scarecrow wrote:[...] it feels pretty wrong to be poring over the finer details of what neighbourhood someone did or didn't live in, when it is very clear that they wanted to lead a private life.
On this basis, I don't see how its ethical for any Barrett biographer to be fishing around for further information on his later life. Yes, in normal circumstances a biographer would not rely on a single family source alone, but in this case fair enough. In Chapman's defence, the majority of the book concentrates on Barrett's earlier life and his musical work.
Is it ethical to concentrate on Barrett's earlier life, when he wanted to lead a private life? His private life is his private life. Whether it's his early or late private life doesn't matter.
scarecrow wrote:I would hope that any further Barrett books would further explore his body of work, instead of expanding on his later, private life. What can really be gained from odd bits of information from David Sore or any other ex neighbours of Barretts, other than satisfying a morbid sense of curiosity?
If some biographer would write a thick book entirely about Barrett's work, I'd run to the shop to buy it. Among a lot of Barrett fans there is more curiosity for his life backstage, his mental state and photo's of him, than for his music, his lyrics and his paintings. Isn't it a shame that despite the attention for Barrett, there's still no songbook reconstructing his lyrics and his chords?
Most attention goes to gossips about how badly Pink Floyd supposedly treated him. I've tried to give some counter-weight by telling that there could also be gossip about how badly Barrett treated Pink Floyd after the release of 'The Piper'.
Keith Jordan wrote:
Wolfpack wrote:I object to "Burp" being revealed as "David Sore" by an admin.
He revealed himself by posting the same comments here on NPF as elsewhere openly on the Internet in full public view.
Call me naive, but I don't see what "Burp" did wrong in this topic. Notably on Barrett's official website there's a Q&A in which Chapman attacks a neighbour giving criticism about Barrett. So, I wonder who started with going into the realm of libel. It seems to me that, with Barrett's family apparently giving an offical room to Chapman, he's perfectly able to defend himself against any public views of critical neighbours. And as the Q&A is a promotion for his Barrett biography 'An Irregular Head', I think this is on-topic to say here.
It seems to my simple mind that NPF takes the side of Chapman, who already has the official Barrett site as a platform. I find Burp's comments on the book (about the existance of "Radha") interesting to read and to think about. And I find it strange that notably a neighbour of Barrett apparently is unwelcome in discussions about Barrrett and in a biography about him. I think this is censorship, but I should know better than discussing with an admin who can also ban me forever.
Felix Atagong wrote:We have here two neighbours of RKB/SB and both are saying that the other wasn't living there. This could have resulted in a nice thought provoking discussion. As such I don't understand Keith Jordan's reaction towards DS...
I agree. I think questioning Radha's existance and stories is an interesting addition for a discussion about a Barrett biography in which she is mentioned as telling a true story. I still like to see a proof that Radha's story isn't a myth, before I'll buy the book.
nosaj wrote:I enjoyed the book and don't really feel this neighbor issue matters much...but, just my opinion.
In that case, I don't think any neighbour's issues matters much. Whether it's gossip about Barrett threatening to kill Roger Waters or (as the biography describes) giving lessons about a make-believe horse.
Keith Jordan wrote:
Felix Atagong wrote:As such I don't understand Keith Jordan's reaction towards DS...
As I said in the part of my post that you chose to leave out, it is not just postings on here that were taken into account. It is not the opinion that got him banned, but his harassment and continuous libelous comments about the author on here, his blog and in another arena that I wont discuss on here at this stage.
This matter can now be dropped and the discussion continued in a legal manner without harassment of the author. If it cannot be continued, then the thread can be closed.
I didn't see anything illegal. I saw a challenge to prove the trustworthiness of the biography that is discussed in this topic. I saw an interesting discussing about that book. It seems to me that an author is defended who himself is attacking people, in his biography and in the Q&A about it. If criticism towards such an author isn't welcome and easily called illegal, then I think it's right to close this thread.
For me, the joy of discussing the book is destroyed anyway. Because I don't feel free to discuss the book any longer.