home

Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards

By Jeralyn, Section Off Topic
Posted on Tue May 09, 2006 at 07:16:30 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Conflicting reports continue concerning Rolling Stone Keith Richards' fall from a palm tree on Fiji. While the New Zealand Herald reported he had two brain surgeries, and possibly sustained brain damage, the Rolling Stones deny it.

The Stones' New York-based publicist, Fran Curtis, issued a statement denying a report in the New Zealand Herald that Richards, 62, had undergone two surgeries since his accident and that doctors were concerned about brain damage.

"Keith Richards did not undergo a second operation. The first and only operation was done on Monday, May 8, and was 100 percent successful," the band's statement said. "There was no brain damage. He continues to improve as expected."

Background here.

< Bush Approval Sinks to 31% | 1 Million Immigrant Vote Drive Begins >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards | 20 comments (20 topical)
    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#1)
    by Edger on Tue May 09, 2006 at 07:43:06 PM EST
    Good for Keith. There's gotta be a song in this somewhere... He's still got the music in him.

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#2)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Tue May 09, 2006 at 11:21:52 PM EST
    No brain damage? Keith Richards? Sometimes they just write themselves, don't they?

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 10, 2006 at 12:05:34 AM EST
    how can they tell?

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 10, 2006 at 12:16:14 AM EST
    on a related note, why hasnt anyone noticed that Charlie Watts has been playing the same drum licks for 40 years? anyone willing to pay 100's to see these guys at this questionable "zenith" of their admirable careers must have brain damage of some sort. let dead dogs lie.

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 10, 2006 at 03:56:55 AM EST
    Bush Diplomacy in Action? Before Keith Richards unfortunate "accident:" link PRESIDENT George Bush can't get no satisfaction -- after Mick Jagger grabbed his hotel room. The Rolling Stone splashed out £3,600 a night for the suite days before the US leader tried to book it. Now Mick, 62, who has been a fierce critic of the Bush-led war in Iraq, is refusing to give it up. After the "accident:" link The Rolling Stones have denied reports they refused to give up their rooms in an Austrian hotel to make space for President George W. Bush's impending visit.

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#6)
    by kdog on Wed May 10, 2006 at 06:36:19 AM EST
    If Nazi bombs couldn't lick him in the cradle, how could a coconut tree? Long live the Human Riff.

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#7)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed May 10, 2006 at 08:20:17 AM EST
    Which other aging artists should give up their trade? If you don't like them, then don't watch them. My question is, why take the time to diss aging artists in the first place? Issues, we got issues here.

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#8)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed May 10, 2006 at 08:21:34 AM EST
    That was to raulduke.

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#9)
    by Edger on Wed May 10, 2006 at 09:24:59 AM EST
    "I'm not a kid anymore, and I've thought to myself, 'How long can I keep doing this?' But within the narrow confines of rock n' roll, it's for me to find out how to use my experience & produce something that hopefully is worth listening to. Like I said, somebody has to find out how far you can take this thing, and I guess it might as well be me!" "I haven't stopped smoking...anything" --Keith Richards


    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#10)
    by jondee on Wed May 10, 2006 at 09:51:45 AM EST
    One of the things I've always loved about Keith is that he's always been a great and faithful ambassador for the roots forefathers and mothers of the music: Skip James, Lonnie Johnson, Memphis Minnie, Muddy Waters etc etc. Godspeed to the "Demon of Dartford."

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#11)
    by peacrevol on Wed May 10, 2006 at 10:58:00 AM EST
    Keith Richards doesnt have brain damage? Better check the lab results again my friend. His brain has been damaged since the mid 1980s.

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 10, 2006 at 11:38:35 AM EST
    Dear Che's, as to the issues, my point was that watching aged, (and beloved-don't get me wrong) rock stars wither and die onstage is not something i consider to be particularly entertaining. its like a memorial service for their career-a great remembrance, but you kind of wish it was a closed casket. i do advocate grabbing the Stones newest single off iTunes, however. Rough Justice is every bit the return to form we all wanted, and will no doubt take its place in the short list of post-"Some Girls" hit singles. (let others debate its Historic Significance, i was a Beatles fan when any of that mattered). but as to which other aging artists should (thankfully) give up their trade? a short list: The Moody Blues all 80's Hair Bands on the State Fair circuit Slim Whitman...if he's not dead already Sting George Bush and Tony Blair, but they're not really entertainers...are they?

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#13)
    by jondee on Wed May 10, 2006 at 11:46:07 AM EST
    Is it really about the music, or is it about the fact that we in the land of perpetual adolescence dont like to see people age?

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 10, 2006 at 01:11:17 PM EST
    good Jondee, i will be the first to admit i do not like getting older, and that probably puts me square in the midst of your characterisation of a land of perpetual adolescents (to turn your phrase). i am reminded of something an octogenarian told me when i was in my twenties: he said "i have all of the same thoughts and impulses you do, and it doesn't occur to me that i can't act on all of them until i try to...and thats always good for a laugh" ill turn 42 in a month, which i understand is the new 32? perhaps our lives are like my iPod...using the latest technological breakthroughs to broaden my appreciation of Ska music from the early 60's. we move forward while fondly looking back and we move backwards despite our age. at least i seem to be.

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed May 10, 2006 at 03:03:04 PM EST
    Raoul, you clearly haven't seen the Stones on a recent tour. Calling them old is completely off-base, they are more energized then ever and amazingly in good shape. Keith included. Here's my review of their Thanksgiving night performance in Denver. But for the fact that they haven't bothered to have facelifts, you would think they are still in their 30's. Don't forget, you're never too old to rock 'n roll. But I think you know that from your HST moniker

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#17)
    by jondee on Wed May 10, 2006 at 09:29:28 PM EST
    Part of the problem is that the Stones brand of rock 'n roll and their quieter, more evocative pieces was never really meant to be played in stadiums. The tradition wasnt born there, and, dosnt really belong there. IMO. I need love to me happy.. Get well dear boy.

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#18)
    by jondee on Wed May 10, 2006 at 09:32:55 PM EST
    keep me happy..

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#19)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed May 10, 2006 at 10:09:59 PM EST
    Raulduke, Point taken. Your short list was great! Yet The Police and Sting to me are two different acts. I would see a Police show tommorrow but wouldn't shell out for Sting. Funny. Rock on. What about "Living with War"? Certainly not his best work (IMHO) but much needed at this time.

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu May 11, 2006 at 08:26:08 AM EST
    Raulduke... People have been making fun of Keith (and his 'brain damage') for years, including his fellow stones. Apparently you struck a nerve with many here? I read an article years ago (in the 60's) that the Stones & Beatles will be popular as long as they wanna be...and that has certainly rung true. I have seen the Stones several times and enjoyed each very much. (politics aside) I personaly take exception with your comment about the Moody Blues. I saw them a couple of months ago and they still rock! As long as they draw an audience...more power to them. However, I never did think Sting could sing a lick.

    Re: Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards (none / 0) (#21)
    by kdog on Thu May 11, 2006 at 03:27:14 PM EST
    Well I never kept a dollar past sunset, It always burned a hole in my pants. Never made a school mama happy, Never blew a second chance, oh no
    Stones: No Brain Damage for Keith Richards | 20 comments (20 topical)