"Blinking Lights and other Revelations" - Eels Biography by Tim Grierson

[Schlomo]

I'm still interested to read the book. A few practical matters keep me from buying it -- a) having it shipped to Korea and b) I don't much care for hardbacks -- but also I've been turned off by the legal wrangling Grierson had to contend with just to get the book published.

Am I mistaken in remembering that E put the squeeze on the author, and the book was more or less censored to appease E? I don't care for that, and in my opinion it compromises the effort.

I also don't like how some individuals -- Butch, especially -- were left out. A biographer doesn't need permission from the subject or surrender creative/research autonomy without undermining his project.

Anyway, it is still interesting, and maybe if there's a paperback release I'll have a look. Or I could find a used hardback copy, perhaps. Either way, I think there's not much to learn from the book, and what there is has been unfavorably colored.

[Olives]

Am I mistaken in remembering that E put the squeeze on the author, and the book was more or less censored to appease E? I don't care for that, and in my opinion it compromises the effort.

Well I didn't know about that, and if that's the case then yes, that would compromise the effort. Clearly, he has interviewed E a lot over the years, so one might suppose that were he to delve too deeply into E's private business he might not be granted that privilege again, but if E's actively intervened with and obstructed the project then that leaves an unpleasant taste. And yes, you get the feeling that those E did give his blessing to contribute to this book were probably told what they couldn't say, at the very least.

I also don't like how some individuals -- Butch, especially -- were left out. A biographer doesn't need permission from the subject or surrender creative/research autonomy without undermining his project.

Also with Butch probably having more insight than most into E and how he works, records and tours, it was a shame that he was prohibited (by a clause in his contract when he left the band, apparently) from contributing directly. Some of the other contributors are however, quite forthcoming and willing to be critical, Tommy (who apparently is best buds with E these days), John Carter and Parthenon Huxley all certainly question some of his decisions, and air grievances..

I'm guessing that, given his position as an active music journalist, he did about as well as he could with this, but yeah you're probably right that elements of his approach undermined the project to an extent. Sounds awful, but it'll be much easier to write a biography of E when he's dead.

[tehdai]

I think with any biography of a living person there would be certain lines you wouldn't want to cross if you ever wanted to talk to the subject again. And as a big part of writing a rock biography is the chance to be forever quoted as "Eels/E biographer Grierson", you'd understand why he'd want to keep lines of communication open.

To be honest, the knowledge that as a condition of leaving the band Butch had to sign a gagging clause is far more damaging to E's reputation than anything Butch could have said (unless he secretly eats babies or something). If you try to suppress a story you eventually become the story. But the Eels camp have never done PR very well (Rocking Eels, anyone? Twitter?)

[Schlomo]

Yes, it's a very strange situation. Interesting, at least. I can relate, actually. I get very defensive when some of my Korean co-workers/acquaintances ask me about my family, &c. Can't imagine why, though. Just a weird reflex.

So I can cut E a little slack for wanting to keep some thing under wraps. But the legal wrangling is a bit heavy-handed, and yeah, it makes him look a little unfavorable. But whatever.

I think the difficulty I have in all of this is that, though I appreciate E's music and such, and I'm a fan if nothing else, I still think about him as a biographical curiosity, much the same way people take an interest in, say, Churchill or Hawkings or whoever. And I don't mean to come off like I feel entitled to the man's secrets, but it's natural to want a clearer image, you know?

[abortioninthesky]

I think the difficulty I have in all of this is that, though I appreciate E's music and such, and I'm a fan if nothing else, I still think about him as a biographical curiosity, much the same way people take an interest in, say, Churchill or Hawkings or whoever. And I don't mean to come off like I feel entitled to the man's secrets, but it's natural to want a clearer image, you know?

I totally agree; I am completely the same. I think one of the main reasons his biography interests me so much is the fact that, more than most artists, his lifeis his work -- from the albums themselves, to the "This Is Your Life"-style tours, the work of Eels has been the work of E explicitly documenting and making sense of the events of his life.

It is a shame, therefore, that Grierson's attempt to find out more about the man -- and, accordingly, his work -- has been hampered by the very subject of his enquiry. E's music and his life are both extremely interesting subject matter, but as a biographer you can't do the best job possible with this great material if one of your editors is the man you are writing about. I doubt Behind the Shades would have been quite so compelling a read if Dylan had looked over every proof and highlighted the stories he wanted to stay and those which needed to be removed. 

Still, I don't want to be too down on the book. It really is a decent read -- even for fans who know most of the story like us. Grierson should be credited for giving a fairly detailed account of Bad Dude in Love, even if it is slightly bizarre that he seems to think it is a great piece of work. Indeed, his account does contradict E's own assessment of the record. E claims it is just "one of many recordings he made during those years, and that this recording just happened to be pressed onto vinyl." He seems to suggest it is another home-made, four track deal, whereas Grierson's interview with the album's producer and his account of E's committed attitude in the studio reveal Bad Dude in Love to be much more than that which E claims it to be. 

Moreover, the new interviews with collaborators such as Tommy, Jim Lang, and Huxley are very illuminating.

[Olives]

I think one of the main reasons his biography interests me so much is the fact that, more than most artists, his lifeis his work -- from the albums themselves, to the "This Is Your Life"-style tours, the work of Eels has been the work of E explicitly documenting and making sense of the events of his life.

Yes, absolutely, having some background knowledge and contextual understanding really does add to the whole Eels experience. It seemed strange to me when I first realised what a private person E was outside of his music, and although I get it now, obviously his songs can't be taken as the final word on the events of his life that he chooses to document - it's always going to be very one sided. And as we've noted in this thread, it seems like it was always going to be tough balancing act to pull off this book to satisfy everyone and not alienate himself from E, but I agree with you that this book is pretty good on the whole.

Though if it is true about E effectively censoring it, i'm not sure how that is defensible on his part, unless Grierson went way too far and crossed some line of decency, which I doubt.

[Audra]

Am I the only one that was slightly disappointed with this book? Yeah, the pictures were cool (so says the photographer) and some of the interviews were fun, Chet's quotes definitely made me chuckle. I felt like the majority of the book was a review of the albums, which we all have and have listened to. I came close to chucking the book out the window when Grierson got to End Times and gave a break down of the songs in terms of seconds: the opening track was a mere 103 seconds while the next was 257 seconds long.

Maybe it's just me...

[Scarlet]

I finished this a couple of weeks ago. Having seen a bit of previous info about it I wasn't really surprised by the restrictions placed on the author so that side of things didn't bother me too much as I was expecting it.
The pictures are good and I found the stuff from Carter really interesting but there was one minor detail that threw me for a bit of a loop.
(Spoiler) The bit where Grierson reveals that E's ex-wife's name is Natasha rather than Anna really made me question how much of TTGSK is misleading or untrue and that made me really sad. I'm sad because I've spent ages over the last few years telling so many people how wonderful and honest and touching TTGSK is and how much I loved it and now I feel that it's lost some of its truthfulness.
I know that it's an author's right to put what they damn well please in print and there's obviously a massive privacy issue here but I don't really see what difference that fact would have made in the grand scheme of things.
It probably seems very minor to everyone but it made a big difference to me.

[Schlomo]

I expect that many things in TTGSK have been fictionalized to some degree, but as far as changing his ex-wife's name for print, that's understandable. It was probably voluntary, as he doesn't seem to hold much of a grudge and doesn't want to make her embarassed or possibly the object of unwanted attention.

[redge]

I finished this a couple of weeks ago. Having seen a bit of previous info about it I wasn't really surprised by the restrictions placed on the author so that side of things didn't bother me too much as I was expecting it.
The pictures are good and I found the stuff from Carter really interesting but there was one minor detail that threw me for a bit of a loop.
(Spoiler) The bit where Grierson reveals that E's ex-wife's name is Natasha rather than Anna really made me question how much of TTGSK is misleading or untrue and that made me really sad. I'm sad because I've spent ages over the last few years telling so many people how wonderful and honest and touching TTGSK is and how much I loved it and now I feel that it's lost some of its truthfulness.
I know that it's an author's right to put what they damn well please in print and there's obviously a massive privacy issue here but I don't really see what difference that fact would have made in the grand scheme of things.
It probably seems very minor to everyone but it made a big difference to me.

It seems like his ex-wife name is more than official... http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1223091/bio

[tehdai]

It seems like his ex-wife name is more than official... http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1223091/bio

Very sure it's been in interviews and things too. To be honest, the name of his wife holds no interest whatsoever for me. The way she affected him, both as an artist and as a man, does, and E writes candidly and well about that. Changing her name in TTGSH was to me, a very classy thing to do in order to protect her from renewed press interest as she moves on with her life. It didn't reduce the power and the resonance of the story one iota.

For me the book-shock was all about Hanson and the gagging order on Butch

[Olives]

Yes, what Tehdai and Schlomo said - seemed to me he was protecting her privacy if nothing else.

[gord]

Isn't her real name mentioned in the liner notes of Souljacker? And she's mentioned by (sur)name in Rotten World Blues. Changing names is fairly commonplace when writing autobiographies, so I didn't think it was that big of a deal.

[DCF_Kieran]

Isn't her real name mentioned in the liner notes of Souljacker? And she's mentioned by (sur)name in Rotten World Blues. Changing names is fairly commonplace when writing autobiographies, so I didn't think it was that big of a deal.

Yup. Most of the fans knew this anyway so it's no big deal.

[e-man]

Well, the book is a very detailed biography about E and the Eels. I've been in contact with the author over the last two years and have talked about various issues regarding the band and E, specifically. According to him, my site (and presumably eels.nl and therockhardtimes) have helped him in the research for the book.

Wow, I haven't been here on EstrangedFriends.net for many months due to stuff happening in 'real life'. You guys really seem like Estranged Friends now ;-)

I actually (finally) found the book in the book stores yesterday. Have not yet finished it (I'm at the end of the Beautiful Freak era now) and yeah, Eels.nl definitely was a resource. Not only on various dates that are mentioned,  there is actually plenty of quotes from my Tommy Walter interview that was on the site that made their way into the book. Not credited to the original source (just 'he told an interviewer in 1997') but still cool that I somehow contributed to the book.

As said, not yet finished reading so I can't really say what I think about the overall book. But the first six chapters are a really nice read. Will continue reading tonight.