Jump to content

Keith Richards "Say No to Drugs"


Recommended Posts

Richards Urges Youth To Stay Off Drugs

Rolling Stone guitarist Keith Richards has urged young people to steer clear of drug abuse - because he claims narcotics "ain't worth it."

The guitarist - himself a former drug addict - has called for kids to refrain from using marijuana, even though he admits the substance is "fascinating".

He tells British magazine Uncut, "Lay off the dope. That's my advice now to all younger members who are into this kind of thing. I know the fascination but it ain't worth it."

Copyright World Entertainment News Network 2008

Link to post
Share on other sites

What?

keith_richards_WI.jpg

Looks like a perfectly fit,non-drug user to me...

(I am being very sarcastic. If the word "junkie" is in the dictionary then Keith Richards pic should be used to help explain the definition.If I met him in a dark alley I would swear I just saw a zombie.If I met him in a lighted alley I would swear I just saw a zombie. Looks like death warmed over.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, lay off the guy already. As far as any of you know, Keith Richards has never used drugs. How many of you out there can say that you've actually SEEN Keith use any kind of drug (aside from the occasional beer or gallon of whiskey, of course)?

Hah! None of you! So, stop spreading unsubstantiated rumors about the guy! You have no proof!

And that MacNamee dude can't even pull out old syringes and gauze pads with Keith's DNA on them. Not this time, pal!

:afro: :afro: :afro: :jester:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, lay off the guy already. As far as any of you know, Keith Richards has never used drugs. How many of you out there can say that you've actually SEEN Keith use any kind of drug (aside from the occasional beer or gallon of whiskey, of course)?

Hah! None of you! So, stop spreading unsubstantiated rumors about the guy! You have no proof!

And that MacNamee dude can't even pull out old syringes and gauze pads with Keith's DNA on them. Not this time, pal!

:afro: :afro: :afro: :jester:

Well all I have to say is,look at the picture. But he did fall out of a tree didn't he?? Or was that Ozzie?

And as far as your sig goes,I have heard it this way: I am a sheet slitter. I slit sheets.I'm the fastest sheet slitter that ever slit a sheet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the word "junkie" is in the dictionary then Keith Richards pic should be used to help explain the definition

I´ve known better examples... Keith was a junkie but his amazing strenght -and talent :bow: :grin: - make him more than this. He never was the perfect junkie, he always had lawyers and money and fame... and what´s more, he will be remembered for being who he was, not only for what he took.

Now, I think Johnny Thunders´ picture would fit in the dictionnary... :shades:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I´ve known better examples... Keith was a junkie but his amazing strenght -and talent :bow: :grin: - make him more than this. He never was the perfect junkie, he always had lawyers and money and fame... and what´s more, he will be remembered for being who he was, not only for what he took.

Now, I think Johnny Thunders´ picture would fit in the dictionnary... :shades:

Yes I agree he always had great talent. I am a HUGE Stones fan and he was and is a big part of their success. But he will always be known for "what he took" as well as his talent. His "great strength" should have been used to "just say no" much earlier in his life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

His "great strength" should have been used to "just say no" much earlier in his life.

Oh, please, how would a rocker -such a rocker!- say such a thing in the sixties or seventies? :shades: He wouldn´t have been Keith Richards then!! :cool: Besides, and quoting Paul Simon, The entire idea is utterly absurd, I'd be laughed at and scorned if the other Swans heard...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, please, how would a rocker -such a rocker!- say such a thing in the sixties or seventies? :shades: He wouldn´t have been Keith Richards then!! :cool: Besides, and quoting Paul Simon, The entire idea is utterly absurd, I'd be laughed at and scorned if the other Swans heard...

Yes I am sure the pressure to do any and all drugs was tremendous during the 60's and 70's,especially if you were a "rocker". But at some point one has to look in the mirror and think "my God what have I done" and then begin to wonder if maybe it's time to "just say no". And in the case of Keith Richards,that point should have been reached years ago instead of now. I have great respect for Keith Richards as an artist but I have little respect for anybody,regardless of who they are,if they do drugs to the point where their brain is mush or they look like a walking corpse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eric Clapton was a notorious junkie but I don´t know if he ever said "No to drugs" when he went into his Giorgio Armani period.

Lou Reed sung about heroin and was an icon for a whole generation with his mise en scène of shooting himself on stage. Many years ago said he never was a junky and even dispised people doing drugs... :confused: :confused:

that was when he was on his Honda trip..

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if the Stones had said "Just Say No" early on, the world may be missing quite a few great songs.

I don't like that statement. I love you, of course, TimLizzy. However, I think that talent is inherent and not dependent on outside influences. Perhaps we may have missed out on even more great songs because they didn't say no early on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying he still wouldn't have made great songs. But much of the music made by the Stones in their best period, 68-72, was directly inspired by or about drugs. I'm not condoning that behavior for anybody now, but what's done is done, and some amazing music came out of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think using (certain) drugs without abusing them can be helpful in the creative process, but if they start becoming a problem it's not really worth it. Smoking a joint here in there pretty much has a positive effect on music, but don't expect to write a great song on crack.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an interesting conundrum with drugs and music. Some of the best and most creative music of the past 60 years have been written by drug abusers. Jimi Hendrix comes to mind pretty immediately. But it ended up killing him after 4 albums. If he had not done drugs, we would have more music from him, but perhaps it would not have been as good. There's really no way to know I suppose, and it comes down to a chicken and the egg sort of question. Do drug users make good music or do good music makers use drugs? Which leads to the other?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many poets, writers, musicians and avant-garde artists in general from all times -or almost- used drugs. Thomas de Quincey, Baudelaire, Rimbaud, Cocteau, Apollinaire... even Sherlock Holmes :grin:

So it´s not strange that nowadays artists do the same. They can afford it, they can afford rehab too... it´s their way of life.

And what´s more, you can hardly stand touring and performing at nights and leading a rock and roll way of life if you don´t take something to help you...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...