unsure, they will lean towards those facts which are dramatic, or controversial. Not unlike supermarket tabloids.

Ya, good point, as with this forum, sometimes people take what is written at face value, I guess I was refering to someone, like yourself, who would be an educated reader, meaning you are well informed of the Alice history and can spot the inaccuracies a mile away, but you are right most readers would take it at face value.

I am not saying a book about the band's history should not be done...I just doubt it would lead to one totally approved version on many topics related to Alice Cooper history. (Is there is even a market for such a book? I don't know?)

Well I suppose if there can be an in depth book on Iggy Pop, who is less popular than Alice, then yes there would be a market for it, I suppose,

A_MichaelUK · Post by **A_MichaelUK** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 11:42 am

>Your rebuttals are so lame and make no point or sense...

To you, maybe not.

>who cares if they are less interesting,

Alice Cooper does. Do you have a problem with that? As GNDM said, there's certain people who think they have some kind of 'right' to know the truth, when as has already explained, no - one really knows what it is or if it even exists.

> that is the point, knowing the actual fact, not the silly embellished stories I've heard a 1000 times...

Who said you have the right to know anything, though?

tommystooge · Post by **tommystooge** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 11:48 am

A_MichaelUK wrote:>Your rebuttals are so lame and make no point or sense...

To you, maybe not.

>who cares if they are less interesting,

Alice Cooper does. Do you have a problem with that? As GNDM said, there's certain people who think they have some kind of 'right' to know the truth, when as has already explained, no - one really knows what it is or if it even exists.

> that is the point, knowing the actual fact, not the silly embellished stories I've heard a 1000 times...

Who said you have the right to know anything, though?

I never said I have the right to know anything? That is why I must surmise my own conclusion...which so far seems to be fairly accurate...

GNDM · Post by **GNDM** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 3:55 pm

That is why I must surmise my own conclusion...which so far seems to be fairly accurate...

"Fairly accurate"? As opposed to the the conclusions of others...?????

There is no truth. There is only perception. ~Gustave Flaubert

Truth, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. ~Unknown

Robbie · Post by **Robbie** » Thu Jul 07, 2011 5:11 pm

With reference to GNDM's response to my post about a definitive history. I appreciate your point about no such thing as a definitive history (to be honest I borrowed the term from the cover of the Bowie book although it may have been definitive biography)however there are many bands whose individual members have written autobiographies or have been the subject of biographies but who have still had a history written about the bands career collectively (the Beatles and Stones spring readily to mind). I am I suppose just surprised that one has never been written about Alice Cooper when books are written and published about far less popular or indeed interesting performers as a visit to the rock music shelves of my local Waterstones confirms.I totally understand that any author producing a history from a range of primary sources will interpret those sources in producing a secondary source. But as I said in my last post part of the pleasure of reading is to agree or disagree with the authors viewpoint.

Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book

Re: Dennis Dunaway's Book