I think this was revealed before? They returned to the studio and John had left a note saying 'Gone to Bali'.
Yes, but not the religious aspect of it (*whether in jest or not). Maybe John met a teacher/guru and found stability in his mind/life during the band's crisis 87-91 years
Also, crude or not...Brian's interaction comes off as humorous for once. AND say what you will but the golden badger is Freddie 's foot. This is potentially new information, considering the vague description given.
People are most certainly always going to wonder and think about Freddie
I would imagine the time spent with the journalist went something like (baring in mind Brian's attention to detail and sudject interest) a long conversation about stereo photography and cameras and the quality of Victorian stereoscopy and his childhood interest in the sudject. Then a chat about how he was in the perfect position to photograph the band etc.
She probably, being a journo and wanting something juicy mentioned Freddie, Brian having talked about the book felt he could allow himself a bit of space to say how great Freddie was and towards the end suffered but never complained.
Journo goes back to her keyboard says to herself fuck that book crap Brian May said Freddie was. . . . . And a two or three hour meeting which involved 10 mins talking about Freddie's illness or the bands partying becomes the subject of the exclusive!
The Brits are a war-like people from a war-like nation. They fought with almost everyone and almost always won. And they can beat the shit out of practically anyone in a bar fight.
I recommend you don't go there. I don't have the statistics on bar fights, but I can run off a disturbingly long list of humiliating military defeats. That goes for nearly all countries, but still. Jingoism doesn't really stand up to historical scrutiny.
And it says much about May’s strategic brilliance that he hasn’t subsequently faded into obscurity, but become the figurehead of a band that is now even more successful than it was during Mercury’s lifetime.
Brian probably doesn't like the article because it exposed his vulnerability a bit too much, which is contrary to this quote - the most pertinent line contained therein.
Sure, they focus on sex and drugs to sell papers and do the clickbait thing for ad revenue. This has become standard practice in most media outlets, as the bottom line keeps it going.
It has a few good tidbits in it (particularly the insight into It's A Hard Life and Mother Love), but ultimately the negative outweighs the positive.
I think the worst bit is the adultery line - that was a low blow. Sure, it was clever, but the writer's need to assert her moral superiority exposes her insecurities far more than his. Everyone has skeletons in their closet. Brian still comes off as a pensive gentleman who is doing what we all do - searching for happiness. She just comes off as an opportunistic twat.
A writer should assume the reader is smart enough to draw their own conclusions instead of providing an editorial along their own arbitrary moral lines. And her mockery of his animal activism is just pandering to the lowest common denominator. Shame on him for giving a shit.
And journalists wonder why the world is growing to hate them.
It is his scientific belief that the cull isn’t working.
And she's also an idiot.
"Scientific belief" is an oxymoron.
Science makes its conclusions based on evidence via rigourous testing, not beliefs. Anyone who looks at the science and disagrees with its findings is encapsulated by belief, not the other way around. Belief is best left to charlatans like Deepak Chopra.
It's a shame that people end up in influential positions as writers without having a basic understanding of reality.
This is the first time that we hear about Freddie losing most of his foot. Did the journalist conducting the interview overstepped here a little and used her own words ?
Let's hope not, because a ton of publications have since created articles out of this one statement.
"a band that is now even more successful than it was during Mercury’s lifetime."
Not sure how that is measured. Certainly the latest tours have been big but they're playing old songs so clearly still living off the success of the Fred era. And we all know how badly TCR bombed. So whatever sales are made now are based on releases of older material (Hammersmith, Rainbow), physical re-releases of Fred-era albums, or downloads of Fred-era songs. Now if they had released new material and it was successful you might argue they're "bigger than ever" maybe, but not when they are solely rehashing the stuff from their past that made them great.
Artistically they aren't bigger than ever, they are stuck in the past. But certainly their brand is still prominent, which is a financial and marketing achievement.
Ha, nice post edit Wizard - I thought it was one of the most honest pieces written about Queen for quite some time? :)
I agree that the article was mostly sensationalistic stuff, same old boring AIDS stories. To be fair to her, the interview is not a strictly factual piece - and her observations of Brian and his demeanour were IMO the most worthwhile bits of the interview. Though he is a brilliant man, Brians monologue rarely raises any eyebrows by itself.
My guess is that Brian must be a very naive man if he thought that after telling those things about Freddie's foot, dwarves and Bali, the journalist would rather write an article about one boring 3-D picture book.
"a band that is now even more successful than it was during Mercury’s lifetime."
Not sure how that is measured.
Most likely, it is not measured. People just say whatever without any sort of research or logic. Some see through that, others simply believe anything they're told. That's how marketing works.
