John Deacon on cover of Bass Guitar Magazine

"he has given the green light to virtually everything they've done in the last 20 years. "

No he hasn't - he removed himself from essentially all decision making. Stop talking shite.

As we're on the topic of John Deacon and his relationship with Brian May, Roger Taylor and Queen in general - I may as well share my thoughts on the subject.

During his promotional tour for Queen in 3D, Brian May spoke at Disney Studios. A member of the audience recorded his slideshow presentation and uploaded it to YouTube. At one point (at the 9:27 mark of this video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_hH-B0Snug), Brian shows a picture of John and says, "This is John. The lovely John Deacon, who sadly I never see these days, because he's become very reclusive. But here he is, in fine form, comparing his stereoscopic self with his mono self. He got into it. He took a lot of stereo pictures himself. He enjoyed it. I'd love to see those sometime, maybe he'll do a book, I don't know."

I found that quote very interesting. Firstly, it shows that Brian still has some affection for John, even though he never sees him. Secondly, it shows the extent of John's current involvement with Queen. Apparently, John has his own collection of stereo pictures, but they're not included in the book. Seemingly, Brian hasn't even seen them. Either John refused to share them, or the Queen team didn't ask for them. In either case, it demonstrates that John has virtually nothing to do with Queen anymore. If he had any real involvement with their current projects, his stereo pictures would have been included, or at least seen by Brian. Just think about how weird it is, that one band member compiling a book of stereoscopic Queen pictures, hasn't even seen the stereoscopic picture collection of another band member.

Additionally, Greg Brooks (Queen's archivist) was interviewed on The Vinyl Guide podcast and was asked whether John is involved in the conversations about new products (at the 17:58 mark of the podcast: www.thevinylguide.com/episodes/ep080-the-queen-archive-w-greg-brooks-pt-2), he says "John? No, not as far as I'm aware. John is really in retirement mode. I'm sure at levels far above my level, that there must be liaison and he's kept in the loop but not that I'm aware of - that would be at management and band level..."

It's seems clear that John isn't involved in the production, design or creation of new products.

More recently, Joe Mazzello, who is playing the role of John Deacon in the movie, was interviewed. When asked about John (at the 0:41 mark of this video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfdeWUVxtNo), he says "John is a very private person. I don't want to speak for him completely, but after Freddie died, he was really affected by that and sort of felt like Queen was with Freddie. After that, he distanced himself from it. But I was actually able to sit down with one of his sons and talk for like four hours..."

I thought that quote was very revealing, mainly because he talked to John's son for four hours. His comments about John could be dismissed as speculation he read on the internet, but the fact that he spoke to John's son and spent time on set with Brian and Roger, makes me believe his comments are accurate.

I don't believe that John hates Brian and Roger, or that they hate John. I think they've simply chosen different paths.

I like your argument Kaltby. I think, also, John doesn't hate them, but he doesn't like what are doing under the name of Queen.
In an article from the 90's, John said without Freddie, is impossible to carry on. Perhaps because the only card at that moment was George Michael and George said no? Who knows...

And another thing, is obvious John and Brian tastes in music are very different. I mean, he and Freddie hated Gimme the prize. One year of love or Cool Cat, even AOBTD, has nothing with May's music taste.

[QUOTE] [b]Mr Right wrote:[/b]

I see it as poor kids of today will look back at Queen in 10 years time and only remember Queen+ Adam Lambert, how fucking sad will that be eh?[/QUOTE]

Because of all of those Queen + Adam Lambert albums that will be replacing Queen albums in the record shops, and on the radio, and in films, and on their youtube channel.

Is it possible for you to say a single thing that makes sense? You've had 1107 chances, and it still hasn't happened yet.

[QUOTE] [b]Negative Creep wrote:[/b]

"he has given the green light to virtually everything they've done in the last 20 years. "

No he hasn't - he removed himself from essentially all decision making. Stop talking shite.[/QUOTE]

Nope - they consult him about everything, usually through through lawyers. They've said it numerous times.

He's 1/3 of the business, so they still need to work with him, recluse or not. It's obviously more difficult this way, but work still needs to be done. Someone posted their financial statements here a few weeks back, so you can see for yourself:

http://queenzone.com/forums/1521216/qpl-financial-statements.aspx

If he wanted out, he could take a lump sum and be done with it. But he's still in the mix. He's just not a performing member anymore. And every time they go on the road, they always ask him to come back. Kind of heart-warming, actually.

[QUOTE] [b]Katby wrote:[/b]

Additionally, Greg Brooks (Queen's archivist) was interviewed on The Vinyl Guide podcast and was asked whether John is involved in the conversations about new products (at the 17:58 mark of the podcast: www.thevinylguide.com/episodes/ep080-the-queen-archive-w-greg-brooks-pt-2), he says "John? No, not as far as I'm aware. John is really in retirement mode. I'm sure at levels far above my level, that there must be liaison and he's kept in the loop but not that I'm aware of - that would be at management and band level..."[/QUOTE]

That's the key words - "that I'm aware of."

Brooks is lower on the totem pole, so he's not privy to these kinds of things. That's a good and honest answer from him.

I respect John's decisions, but I regret that he didn't do a proper farewell to his fans.
A last interview, some sort of goodbye...he just faded away in '97 without an explanation and that was it.

[QUOTE] [b]Mr Right wrote:[/b]

Real Wizard Deacon may have given the green light but at least he knows his conscience is clear and he never got involved physically on stage with the circus of Queen+.
He had the common sense to realise after Freddie passed away that Queen would never be the same even if they did continue.
He still deserves the royalties as he was a valuable member of Queen all those years and he worked damn hard for the money.[/QUOTE]

He deserves his royalty cheques even though he has done nothing with them since 1997, but Brian and Roger who have kept the Queen name alive and current don't?

He didn't leave the band, he retired from the music business, and he didn't do that when ( according to you) Freddie died, he continued to work with the band under the Queen+ name for six years before he retired.

When people turn their admiration for celebrities into a religion, then they obviously go for fantasy stories and Hollywood-esque narratives rather than the more realistic conclusion one could draw from the evidence.

- John, the poor old socially-secluded hermit who, over a quarter of a century after Frederick's death, still hasn't gotten over it and cries to sleep every night thinking of how those evil Maylor chaps are allegedly ruining the legacy he worked so hard for, possibly using the multi-million-quid cheques to wipe his tears away with.

vs

- John, the clever millionaire businessman who's found a way to keep earning even more without lifting a finger.

Same as with other topics (14 times vs 4, 180 overdubs vs 25-ish, 1st place on the Ivor's vs 2nd place, 7-minute-long vs 5:55, last recordings in October/November rather than May, etc).

[QUOTE] [b]Apocalipsis_Darko wrote:[/b]

I like your argument Kaltby. I think, also, John doesn't hate them, but he doesn't like what are doing under the name of Queen.
In an article from the 90's, John said without Freddie, is impossible to carry on. Perhaps because the only card at that moment was George Michael and George said no? Who knows...[/QUOTE]

and they never carried on, in the real sense.
George Michael was not a rock singer, he was really unfit to be the lead singer of Queen.
Brian May admitted this fact when he said GM was scared after seeing the hole "Queen machine" in full mode preparing for the Freddie live tribute at Wembley.

Well, if Adam Lambert can sign WWRY, why not George?
George did also a brilliant performance with 39'.

If John ever did decide to run away to join the circus it would have to be called Queen & John Deacon + Adam Lambert. So i can fully understand his reluctance.

As I said earlier in the thread, I think Brian and Roger simply chose a different path to John. I think there's enough evidence to show that John was affected by Freddie's death, but as Sebastian said, that doesn't mean he cries himself to sleep at night all these years later.

He obviously isn't directly involved with Queen anymore, but that doesn't mean John hates Brian and Roger. He still gives them permission to use his songs and Brian and Roger seemingly still like (and miss) John. According to their Twitter page, Brian gives an "affectionate insight" into John, in Bass Guitar Magazine, but I still haven't been able to find a copy in the shops. I'm also curious about the claim on the cover that "the world's greatest bassists salute the master". There could be some interesting quotes, in there.

Has anyone found a copy yet? It's supposed to be available from WHSmiths, in the UK.

George Michael is a much more classy act than Adam Lambert ever will be. He put everything into his performance at Freddies tribute concert and he never came across as arrogant or big headed to take over Brian John or Roger unlike Lambert who thinks he is it.
Best thing of all is that George & Freddie were good friends.