PDA

View Full Version : Felder's "Heaven and Hell" Discussion Thread



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

sodascouts
10-27-2007, 03:07 PM
Here's the place to give your thoughts on Felder's new book Heaven and Hell.

sodascouts
10-27-2007, 03:19 PM
Here's some of my overall thoughts:

I found the rags-to-riches arc interesting. I liked reading about his early career.

Then we come to the parts about the Eagles. IMHO, Felder's book was (unsurprisingly) unfair to Glenn, and that kept me from enjoying it. I'm not going to pretend that Glenn is some angel and that he never was mean to Felder. I'm sure he was on more than one occasion. But Felder makes him sound like a sadist whose only joy comes from insulting other people to "make himself feel superior." Now, I guess that is his true perception of Glenn's behavior, but I feel fairly sure his illustrations of Glenn's so-called cruelty are exaggerated. As examples he gives nicknames Glenn made up for people that seemed mean, but we weren't there. One of the examples he gives is Glenn calling David Sanborn "Dolphin" because he had a withered hand. Well, Sanborn was hardly a no-name who was forced to take it if Glenn insulted him. Obviously, he wasn't bothered by it too terribly much, yet we're supposed to be? Since it didn't bother Sanborn, it's logical to conclude that it was one of those things that sounds bad in print, but when you hear him say it, it's good-natured... Like all of the guys calling Azoff "Shorty." Guys do that kind of stuff all the time for some reason; I've seen it. Side note: Can any men here explain why so many guys do that? It's always mystified me!

The same for what Felder describes as Glenn's "cruelty" to his road manager Tommy Nixon. Felder paints Nixon as a pathetic type who was forced to take Glenn's abuse because he couldn't find work elsewhere and thus was "dependent on Glenn for a job and money." That's just ridiculous. I have met Nixon. He doesn't seem to me to be the cringing type who never would stand up for himself, and with being the tour manager for the Eagles on his resume, you can bet he would be able to get a job elsewhere any time he wanted!

If we want to break it down into chapter discussion, I'll give my thoughts on Chapter One when I have more time.

Freypower
10-27-2007, 08:46 PM
To be brutally honest is there much point in discussing the early 'I was so poor I lived in a cardboard box in the middle of the road' stuff? There isn't that much to say about it.

I am going to make an overall point though. I think that Felder never accepted that he was a 'second banana'. He could not accept that he was a great guitar player and that was all. He also wanted to be a great singer, great songwriter, great frontman, great businessman and he resented Don and Glenn because they were all those things. And that carried over into his personal life. Susan became a successful businesswoman, and he couldn't deal with that either. I felt sorry for him at times but I'm afraid the self-indulgent whining and 'why me' attitude irritated me.

JoeFan
10-28-2007, 04:40 AM
I've only read bits of the book, but it's easy to see that Frey is the first on Felder's enemies list. I knew they never got on, but I was still surprised that Felder portrayed Frey as being horrible not only to him, but to everyone in his path. Before we dismiss every criticism though we should remember that they were all immersed in drugs, and drugs can worsen the behaviour of even the nicest person.

Freypower
10-28-2007, 06:24 PM
I agree - the drugs had a lot to do with how people behaved (including Felder). I also know that Glenn can be extremely abrasive. I think, however, that these qualities of his have been exaggerated and his more positive qualities completely ignored in this book. It's similar with the 'Don Henley has no sense of humour' stuff. But Felder at leasts accepts Don's talent so he doesn't over-emphasise this.

Brooke
10-28-2007, 06:58 PM
I agree Felders childhood years aren't really discussion worthy!

One little tidbit I picked up on so far is that Felder says that he would never have rushed out in the early days of the Eagles (before he, Felder, was a member) and bought one of their albums. He would have spent his money on Fleetwood Mac, Hendrix, or Clapton. But yet, he knew his "best friend" Bernie was in the Eagles and he heard TIE on the radio all the time. Now, if your "best friend" was on the radio and had an album out, wouldn't you buy it? Not much of a best friend there, I say! Hmmmmm...... :?

Freypower
10-28-2007, 07:07 PM
He also says that the Beatles were about 'marketing'. He does not have a clue.

Another point is that world events, let alone American events, completely passed the man by. He mentions the Cuban missile crisis and Kennedy being shot. And that's it until the O.J. Simpson trial.

sodascouts
04-05-2008, 09:31 PM
Here's a funny review of the book:

"Sniping Lingers Long After Bands Split" (http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/apr/04/sniping-lingers-long-after-bands-split/)

glenneaglesfan
04-18-2008, 12:12 PM
That's a pretty accurate reflection on the book! Thanks for posting it, Soda.

LTL, I hope you don't mind me quoting you over here.


I just wanted to say... I doubt the book would really change my opinion of Glenn. (but I was prepared for some bad stuff) I'm about halfway through it now... and to be honest, I think Don F. is a hack!

He acts like he was SO casual when he was invited to join the Eagles. :roll: WHATEVER! The hack was probably bouncing off the walls to be invited to join an established band that had a major label backing. Also, no matter what he has said, or elluded to about Glenn... to me, it was Glenn just taking charge of the band to make sure they stayed on top. Heck, someone had to.

I TOTALLY noticed the whole "picture" thing... w/Don and Glenn looking HORRIBLE, like evil demons... while he's all smiley and holding his infant child. He may be able to play guitar... but his "victim of rock-n-roll" stance is SO over the top. I'm almost embarrassed for him that he wrote this... almost, but not quite. :)


I completely agree with you about the photos! DF could hardly have chosen worse ones of Don and Glenn.

Reading the book certainly didn't make me think any the worse of Glenn. It seems that Don F lacks a sense of humour - ok, some of the teasing may have gone too far, but they were young men, high much of the time, and under the pressure to produce and perform great music. The band would never have got far as a complete democracy - as you say, someone had to take charge, and while Don became the predominant songwriter and soloist, Glenn took charge of arranging the music, among other things.

My overriding impression of Don F from this book is that he was one of those guys who takes on the role of victim, of circumstances, of other people, even deranged fans. The best bits of the book are when he talks about how the music came about, and his encounters with other musicians such as the young Tom Petty. The rest of it seems to be a bit of a wallow in self pity.

I hope by writing it he feels he has conquered his own demons and can get on with the rest of his life, and leave the other band members to get on with theirs.

sodascouts
04-18-2008, 12:19 PM
I too agree about the photos - the photo of Don was so bad it didn't even look like him! Little passive-aggressive jab there. In fact, I have a feeling that Felder was often passive-aggressive, especially as Glenn and Don grew more dominant. Guys harp on petty things when they feel helpless about the bigger issues.

I think there's no doubt he's leaving stuff out that may better explain their behavior, especially Glenn's, and that many times things sound worse in print than they are in "real life." I also think that he's misrepresenting other people's feelings. He should speak for himself and leave off speculating on what the others were thinking.

That said, I do think Felder really does feel he's been wronged and isn't just saying that to make Glenn look bad. It's a pity he couldn't work it out with them more amicably, but he should've known by then it was Glenn's Way or the Highway when it came to the Eagles.

I also respect that Glenn took Felder's call in the end like a man, instead of hiding from him. He had the guts to tell Felder that it was over himself, and not just through a lawyer or Irving.

luvthelighthouse
04-18-2008, 03:13 PM
I finished the book last night and have SEVERAL comments I need to make... but I don't have time now... If anyone cares, I'll probably write my review this weekend. So many things to address...

Brooke
04-18-2008, 04:20 PM
I just thought Felder came off very whiny. It really made me think less of him as a person the way he constantly berated Glenn. It did not make me think less of Glenn or Don.

He sounds like he wrote all of HC, when, I believe, he only wrote the music. (which is awesome, btw!)

I did enjoy reading about his connections with the Allman brothers, Stephen Stills, and Tom Petty.

luvthelighthouse
04-19-2008, 11:42 PM
Ok, my thoughts on H&H. First off, I think it should have been titled either, "Poor, poor millionaire RockStar vicitim" or, Glenn Frey the Indian Giver - How he gave me fame and fortune in 1974, and took it away in 2001. :wink:

I think the whole tone of he book really begins when he states how Glenn called him up to ask him to play some slide guitar on a song, and his reply was "sure", then he finishes up the details with " I scribbled down the details of the back of a supermarket bill and stuffed it in my back pocket w/out giving it a second thought. Putting on my tool belt, I got down to the more important business at hand". Okay, first off, he acts so flippant about getting this call... it's unrealistic to believe he was unphased by this call. So, that is why I say this sets the tone. In other words, to me, it's his attempt to act like he never really cared about being an Eagle, but just kinda settled. Like they needed him more than he needed them.

His next comment of "I thought joining the Eagles would mean less money than I was getting doubling for David Blue or Crosby & Nash" WHATEVER!!! He freaking knew they were a cash cow. Hello, touring band with the backing of a major label. Yeah, I'm so sure he almost thought he'd be making less money. :roll: He knew he'd be making at least the same if nothing else.

Next, his attempt to justify his infidelity, "3E parties were organized to perfection and so entirely accepted as normal, that I completely lost sight of who I was" - Okay, that line I buy... I totally understand, when in Rome and being lost in a moment, especially being a rockstar... but then he loses me with, "half the time I was so high I didn't know what I was doing anyway... I defy any man to resist temptation in such circumstances" - To me,that's just making an excuse for his behavior. If he just would have left it as, basically saying he was a dog lost in the moment, I would have respected him more.

Then he goes on about how Glenn and Henley had personal assistances and what not... okay, so if he wanted those things, why didn't he put some people on the payroll instead of whining about it?

Now, being a wife and mother, this just pissed me off! Felder's on the road for 10 months and Susan is home alone raising the kids. She is pretty much a single parent. He also kept saying, (paraphrasing) "I'd do anything for Susan and the kids"... yeah, except for come home and stay sober! Even when he was in town recording, he'd crash at the studio because he was too wasted to drive home. That is hardly doing "anything" for them. That's pretty much doing whatever he wanted. Anyway, this is what really ticked me off, when he claims the marriage therapist said the fact that when he came home from tour and wanted to relax w/his family but couldn't because Susan was calling all the shots, that by doing so, "the effect had been to make me feel less and less involved in family life and more and more periphery, which, had helped push me into the arms of other women". :fingerwag: Is this Hack serious??? I mean, really, lets blame Susan for running her household alone for ten months of the year, and then not falling down like a fragile wife when he was home those handful of weeks... yeah, it was really Susan fault he turned to other women. :evil: Oh, it makes me so mad!

Another thing that made me mad was when Susan started her jewelry business and he states, "with my emotional and financial support"... "I was all for it, and invested heavily in the business to give her enough capital to get started". LOSER!!! I'm sorry, but they had been married for several years, and that income from the Eagles was joint, as far as man and wife are concerned. He acts like he was some hero for giving her money... again, hello, it was her money too... they were married!!!! Hack! :evil: Finally, when the Eagles were no more, and he left her, he pretty much blamed HER for her never being available to him. Again, HE was never there for her the first 15+ years of marriage. Karma sure can be a bit@h, 'eh Don.

The part were he discusses being inducted into the Hall of Fame is unsettling to me. I really wish I know what really happened. I don't recall them being inducted, and I can't find it anywhere online... but I wish I could see their speeches. In any case, Felder states how ackward it was to have all seven of them together. He states that Glenn and Henley shunned Randy and Bernie. However, I recall reading an article in which Randy stated he was nervous about attending, but then everyone started joking around and he felt more comfortable and happy to be there... So, I wish Felder wouldn't have tainted that moment for me... because I want to believe that for that night, seven guys were proud to be in America's best selling band.

Now, one of my favorite parts of is when he states he moved out of the house he and Susan shared, and was embarrassed to be living in a one story building off Mulholland Drive. Then goes on to describe how he was going to help an assistance bring all his Christmas gifts inside (it sounded so vain and trashy when I read it)... but the very best was when he discovered Henley and Irving didn't get him anything and "I stood there shivering in the driveway as the electric gates slid shut behind him". - Here is where you will find why I dubbed him the Poor Poor Millionaire RockStar Victim.

Then, he gets fired... Okay... I have NO clue if he deserved it or not. I have no idea why Glenn and Don fought him so hard on seeing financials unless they were indeed trying to screw him. I'm sure Don and Glenn were no angles in the financial liberties they took from the Eagles... but on the other hand... I'm sure they really did feel they deserved more. They were founding members, they were a strong songwriting team, they were the primary "voices" of the Eagles. As we've seen, other bassists and guitars can come and go... but you can never replace the vocal stylings of Don and Glenn. I can understand why they felt they were "worth" more. Also, I'm sure Felder really did feel like he was getting raw deal. I'd proabably have been pissed too... but in the end, how much money do people really need anyway.

So, if you read through all this, thank you! It was long, and winded... but I had to vent my frustrations of this book... so there you have it... my book review. :)

One last thing... I'm SO impressed that with how stoned and drunk they were that music and voices are crystal clear when they were performing!

Ive always been a dreamer
04-20-2008, 02:26 PM
Okay – here are some of my observations about Felder’s book.

First of all, I was really hoping that he would really give us some objective details and insight about the inner workings of the band, particularly after the HFO resumption. Those of us who are interested have a pretty good idea about what went on in the volatile ‘70’s when a typical day went something like sex, drugs, and rock ‘n roll (hmmm - I wonder if it was in that order :wink:). Obviously, I was disappointed about the lack of details. The book was titled “Heaven and Hell” – I just don’t think Heaven got equal time.

Now – I am not silly enough to believe that the book was going to be totally objective – after all, it is Felder’s version of what happened. I also acknowledge that I am biased, but I like to think that it’s not at the expense of losing total objectivity. I certainly don’t put Glenn and Don on a pedestal, but I really was surprised at the degree of Felder’s unapologetic, slanted version of events. These guys were young, good-looking, rich, famous, talented, high on controlled substances, and immature. Of course, all of them contributed to the discourse within the band. And since Glenn and Don had emerged as the leaders of the band, it makes sense that the spotlight was on them more. I just think Felder would have come across as more credible if he had also acknowledged some of this. Instead, he comes across as a whiny, self-indulgent, ungrateful, immature millionaire rock star who thinks he’s been victimized. And quite frankly, I think that is what a lot of us find a little hard to swallow about his book.

Now – I do believe that Felder honestly thinks he was wronged by Irving, Glenn, and Don. Whether or not that is true, I have no idea. However, his main complaints seem to go back to when he was “forced” to sign the contract at the beginning of the resumption. I can only say this – in my world, I get to renegotiate my salary annually. If I don’t like the offer, I can refuse it and find another job. However, once I accept the terms, even if I don’t particularly like them, then I feel I am obligated to shut up, move on, and do my job to the best of my abilities without bitching and complaining. That appears to be the road that Joe and Tim took, and they are still in the band. Is that fair??? I say yes – even though it may not be democratic - but then, the band is no longer a democracy. As long as they were forthcoming with the terms of his contract, and he agreed to those terms, he should have accepted it and moved on. I think the crux of Felder’s problem is that he was no longer treated as an equal, and he just couldn’t seem to “get over it”. As talented of a guitarist as he is, I don’t think he was ever an equal contributor to the band, and therefore, it is understandable that he eventually wasn’t treated as such. Some people could argue that he was “overpaid” from 1973 –1980 when he was receiving the same cut as Glenn and Don.

Another thing that bothered me a lot is how Felder repeatedly claimed that he wasn't doing all of the bitching and complaining just for himself, but also for Tim and Joe, and, yes, even Randy and Bernie. I found it very disgusting and insulting that he believes this. These are all grown men who can speak, think, and act for themselves. They don’t need a self-appointed savior to protect them from the “Gods”.

Lastly, the most unsettling part of the entire book for me was the way Felder portrays his firing. It turns my stomach to picture him calling Glenn to beg for his job back. If things had been as awful as he would have you believe, then you would have thought he would have been throwing his hand up and shouting “Free at last, free at last”. If he was so mistreated, why didn’t he just leave? The image of that final phone call between he and Glenn speaks volumes to me about the character of the two men.

Ive always been a dreamer
04-20-2008, 02:47 PM
And OBTW - I agree with most all of the other comments in this thread as well. I love the suggested alternate titles for the book. :D As I said before, the one that Felder chose doesn't seem to fit.

sodascouts
04-20-2008, 03:08 PM
I agree that if the Eagles fully disclosed to Felder what the new terms were and he agreed to them, he has no right to complain. It was "take it or leave it" and he chose the former. I think even he realized that he should have just "taken it" without the complaining at the end - hence the phone call.

I don't view the phone call as harshly as dreamer does, though. I mean, the guy is so pathetic on it that I can't help but feel sorry for him.

LTL - I think every self-respecting woman cringed at the parts you highlighted regarding his treatment of his wife. Bernie and Tim were able to resist temptation, after all... so much for the "I defy any man..." line. Of course, it has been said there was some resentment about Bernie not partaking in the more hedonistic aspects of the band - that they felt he was looking down on them - but still, it's obviously not impossible.

I too wanted more about the personal dynamics of the band, especially after HFO - an era which is rarely talked about as it's not as "exciting" as the fast-living of the seventies.

There were some anecdotes I found funny, though - like the guys having to figure out ways to do drugs when there were Secret Service agents around thanks to Bernie's girlfriend Patti Davis, daughter of then-governor Ronald Reagan. I was also interested to read about the confrontation before Bernie left the band, as there are several stories of how that went down.

I was disappointed by the account of the infamous "Long Night at Wrong Beach." I was again curious as to how that went down, but his version doesn't ring true to me.

Ive always been a dreamer
04-20-2008, 04:08 PM
Well Soda - I agree with you about Felder being pathetic during his firing. I guess it boils down to how we perceive pathetic characters - are they sympathic or are they grossly pitiful and inadequate? Obviously, I must be pretty harsh and feel the latter description applies here.

The way I look at it is here is a guy with a long history of bitching and complaining who decides to call in lawyers to investigate his employer. What reaction was he expecting? Right or wrong, I can assure you that if I did the same thing, my employer would no longer need my services. All I'm saying is that if Felder thought he was doing the right thing, then I'd say go for it - kudos to him. But, for crying out loud, be willing to accept the consequences and take responsibility for your actions. I think that is the trend in Felder's personality that I see throughout the book that culminates in his firing. He doesn't seem to be able to get past his unrealistic view of himself as a perpetual victim.

On the other hand, as you mentioned earlier, I respect Glenn for even taking the call. He could have easily refused it. Now, I guess if you want to be cynical, you could say that Glenn only took the phone call so he could rub it in to Felder, but, even Felder doesn't suggest that scenario.

I also agree with your comments regarding the long night at wrong beach. Again, he portrays himself as the innocent victim here. At least, with 35 years of retrospect behind him, he could occasionally take some responsibility and say "hey, it was probably as much my fault as it was Glenn's" or "I can understand why he may have been upset".

sodascouts
04-20-2008, 04:28 PM
The part were he discusses being inducted into the Hall of Fame is unsettling to me. I really wish I know what really happened. I don't recall them being inducted, and I can't find it anywhere online... but I wish I could see their speeches.

Oh, almost forgot to tell you -

You can see the induction speeches here:

http://www.eaglesonlinecentral.com/downloads/multimediafunstuffvideo.htm

Freypower
04-20-2008, 06:16 PM
Regarding the conversation with Glenn he only rang Glenn when he was unable to speak to Don. Even then he still didn't understand who the band leader was.

During that conversation he called Glenn 'Roach' - the old 70s nickname. He knows better than I do but the name doesn't seem very appropriate to use when you are trying to ask for your job back and I was surprised that anyone was calling Glenn that in 2001.

I agree with the comments about how he whined when Susan set up her own career and it was only due to his money that she succeeded. I found that offensive and patronising.

Even when he talks about the music it is only about his contributions, and occasionally Henley's. Surely it was not THAT cut and dried. He played on these songs and he seems to hate them. It makes it that much harder to swallow the stuff about wanting to be in the band so much if he didn't even like the songs.

I agree with Dreamer about his claims that his complaining was also for Tim, Joe, Bernie and Randy. I don't get that.

Regarding the lack of acknowledgement of Glenn's talent, he read Marc Eliot's To The Limit and decided to follow that line, except that he heaps vituperation on Glenn. Eliot dismisses Glenn almost entirely. Felder hates Glenn.

Glennsallnighter
04-20-2008, 07:30 PM
I haven't yet read Felder's book but I DO intend to do so, so I can't comment on it as yet. However I have read To The Limit and I must completely concur with what you say FP. Eliot does indeed dismiss Glenn :heart: and gives him no credit at all as being the 'Leader of the Band'. Even from the first chapter it is obvious that Don gets a lot more attention than Glenn :heart: and there are also some glaring inaccuracies wrt Glenn :heart: . Although not as comprehensive I think 'Flying High' is a much more objective read. JMHO!!

sodascouts
04-20-2008, 07:41 PM
Honestly guys, I didn't get the same impression from the Eliot book. When I first read To the Limit, I was a new fan and was just trying to learn more about the band. I wasn't a hardcore Glenn fan at that point; I was only a casual Eagles fan. When I finished the book, I didn't come away saying "Wow, that guy Glenn Frey was sure lame!" Yeah, Don Henley got more ink, but that's hardly surprising since he semi-cooperated with the author. I don't think Glenn came across badly in the Eliot book. JMHO.

luvthelighthouse
04-21-2008, 12:52 AM
Soda, thanks for the Induction links! I dunno... Felder looked pretty freaking happy to be there IMO... and Randy looked beyond happy... so I dunno...

I understand the Felder was obviously going to be biased, being his book and all... but the fact that he portays himself so saintlike and victimized is what takes away from it's crediablity.

I also wish there were more "hevenly" times told. I mean, they must have gotten along at SOME point, 'eh?

The more I thought about this... I think it's like this... when you have a group of people, some people take EVERYTHING so freaking personally, while others in the same group never give it a second thought. So, while Felder was so busy being pissed at "the gods"... "the gods" probably never/rarely even noticed, because to them, nothing was a big deal.

Felder seemed like it was a burden to be in the band pretty much from the start... so I don't understand why he is SO upset over the firing. Shouldn't it have been more of a relief? I mean, it's not like he ever has to work another day in his life... so it's no like he's wondering where his next meal is going to come from. Also, I find it REALLY hard to believe that when he called Glenn that last time that he called him Roach. I mean, really... these are grown men, and in that circumstance... I think that was just written for effect. Also, I think he called himself Fingers every chance he got for effect too... so show that he indeed was THE lead guitarist. KWIM?

Also, since Don and Glenn countersued him because of the book... I wonder if some juicy stuff was left out due to legal reasons.

Oh yeah, I forgot one other book title that he could have used, "Left Handed Complements to Don Henley". Did you notice how he puts Henley on a pedistal for his lyrical talents, but knocks him down in the same sentence for being "a god"?

Brooke
04-21-2008, 09:55 AM
I'm loving everyone's comments and agree with most all!

I have to say I'd never heard of Felder being called Fingers until I read this book. Had anyone else? And yeah, he referred to himself by that most of the time! :roll:

sodascouts
04-21-2008, 12:28 PM
LTL, I think another purpose of his left-handed compliments to Don Henley was to take jabs at Glenn. For instance, the whole, "if we're paid by importance, then Don should receive lots more than Glenn" line. :roll:

I wouldn't be surprised if Felder used the term "Roach" in that last phone call simply as an attempt to emotionally manipulate Glenn. I think he used the old nickname to remind Glenn how long he'd been in the band, how far they went back - ie, "We've been in a band together since the days you bummed joints off everybody and were called 'Roach.' You can't just toss me aside when we have all that history."

Obviously, it didn't work.

Freypower
04-21-2008, 06:32 PM
But it didn't come off the way he wanted. It comes across as pathetic.

I knew his nickname was Fingers but I didn't expect it to be used so often.

The 'left handed compliments to Henley' bit is interesting. And I think that 'the gods' took note of every complaint, everything Felder did.

I don't want to turn this into a discussion about Eliot. It isn't so much that Glenn is 'lame' in that book as that he's ignored. His voice and musicianship is ignored as they are by Felder. Eliot says after OOTN that Glenn stopped leading the band because 'maybe he wasn't strong enough to hold on to the reins of power', which is ridiculous. Don started singing more songs, but the band remained Glenn's. There are jibes about Glenn's 'long face' that put off a woman who subsequently dated Don, who is portrayed as the 'great lover'. There are jibes about the suit on the cover of NFA which makes him look 'foolish'. That's just some of it. But as I've said before, Eliot's version of Wrong Night is far more balanced, and by the time the reunion occurs he even has Don quoted as saying he was happy to let Glenn take charge. It is preferable to Felder's book in that way.

Mrs Frey
04-22-2008, 05:12 AM
I don't want to turn this into a discussion about Eliot. It isn't so much that Glenn is 'lame' in that book as that he's ignored. His voice and musicianship is ignored as they are by Felder. Eliot says after OOTN that Glenn stopped leading the band because 'maybe he wasn't strong enough to hold on to the reins of power', which is ridiculous. Don started singing more songs, but the band remained Glenn's. There are jibes about Glenn's 'long face' that put off a woman who subsequently dated Don, who is portrayed as the 'great lover'. There are jibes about the suit on the cover of NFA which makes him look 'foolish'. That's just some of it. But as I've said before, Eliot's version of Wrong Night is far more balanced, and by the time the reunion occurs he even has Don quoted as saying he was happy to let Glenn take charge. It is preferable to Felder's book in that way.

FP, I haven't read Felder's book (and as I stated in another thread, am not in any great hurry to read it either :evil: ), but I've quoted you here because I've read Eliot's book. I was annoyed at the scant attention Glenn's :heart: contributions to the band received - Don's (and I'm not taking a stab at Don here) contributions were written about in the finest detail, while Glenn's :heart: was given a summarised treatment. The two lines I've highlighted were a sore point with me, especially the first one. I cringed when I read the part where the woman Glenn :heart: dated referred to him looking like a "witch", with his "long face", "heavy" nose and long hair with the middle path. Did we really need to know about that? :roll: :evil: I admit that I far prefer Glenn's :heart: look later in his life, but I certainly would not liken his look to that of a witch. Ugh.

As for Glenn :heart: looking "foolish" in a suit... I rest my case. :roll:

Brooke
04-28-2008, 10:26 AM
I got this in a google alert today.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/music/2008/04/27/2008-04-27_eagle_don_felder_has_landed.html

I wonder why the guys haven't opened up any lines of communication with him? :roll:

DonFan
04-28-2008, 02:32 PM
I purchased H&H yesterday and just finished it. I agree with most everyone's comments as well. Yes, he did give left-handed complements to Don in his attempt to knock Glenn, but mostly all DF was trying to do was portray himself as a "poor little trod-upon millionaire rock star who got even more upset when he was fired and his wife finally got a life." As you have pointed out, if he didn't like the deal he was handed, he shouldn't have signed the papers, and it was unbelievable when he called Joe & Timothy and gave them that "I was doing this for you too" line, in a lame attempt to gain their support.

However, I did get a kick out of a few of the little details he threw in, such as the "Eagles Greatest Tits" video. :lol:

sodascouts
04-28-2008, 02:46 PM
lol Brooke! Yeah, I sure wonder why!

DonFan - like you, I did chuckle at a few things he tossed in there. The book wasn't all bad!

sodascouts
04-30-2008, 02:24 AM
Got this in a Google alert:

Eagle Don Felder Has Landed (http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/music/2008/04/27/2008-04-27_eagle_don_felder_has_landed.html)

Freypower
04-30-2008, 09:07 PM
The truth? I am sorry, but he means his version of the truth. As for the other things he says he wanted the book to be, I got nothing of that out of it. I will restrain myself from reflecting on what I thought of the 'great sense of who I am' part.

When, I would like to know, did Frey and Henley berate Felder's talents and humiliate him? As for the patronising stuff about Frey needing 'therapy' Felder admits in the book that he was out of it on drugs most of the time himself. Who is he to preach?

As for Frey and Henley being 'self-involved'? Hello pot, meet kettle.

Again I say that there obviously has to be some truth in Felder's book but without Frey and Henley's version does he really expect it to be taken as complete gospel?

Glennsallnighter
05-01-2008, 05:53 AM
As for Frey and Henley being 'self-involved'? Hello pot, meet kettle.



:hilarious: :hilarious: :hilarious:

sodascouts
05-01-2008, 12:01 PM
I've recently been in a discussion about this and it seems when you say that Felder just might have misrepresented Glenn, even just a little, you're slammed for favoring him. Well, I think it's very naive to think that Felder has been 100% accurate in his portrayals. I think he was very hurt by Glenn and that probably colored his perceptions, so he was speaking with honest emotion.

But remember: "Don't believe everything you read." Let's exercise some critical thinking skills here.

Freypower
05-01-2008, 07:40 PM
I have tried very hard not to let my preference for Glenn affect how I feel about this book. If Felder had made even ONE positive statement about Glenn, just one, I may have found it easier to accept what he said. I said elsewhere that Glenn's arrogance and need for control is emphasised in this book and I don't have a problem with that. But I cannot believe that Glenn is as totally without redeeming qualities as Felder paints him. I'm not going to go into a spiel about what I consider Glenn's good points, but I think one of them is his generosity to his bandmates, including Felder. He consistently praised Felder after the band split, which Felder appears to have forgotten.

Perfect Little Sister
05-02-2008, 12:57 PM
OH MY FP!!!! I LOVE your sig!!!

Freypower
05-02-2008, 06:34 PM
Thanks, it's one of Maleah's fabulous efforts.

sodascouts
05-06-2008, 02:59 PM
Another interview with Felder:

"Guitarist Reveals Life as an Eagle Didn't Always Soar" (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment/orl-donfelder08may06,0,442912.story)

Brooke
05-06-2008, 04:28 PM
He hopes that Heaven and Hell might also be educational.

"There were a lot of learning experiences," he says. "If there's anybody that has had that American dream of wanting to live that life of a rock star, I wanted them to know that there are some pitfalls along the way.

"I wanted to leave some sign posts there for younger readers, some cautionary warnings about what not to do."

- Jim Abbott

Educational?

Ok, do you think that book will be added to the curriculum anytime soon?

Younger (?) readers will certainly be reading it! I know I'd like to have my tween reading it! :roll:

This is actually funny beyond words!

carol7lynn
05-12-2008, 11:57 AM
Easy read and luckily I borowed the book from my local library so I didn't have to pay to read a re-hash of Marc Eliot's book. Glad I didn't waste my money. Can't imagine why anyone tried to block Felder's book. The only dish here were left-overs. HoHum!

Carol-Lynn
SoCalGalNow 8)

JoeFan
05-13-2008, 03:06 AM
Can't imagine why anyone tried to block Felder's book. The only dish here were left-overs. HoHum!

LOL!

sodascouts
05-13-2008, 10:02 PM
Yeah, nothing too surprising about it, except maybe the level of animosity towards Glenn. I knew they didn't like each other, but I didn't expect Felder to portray him as a sadist!

sodascouts
05-17-2008, 02:55 AM
You can hear a tiny snippet of the upcoming interview here:

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/multimedia/18942314.html

Just one more retelling of how HC came about.

sodascouts
05-17-2008, 03:08 AM
Felder's hitting the promotional trail hard. Yet another interview:

"Ex-Eagle Felder Recalls Flight and Fight" (http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/may/16/ex-eagle-felder-recalls-flight-and-fight/)

Freypower
05-17-2008, 06:56 PM
Did you have any ethical qualms about breaking confidences about what people did 30 years ago?

I tried to be as honest and truthful not only about myself but about everyone who was there. It's me, with all my ugliness, my warts, everything. I didn't try to paint them in some ugly and bitter way and make myself out to be the shining star. That's just crap.

Any regrets?

I miss them . . . there were a lot of good times I shared with those people. My ex-wife, we're the best of friends. I wish I could arrive at that place with the Eagles.

I'm sorry, but if he seriously claims he didn't try to paint 'them' (the Gods) in an 'ugly and bitter way' and make himself out to be the 'shining star' I'm afraid he failed. And as for 'missing them'...

Also, yes, Hotel California was a single. Yes, it went to Number One. However it was the SECOND single from the album. The first single from the album was New Kid In Town, which also went to Number One, something which Felder cannot bring himself to admit..

'I wrote Hotel California'. That's all he's got. It's sad. When he talks about 'writing for that album' he makes it sound as if he wrote everything. He didn't.

samo
05-19-2008, 09:54 AM
I was in Barnes & Noble Saturday and I saw Felder's book--they had it on sale--my friend asked me if I was going to buy it; I quickly told her no. I don't want to read a book that all the author does is whine & cry and shoot arrows at people; even if they don't like each other.

DonFan
05-19-2008, 10:01 AM
"When Hotel California was done I remember sitting in L.A. and listening to the record and Henley said, 'That's going to be our single.' I said, 'You gotta be kidding me.' AM radio in the '70s, you had to be 2 minutes and 45 seconds. You couldn't be over 3 minutes. That track was 6 minutes long, it was slow, it stopped in the middle, you couldn't dance to it. I said, 'That's not the right song. It's definitely an album cut.' He said, 'No, it's going to be the single.' The record company just went along with what we chose. There'd been a big train wreck prior to that on the song Best of My Love. They'd put it out and the record company had edited the single to get it down to that two minutes 45 second length without approving the edit with the band. We heard it on the radio in some rent-a-car we were driving in the Midwest and went 'What the heck happened?' Henley went through the roof. Irving (Azoff, the band's manager) or someone had this gold record mocked up with Best of My Love on it and a hacksaw inside the glass. They sent it over to Joe Smith at Elektra Records and had it epoxy-ed to the wall in the hallway so they couldn't take it down. It was our way of saying, 'Don't do that again.'"

This cracked me up. :lol: I appreciate Irving's twisted sense of humor!

Mrs Frey
05-19-2008, 10:36 AM
I was in Barnes & Noble Saturday and I saw Felder's book--they had it on sale--my friend asked me if I was going to buy it; I quickly told her no. I don't want to read a book that all the author does is whine & cry and shoot arrows at people; even if they don't like each other.

LOL, Samo! Your post reminds me of certain song lyrics that go as follows:

All that whining and crying and pitching a fit
Get over it!
Get over it!

Mrs Frey
05-19-2008, 10:40 AM
Quote: "When Hotel California was done I remember sitting in L.A. and listening to the record and Henley said, 'That's going to be our single.' I said, 'You gotta be kidding me.' AM radio in the '70s, you had to be 2 minutes and 45 seconds. You couldn't be over 3 minutes. That track was 6 minutes long, it was slow, it stopped in the middle, you couldn't dance to it. I said, 'That's not the right song. It's definitely an album cut.' He said, 'No, it's going to be the single.' The record company just went along with what we chose. There'd been a big train wreck prior to that on the song Best of My Love. They'd put it out and the record company had edited the single to get it down to that two minutes 45 second length without approving the edit with the band. We heard it on the radio in some rent-a-car we were driving in the Midwest and went 'What the heck happened?' Henley went through the roof. Irving (Azoff, the band's manager) or someone had this gold record mocked up with Best of My Love on it and a hacksaw inside the glass. They sent it over to Joe Smith at Elektra Records and had it epoxy-ed to the wall in the hallway so they couldn't take it down. It was our way of saying, 'Don't do that again.' "

This cracked me up. :lol: I appreciate Irving's twisted sense of humor!

That is funny, DF! I can understand how the Eagles felt about having their record tampered with, though!

samo
05-19-2008, 11:03 AM
MF you are so right! I did not even think of "Get Over It". :)

sodascouts
05-19-2008, 03:46 PM
A short video interview with Felder:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vr3TRCgTlVQ

Mrs Frey
05-20-2008, 02:19 AM
MF you are so right! I did not even think of "Get Over It". :)

You probably had the lyrics settled in your subconscious mind, Samo! :wink: How appropriate they are! :twisted:

glenneaglesfan
05-20-2008, 06:09 PM
Thanks for that link. My impression is that he is starting to try and redeem himself from the rift he has created with Don and Glenn, but, man, it is way too late for that.

I've posted a link on DFO. Thanks, Nancy!

Molly
05-22-2008, 09:52 PM
As I was getting ready to leave for Virginia Tuesday morning, one of our local radio stations interviewed Don Felder.

The DJ's started off by introducing him as "the man who wrote the classic song, Hotel California".

Don referred to his relationship with Glenn and Don as "a current separation" and told the DJ's how he's still "reaching out to them but as of yet, he hasn't gotten any response back". (Insert here the DJ's tsks and "awww, that's a shame"). :roll:

Hubby laughed at me for "talking back to the radio" and asked me if I wanted to "fire off an angry e-mail to the radio station".

I left the room before the interview was over.

Freypower
05-22-2008, 10:46 PM
So he didn't really mean all that nasty stuff he wrote about Glenn in the book, huh?

It would honestly have been better if he had stuck to the 'evil Gods' stuff because this sudden humility and 'reaching out' is not pleasant to watch.

Share1967
05-22-2008, 10:56 PM
He writes a book slamming the others guys. Wow, I cant imagine why they wouldnt want to best buds now. Can you believe his audacity? :shock: He may of already burned his bridges.

Ive always been a dreamer
05-22-2008, 11:11 PM
Yeah - I'm thinking that I probably wouldn't be very interested in mending fences with someone that sued me.

I can't believe that Felder has his lawyers sending letters to Glenn, Don, and Irving, and then he is shocked when they fire him.

Then, he files a lawsuit against them that drags on for years, and now, he doesn't understand why they don't want to patch things up.

Is this guy for real???? Is he really sincere about this or is it just a bunch of BS to make people feel sorry for him? I honestly don't know which scenario is scarier.

samo
05-23-2008, 07:58 AM
What's with this guy anyway?!?! "A current seperation"? Does he really think that there is any chance in heck he would get back into the band?

My message to Don F.: "Here's your sign" (a Bill Ingvall moment)

I think all his party-hardy times from the 70's has effected his mind :smokin:

Brooke
05-23-2008, 09:57 AM
or is it just a bunch of BS to make people feel sorry for him? I honestly don't know which scenario is scarier.

I do! After the way he bashed them in the book, who does he think he's kidding? :cuss: :machinegun:

And, did Felder contribute any of the lyrics to HC?

Mrs Frey
05-23-2008, 10:42 AM
I'm sorry, but I find Felder and all your comments very amusing. :rofl:

He must be desperate for publicity, or he has one or two screws loose.

samo
05-23-2008, 11:19 AM
I have known people like him. They just don't get it. In their minds they have done nothing wrong and they just can understand why people don't like them or want them around anymore.

Freypower
05-23-2008, 06:48 PM
or is it just a bunch of BS to make people feel sorry for him? I honestly don't know which scenario is scarier.

I do! After the way he bashed them in the book, who does he think he's kidding? :cuss: :machinegun:

And, did Felder contribute any of the lyrics to HC?

As far as I know, Felder did not write any of the lyrics to HC. So all the stuff about how he 'wrote' HC is wrong.

Like I said, I preferred the hostility because I could see the justification, even if I didn't agree with it. I find this new approach pathetic in the extreme, reminiscent of when he begged the hated Mr Frey to take him back.

Brooke
05-23-2008, 08:33 PM
I didn't think he did. The way he goes on in the book, he wrote the whole song! :roll:

Molly
05-24-2008, 09:27 AM
or is it just a bunch of BS to make people feel sorry for him? I honestly don't know which scenario is scarier.

I do! After the way he bashed them in the book, who does he think he's kidding? :cuss: :machinegun:

And, did Felder contribute any of the lyrics to HC?

As far as I know, Felder did not write any of the lyrics to HC. So all the stuff about how he 'wrote' HC is wrong.

Like I said, I preferred the hostility because I could see the justification, even if I didn't agree with it. I find this new approach pathetic in the extreme, reminiscent of when he begged the hated Mr Frey to take him back.

It was the DJ's who introduced him as the person who wrote HC. He didn't, however, jump in quickly to correct that misconception. He did go on later in the interview to tell the story of writing it at his beach house, submitting it to the band on a cassette containing a bunch of half finished songs, and how it is the one that jumped out at Henley and Frey. So, I'm sure, in his mind, he cleared everything up.

I thought it was interesting that the song "Heavy Metal" was apparently part of that same cassette that was submitted to the band. When I think of the Eagles, first thing that comes to my mind is a song called "Heavy Metal"!

Freypower
05-25-2008, 07:15 PM
It's funny though - Heavy Metal is a decent song, partly because Don Henley does some really good backing vocals on it (Tim may be on it too). I think if the Eagles had done it it could have worked.

Mrs Frey
05-26-2008, 02:19 AM
or is it just a bunch of BS to make people feel sorry for him? I honestly don't know which scenario is scarier.

I do! After the way he bashed them in the book, who does he think he's kidding? :cuss: :machinegun:

And, did Felder contribute any of the lyrics to HC?

As far as I know, Felder did not write any of the lyrics to HC. So all the stuff about how he 'wrote' HC is wrong.

Like I said, I preferred the hostility because I could see the justification, even if I didn't agree with it. I find this new approach pathetic in the extreme, reminiscent of when he begged the hated Mr Frey to take him back.

Call me biased, but I don't know how anyone can hate Glenn :heart: Frey. :?

Brooke
05-26-2008, 10:37 AM
In the Rolling Stone article, Joe was asked about Felder and he put it all in the proper perspective and I quote:

"You know what? It's Glenn's band. He decides shit with Don. I joined their band. They call the shots, that was the agreement when I came in, and it's the way it always will be. It's best when the four of us are all nodding yeah, or it's three against one, and the one guy is saying, 'Well, ya know.' But ultimately it's Glenn and Don's band. It's a democracy with two dictators." :rofl: (LOVE that!)

I know they changed the plan with Felder, but hey, I guess he could take it or leave it and he left it. Joe understood.

AzEaglesFan
05-26-2008, 04:48 PM
I finally found Heaven and Hell at Borders Book store. I'm like a lot of you. I found Felder's life interesting but bashing Glenn and Don Henley didn't need to be in there. It was interesting to me all the people he came into contact with over the years and his take on them. For the most part he seemed to get along with everyone along the way and stayed friends with most of them.

Ive always been a dreamer
05-27-2008, 01:03 PM
It would honestly have been better if he had stuck to the 'evil Gods' stuff because this sudden humility and 'reaching out' is not pleasant to watch.


I totally agree with you here, FP. And just a few more thoughts about Felder’s book and publicity tour…

First of all, even though it’s not a huge deal, it would just make Felder appear a little bit more forthcoming if he had the interviewers introduce him as the man who co-wrote Hotel California. After all, it’s all about perception, isn’t it – we wouldn’t want people to be misled. :roll:

The next point I want to make is about all of Felder’s complaining that Joe or Tim did not come to his defense when he was fired. He never offers any explanation of why they should have other than because they were supposed to be his friend. Well, unfortunately for Felder, they are apparently Don and Glenn’s friends as well – and when they were forced to chose, is it any surprise who they chose? After all, who did Felder chose when his good friends, Bernie and Randy, left the band. I don’t believe Felder mentions him running to their side to continue their friendships. As a matter of fact, I got the distinct impression that he has not had much communication with either of them since their respective departures from the band.

I know there are people who argue that Felder’s situation with the band was different than Joe’s and Tim’s because he was originally brought in as a partner. This is true – however, as Brooke mentioned, things changed over time. For whatever reasons, it became clear at the time of the resumption that Felder was no longer considered on an equal level in the band as Don and Glenn. He accepted those terms at the time, and offers no evidence that he was misled. Even though he was apparently dissatisfied, he chose to remain a member of the band. While some people argue that he had no choice, and was forced to agree, I say hogwash! No one held a gun to his head, and he could have chosen to quit and offer his fine talents to another band. He never attempted to leave what he describes as an abusive situation – instead, he chose to cause discourse within the band until he was forced out. To me, there is no rocket science here. How many times do we preach to our kids every day that they need to take personal responsibility for their actions and the choices that they make instead of blaming others?

Maybe Felder was treated unfairly - none of us really know the answer to this. However, I will say that if he had rejected their offer and left the band at the time of the resumption because he felt he was being mistreated, I would have definitely respected that. But instead of leaving it, he made the decision to take it. He should have accepted it, and moved forward gracefully. I could have even understood that he could have second guessed himself after a while, but to second guess yourself for 7 years!!! :headscratch: :hmm:

Freypower
05-27-2008, 07:46 PM
:applause:

Perfectly expressed, Dreamer. Thank you.

Mrs Frey
05-28-2008, 03:25 AM
I agree with you, FP - very well written, Dreamer.

sodascouts
05-28-2008, 06:10 PM
Here's another review of the Felder book:

"This Might Be Heaven, This Might Be Hell" (http://themanwhonevermissed.blogspot.com/2008/05/this-might-heaven-this-might-be-hell.html)

Freypower
05-28-2008, 06:21 PM
Well, that was an interesting and objective take, but there goes that 'body language' stuff again. From what I can see the band get on a lot better these days. Remember how Glenn said that it became fun to do sound check and rehearsals again? The reason it 'became fun' was because the 'disruptive element' (Don Henley's words) had gone.

Ive always been a dreamer
05-28-2008, 08:43 PM
Yep - that was an interesting read. Thanks for the link, Soda.

sodascouts
06-24-2008, 04:28 PM
Another Felder interview:
"'Gods' Set Eagle Free" (http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/arts/story.html?id=704875b6-c8c4-4354-9f68-00784fbdcb2a)

It's pretty much more of the same. Apparently the latest tidbit is a scolding over shoes by Don Henley.



Felder, phoning from his Los Angeles home, said it became impossible to be musically creative with The Gods calling all the shots.

"I mean, I wore the wrong shoes on stage one night, and Henley berated me for it," he said.
Man, how did Felder survive such trauma? lol

Brooke
06-24-2008, 06:45 PM
Interesting! Thanks Soda!

At least this time they state that Felder wrote the music for HC and don't lead you to believe that he wrote the whole song!

And who knew The Don Felder Band played shows anywhere? :?

Freypower
06-24-2008, 07:04 PM
I certainly didn't know about the Don Felder Band (nice modest name, no)?. And excuse me but isn't playing corporate shows about.... money? This 'it's all about the music, MAAAN' stuff is crap. This is the man who did nothing but complain that he didn't get his 'fair share'. Please.

The 'tears spurted from my eyes' stuff is just funny. Sorry, but it is.

As for being 'berated' by Henley for wearing the 'wrong shoes'.... storing that sort of stuff up for years and years and being so bitter about it is not helping Felder. If I ever see even the slightest indication that he may possibly think he may have been at fault on occasion too, I will shout it from the rooftops. Until then I'm afraid I can't 'relate' to him at all.

Brooke
06-24-2008, 07:11 PM
I just about choked on my iced tea when I read that about the "tears spurted from my eyes" part, too! :roll:

And I hear ya, Fp! :nod:

samo
06-25-2008, 10:41 AM
Hold on a minute everyone....let me get him a tissue for his spurting tears :roll:

Yes, that is sarcasam you hear 8)

Freypower
06-26-2008, 12:54 AM
Just to give a bit of perspective on all this - the Eagles aren't the only band to have had what appeared to be bitter, perpetual feuds. We watched a Rock Family Trees program on Deep Purple last night. To put it mildly, the relationship between Ritchie Blackmore and Ian Gillan is icy. I said to Mike 'I thought Frey & Felder hated each other' and he said 'amateurs'! Blackmore also once got into a fight with Gillan's replacement, David Coverdale. The constant lineup changes in that band and formation of offshoots (Whitesnake, Rainbow, Paice Ashton Lord) is pure soap opera.

I honestly believe, as Henley said in Rolling Stone, the best bands don't have one dictator but two (with Henley being Frey's second in command in the Eagles). The other really great bands are as follows:

Beatles (Lennon-McCartney)
Rolling Stones (Jagger-Richards)
Led Zeppelin (Page-Plant)

And that is it, unless you wish to include the Who (Townshend-Daltrey, and I'm dubious about that, because Townshend wrote all the songs). Possibly Queen (Mercury-May).

It could be argued that other great bands with one dominant force, like my beloved Dire Straits, aren't really BANDS in the proper sense. Pink Floyd had two dominant forces (Waters, then Gilmour). Even the Byrds basically boiled down to Roger McGuinn. REM have tried to be democratic and in my opinion never became the great band they could have become. I don't know how U2 operate because I don't like them.

Mrs Frey
06-26-2008, 06:59 AM
FP, your "feuding duos in bands" information is very interesting. I don't know much about '70s rock bands (my main interests, until I discovered the brilliant Eagles, have always been '50s and early '60s music), so I learnt a lot from that.

I'd like to add to your list of one-person dominated bands, Creedence Clearwater Revival. Apparently the Fogerty Brothers didn't get along very well, because Tom resented John's dominance. IMHO, however, John Fogerty WAS CCR. He sang all the songs, he played lead guitar and he wrote almost all their recorded material (of those that I know). No John Fogerty - no CCR.

By the way, your hubby's "amateurs" comment really amused me! :lol:

Mrs Frey
06-26-2008, 07:02 AM
Hold on a minute everyone....let me get him a tissue for his spurting tears :roll:

Yes, that is sarcasam you hear 8)

:rofl:

Mrs Frey
06-26-2008, 07:17 AM
I certainly didn't know about the Don Felder Band (nice modest name, no)?. And excuse me but isn't playing corporate shows about.... money? This 'it's all about the music, MAAAN' stuff is crap. This is the man who did nothing but complain that he didn't get his 'fair share'. Please.

The 'tears spurted from my eyes' stuff is just funny. Sorry, but it is.

As for being 'berated' by Henley for wearing the 'wrong shoes'.... storing that sort of stuff up for years and years and being so bitter about it is not helping Felder. If I ever see even the slightest indication that he may possibly think he may have been at fault on occasion too, I will shout it from the rooftops. Until then I'm afraid I can't 'relate' to him at all.

Highlighted part: :rofl: I love that, FP! And I agree with you about Felder playing for the money, just like any other band who is able to make money. Take it from me - with times being what they are, no band can afford to play for free.

The "tears spurted from my eyes" part amused me too. My first sarcastic thought was, "Ag, shame", as they say in South Africa.

You're also quite right about Felder not once mentioning when he could've been at fault. There are at least two sides to every story, and neither Glenn :heart: nor Don have brought forth their side to the story. I'm sure that they made their mistakes, but Felder cannot possibly be without fault. There has to be a reason for Glenn :heart: and Don's attitudes towards Felder.

Felder should be careful - his halo is going to rust. :evil: All his sympathy seeking is becoming tiresome. For someone who is not interested in money, he has certainly picked a good time to promote his book - just as the Eagles embarked on their LROOE tour! How transparent is that? :roll:

Haywire
06-26-2008, 03:44 PM
Hi, my name is Tom. This is my first post but I have been lurking for a while. I have read Felder's book too and I attended a book signing. He was nice. I liked him.

I am confused why people are saying he never took responsibility for anything. He apologizes many times for things he should have done differently. He doesn't blame everything on other people. He says he is sorry about cheating on his wife for instance. Yeah he says temptation was everywhere but it WAS, that is him being honest. He also says it was wrong. He says he feels real guilty about it.

He isn't just insulting to the other band members. What about all the times he talks about how great Henley is at lyrics, do we really think that was all done to upset Frey? He compliments Frey sometimes too even though that ended so bad.

I'm glad Don Felder is still playing with his band. He is a great guitarist. It would be a shame if he stopped playing. I think it is nice of him to call his act 'The Don Felder Band' instead of just going out there as Don Felder. He knows how valuable his band is so he includes them in the name, that's the opposite of arrogant. He has to keep his name first so people know who they are getting. Why pick apart and insult everything he does??

I don't mean to argue but I want to stand up for Felder, seems nobody else is.

sodascouts
06-26-2008, 04:26 PM
Welcome Tom!

You're right in that Felder apologizes for things and feels guilty for them, but I guess to me it just didn't ring true because of all the excuses he continually offers for his behavior.

Felder does compliment the guys sometimes. I think he must have a level of professional respect for them.

I don't mean to pick apart everything he does, but he put himself out there with this book. He had to know it would make him a target of fans who weren't impressed with his portrayals.

Regardless I am happy to discuss it and I recognize everyone has their own take on the matter. I'm glad you had a good experience with him at the book signing.

Ive always been a dreamer
06-26-2008, 05:42 PM
Hi Tom – and welcome. Glad you found us here on The Border. I’m also glad to hear your viewpoint about Felder and his book. It’s nice to have someone here to present another side because as you mentioned, Felder hasn’t gotten a lot of support here from the fans on this board, myself included. :wink:

I’ll try to address some of your comments from my perspective. First of all, you say you attended Felder’s book signing and he was nice. I do not doubt that he is very nice and gratious when you meet him. I have met Glenn Frey on several occasions, and I can tell you he has been extremely kind to me and my friends. I have also heard similar comments from friends I know that have met Don Henley and Joe Walsh. Unfortunately, I don’t think you can truly judge someone just meeting them as a fan. I'm sure that all of these guys can appear to be very nice. Unfortunately, nice people can disagree and not like one another. And I get the impression that there may be a mutual dislike among these guys. That doesn't necessarily mean that some of them are all good and some of them are all evil.

My complaint about him not accepting responsibility is because he constantly offers excuses for his behavior. But, I think the bottom line is that Felder believes that he should have always been entitled to the original agreement that he made when he joined the band in 1974. IMHO, I don’t believes he ever thought it was fair that his contract was restructured at the time of the resumption, and was continuously upset because he was not treated as an equal in the band. Here is a quote from him in his most recent interview: "Do you let your two partners screw you over and run off with the whole thing?" replied Felder. "Or do you stand up for what you agreed to do when we started?" Unfortunately for him, the fact of the matter is that he was not an equal contributor to the success of the band. Yes, he is an extremely talented guitarist, and yes, he co-wrote the band’s biggest hit – but that doesn’t make him equally responsible for the amount of money that this band has earned over the years. If that were the case, the band’s profits would have plunged after his departure.

I still maintain that if he thought he was being treated unfairly, then he should have never agreed to the restructuring of his contract.

And then, there is his final comment in his interview "All I really ever wanted to do was play the music." I’m sorry, but this is just disingenuous from a guy who just settled a 7 year lawsuit that he initiated. Again, it is just another example of how he views himself as a victim who was constantly abused by these men. I just think it makes him come across as spoiled, whiny, and ungrateful. I would say exactly the same thing if these words had come from Don Henley or Glenn Frey.

However, having said all this, I still maintain that all of the parties involved shares responsibility for what happened with the band. I don't believe any of them were angels.

Freypower
06-26-2008, 07:09 PM
He isn't just insulting to the other band members. What about all the times he talks about how great Henley is at lyrics, do we really think that was all done to upset Frey? He compliments Frey sometimes too even though that ended so bad.
.

Welcome Tom and I appreciate your input. I see the sense in what you are saying but I'm afraid I must disagree with the part I have quoted.

Yes, he praises Henley and that appears to be genuine. But I'd appreciate it if you could direct me to ONE compliment to Frey - ONE. I cannot remember any praise of Frey in the entire book. He's being honest here, I guess. The dislike was mutual and deep. Why should he say anything positive about a man he came to hate (and I don't think hate is too strong a word)?

Haywire
06-26-2008, 10:06 PM
Thanks for the welcome.

Freypower, he says Glenn was 'great at conceptualizing.' He credits him for the concept behind Hotel California. So he gives him credit even though he has bad feelings towards him.

Freypower
06-26-2008, 11:03 PM
I've looked at the book to find your reference.

This is going to sound like nitpicking and/or sour grapes on my part but praising 'conceptualising' as opposed to Glenn's actual musical, lyrical or vocal talents to me sounds like damning with (very) faint praise. He good as implies that Glenn has no talent for anything else. I note that he says that Glenn also had the 'concept' for both Victim Of Love and Life In The Fast Lane , but will he give Glenn any credit for writing music or lyrics? No.

He then drops the clanger about how Don H. said H.C. should be the single, which entirely ignores New Kid In Town.

Then I notice he makes a comment about the 'fun Glenn' that he did enjoy being with on occasion. OK, that is a couple of lines.

Mrs Frey
06-27-2008, 02:57 AM
Welcome, Haywire! :D :yay: We're glad to have you here and hope you enjoy your time with us.

I'm glad you had such a pleasant experience meeting Don Felder when you purchased his book.

I'm sorry if our comments have come across as so negative, but I'm sure you can appreciate that it's not easy to continue reading negative comments about one's favourite artists. I'm a HUGE Glenn :heart: Frey fan, and each time Felder takes a stab at him during his promotional interviews, it's as though he's taking a stab at me. I can understand if Felder is hurt by any wrongs that Glenn :heart: may have committed against him, but in fairness to Glenn :heart:, he has never said anything against Felder in public. Neither has Don Henley. I'm a great believer in keeping private matters private. It doesn't matter whether you're a successful rock 'n roll star or a bricklayer (to quote Glenn :heart:) - we are all people with feelings, and feelings need to be respected. The whole world really does not need to know all the bad things that happened within the inner circle of the Eagles.

We need to put ourselves in the shoes of "The Gods". They are mature now and have families. What are their children to think of the mudslinging going on in Felder's book? These are all things to consider.

We all make mistakes in life. If I were Glenn :heart: or Don, I certainly wouldn't want anyone to tell the world of my indiscrepancies or faults. We ALL have faults. All we can do is try to be the best we can be. Glenn :heart: and Don have repeatedly admitted to their faults, and have certainly improved their lives since the '70s. What more can they do? They cannot correct the wrongs of the past! They can only move on and "Get Over It". I suggest Felder does the same. If there wasn't an opportunity to make money by writing a sensationalist book, he would not have written one.

I'm sorry, but I don't suffer hypocrites gladly. I really feel strongly about this.

Haywire
06-27-2008, 02:35 PM
To me it seemed the story about Hotel California being a single was meant t o show how smart Henley was, to think of releasing such a long song as a single. It didn't take any guts to release New Kid in Town as a single so why talk about it?

'Mrs. Frey' I could tell you were a huge fan, if your name didn't tell me all those beating hearts would, you made your point!

I read the recent Rolling Stone interview and Henley took stabs at Felder in that. And Felder was even cut out of photos though I don't know if that was the Eagles' fault.

He did not contribute as much as Frey and Henley but he does not deserve to be cut out! He DID contribute to the band, that is undeniable.

sodascouts
06-27-2008, 02:59 PM
Speaking of the press, here's the latest interview:

"Former Eagles Guitarist Tells His Story in Book" (http://newsok.com/former-eagles-guitarist-tells-his-story-in-book/article/3262588/?tm=1214516739)
By Gene Triplett
Entertainment Editor

Ive always been a dreamer
06-27-2008, 03:00 PM
He did not contribute as much as Frey and Henley but he does not deserve to be cut out! He DID contribute to the band, that is undeniable.

But Haywire - here is the crux of the problem. He did, in fact, contribute to the band. I don't think anyone has ever tried to dispute that. However, I also don't think there is any evidence that suggests that Henley and Frey were trying to cut him out completely when he was a member of the band. The problem is that they wanted to compensate him for his contribution proportionately. Now, I can see how that proportionate amount may be negotiable. However, Felder didn't want to negotiate - he wanted the same amount as Henley and Frey just like he had in the beginning. Again, to quote him:

"Do you let your two partners screw you over and run off with the whole thing?" replied Felder. "Or do you stand up for what you agreed to do when we started?"

sodascouts
06-27-2008, 05:06 PM
I don't know whose decision it was to cut Felder out of the photo in Rolling Stone, but I wouldn't read too much into it.

As dreamer says, I don't think anyone can deny that Felder contributed to the Eagles. He made their sound more rock-edged in the late 70s, he came up with the instrumental track to their most famous song.... he was definitely a valuable asset to the band.

However, I think by the time he was fired, he was more of an albatross than an asset.

Freypower
06-27-2008, 06:59 PM
To me it seemed the story about Hotel California being a single was meant t o show how smart Henley was, to think of releasing such a long song as a single. It didn't take any guts to release New Kid in Town as a single so why talk about it?



New Kid In Town runs for 5.03. It isn't exactly short. So history should be rewritten because it isn't as long as Hotel California?

It isn't a question of 'not taking any guts' to release it. It is one of the band's most challenging songs. His objection to it is that Frey sings it and he had no hand in writing it. He wanst it to sound like Hotel California was the first single from the album which went to Number One. This is not true.

If I read one more comment by him saying 'I just cared about the music' .... seriously. Why can't he be honest? And he talks about being 'friends' with these people when all he does is insult them. I concentrate on Frey, but he says stuff about 'Henley gave a rare smile'. What does that mean? That he wants to emphasise the stereotype of Henley being humourless as opposed to the real person he claims to have known?

What Henley did in Rolling Stone was give his and Frey's side of the firing, after enduring endless variations on Felder's side. I thought he handled it with dignity. He is surely as entitled to give the other side as Felder is.

As for all the moaning about no longer being friends but associates and shareholders, would he have preferred the Eagles to stay in the minor league and not make any money so he could hang on to his alleged 'idealism'? He contradicts himself at every turn. If it was only about music he would not have sued and he would not be so obsessed with the 'equal share' stuff.

And finally, Bernie Leadon at least was not pushed out by 'oppression'. Both Leadon and Meisner did clash with Frey, true. But again we get this 'redressing the balance for Leadon and Meisner' stuff. What did Felder to do stop them leaving? Has he seen them since?

I don't want to be this harsh. I really don't. But there are far too many holes and discrepancies in what Felder claims.

Mrs Frey
06-30-2008, 02:57 AM
'Mrs. Frey' I could tell you were a huge fan, if your name didn't tell me all those beating hearts would, you made your point!

I read the recent Rolling Stone interview and Henley took stabs at Felder in that. And Felder was even cut out of photos though I don't know if that was the Eagles' fault.

He did not contribute as much as Frey and Henley but he does not deserve to be cut out! He DID contribute to the band, that is undeniable.

My user name and beating hearts aside, Haywire, I felt I needed to emphasise the fact that it's difficult for us Frey fans to swallow all Felder's negativity regarding our hero. Felder is, after all, not without fault.

I read the Rolling Stone interview too and truth be told, I'll need to go back and find the stabs that Henley took at Felder, as I can't even remember them. It's STILL true that Frey has said nothing about the whole affair.

I noticed that Felder was cut out of the Rolling Stone double-page spread photo, but that's probably because the article was focused on the current band. I don't think it has anything to do with purposely wanting to deny his significance to the band. When Glenn was interviewed by Bob Costas back in 1992, he made a point of giving Felder credit for his contributions to the Eagles.

How often has Glenn subordinated himself in the Eagles to stroke others' egos? How often does he get credit for that? I'm sorry, but Glenn is not a villain. It has ALWAYS been Glenn's band, and the biggest problem with the Eagles back then is that the members didn't want to accept that. Henley admitted in the "60 Minutes" interview that Glenn's leadership was and still can be a source of tension between him and Glenn. Fortunately, now, they've found a way to make things work.

sodascouts
07-08-2008, 07:46 PM
Check this out guys!

"Psycho Santa" responds to his depiction in Felder's book! (http://www.rockandrollcollection.com/psycho_santa.html)

Looks like everything is patched up now.

DonFan
07-08-2008, 08:08 PM
That is quite an amazing account.

No matter how much I read about the guys, every day something new comes to light. It is hard for me to imagine all the crazed fans they have had to deal with over the years. No wonder they are so guarded about their privacy!

rcknalwys
07-09-2008, 10:57 AM
What a great story Soda! Thanks for sharing. I can only imagine the lengths some people will go to for an autograph. No wonder the guys shy away from people.

Ive always been a dreamer
07-09-2008, 12:49 PM
Yeah - I can definitely see how the guys could get freaked out by over-zealous fans. Well, at least in this case, all has ended well, hopefully. If the guy is sincere in that he is "just a fan" and he meant no harm, it's great that he had the opportunity to apologize to Don for his bad judgement.

TimothyBFan
07-09-2008, 01:15 PM
Thanks for posting that Soda--I enjoyed reading it. Glad it all working out in the end.

jwd
07-11-2008, 09:29 PM
Whew,
This one has no doubt been a hot topic here this year. Truth be known, this year’s Rolling Stone cover story AND Felder’s book sparked my reinterest in the band.
Here’s where I agree with the theme of most posts of this topic: Felder was naïve and occasionally could be labeled a whiner. After he was canned, Schmidt’s comment that “You keep harking back to a deal you made in the 70s, that’s history, you should have just signed the papers and sent them back” is one of the bright lights in the book. From my view, if he’d taken the Walsh/Schmidt attitude of ‘go with the flow/take the bucks they give you,’ he’d be an Eagle today.
Where I disagree: The theme of -- Felder was dead wood, he was holding them back, he’s a jerk, our beloved Glenn and Don are better off now.
Musically, I don’t think they’re better off. I don’t care for 80 percent of the new record. The Walsh tunes are the only ones that got better to me with repeated listening. Anything that would give them more edge would be a welcome improvement. This may be largely due be a fault of the songwriting, which isn’t up to their 70s standards (blasphemy! I’m sure some posters are thinking…) and Felder’s playing wouldn’t help anyway.
Back to Felder…No he wasn’t a fit personality-wise but only because he joined a band that was conceived as equals and he couldn’t adjust to becoming a lesser—the black figures in the “Hell Freezes Over Tour’ mock up did say a lot as to what they became in the resumption. His take that two pigs crowded the others on the trough is accurate. Both Frey and Henley leave a lot to be desired as personalities. That came through in Marc Eliot’s book too.
I’m not being tougher on them than I would be on any major other band and their members. Through a bunch ‘o books I’ve read (including Bill Wyman’s) there is little question Mick and Keith took over the Rolling Stones and in many ways screwed their fellow bandmates. But long term, their music held up better.
In the end, it is about the music a band leaves behind.
Perhaps what bugs me most about the comments on Felder’s book is: Where on earth could you possibly get such an inside look of this band?!! Eliot well detailed how Henley & Azoff screwed him on pretty much the only book that tried to give a detailed, honest look at Eagles in his updated version.
So taking this book with the grain of salt that it’s just one man’s view, it still gives tremendous insight and details of band that really doesn’t have much written about and for that alone, is a worthy effort.

sodascouts
07-12-2008, 11:06 AM
JD, I can see where you're coming from. Here's where I'm coming from: when I say that Felder had become an albatross, I mean that he acted as a hindrance towards the end.

It seems Felder and Frey never really were the best of pals, but that was overlooked because Felder's contribution to the band was so great. Still, it undeniably contributed to the dissolution of the band in 1980. I think that by 1999, the negatives once again were outweighing the positives. This time, though, the band didn't break up - they broke up with Felder.

I don't think anyone has said that Felder wasn't a terrific guitarist. He was - and is - very talented. But it takes more than talent to make a band work.

Whether or not Frey and Henley were in the wrong, they had reached a standstill with Felder that could only be resolved by 1) them giving Felder more of a share or 2) Felder leaving - whether it be of his own accord or no. Until that resolution occurred, the band could no longer function well. In fact, they might have ceased to function altogether.

Ive always been a dreamer
07-12-2008, 12:49 PM
While I have a few minutes, I’ll try to respond to your post, jwd. First of all, you may be surprised to find that I really don’t disagree with you about most of the things you stated. I also agree with Soda's post. I’ll try not to repeat much of what I have already said, but here goes.


After he was canned, Schmidt’s comment that “You keep harking back to a deal you made in the 70s, that’s history, you should have just signed the papers and sent them back” is one of the bright lights in the book. From my view, if he’d taken the Walsh/Schmidt attitude of ‘go with the flow/take the bucks they give you,’ he’d be an Eagle today.
I totally agree with this statement. It has basically been the motif of most all of my criticism towards Felder. Whether he can see his mistakes or not, what is important is how he was perceived by the rest of the band.


Where I disagree: The theme of -- Felder was dead wood, he was holding them back, he’s a jerk, our beloved Glenn and Don are better off now.
Musically, I don’t think they’re better off. I don’t care for 80 percent of the new record. The Walsh tunes are the only ones that got better to me with repeated listening. Anything that would give them more edge would be a welcome improvement. This may be largely due be a fault of the songwriting, which isn’t up to their 70s standards (blasphemy! I’m sure some posters are thinking…) and Felder’s playing wouldn’t help anyway.

I partially disagree with you here. However, this is all subjective anyway so it would be hard to ever get consensus here. I personally think LROOE stands up very well against all of their previous work. IMO, as brilliant as Felder is, the band doesn’t lose that much musically at all with Steuart Smith. He is an incredible musician. My only complaint with the album is that there are quite a few songs that really don’t appear to be much of a collaborative effort for the band. This is beared out by the fact that the credit information is very scarce about the album, IMO, I’d bet good money that some of the songs don’t even have all four current Eagles playing or singing on them. However, you are right, I’m going to say that I don’t think Felder’s presence would have made any difference here.

Where I will say I miss Felder’s presence is more in the live shows. I think Felder was a very good entertainer. He brought an energy to the live shows that is missing now with Steuart. Now, in fairness to Steuart, he probably stays more in the background since he is not an ‘official’ Eagle. But it was always such fun to watch the interaction between Joe and Felder on stage. I think the live shows suffer for this, but certainly not enough to keep me away.


Both Frey and Henley leave a lot to be desired as personalities.

Reading back through this thread, I don’t remember anyone claiming that Felder was 100% at fault or that Henley and Frey were angels. Rather than repeat what I’ve already said, I’ll just copy and paste my comments from an earlier post:

“Now – I am not silly enough to believe that the book was going to be totally objective – after all, it is Felder’s version of what happened. I also acknowledge that I am biased, but I like to think that it’s not at the expense of losing total objectivity. I certainly don’t put Glenn and Don on a pedestal, but I really was surprised at the degree of Felder’s unapologetic, slanted version of events. These guys were young, good-looking, rich, famous, talented, high on controlled substances, and immature. Of course, all of them contributed to the discourse within the band. And since Glenn and Don had emerged as the leaders of the band, it makes sense that the spotlight was on them more. I just think Felder would have come across as more credible if he had also acknowledged some of this. Instead, he comes across as a whiny, self-indulgent, ungrateful, immature millionaire rock star who thinks he’s been victimized. And quite frankly, I think that is what a lot of us find a little hard to swallow about his book.”

I will also say that none of us really knows these guys, so we can only judge by the snipets of information that we hear or read in interviews and books. I have heard/read both Henley and Frey say more than once that they made lots of mistakes along the way. Frey frequently refers to his “checkered past” and Henley often talks about how “young and foolish” they were.


Perhaps what bugs me most about the comments on Felder’s book is: Where on earth could you possibly get such an inside look of this band?!!

This is probably the one statement where I disagree with you the most. I do think the book was well written and it was an interesting read (although I admit I’m pretty easy when the subject matter is this band). I actually did enjoy reading and learning more about his personal family life. However, as a fan from the beginning, I was very disappointed in that there was very little information about the band in the book that I didn’t already know. IMO, all Felder did was spin his version of facts and events that we already knew about. I was really hoping that he would really give us more objective details and insight about the inner workings of the band, particularly after the HFO resumption.

I have to admit it amazes me to read fans say that this book totally changed their opinions about the band or that they are no longer fans after reading this book. I have to just scratch my head and wonder what they learned in the book that made them see the band so differently than they did before.

Sorry this turned out to be a lot longer than I intended. :wink:

The_Girl_Of_Summer
07-12-2008, 10:28 PM
Another interview with Felder:

"Guitarist Reveals Life as an Eagle Didn't Always Soar" (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment/orl-donfelder08may06,0,442912.story)


He hopes that Heaven and Hell might also be educational.

"There were a lot of learning experiences," he says. "If there's anybody that has had that American dream of wanting to live that life of a rock star, I wanted them to know that there are some pitfalls along the way.

"I wanted to leave some sign posts there for younger readers, some cautionary warnings about what not to do."

- Jim Abbott


Educational?

Ok, do you think that book will be added to the curriculum anytime soon?

Younger (?) readers will certainly be reading it! I know I'd like to have my tween reading it! :roll:

This is actually funny beyond words!

I agree somehow I don't see me reading it in AP English this year

Mrs Henley
07-13-2008, 06:08 AM
I don't see people this reading for English next year.
Anyway, it wouldn't be my first choice.

jwd
07-13-2008, 12:35 PM
Good Job IABAD...

When a have a few moments, I'll give my take on those thoughts.

jwd
07-14-2008, 06:47 PM
I personally think LROOE stands up very well against all of their previous work. My only complaint with the album is that there are quite a few songs that really don’t appear to be much of a collaborative effort for the band. This is beared out by the fact that the credit information is very scarce about the album, IMO, I’d bet good money that some of the songs don’t even have all four current Eagles playing or singing on them. However, you are right, I’m going to say that I don’t think Felder’s presence would have made any difference here.

Where I will say I miss Felder’s presence is more in the live shows. I think the live shows suffer for this, but certainly not enough to keep me away.

Here I cannot comment.....except to say the ticket price is what keeps me away. They've outpriced a lot of people like myself who are not cheapskates but to us...that kind of money is just not worth the entertainment value provided.

And your comments on LROOE not being a 'collaborative effort' are dead on. Felder details the troubles of Henley and Frey wanting to work on new songs in separate studios....separately...in the band's aborted late 90s sessions. Sadly, while it kept them from each other's throats, the music really does suffer. The Beatles' White Album may have great songs but as their engineer Geoff Emerick wrote in his book last year...those separate working conditions were the beginning of the end for that band.



I just think Felder would have come across as more credible if he had also acknowledged some of this. Instead, he comes across as a whiny, self-indulgent, ungrateful, immature millionaire rock star who thinks he’s been victimized.

I disagree. I think to Felder, admitting he slept around was a revelation he'd rather not go into. To him, that was a real fault. He could write about it a bit more honestly perhaps. To me, he is a bit whiny but not nearly what you suggest. I think if he'd had a small amount of gripes with Henley and Frey, it would be simple bitching. But he had a laundry list, some of which small, some substantial but the volume does count for something in this case.



I actually did enjoy reading and learning more about his personal family life. However, as a fan from the beginning, I was very disappointed in that there was very little information about the band in the book that I didn’t already know. IMO, all Felder did was spin his version of facts and events that we already knew about. I was really hoping that he would really give us more objective details and insight about the inner workings of the band, particularly after the HFO resumption. I have to admit it amazes me to read fans say that this book totally changed their opinions about the band or that they are no longer fans after reading this book. I have to just scratch my head and wonder what they learned in the book that made them see the band so differently than they did before.

Letsee...to me, he gives considerable details of the recording sesions for every album he was on...much of which are not public knowledge, the tours, including the between hours from show to show. THAT's the stuff I want to know. This guy was there for all of it. It's not realistic to think that there would be an 'unbiased' version of those kind of details. I would prefer an 'autobiography' from ALL members, similar to what Aerosmith did a few years back but these guys are way too tightlipped for that. So Felder's account is all we've got. I WANT to know what songs were bright lights in their infancy, how things were put together, etc. I appreciate the book for that.

:)

Ive always been a dreamer
07-20-2008, 03:33 PM
First of all, I apologize for taking so long to respond to your post, jwd. I was going to post something this past week, “but the world got in my way”. :wink: I guess we may have to just agree to disagree about some of this. But, at the risk of repeating myself, I’ll try to give a few examples that I haven’t already mentioned.

I agree that Felder admits to some things that he regrets in his book. However, there is a difference between admitting that you did something and taking personal responsibility for it. Where I have a problem is that he generally tends to blame other people or other circumstances for his indiscretions by always offering an excuse for why he did what he did. I also acknowledge that he may have had a laundry list of issues with Henley and Frey. But, I keep having to scratch my head and wonder, why did he stay? I remember as I was reading his account of his life after the band broke up - he claims that he didn’t do much music (outside of Airborne, which he may have been contractually obligated to do) because he wanted to stay at home and mend his family life. However, he goes on to recount later that his son Cody, who was born in the early 80’s, blamed him for not spending enough time with him when he was growing up - just seems like a contradiction to me. In addition, he also says later in the book that he had always told Irvin that anytime the Eagles were ready to get back together to count him in. Again – seems like a contradiction in terms for someone whose top priority was his family. It seems to me that he didn’t work or join any other band in the 80’s because his ego wouldn’t let him just be in any old band – he wanted to be in THE TOP BAND or none at all. Then, when he finally got his wish and the band resumed in the 90’s, you would have thought he would have been ecstatic. But instead, he goes on for pages and pages in the book ranting and whining about his laundry list of complaints. I just see a pattern of whining here that goes back to when he first joined the band, and continues to this day. Even if his complaints are legitimate, IMO, it still comes across as him perceiving himself as the poor, helpless victim of the “Gods”. Now, I will also say that I admire people who stand up for what they believe in. However, wise people also must recognize when they are fighting a losing battle. There comes a time when it is best to heed the advice of the Serenity Prayer and just accept the things that you can’t change or either let go for good.

I agree that I appreciate the parts of the book where he gives detailed accounts about how things happened. However, my complaint is that there is far too little of this. If he had done more of this, and less whining and complaining, I would have enjoyed the book a lot more and found it much more credible. As I said earlier, I think that he didn’t give equal time to the “heaven” part of being in the band. Felder complains endlessly about the money-hungry, power-hungry “Gods” – but, I just don’t see him as being much different from them at all. The real difference was that he wasn’t really ever on their same level, and his ego couldn’t handle it. To me, this is hypocritical and hypocrisy is something that I do NOT admire.

sodascouts
07-22-2008, 12:59 PM
Another promotional interview:

"Don Felder Takes It Easy in His Post-Eagles Days" (http://news.bostonherald.com/entertainment/music/general/view/2008_07_21_Felder_takes_it_easy_in_his_post-Eagles_days/srvc=home&position=also)

Brooke
07-22-2008, 01:52 PM
Interviewer: Your book doesn’t have a lot of peaceful, easy feelings in it. You paint Henley and Frey as vindictive guys who ruled the Eagles with iron fists. Are you worried your portrait of the band will taint the music’s legacy?

DF: Well, that’s sort of what happened to the music. The bickering and arguments tainted it. All of it just crushed the whole creative thing we had going on so I wanted to be honest and not pull punches in the book. To paint it in a sweeter light, it’s just not the right thing to do.


PULEEEEZE!




Interviewer: But you’re not bitter?

DF: The only person bitterness hurts is the person carrying it around. I can’t forget I was given the American Dream.

HARUMPH!!!!! Do you believe this guy?! :argue:

Ive always been a dreamer
07-27-2008, 09:45 PM
Another promotional interview:


But you’re not bitter?

The only person bitterness hurts is the person carrying it around. I can’t forget I was given the American Dream.

HARUMPH!!!!! Do you believe this guy?! :argue:

Nope! :twisted: :wink:

guitarboy
08-18-2008, 07:16 PM
I have not read Felder’s book , but my perspective as a musician is this. Frey and Henley wrote and sang most of the Eagles material. Yes Felder wrote most of the guitar solos and the music for Hotel California, but he isn’t the front person. Henley and Frey are doing most of the up-front work with the band.
The bottom line is: you get paid for what you do and contribute to the overall success of the band. There is no doubt that Felder is an excellent guitarist and he gave the Eagles some excellent riffs. But when push comes to shove he is replaceable as we see now with Steuart Smith taking over his role.( He’s not quite the same, but almost as good).
I conclude that Felder should have swallowed his pride and signed on to continue with the Eagles. He would have made a ton of money touring with them and would still be regarded as an Eagle as apposed to being just part of the Eagles band like Steuart Smith.
Tom.

Brooke
08-18-2008, 07:28 PM
Here, here!:thumbsup:

And welcome to the Border, gb! Glad you found us!

sodascouts
08-19-2008, 12:21 AM
You got it, Tom. I totally agree!

Welcome from me, too!

TimothyBFan
08-19-2008, 07:10 AM
Couldn't agree more gb and welcome to the board!

I finally bought my copy of Heaven and Hell, now will I read it? I just don't know if I want to but I'm sure curiosity will eventually win out and I will muddle thru it, cursing and shaking my head all the way!:brickwall:

Ive always been a dreamer
08-19-2008, 11:08 AM
Welcome guitarboy. Glad you found us and hope you enjoy yourself here on The Border.

As far as your comments about Felder, I also totally agree with what you said. As I previously stated, I did find parts of his book enjoyable and interesting, but I would have liked more stories and less of his whining and complaining. I just can't understand how Felder can view "the Gods" as being money-hungry and power-hungry without seeing himself in the same light. His whole laundry list of gripes is about the fact that they had more money and power than he did. It seems to me that if he were not the same, it wouldn't have mattered so much to him. Henley and Frey felt they deserved more based on their contributions to the band's legacy. Felder thought he deserved the same as them based on an agreement made in the 70's before there was a legacy. I just find it unrealistic that he seriously believed that a 30 + year contract should be honored as if nothing had changed over the years. :confused:

glenneaglesfan
08-19-2008, 11:45 AM
Hi Tom, and welcome to the Border! You have put it very succinctly. It was Glenn and Don H's band from the start and their contribution far outweighs Felder's. Many of the Eagles songs that still get regular airplay, even over here in the UK, are from the first two albums and On The Border, to which he only made a minor contribution. Why should he have expected to share all the royalties?

Dreamer, I agree with you on the book. I thought it was quite well written and enjoyed the stuff about his early life and career, but he lapses into self pity regarding his relationships with the band members and his own wife and family and it becomes somewhat tedious and hypocritical.

samo
08-21-2008, 10:27 AM
I have a friend who has a copy of the book....debating on whether to borrow it or not....

Brooke
08-26-2008, 03:22 PM
I enjoyed reading the book and it was an easy read. It did not make me think more highly of Don Felder though. He came off as poor, poor, pitiful me! :zzz:

I say if you can get your hands on it, it's worth reading though.

sodascouts
08-27-2008, 07:17 PM
GEF linked to this from DFO (http://www.donfelderonline.com) a while back, but I just noticed it recently:

Q&A with Don Felder - Backbeat Online (http://blogs.westword.com/backbeat/2008/08/qa_with_former_eagles_guitaris.php)

It's long, and we get his response to the Rolling Stone article.

Brooke
08-28-2008, 11:58 AM
DF: Unfortunately, it is primarily marketed at the Eagles audience – people who know me primarily through my success with the Eagles, obviously. And a lot of people read the book, and even though they derive a great deal of information about me, and enjoy a lot of the chapters about my early years, they’re really waiting to get to the salacious, juicy parts – all the dirt that was going on behind the Eagles story. So yeah, I think a lot of people focus on that, and obviously the press does. But as far as Rolling Stone, the Eagles, meaning Don Henley and [longtime band manager] Irving Azoff, have a great romance with Jann Wenner [Rolling Stone’s founder and publisher]. I knew going in to submitting my book for a review of that magazine, as well as in the Eagles cover article that came out the following month, that most likely it was going to be negatively reviewed and I’d be negatively portrayed in that article.


Well, Don, when the book has the title "My Life In The Eagles" the people that buy the book are interested and are focused on the parts about The Eagles! That's what got their attention and what they're interested in hearing about. Why didn't you name it "The Life Of Don Felder" if you wanted to focus the attention on yourself? :confused:


And yet by the ‘70s, once I was in the Eagles, I was drugged into promiscuity and drugs and alcohol.

And you never did any of these things before this time, ever? Hmmmmm......:eyebrow: He may not have checked his facts on that one!

At least I now somewhat understand his gripe about wanting to jam once in a while with the guys rather than play the songs night after night, note for note, exactly like the albums. He explained that really well. To him that was boring and left him a bit unsatisfied. "No creative spontaneity. No fun. All business."

Thanks for sharing that SS. Very interesting.

sodascouts
08-28-2008, 03:03 PM
Well, Don, when the book has the title "My Life In The Eagles" the people that buy the book are interested and are focused on the parts about The Eagles! That's what got their attention and what they're interested in hearing about. Why didn't you name it "The Life Of Don Felder" if you wanted to focus the attention on yourself?

Seriously! And once again, he acts like he was practically forced to participate in the orgies and drug parties going on. He says no one could resist unless he was a "saint" - however, didn't Bernie? But of course it was undoubtedly MUCH WORSE for Felder. :rolleyes:

At least he said Frey and Henley weren't evil.

Freypower
08-28-2008, 06:21 PM
The Eagles DON'T have a 'great romance' with Jann Wenner. It's been the opposite for decades. They have had to prise any coverage from Mr Wenner out of him with the greatest difficulty.

He says he totally rearranged Hotel California and then gets upset when the credits were changed to read Henley/Frey/Felder (then of course puts in the dig that Glenn contributed nothing to the rearrangement). He really does seem to believe that he wrote the entire song. I find it extremely difficult to believe that Glenn contributed nothing to it, but that is Felder's entire rationale, that Glenn has no talent at all. The only person he talks about here is Henley, and he makes Henley sound like a humourless control freak, as opposed to Glenn, who apparently did nothing for the band's entire career.

The diatribes about 'greed and power' sound very hollow when Felder is the one 'asking questions' about money. And he forgets that after 1994 he was no longer an equal partner. Yet he refers to both of them as his 'partners'.

The only part I agree with is the band's lack of spontaneity but unfortunately it seems that it is too late to do anything about that now.

As for the album's songwriting credits, which he claims he hasn't seen (!) that makes me uneasy too, but again, what can be done about that? If they can't sit in the same room and write songs together, well, they can't. If Don prefers to write with Steuart Smith and Glenn prefers to still use Jack Tempchin or to write alone, that has to be accepted. There was a specific reason for using How Long, to get back to where they once belonged, so to speak. We could go on all day about the weaknesses of the album, and there are some, regarding distribution of talent (Felder no doubt would agree that Tim and Joe are underused).

The attempt to justify why he didn't attempt to continue making music doesn't wash.

But it's not a 'revenge' book. Of course it isn't. I could go on, but why bother?

Freypower
08-28-2008, 06:57 PM
Oh, and by the way, I don't hear American radio, but I was under the impression that How Long was a huge radio hit. Anyway, he has to admit that the album was a 'phenomenon' despite what he thinks. The days of hearing a song on the radio and then buying the album are gone.

I could be nasty and say that at least Frey and Henley HAD solo careers, but you know....

Prettymaid
08-29-2008, 11:40 AM
That's what I love about Joe. Every time they tour he does his songs just a little differently.

sodascouts
11-16-2008, 04:50 PM
Some new interviews. This brief one is from The Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20081115.EAGLES15/TPStory/Entertainment).

sodascouts
11-16-2008, 04:54 PM
In this interview with the Toronto Star (http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/Music/article/536479), Felder says that there were MAJOR edits that took out the vast majority of dirt. He's never said this before.

sodascouts
11-16-2008, 04:58 PM
So, according to the above, what Felder wrote about the Eagles was so potentially damaging that they sued to have major chunks removed... and he STILL doesn't get why they don't respond to his "reaching out."

:headshake:

EagleLady
11-16-2008, 04:59 PM
How the hell can he assume Glenn and Don are unhappy? what a cocky bastard

Freypower
11-16-2008, 06:26 PM
All the 'pumping gas at Mr Henley's station' and the stuff about 'Henley' wanted to release Hotel California as a single suggest that STILL, he does not understand how the band functioned.

I look at Don and Glenn and I don't see two unhappy men. Perhaps he should think of the fact that they were unhappy when they were with him. That is a huge call to make. He's the one who instead of attempting to be creative rants on and on and on about the two of them. They have moved on. He hasn't.

I find it very difficult to believe that all the 'dynamics of the band' stuff was taken out (unless Glenn was unhappy at being reduced to a walk-on part). Felder is making excuses for the book being a self-indulgent whine.

sodascouts
11-16-2008, 07:07 PM
I look at Don and Glenn and I don't see two unhappy men. Perhaps he should think of the fact that they were unhappy when they were with him.

LOL! Good point! Getting rid of Felder probably turned a lot of their frowns upside-down. ;)

GlennLover
11-16-2008, 11:33 PM
Right on FP & Soda! Don H has indicated that the band would not have continued on without the personnel change.

TimothyBFan
11-17-2008, 09:02 AM
That last interview bothers me twice as much as the others for some reason. Can we say "bitter"?:headshake: GET OVER IT FELDER!!! Every interview drives me just a little crazier than the last and I lose a little more respect for Mr Felder (if that is possible).

This part in particular made me really grit my teeth:

"While Felder was still reeling from the heady effects of his new gig back in 1974, he had no way of knowing that he'd soon become a cog in a dysfunctional machine that was in the service of Henley and Frey. Clearly, Henley and Frey had seized control of the band in its early days and are characterized in Felder's book as cruel and cold, self-serving opportunists who traded their musical integrity for rock 'n' roll spoils.

"They saw the Eagles as a production, like a play, not as a band," Felder said. "They wanted it note-perfect at every performance, a reproduction of the recordings.

"There was very little creativity in that band after Hotel California. We were living off the past – just look at how many greatest-hits packages the Eagles have released.

"Sooner or later we all came to realize we were just pumping gas at Mr. Henley's station," Felder added, repeating a quote attributed to one of the Eagles' producers in Heaven and Hell."

Boy that really bothers me!!! :enraged:

Freypower
11-17-2008, 07:41 PM
I can see why it made you angry. None of it is true. If he felt there was no creativity there, he could have left. As for the number of Greatest Hits releases you show me a major band that hasn't repackaged their material several times. If you look at it, it's only GH1&2, Selected Works and Very Best Of plus a couple of budget compilations. That is not that much.

I don't know what he is talking about when he says Frey & Henley 'sacrificed their musical integrity'. Frey and Henley continued to make music. What has this man done except brag for 7 years about how he wrote one song?

Again, if there were even a vague hint of self-criticism, this would not be so hard to take.

GlennLover
11-18-2008, 12:07 AM
the sorry tale of his 27 years as the drug-addled, groupie-banging, often abused and eventually discarded guitarist with the enduringly popular American country rock band


This quote bugs me.

I also heard Felder say in a very recent interview that he was fired after being in the band for 27 years. :eyebrow: It was 27 years from the time he joined the band in 1973 until he was let go in 2000, but does he not remember that the Eagles did not exist from 1980 to 1994 :?: He did not have 27 years service with the band.

Anything to make Glenn & Don look bad.

sodascouts
11-18-2008, 12:51 AM
Very true. He was in the Eagles for 11 years (1974-1980; 1994-1999).

MikeA
11-18-2008, 10:39 AM
In reality, all of them including Meisner and Leadon were "in the band" during the 80's. They just weren't performing. They were still getting royalty checks from sells of all of the works they were each a part of.

sodascouts
11-18-2008, 11:09 AM
Since when is collecting royalty checks the same as "in the band"? I daresay if you asked Bernie if he was still "in the Eagles" because he still got checks, he would give you a resounding "NO."

Not to mention that a lot of non-Eagles get royalties as well from Eagles material. Are they also "in the band"?

Is Ringo Starr still "in the Beatles" though the group has been disbanded for decades and half its members are dead?

ticky
11-18-2008, 11:36 AM
I do seem to remember someone says Ringo IS a Beatle ...

EagleLady
11-18-2008, 11:44 AM
That was a little rude Soda.

sodascouts
11-18-2008, 12:02 PM
I do seem to remember someone says Ringo IS a Beatle ...

But would you say he is currently in the Beatles because he gets royalties?

EagleLady, I don't know what your definition of "rude" is, but in my book disagreeing with someone's logic is not "rude." However, calling someone ELSE rude is not very nice. Perhaps you should consider that before you toss the term around.

MikeA
11-18-2008, 12:03 PM
Since when is collecting royalty checks the same as "in the band"? I daresay if you asked Bernie if he was still "in the Eagles" because he still got checks, he would give you a resounding "NO."

Not to mention that a lot of non-Eagles get royalties as well from Eagles material. Are they also "in the band"?

Is Ringo Starr still "in the Beatles" though the group has been disbanded for decades and half its members are dead?

Well, certainly they are not "in the band" as far as performing goes. But like Ringo and Paul who are and always will be "Beatles", the guys who were in the band and are receiving compensation for their contributions to the success of the band, are still involved from a financial standpoint.

As for the 80's, certainly Felder was "in the band" as much as were Frey, Henley, Walsh, and Schmit. You could make an argument that Meisner and Leadon were not a part of it during the 80's, but you really can't leave Felder out any more than any of those currently performing now who were in the band when they took their Vacation.

I'm not an insider with the Eagles, but I very much appreciate the talent that Felder brought to the band while there! He is bitter now. That is obvious.

But I daresay that there is bitterness on the parts of more than must Felder. He only told "his side" of the story. No one could do more than that. Should he have? Well, there was no decision reached on that point by the legal system. If I'm not mistaken, the Eagles LTD settled out of court with him so they must have not been extremely confident that they had a case against him that would come out in their favor.

I only know that there are two sides to every story (at least TWO). We've heard Felder's side. We have not heard the Eagles side. They pretty much refuse to talk about it.

It must be economically advantageous to Felder to follow the path he is on or he wouldn't be doing it <LOL>. If he has an audience, then I say more power to him <LOL>

If what he is saying is liableous (is that a word?) then The Eagles can sue him again.

EagleLady
11-18-2008, 12:06 PM
Well, certainly they are not "in the band" as far as performing goes. But like Ringo and Paul who are and always will be "Beatles", the guys who were in the band and are receiving compensation for their contributions to the success of the band, are still involved from a financial standpoint.

As for the 80's, certainly Felder was "in the band" as much as were Frey, Henley, Walsh, and Schmit. You could make an argument that Meisner and Leadon were not a part of it during the 80's, but you really can't leave Felder out any more than any of those currently performing now who were in the band when they took their Vacation.

I'm not an insider with the Eagles, but I very much appreciate the talent that Felder brought to the band while there! He is bitter now. That is obvious.

But I daresay that there is bitterness on the parts of more than must Felder. He only told "his side" of the story. No one could do more than that. Should he have? Well, there was no decision reached on that point by the legal system. If I'm not mistaken, the Eagles LTD settled out of court with him so they must have not been extremely confident that they had a case against him that would come out in their favor.

I only know that there are two sides to every story (at least TWO). We've heard Felder's side. We have not heard the Eagles side. They pretty much refuse to talk about it.

It must be economically advantageous to Felder to follow the path he is on or he wouldn't be doing it <LOL>. If he has an audience, then I say more power to him <LOL>

If what he is saying is liableous (is that a word?) then The Eagles can sue him again.


Why are you sticking up for Felder? They would not have continued on with him.

sodascouts
11-18-2008, 12:07 PM
Felder undeniably contributed to the band, as he is quick to remind us. ;) He is a genius at the guitar and I respect his talent.

While the settlement does indicate that the Eagles were not confident of winning, it also indicates that Felder was not confident he would win either.

EagleLady: MikeA can feel free to "stick up for Felder" although honestly all I see is a man who is making some good points, not someone who is on a charge to defend Felder.

Adults can discuss things reasonably without accusations.

EagleLady
11-18-2008, 12:09 PM
Well IMO, I wouldn't stick up for such a whiner like Felder

ticky
11-18-2008, 12:10 PM
But would you say he is currently in the Beatles because he gets royalties?

EagleLady, I don't know what your definition of "rude" is, but in my book, disagreeing with someone is not "rude." However, calling someone ELSE rude is not very nice. Perhaps you should consider that before you toss the term around.

Not because of the Royalty checks persay, but definatly because of the popularity. I mean I listen to Abby road and I dont think "AHh the FORMER Beatles..." just as when I listen to Misner sing Try and Love Again, I dont think "OH yes.. the Former Eagles..." I dont know if it's the history or the popularity that makes a person a member of a band (IE the guy who Ringo replaced I wouldnt call a Beatle) but either way, I just KNOW that the albums I listen to that include Misner, Leadon and even Felder are The Eagles .

ticky
11-18-2008, 12:11 PM
Well IMO, I wouldn't stick up for such a whiner like Felder

Maybe he is a whiner, but you cant deny his talent and his contributions. Im not Felder fan, but the guy can tear it up!

EagleLady
11-18-2008, 12:11 PM
But would you say he is currently in the Beatles because he gets royalties?

EagleLady, I don't know what your definition of "rude" is, but in my book disagreeing with someone's logic is not "rude." However, calling someone ELSE rude is not very nice. Perhaps you should consider that before you toss the term around.



Perhaps you could have given your opinion without such a biting tone IMO

sodascouts
11-18-2008, 12:16 PM
Not because of the Royalty checks persay, but definatly because of the popularity. I mean I listen to Abby road and I dont think "AHh the FORMER Beatles..." just as when I listen to Misner sing Try and Love Again, I dont think "OH yes.. the Former Eagles..." I dont know if it's the history or the popularity that makes a person a member of a band (IE the guy who Ringo replaced I wouldnt call a Beatle) but either way, I just KNOW that the albums I listen to that include Misner, Leadon and even Felder are The Eagles .

I think a lot of people have that emotional response, and it's a legitimate one. I know that even if the Eagles disbanded never to be heard from again, a lot of people will still call them "Eagles" forever.

I guess I just think that such an emotional claim isn't the same as an official membership in a band, you know? JMHO.

Anyway, this was never meant to be a big deal! lol

ticky
11-18-2008, 12:29 PM
Not a big deal *G* a lively discussion!! *G* who would I have to have lively discussions with if it werent for you Soda LOL
and yes, current membership of a band is important, but how do you determine band membership with something like music which continues to have it's own life long after the band or it's members have moved on? I completely agree that The Eagles today do not include Felder, Misner and Leadon (thats a given of course) but the music remains.. :) IMHO

MikeA
11-18-2008, 01:54 PM
I'll be the sacrificial lamb or devil's advocate here. But I want to have the leisure to formulate a meaningful response. My intent really isn't to stir up hate and discontent. I just tend to look at things "objectively". It is my nature.

One thing though that we should all remember is that these guys are artists. I had marks on my report card when in elementary school "Does Not Play Well With Others" <LOL>. The Eagles (i.e., Frey and Henley along with Rhonstat, CSN&Y, POCO....ect...) were all in the ground breaking climate of the late 60's and early 70's as the singer-songwriter designation of musicians was forming itself. On top of that, Frey and Henley were from the beginning trying to make successful a genre of music that had not been successful before (country rock). Combine that with their young ages. They were blessed with tremendous success before they had the maturity to deal with it! Can we say "Volatile?"

They did methodically plan out their strategy and that included enlisting Leadon and Meisner. Later on, they furthered their goals to success by taking the next step for them by moving more into Rock and to do that, they needed another type musician....Felder. One album later, they kicked it up another notch by hiring Walsh and later still, by replacing Meisner with Schmit.

Note that with Leadon and Meisner, partnership as an Eagle was part of the agreement. It was the same with Felder. These three were full partners in the Eagles LTD. Walsh and Schmit were not and are not partners in the Eagles LTD. In the case of Meisner and Leadon, they "officially" left "voluntarily".

Felder, for whatever reason, did not leave even when it was obvious that he was a bone of contention. Why should he? He was as much of a partner of the Eagles corporation as was Frey or Henley.

At that point, I really think that one of two things took place and I do not know if the public will ever know what really happened. But on the surface, it appears that "The Eagles" either made a horrible judgmental call that violated Felder's rights as a Partner or they realized what they were doing and knew they were stepping over the legal lines and decided to do it anyway! They had to have known that you can't FIRE a partner! You would have to assume that they had legal counsel that would have advised them as to the legal Pandora's Box they were about to open up. They could either buy him out or make life so difficult for him in the band that he would leave on his on or Felder could have sold his partnership and walked away. Who knows what offers were made or what conditions existed!

Whatever the case, they got what "The Eagles" wanted eventually though I'm sure it cost them dearly to get it. Felder was out. Maybe it was something that had to be done to allow the Eagles to "move on" where Don and Glenn (the ONLY two remaining Partners in the corporation) wanted it to go. Maybe it was even cheaper to do it that way than to settle without the Judicial System's involvement. But the Eagles were in the driver's seat through all of this. When they "Fired" him, they engaged the game. Felder responded in the only way he could short of rolling over and playing dead. He Sued.

As for his book....I've certainly read a lot worse accounts written by artists! And, knowing something of the background of the 60's and 70's musicians, I do not have a lot of trouble seeing the issues from Felder's viewpoint.

You could say that Frey and Henley elected to take the "high road" by not responding to allegations made in the book. Maybe so. Or maybe they simply believe it is beneath their notice. If they do think it beneath them, then we are all probably making a lot out of something that Don and Glenn do not consider worth rebutting.

I've said it before and will say it again, I love these guys as musicians, but they are NOT ROLE MODELS! They were back in the day, exceptional pioneers in music. Today, they are very good performers (I do not there is anyone better!) though I do not think myself that their current contributions of new material is up to the standards they established in the Sevienties.

They were and are very successful in what they did and still do. But they took it to the limits too! Today, the remaining members of The Eagles Corporation are both artists and also very successful Businessmen. I admire them for their success. But I wouldn't want my son to pattern his life on the flowchart that any of the Musicians of the 60's and 70's charted out!

AS for "sticking up for Felder", he really doesn't need any of my help. But were he to offer me say .00001% of the setlement in the lawsuit, I could retire and would stick up for him then! <LOL>

EagleLady
11-18-2008, 02:06 PM
Well Mike seeing as Felder was a source of contention, I feel that by firing him, they were able to go on without any stress or contention. As for the role models thing, well I see it differently. I see them as being complete role models for someone to look by.

MikeA
11-18-2008, 02:17 PM
Well Mike seeing as Felder was a source of contention, I feel that by firing him, they were able to go on without any stress or contention. As for the role models thing, well I see it differently. I see them as being complete role models for someone to look by.

But that's my point EL. They couldn't legally "FIRE" him. He was one of three equal partners in a corporation. They could buy him out. But that was the only legal way they could exclude him from the Band.

And as for the role model thing....no, I won't even go there! <LOL>

EagleLady
11-18-2008, 02:30 PM
I say we should just let sleeping dogs lie. I don't really like Felder's attitude anyways.

Freypower
11-18-2008, 06:13 PM
But that's my point EL. They couldn't legally "FIRE" him. He was one of three equal partners in a corporation. They could buy him out. But that was the only legal way they could exclude him from the Band.

And as for the role model thing....no, I won't even go there! <LOL>


The point is that when the band reformed he lost his equal status as a partner - to which he AGREED. He agreed to have his status downgraded. Therefore they were perfectly entitled to fire him. And to me there is no point saying they could not do it, when they did.

MikeA
11-18-2008, 07:45 PM
The point is that when the band reformed he lost his equal status as a partner - to which he AGREED. He agreed to have his status downgraded. Therefore they were perfectly entitled to fire him. And to me there is no point saying they could not do it, when they did.

Hi FP,

I don't think he ever relinquished his partnership. He might have agreed to take a low profile so that the reunion could take place with him being a part of it. I do seem to recall something like that happening. But that was what the lawsuit was primarily about....unlawful termination. You'll certainly remember that that lawsuit drug out what seemed like "forever" and never was settled in court. They reached an agreement in the private sector which I assume was an agreement that was satisfying to all parties concerned.

The Eagles did get what they wanted...separation from Felder, but it couldn't have ever happened in such a way as an Employer terminates employment with an Employee. The closest analogy I can think of is if Abercrombie tried to "fire" Fitch....or Sears maybe trying to "fire" Robuck. One could buy the other out if the other wanted to sell, but one couldn't just decide that he didn't want to do business with the other and kick him out.

The Eagles went on to produce a new album without Felder. Felder wrote a book. I'm happy for both parties. It's pretty obvious that the book did the Eagles no real harm....look at their sold out concert performances! Multiply that by the costs of the tickets! They ain't hurtin'! <LOL>

I would imagine that the sales of the book and the notoriety that Felder has achieved with it and the cash settlement he got from Eagles LTD have hurt him none either.

And, I'm thinking that as with any writer, any publicity he gets is good publicity. The more people who hear about the book and the controversy surrounding it, the more copies it will sell. Felder's got to love that <smile>.

Okay, back to the original comments to my first post on this topic:

I am NOT sticking up for Felder. I'm simply stating the facts surrounding the legality of his termination of partnership with the Eagles, as I know them. I do not claim that I know the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

But if the Truth as I know it, be known, I don't think any of the guys were Angels. I would be sort of disappointed if they were! They are Musicians with tremendous talent and I appreciate that in any Musician and in particularly in the Eagles! With that talent and success, they also carried with them tremendous egos. That goes with the territory.

I do appreciate the talent that every doggone one of them has demonstrated time and time again since their first release. I didn't become a fan of theirs because they were Saints nor because they were Sinners. I fell in love with what they did as Musicians!

Knowing that every darn one of them had their faults detracts not at all from my devotion to them as musicians. I really don't care if they steal candy from babies and cheat at solitaire....it doesn't change their ability entertain better than any other group that has ever existed.

And THAT is why I am one of the biggest fans of the Eagles and each of the individuals that make up that group! ALL of them including Felder. Whatever it took to accomplish the success they were after during each phase of their growth was a commitment they made. Each change in the makeup of the band was plotted and executed for a reason. And, each action they took has enhanced their success....even the separation from Felder.

I do admit that I do not understand that separation very well, other than from a standpoint of personality conflict. Prior to that "transaction" the separations had been more practical though there was conflict in personalities there as well. They terminated relationship with Leadon and Meisner with the idea of moving away from Folk/Country and more into Rock and brought Felder in to further that move. The same happened when they brought Walsh in though in Joe's case, there was some compassion involved I think. I think Joe has never forgotten that nor do I think he is ungrateful for that act on the part of the Eagles....but it was a two way "transaction" that benefited both Walsh and the Eagles.

I do think that the loss of Don Felder hurt the Eagles "Musically", but I also believe that if they could not work together toward getting LROE finished and continue touring as they so obviously wanted to do, then it was predestined that somehow they sever relationships with Felder. This they did and I think they did it with their eyes open knowing the consequences.

Prettymaid
11-19-2008, 09:57 AM
Thank you Mike. I'm rather objective about it too, but am not willing to receive the wrath of The Border members!

Most of the members here see the guys as handsome iconic figures and will always stick up for them through thick or thin as if they were their own husbands!

I'm afraid Felder has become a bad word here.

sodascouts
11-19-2008, 02:44 PM
Ouch, PM! That's pretty harsh criticism.

If I have ever given anyone the impression that I will be angry if they support Felder, I apologize. Everyone has a right to their opinion and, as I said before, I am happy to have an intelligent discussion with anyone on the topic. MikeA has several good points.

By the same token, though, if someone believes that the Eagles were right to fire Felder, that doesn't mean their opinion is not "objective" or that they worship the guys. It simply means their opinion is different from yours.

As long as there's no attacking going on, I don't see a problem. It's true that some people feel that if you disagree with someone else, and say so, that you are being rude. I don't think MikeA is that delicate a flower, are you Mike? ;) I appreciate someone who can hold their own.

I know sometimes people think that if they disagree with an opinion of an administrator, they'll "get into trouble." Let me assure everyone that that is not the case on The Border. I welcome your opinions and again, if I have somehow given the impression that I do not, I am sincerely sorry and will work harder to clear it up.

I'm afraid that doesn't mean I will hesitate to give my opinion, though! lol

MikeA
11-19-2008, 03:05 PM
No Soda, my skin is pretty thick.

But I really don't want anyone thinking that I am attacking either THEM or their position. I'm not.

As to whether or not the Eagles LTD was "right" to get rid of Felder....I think I understand why they needed to do it. My only point was that they couldn't legally fire him. But if they could continue without him, but couldn't continue with him, and if they wanted to continue, then it was pretty much etched in granite that they had to part company. I just think they took a pretty sloppy way of doing it <LOL> It would have probably been a LOT cheaper to have just bought him off at a price that Felder was willing to accept in order to resign and turn over his 1/3 control of Eagles LTD. I think that would have been much cheaper than what they probably ended up paying plus the legal fees and the delay in being about to release anything "new" that Felder would have had no claim on as a member in the Partnership (Eagles LTD).

I wanted to point out the fact that there were a LOT of circumstances, many of which we know nothing about, that might have and probably did trigger Felder into saying the things he said. Nothing is ever done without reason even when the "reason" is founded upon something that isn't correct. Felder obviously believed it to be correct and as long as his perceptions were what he was experiencing (right or wrong), he was then being honest as to what he wrote.

I'm re-reading that and it doesn't even make a lot of sense to ME! Felder might be wrong, but he I think, was "telling it like it was" from the way he perceived it. That at least, is "honest". After all, this is an 'AUTOBIOGRAPHY'.

If someone writes an autobiography and describes in detail having a friendship with a pink rabbit with purple poka-dots, and if that is something that he actually experienced...fact or fantasy, it would be "factual" to him and in writing about it, he is being "honest".

Since his book is about HIM (Felder) then what he experienced from his own perspective was a perfectly legitimate situation for him to document. As I've said before, there are two sides to every story and we are only hearing Felder's as Frey and Henley have chosen not to defend the allegations.

sodascouts
11-19-2008, 03:10 PM
But I really don't want anyone thinking that I am attacking either THEM or their position. I'm not.

As far as I can tell, no one thinks that.

Regarding Felder's perspective: I too think Felder was being honest about his emotions.

Prettymaid
11-19-2008, 03:12 PM
Ouch, PM! That's pretty harsh criticism.


Sorry Soda, I didn't mean for it to be critical. By objective I simply meant that I have not read the book, nor have I read anything about the lawsuit.

I have noticed quite amusingly that some of the Felder threads don't get much of a response, and I have read others' posts concerning Felder. They usually aren't pretty!

My post was meant to be tongue in cheek - again, sorry if I offended!

MikeA
11-19-2008, 05:54 PM
Some of you are already members of my little Forum. If you are, I hope you have read my review of Felder's book.

If you are not, maybe you can get to the review at the following link if you are interested

http://www.mvabercrombie.net/Forum/index.php?topic=89.0

If you wish to join, go to
http://www.mvabercrombie.net/Forum

and in your profile, request access to the Music group. You can also ask and be admitted to Golf and my Casino related forums as well at that time.

I'd love to have you over there though there is a lot of redundancy between my forum and Borders here. BTW.....I refer everyone on my forum to Borders here. I'm not trying to compete with Borders.

GlennLover
11-19-2008, 07:22 PM
I just thought that I wold add MHO here. My intention is not to add any fuel to the fire.

I agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinion of the situation & the actions of the parties involved, without criticism. I like to hear all points of view. Personally, I commend Don & Glenn for taking the high road & rising above the criticism. Especially Glenn, since as far as I know he has said nothing at all about Felder leaving. From everything I have read of Glenn, it seems to me that he is one to offer praise as he sees fit, but he says very little or nothing if he feels very derogatory towards someone.


As for buying Felder out, my observation is that Felder would rather have the glory of being an Eagle rather than the money & probably didn't want a buy out, at least at first. I remember hearing of the incident where a woman thought that he was Don Henley & he carried on as if he was. He didn't bother to correct her. Again, just my very humble opinon.

Mike, you made a comment about the Eagles being role models. I just wanted to clarify my thoughts on that. I certainy don't consider them positive role models for their behaviour in the seventies. Quite the opposite. It is the fact that they have risen above that & become responsible citizens, husbands & fathers. That they kicked the drug & drink habits & the wild actions, all "that "childish stuff", as I have heard Glenn call it in interviews. Don has also admitted that they did some very stupid things in their past. All four have worked to "give something back" through their charitable work. This is a large part of what attracted me to Glenn in the first place.

Anyway, I had a little time on my hands & decided to give my 2 cents worth. :)

MikeA
11-19-2008, 09:21 PM
I just thought that I wold add MHO here. My intention is not to add any fuel to the fire.
:)

Very well Stated Glennlover. No sarcasm at all in that praise!

You are very correct, it was the reference to their "role modelness" (??) of the Seventies to which I was making reference in that other post. And like you, I really do admire anyone who can unload their Monkey. I am a smoker and have not been able to kick that nasty habit. I have carried that hairy beast around for almost 50 years so I can seriously admire anyone who can climb out from under addiction and reclaim their lives.

Role Model for today....I don't know. I'd really have to think about that one. Understand me though. My hesitation is not because of any immoral conduct that I am aware of. It certainly isn't because of the altruistic endeavors they indulge in.

But the reality is, they are part of a HUGE Financial Machine. They are in BIG BUSINESS. They are dealing with hundreds of millions of dollars in worth. I don't know what goes on behind the scenes (maybe I'd like to find out and then make up my mind, but the chances of that happening now are less than ZERO <LOL>). But I'm sure that managing all those millions would make it very difficult for them to live what most of us would consider a "normal" life.

I really hope that for each one of the Eagles (past, current and future) that they are able to really enjoy their lives...their families...their fortunes.

I say that because I have known extremely wealthy and powerful people on a very close basis. Life is NOT a bowl of cherries for them. They are married as much to their careers and to the wealth they have accumulated as they are to their wives and husbands. I'm speaking from PERSONAL experience and do not know if I could chose that sort of a role model to build my life upon. I know that these people have to be very VERY careful when they let someone into their lives. They are always suspicious of someone trying to befriend their money or power instead of befriending their Person. Most of the time, they have to be extremely careful of what they say, how they display emotion, how they deal with any situation for fear that these things will be noticed and used against them.

Okay, that was not why I said I wouldn't want my son to pattern his life after them (I wouldn't expect him at his age to understand it). That was purely because of the bad decisions they made when they were on the rise and when they were first up on top of the mountain of success. But, you have to ask yourself...."would they be who they are today had they NOT indulged themselves as they did when they were in their Twenties?" I don't know. We are each the summation of every experience we have ever had.

Ive always been a dreamer
11-26-2008, 01:32 AM
Sorry, I’m a little late weighing in on this, but my time on the board has been limited lately. The first thing I want to say is that I, for one, always welcome a spirited debate as long as it is done rationally, fairly, and respectfully. I am a firm believer that there are three sides to every story.

Even though I have vehemently criticized Felder, you can go back through this thread and see that I have never maintained that Don or Glenn were gods that should be put on a pedestal. However, it seems to me that any of us who defend them are often unfairly accused of blind adoration and worship. As much as I love these two guys and, yes, think they are incredibly hot, I do NOT see them ‘as handsome iconic figures that I will always stick up for through thick or thin as if they were my husbands!’ I have criticized both Don and Glenn for various things on more than one occasion.

I look at it as two separate things. It is not a case that if you are for Henley and Frey, then you have to be against Felder or vice versa. I acknowledge that he is an amazing musician, and I believe that he made some incredible musical contributions to the band. My problem with Felder stems primarily from my perception that he views himself as a perpetual victim in his book and in subsequent interviews. I honestly do not understand how he can criticize Frey and Henley for being money-hungry and power-hungry without seeing himself exactly the same way. I do not believe he is being intentionally dishonest – but I do believe that he has lost some of his objectivity in his recollection of various events. I have mentioned in some of my previous posts in this thread that anyone that exercises some measure of critical thinking will find that there are quite a few contradictions throughout his book and interviews.

With regard to the way the Eagles handled his termination, I maintain that it is difficult to make any real judgments since there are so few details available to us. Is it clear whether or not Felder was still a full partner in Eagles, Ltd. after his contract was restructured in 1994? If so, do we know whether Felder would have agreed to a buyout? One thing we do know is that Glenn and Don wanted him out, so that’s what happened. It is also clear that by the time he was given his walking papers along with three $1000 checks, Azoff, Frey, and Henley knew that a lawsuit was inevitable. My assumption is that the legality of the termination was dealt with in the settlement. I don’t believe that we can draw any conclusions from the fact that both parties felt it was in their best interest to settle the lawsuit rather than to go to trial.

I do wish Felder well in his future endeavors. I have to admit I’d rather see him try to move forward with new creative ventures instead of spending the rest of his years living off of his Eagles’ income. Unfortunately, it is probably very unrealistic for him to cling to the idea that things will ever be ‘patched’ up with his former bandmates.

MikeA
11-26-2008, 08:10 AM
IABAD,

Good points. I do not know much about how the contract of Felder was renegotiated back When Hell Froze over either. I doubt (opinion ONLY here) that Felder would have agreed to reduce anything on the financial end of the contract (see comments on Wikipedia further down this post). And, again from what I have heard, there were a lot of compromises made by more than just Felder, by all partners and other members of the band, to facilitate getting them all back together for that 1994 tour. In order to make that happen, I can see Felder relinquishing or reducing some of the decision making power in the band.

The only reference I can find from an unbiased source is that Felder did give up equal shares of income from the release of the Boxed Set that sold for $60 a copy. According to Wikipedia, this amounted to Felder receiving 6 times less than did Frey and Henley for that one product. Nothing was stated about the control in the Corporation. There was a nebulous mention in that Winkipedia document of an allegation by Felder that Glenn and Don had at least attempted to increase their share from equal thirds to some undisclosed greater portion. There was no confirmation that this attempt actually happened or that it was put into practice.

But I think he would have been an absolute fool to have given up any share of the financial aspect of the Eagles LTD without a court battle in 1994. It could have happened. I do recall what happened with Stepenwolf when the leader (German guy whose name escapes me) got the others in the band blown out of their minds on drugs and then coerced them into signing away their rights to anything having to do with the name of the band and if I recall correctly, playing any of its music! Felder may have wanted to play in a heavyweight band again so bad that he might have though it worth it to give up part of that partnership. However, it is blatantly obvious to me anyway, that he didn't fully give up partnership else that lawsuit would never have happened.

If the conflict between Felder and the other partners of Eagles LTD (in this case it was just Don and Glenn as far as I know for I have personally heard Joe say to ME that he didn't factor into that and that there was a lot of "garbage" dating to pre-Joe (those are Joe's words as near as I can recall them) and I just can't see Tim having those types of conflicts (and that is meant as a good thing about Tim)) was so great that they could not or would not continue performing together, then some action had to be taken to sever relations with Felder completely.

My only criticism of Don and Glenn is the way in which they went about removing "the conflict". I do not criticize them for doing it. Maybe they did try to buy him out. We have virtually no information concerning that, or at least I don't. But if they did, whatever the point of the negotiation was, it was unsatisfactory to Felder. And as a partner in Eagles LTD, Don Felder had every right to be a part of the negotiations having to do with anything concerning the Corporation. This just happened to be a negotiation with the heads of the Corporation to FIRE one of its Partners. I can't imagine Felder agreeing to THAT <LOL>!

You are all correct when you clarify that resolution obtained out of court indicates no "right or wrong" on the part of either side of the conflict. It is certainly possible that Felder agreed to relinquish all claims of revenue to which he was entitled for his years with the Corporation and that he got no cash settlement from them at all for forfeiting his partnership in Eagles LTD. They may have just talked him into walking away a happy camper. Maybe. But I kinda doubt it! I base that on the suits and countersuits and duration of the arbitrated conflict. Felder was suing for "unlawful termination" and the other partners of Eagles LTD were suing Felder for "breach of contract" having to do with a book that Felder was "attempted to sell the rights to a "tell-all" book".

It makes no difference "to we the fans of The Eagles" what the details were. Don Felder now has whatever settlement that was mutually arrived at and he has his income from the book. I think it unlikely that either Felder or his family will have any financial concerns if they manage whatever they did get from the settlement properly. He has royalties to the sales of four albums that were released while he was a partner in the band plus two or three compilations of "greatest hits" and one of those "greatest hits" albums was the biggest selling album in HISTORY! It will be interesting to see what Felder does musically in the future.

I do think one thing is abundantly clear though. We as fans of music will almost certainly never hear Don Felder, Joe Walsh, Don Henley, Glenn Frey and Timothy B. Schmit play live together again. And that is OUR LOSS.

Ive always been a dreamer
11-26-2008, 04:41 PM
Well, I still think it is unclear about whether or not Felder was a full partner in Eagles, Ltd. after the 1994 reunion. He has even made statements in recent interviews to the effect that he was "standing up for the agreement made when they started". That indicates to me that he wanted to go back to the agreement made in the 70’s. Whatever the case, I don’t think it was unreasonable that Frey and Henley felt that they were entitled to a larger piece of the pie after the resumption. Felder has never claimed that he was under any duress or misunderstanding when he agreed to his 1994 contract. So the question to me is who went back on their word? Again, I don’t know the answer – I’m just asking the question.

It appears that he was never satisfied with the terms of the ’94 contract. I have always maintained that if he was unhappy with it, he should have refused to sign it. He could have sued or left the band at that point. Mike, you asked the question earlier, why should he have left? Well, aside from the wealth, power, and status of being in the Eagles, maybe to get out of what he describes as a miserable situation. So when Felder makes comments that it was always just about the music for him, does anyone really think that is believable?

The bottom line though is that unless someone else decides to provide us with more information, Felder's account of the events is all we have. As we've said, we may never get the whole story. I agree that the entire situation is very sad and his talent is missed. However, I think Steuart Smith is doing a very admirable job of filling the gap, and hope to see the guys continue on for a few more years. Glenn declared in February of this year that "band morale is at an all time high".

MikeA
11-26-2008, 08:20 PM
IABAD,

That is nebulous to me anyway...the renegotiation of the contract between Felder and Don and Glenn in '94. I cannot imagine why Felder would have ever signed away anything at that point unless he just wanted to perform with the band and "they" wouldn't perform under the existing contract with him. It may have been a case of Felder looking at the situation, his own financial situation and thinking....there is a lot of money in a reunion and a smaller part of it is still a big piece. And he may have just wanted to perform again as part of the Band that he was most successful with. Who knows for sure.

But even if it was about his percentage in cut, nothing I've read or heard indicates that he ceased being a Partner in the Eagles LTD during the renegotiations. So, his complaints about being "coerced" in '94 is all a moot point when it comes to the separate action brought against him by the attempt at "firing" him. If he was a Partner, I still maintain that they couldn't legally sever relationships with him in that particular manner. We'll never know that for sure either I guess since it was settled out of court.

But you and I and the rest of the Eagles fans can speculate until Kingdom Comes and never get anything resolved without a lot more information and I'm sure that type information is "gagged" in the terms of the out of court settlement.

I'm not worried about how much better things are for the three of them. I don't even know for sure that Felder is STILL not a partner though it would surprise me tremendously to find out he still was <LOL>. I can't imagine a settlement in which they would agree to allow him any kind of control in the Corporation.

It does bring up another point that I wonder about. I wonder if Felder still gets royalties from the sales of the albums the Eagles LTD released prior to 2001? It could have been part of the recent settlement that ALL rights to anything having to do with the Eagles was wiped out with the cash settlement. I hadn't thought about that because those old Eagles recordings are still selling and I'm sure they are still generating a LOT of revenue for those who still get a royalty off of each recording sold!

I'm not concerned about Glenn and Don. They are big boys and seem to have now the setup in the Eagles LTD that they've wanted. And, they are very obviously taking every advantage of it in that they are still producing music and touring with the Band and are being extremely successful with it.

But still, it saddens me that the polish that the lineup had musically with Felder in it during at least three of the four albums that Felder was involved with (not counting compilations), will not be something that there is much of any chance at all of being repeated. Maybe it wouldn't have been possible even if the lawsuit hadn't occurred. Certainly not according to the three parties involved! There is no doubt that there was a lot of stress "at the top".

But it is what it is. It's over. The Eagles live on. YEA!

sodascouts
11-27-2008, 01:15 AM
Another interview, this time from LancasterOnline.com (http://articles.lancasteronline.com/local/4/230552).

Ive always been a dreamer
11-27-2008, 01:22 AM
But it is what it is. It's over. The Eagles live on. YEA!

Now, we may have finally found some common ground that we can get all members of The Border to agree on! :wink:

Thanks for posting the new interview, Soda. Unfortunately, it is just a little more of the same ole stuff. :unimpressed:

MikeA
11-27-2008, 08:53 AM
After some digging, I found the following that was NOT spun towards the defense of Don Felder...if anything, it is spun the other way. One thing is very definitely true about this....It was a bloody mess! But, I guess that like many marriages, they start of right and maintain, or they end in gory battles under arbitration.

Reborn Eagles Lose Peaceful, Easy Feeling
By Jeff Leeds
December 08, 2002 in print edition C-1

Rock star Don Henley has become an outspoken advocate for musicians’ rights, complaining loudly and often about greedy music labels that allegedly shortchange bands out of their royalties.

“Record companies have been screwing artists for ages,” he said in an interview last year. “It’s time we organize and fight back.”

But now, in a little-noticed court case (?? <LOL>) bubbling through the system, the 55-year-old Henley finds himself accused of essentially the same unfair practices by one of his own former bandmates. Longtime Eagles guitarist Don Felder has sued Henley, claiming that the singer and fellow band member Glenn Frey cheated him out of his share of album and concert earnings.

The legal showdown follows an internal dispute last year in which Henley and Frey fired Felder, a member of the band since 1974. The case could expose the inner workings of one of America’s best-selling bands and decide what will become of hundreds of millions of dollars the Eagles earned after reuniting in 1994 for a successful tour and new album.

Feuds among band members are not uncommon in the music business. The Eagles turmoil is the latest in a long history of intra-band legal wrangling that runs from the Beatles to Guns N’ Roses to Destiny’s Child. But this dispute is unusual because it involves bandmates who had managed to play together for such a long time.

And it could be a particularly big blow to the reputation of Henley, who has blasted the music labels’ contracts and accounting practices in testimony before California lawmakers. He also leads the Recording Artists Coalition, which this year demanded fairer agreements and additional disclosure of financial data from the industry.

Felder’s lawsuit accuses Henley and Frey of bullying him into “one-sided” agreements divvying up band profits, withholding financial information and firing him without cause.

Felder, 55, declined to be interviewed but issued a statement to The Times referring to Henley: “It is absolutely the height of hypocrisy for him to attempt to reinvent himself as the champion for artists’ rights.”

The lawsuit, filed last year in Los Angeles County Superior Court, seeks past earnings and potentially lost income totaling more than $50 million. Felder is seeking to dissolve Eagles Ltd., the corporation that holds rights to the band’s name, some unreleased recordings and other property.

Henley, who is scheduled to give a deposition in the case Tuesday, could not be reached for comment last week. But Daniel M. Petrocelli, the attorney representing Henley and Frey, said the band’s various contracts had been disclosed and “fully approved” by Felder.

“He’s not offering to return the 15 or 20 million he made since 1994, is he?” Petrocelli said. “Everything in that complaint is: ‘I regret what I did, even though I made $15 or $20 million, and I want to rewrite history.’ Felder jumped at the chance to get back in this band when it reunited, because it made him a lot of money.”

Henley and Frey countersued Felder in August, alleging he breached his contract by writing and trying to sell a “tell-all” book about his life in the band. The book has not been published.

*

Possible Settlement

Record executives who have been following the case say they expect the two sides to reach a settlement eventually. But Felder has complained that Henley and Frey have withheld crucial documents during the discovery process, prompting a judge in the case to sanction them $5,600 earlier this year.

Irving Azoff, the band’s longtime manager and Henley’s personal manager, said: “I’m really proud of what Don Henley and other artists have accomplished” in pressuring labels to reform their business practices.

Felder, he added, “should be saying thank you.”

Azoff said the lawsuit would not interfere with the band’s plans. The Eagles have toured without Felder for the last year, adding guitarist Steuart Smith to their lineup. Azoff said the band was recording a new album and planned to mount another tour next year.

The Eagles are regarded as one of the most successful American bands ever, having sold more than 80 million albums in the U.S. alone since forming three decades ago. The band’s “Greatest Hits 1971-1975” ranks as the best-selling album of all time, with an estimated 28 million copies sold, according to the Recording Industry Assn. of America.

The Eagles were founded in 1971 by Henley, Frey, bassist Randy Meisner and guitarist Bernie Leadon – four musicians who had played backup for Linda Ronstadt. After scoring early hits such as “Witchy Woman” and “Take It Easy,” the band added Felder to its lineup in 1974 as part of a shift to a harder rock sound. The band also made him a shareholder in Eagles Ltd.

The band continued its ascent toward megastardom but was beset by infighting. Leadon left in 1975. Meisner left two years later, after the completion of the album “Hotel California,” whose title track was co-written by Felder.

After contentious recording sessions for their next album, the band members halted their work together in 1980. Each continued to receive royalties on sales of Eagles albums.

Each of the band members pursued solo careers. Henley and Frey scored the biggest individual successes, but neither approached the blockbuster success of the Eagles as a recording artist or concert draw.

After more than a decade apart, the band reunited in 1994 for a tour titled “Hell Freezes Over,” a reference to a remark Henley once made about the prospects for a reunion.

Before getting back together, Felder’s lawsuit says, the band members had always split album, concert and merchandise revenue equally. But, according to the suit, Henley and Frey demanded that a new corporate structure be designed for the reunion effort and threatened to fire him unless he agreed.

Under that 1994 agreement, the lawsuit contends, profit would flow into a series of new companies in which Henley and Frey each held about 30% stakes – double that of band members Felder, Timothy B. Schmit and Joe Walsh – as well as all voting stock.

The lawsuit says Henley and Frey engaged in self-dealing to divert money from the Eagles corporation to these new companies. In other instances, the lawsuit maintains, Henley and Frey paid “excessive compensation” to Azoff, in part by cutting sweetheart deals to divert profit to Azoff’s record label, Giant Records, and his merchandise sales firm.

The 1994 album “Hell Freezes Over” has sold an estimated 7.7 million copies, according to Nielsen SoundScan. Since ‘94, the Eagles have generated more than $240 million in ticket sales.

Attorney Petrocelli said Henley and Frey were entitled to bigger shares because they founded the band and wrote most of the Eagles’ songs. Since Felder’s departure, he said, the Eagles “have been playing to sold-out crowds, and there hasn’t been a single person asking for a refund because Don Felder was not there.”

The lawsuit also alleges that Henley improperly used his stake in the Eagles corporation as leverage in his own legal disputes. The lawsuit says Henley and Azoff steered the “Hell Freezes Over” album to Geffen Records as part of an agreement to settle Henley’s legal battle with the label over his solo contract.

After the settlement, Henley was released from the contract and then signed a three-album deal for an estimated $30 million with Warner Bros. Records, according to sources familiar with the situation.

*

Allegations of Bullying

Felder’s lawsuit says that in 2000, after a successful concert to ring in the new year, Henley and Frey again bullied him into signing a new deal that would further diminish his role. Under the agreement, Henley and Frey would receive triple the proceeds that Felder got from the band’s new boxed set. That collection has sold about 267,000 copies.

Over time, the lawsuit says, Henley and Frey grew increasingly upset with resistance from Felder and his business attorney, Barry Tyerman. Felder said he tried to “appease” Henley and Frey by dismissing Tyerman early last year. But he said Henley and Frey still notified him that he had been fired from the 30-year-old band.

What “I’ve learned from Don Henley, Glenn Frey and Irving Azoff is not to trust anyone,” Felder said.

According to the lawsuit, Henley and Frey told Felder that his termination also required him to sell back his shares in the Eagles corporation for a nominal sum. The suit says that Henley and Frey eventually informed Felder that they also would buy back his shares in the Eagles’ affiliated companies and that they enclosed three checks totaling a mere $3,000.

But for all of Felder’s grumbling about being squeezed out, Petrocelli said, his clients acted in the best interests of the Eagles.

They “felt, creatively – chemistry-wise and performance-wise – that he should no longer be part of the band,” he said. “They removed him, and they had every legal right to do so. This has been happening with rock ‘n’ roll bands since Day One.”

Ive always been a dreamer
11-28-2008, 01:15 AM
Thanks for finding this, Mike – I have actually seen and read that article before. As a matter of fact, it is one of the things I read that leads me to believe that Felder was no longer a full, equal partner in Eagles, Ltd. after 1994. The implication seems to be that he was subordinated to about the same level as Joe and Timothy. According to this article, Felder sued for 'termination without cause' rather than 'unlawful termination', which is a subtle but very important difference. The interview that Soda posted says he sued for breach of contract. In any event, my guess is that unless he was a full and equal partner at the time of his dismissal, then his termination was, in fact, legal. That may explain why Felder has indicated in recent interviews that he was claiming that his original 70’s agreement should be honored. It seems that his biggest argument here was that he was coerced and bullied into signing the 1994 and 2000 agreements, and, therefore, they should both be null and void.

MikeA
11-28-2008, 09:45 AM
Good or bad, we as fans, having an emotional attachment to the Band and its members, legally are considered "uninterested parties" and as such, will never have the disclosure that we might desire in satisfying our curiosities surrounding this lawsuit catered to.

We have to accept it that a settlement was reached that was agreeable to both concerned parties.

I just now laughed at myself and erased about thirty (<LOL>) pages of reply to IABAD's . I was quibbling over the "termination" clause which is totally academic at this point.

I think we are all content that Felder is no longer with the Eagles. If he were, then the Eagles wouldn't have a new album out and they wouldn't be touring.

I admit that I would have much rather the entire thing had not happened for I would have dearly loved for Felder to be playing opposite Walsh in the band. But because there was all of that conflict between Felder/Frey/Henley, I am glad that they were able to settle matters and all three of them move on to hopefully better things after the parting of the ways.

Our only difference of opinion is in the way we feel about Felder himself and whether he was justified in bringing the suit against Frey and Henley of Eagles Ltd. And really, what we think about it after the fact, does not alter the price of tea in China at all.

We On The Border, have presented several different views of the Fan's perceptions of and reaction to Felder's book. It has certainly given readership who take the time to dig through it "something to think about."

To that end, this discussion I think was worthwhile.

Ive always been a dreamer
11-28-2008, 12:06 PM
Well, as we have stated several times before, none of us absolutely know all the details of the legal wranglings that took place, and probably never will.

I also agree that Felder's talent is missed by the band, but if the rest of the band functions better with him gone, then it is for the best.

I also agree that the discussion on the board has been entertaining and worthwhile. While it is true, most of us sided with the band, I believe we welcomed all opinions so that both sides of the issues were presented. IMHO, it has been a healthy, mature, fair, spirited, and most importantly, respectful debate.

And you never know, but the saga may continue if bits and pieces continue to leak out. :idea:

Just Another Hired Hand
11-29-2008, 12:16 AM
I have read Felder's book. I don't think he puts a glove on anybody.I thought his dislike of Don Henley came across much more pronounced than his dislike for Glen Frey. Felder's recall of his conversation of Timothy B. Schmit was very insightful. He (TBS) made mention of Felder bringing up "old agreements". People, lest we forget the band was split up 14 years! Joe Walsh makes known the problems artists have when they're on their own. The Eagles are many things but first and foremost they are a business.

The book reminded me of the same pettiness that led to the break up of CCR. John Fogarty was CCR. The other band members wanted an equal share for minimal contributions. Felder's book is a study in how stupid one can be. How can you let pettiness destroy such a lucrative, good thing? I have some close musician friend that would have given their bottom dollar to have been in Felder's position as an Eagle. Even though he still collects royalties, I sometimes wonder if Felder has any regrets.

I think his departure shows the Eagles are evolving. Even though Steuart Smith is not a full fledged Eagle, he is a fantastic guitar player. I enjoy Eagles music just as much now (maybe even more) as I did before. He was a major contributor to LROOE, which I think is fantastic.

Still, while I don't lament Felder's departure, his contributions are undeniable. The Felder experience is a sad commentary on how sometimes business and artistry just don't mix.

Freypower
11-29-2008, 05:40 PM
I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on the dislike of Henley versus Frey in the book. Felder has not one good word to say about Frey in any context, ever, while he goes out of his way when he feels like it to praise Henley's talent, even if he thinks Henley is a humourless control freak. He gives the impression that Frey has no talent at all. He does not even praise his singing voice. In this respect the book is eerily similar to Marc Eliot's To The Limit, which was also dismissive of Frey. The difference is that Eliot wasn't in the band. One reviewer suggested an alternative title for the book could be 'Lord, How I Hate Glenn Frey'. He has done interviews where he has said things like Glenn has bipolar disorder and should have had 'therapy'. The most he says about Henley is that Henley 'berated' him for wearing the 'wrong' shoes. It is not just my bias here. The entire book is anti-Frey to an extreme degree.

Just Another Hired Hand
11-29-2008, 11:03 PM
I originally thought he disliked Frey more than Henley until I got toward the end of the book. He talks about reaching out to the other band members and describes the conversations that took place between them. He was genuinely surprised and shocked that Glen Frey spoke to him. I thought an extreme amount of contempt for Don Henley came through when he describes his frustration and annoyance with Henley's refusal to speak to him. It also struck me that he was quicker to snipe Henley. I am thinking back to the part where he describes the desire of one of the band mates wives to be photographed with Henley and he just sneered and walked away. Incidents such as these are what I base my conclusion on.

I sometimes got the impression that his skirmishes with Frey were more like an intense sibling rivalry. I grew up with brotheres and we were all close in age. I know how intense and downright hateful it can sometimes get.

Ive always been a dreamer
11-30-2008, 12:48 AM
JAHH - I agree with most of what you said in your first post. However, even though there doesn't seem to be any love lost between Felder for either Henley or Frey, IMHO, he seems to have more contempt and bitterness towards Glenn. I am basing my opinion on both the book and subsequent interviews that Felder has given. But it's all rather subjective anyway, so it is doubtful that either of our perceptions will be changed.

As far as your statement that Felder still collects royalties, I was wondering if you just assumed this or do you know this to be the case? I am curious because we were discussing this earlier in this thread. I figured that Henley and Frey may have wanted to sever their relationship entirely with Felder, so that part of the settlement would preclude him from collecting any future royalties.

Just Another Hired Hand
11-30-2008, 01:11 AM
I have no direct knowledge of Felder collecting Royalties. I am basing it on an observation he made in the book; "Change a word, in for a third." Hotel California" is truly a classic rock song. I've looked for law suit settlement details but what little is known is hard to find. I can't imagine, that had I been in Felder's position, I would have given up my rights to such a treasured song. I mean it's like a U.S Layla". It is hard for me to believe that he still wouldn't have some sort of a hand in the use of such a great piece of intellectual property.

He also mentions that his ex-wife Susan is guaranteed a comfortable income for life...It's got to be coming from somewhere.

Ive always been a dreamer
11-30-2008, 01:41 AM
Thanks for replying so fast, JAHH. I am not doubting that Felder has received royalties in the past, but I am still uncertain about the terms of the court settlement. I understand that the amount of the settlement was quite lucrative (likely 20 - 30 million), so it is possible that he settled for a lump sum payout and gave up rights to any future earnings. I don't know if this is the case, but it seems to me that I heard rumors to that effect.

As far as monies to his ex-wife, I took his comments to be referring to their divorce settlement between them. I can't imagine that she would be receiving direct payment from the Eagles for any of Felder's earnings (although, I guess anything is possible).

sodascouts
11-30-2008, 03:13 PM
Oh, I'm almost positive that Felder would not agree to give up royalties on his songs like Hotel California, even for a large lump sum. Part of the reason the Eagles fired him was to prevent him from getting any royalties on FUTURE releases, but I seriously doubt he would sign away royalties from previous recordings. In fact, I think I remember Howard Stern saying something about the Eagles making money for him when they play HC, and Felder grinning and snickering about it.

Freypower
11-30-2008, 06:32 PM
I originally thought he disliked Frey more than Henley until I got toward the end of the book. He talks about reaching out to the other band members and describes the conversations that took place between them. He was genuinely surprised and shocked that Glen Frey spoke to him. I thought an extreme amount of contempt for Don Henley came through when he describes his frustration and annoyance with Henley's refusal to speak to him. It also struck me that he was quicker to snipe Henley. I am thinking back to the part where he describes the desire of one of the band mates wives to be photographed with Henley and he just sneered and walked away. Incidents such as these are what I base my conclusion on.

I sometimes got the impression that his skirmishes with Frey were more like an intense sibling rivalry. I grew up with brotheres and we were all close in age. I know how intense and downright hateful it can sometimes get.


He was horrified by Henley's refusal to speak to him because, right up until then, he still did not understand that Frey was the band leader and it was Frey who fired him (with Henley's agreement). Henley was in no position to speak to Felder.

Earlier in this discussion we talked about 'back handed compliments' to Henley to emphasise even further his hatred (it is not too strong a word) for Frey.

Sadly, I don't believe Frey and Felder experienced 'sibling rivalry' because it is my belief they disliked each other intensely from the very beginning.

Just Another Hired Hand
11-30-2008, 11:14 PM
Trust me, so do siblings in rivalry!

sodascouts
12-01-2008, 12:31 AM
I agree that Felder seems angrier at Glenn. While he doesn't let Henley off the hook, he characterizes Henley as a greedy, incredibly talented genius with occasional flashes of nastiness. He characterizes Glenn as a greedy, moderately talented sadist with occasional flashes of brilliance. The former is definitely more flattering than the latter.

Also, Felder repeatedly contends that Glenn was jealous of Henley, and goes further to claim that Glenn's jealousy is so intense that it causes him to hate Henley to this day. Felder asserts that Henley is a more talented singer, songwriter... he compares Glenn unfavorably to Henley again and again. All of this make me think that Henley comes off better overall.

(Note: while Felder is certainly free to express his opinions on who he believes is the better songwriter, I don't think he has the right to act as if he knows the heart and mind of Glenn Frey when it comes to his feelings about Henley.)

As far at that final phone call goes, according to Felder's book, he tried to reach Henley first because he figured Henley would be more sympathetic. He knew that if he could get Henley on his side he had a better chance at working it out than if he approached Glenn alone. While he understood Glenn had the final say, he also knew that Henley considerably influenced decisions, and indeed Irving Azoff had presented the decision to Felder as a joint one.

That said, if Henley had adamantly disagreed with Glenn's decision, it probably would have been the end of the Eagles again. I doubt Glenn would have compromised on it at that point. Look at what happened in 1980. It seems to me that when it comes down to it, as I've said before, it's the FreyWay or the highway! lol

Ive always been a dreamer
12-01-2008, 11:57 AM
Oh, I'm almost positive that Felder would not agree to give up royalties on his songs like Hotel California, even for a large lump sum. Part of the reason the Eagles fired him was to prevent him from getting any royalties on FUTURE releases, but I seriously doubt he would sign away royalties from previous recordings. In fact, I think I remember Howard Stern saying something about the Eagles making money for him when they play HC, and Felder grinning and snickering about it.

Hmmm - As I said in my previous post, since none of us knows for sure what the terms of the settlement are, we will really never be able to determine this for sure without additional information. However, I certainly don't think it is that far-fetched if he settled for a LARGE lump sum payout. I remember that I heard rumors to that effect at the time of the settlement, but I honestly don't recall where I heard/read it. In any event, with regard to Felder grinning and snickering at Stern's remark, I don't read anything in to that necessarily either. It reminds me of the times when interviewers have introduced him as the man who wrote Hotel California. Rather than correct them, Felder just smiles and says nothing.


I agree that Felder seems angrier at Glenn. While he doesn't let Henley off the hook, he characterizes Henley as a greedy, incredibly talented genius with occasional flashes of nastiness. He characterizes Glenn as a greedy, moderately talented sadist with occasional flashes of brilliance. The former is definitely more flattering than the latter.

Also, Felder repeatedly contends that Glenn was jealous of Henley, and goes further to claim that Glenn's jealousy is so intense that it causes him to hate Henley to this day. Felder asserts that Henley is a more talented singer, songwriter... he compares Glenn unfavorably to Henley again and again. All of this make me think that Henley comes off better overall.

(Note: while Felder is certainly free to express his opinions on who he believes is the better songwriter, I don't think he has the right to act as if he knows the heart and mind of Glenn Frey when it comes to his feelings about Henley.)

As far at that final phone call goes, according to Felder's book, he tried to reach Henley first because he figured Henley would be more sympathetic. He knew that if he could get Henley on his side he had a better chance at working it out than if he approached Glenn alone. While he understood Glenn had the final say, he also knew that Henley considerably influenced decisions, and indeed Irving Azoff had presented the decision to Felder as a joint one.

That said, if Henley had adamantly disagreed with Glenn's decision, it probably would have been the end of the Eagles again. I doubt Glenn would have compromised on it at that point. Look at what happened in 1980. It seems to me that when it comes down to it, it's the FreyWay or the highway! lol

Now, I believe your comments are dead on here, Soda. And the Freyway or the highway thing is hilarious. :applause: I certainly don't think any of us know the inner workings of the band better than Felder. I think we have to take him at his word that believed he had a better chance at changing Henley's mind than he did Glenn's. But when Henley did not return his calls, he turned to Glenn in a desperate, last ditch attempt to beg for his job back.

Freypower
12-01-2008, 06:57 PM
Thank you for both of those posts, Soda and Dreamer.

Would a 'Freyway or the highway' banner be too corny for words?:rolleyes:

Can I add that during the 'vacation' years whenever Glenn was asked about Felder he went out of his way to praise the man's talent.

Just Another Hired Hand
12-01-2008, 09:30 PM
I feel Felder had a stronger dislike for Henley in the way he wished pain on him...I mean the pain of a break-up. Anyone whose been there knows how painful it can be, even if it results in a hit song. He hoped for Henley Break-ups to spur continuing Eagles creativity.

My wife, also a die hard Eagles fan, and I agree that for a long time Felder thought he had a relationship with Frey that really wasn't there. On the whole they met at the wrong times in their lives...Felder was married and had children at a much younger time in his life than the others.

sodascouts
12-02-2008, 11:07 AM
I feel Felder had a stronger dislike for Henley in the way he wished pain on him...I mean the pain of a break-up. Anyone whose been there knows how painful it can be, even if it results in a hit song. He hoped for Henley Break-ups to spur continuing Eagles creativity.

I understand what you're saying, but you'd be surprised how many musicians say things like this! I remember Stevie Nicks talking about how good breakups made good songs regarding Rumours, for instance. I'm not sure it was an indicator of ill will so much as one of those musical tropes!


My wife, also a die hard Eagles fan, and I agree that for a long time Felder thought he had a relationship with Frey that really wasn't there.

Hmm, this is a very interesting observation I hadn't thought of before. Felder did complain about things like how he wrote a sympathy note to Glenn about his divorce but Glenn didn't write one to him, how he gave Glenn a Christmas present and Glenn didn't give one to him, etc. He also has similar complaints about the other Eagles, but he does seem to fixate more on Glenn when it comes to "friendship slights." Perhaps he did believe there was more to their relationship than there really was, although considering how the band breakup went down, you'd think he'd know better. Then again - look at his puzzlement even now about why the guys don't want to be his buddies! Your speculation makes sense.

Just Another Hired Hand
12-02-2008, 10:34 PM
I understand what you're saying, but you'd be surprised how many musicians say things like this! I remember Stevie Nicks talking about how good breakups made good songs regarding Rumours, for instance. I'm not sure it was an indicator of ill will so much as one of those musical tropes!


You are dead on here, but Felder seemed to be piling it on. He came across as being somewhat vicious with this sentiment.

BTW...Thanks for the reply to my technical question...this post is testament to the perfect teacher (I'm definitely not the perfect student!)

Ive always been a dreamer
12-05-2008, 12:59 AM
I feel Felder had a stronger dislike for Henley in the way he wished pain on him...I mean the pain of a break-up. Anyone whose been there knows how painful it can be, even if it results in a hit song. He hoped for Henley Break-ups to spur continuing Eagles creativity.

My wife, also a die hard Eagles fan, and I agree that for a long time Felder thought he had a relationship with Frey that really wasn't there. On the whole they met at the wrong times in their lives...Felder was married and had children at a much younger time in his life than the others.

Sorry for the delayed response, but I just wanted to concur again with what Soda said here. Thanks for your observation. You do, in fact, bring up a very interesting point here about how Felder may have perceived his relationship with Glenn, and how his delusion and disappointment may have possibly contributed to his bitterness.

Tessa
12-28-2008, 07:45 AM
I just sold the book, which I got for Christmas, on eBay.

It was a bit disapointing for me...I liked DF so far...only knowing him as a guitar player of course.

But his book is full of self-pity and blaming everyone else but himself for things he did and even for things he did not. http://www.cosgan.de/images/smilie/frech/e040.gif

Even if I didn't like DH or GF before reading this book - after reading it both are really likeable.

sodascouts
01-18-2009, 05:20 PM
Just found this interview on YouTube - forgive me if it's been posted before:

Night Talk Part 1

Night Talk Part 2

Night Talk Part 3

RoryO
01-19-2009, 09:15 PM
I was looking for an Eagles site, having been a long time fan (still am and loved the concert in LA with the Dixie Chicks last year!), found this site, and registered. Some good stuff here. I recently finished Don Felder's book and thought I would see what other folks thought, but what a surprise. Interestingly, what I found was what appeared to be a forum for apologists for each person's pet Eagle - other than Don Felder. It was one of the least objective discussions I've seen. Almost nothing from the book seemed to be taken seriously by anyone. Instead, it seems more of a matter of what can we find wrong in order to defend our favorite Eagle. Frey is mostly refered to as Glenn, and Henley is mostly referred to as Don, but Felder is always Felder. Wow. Gee, just perhaps, it could be that much of what Felder said is actually true, and that Frey and Henley were, and have been, very not-so-nice people and really out of line in their dealings with other band member; but I see very little discussion of that - mostly, "Well so and so could have done that, but that's OK if he did"; or, "I'm sure they never did that"; or, "Even if that happened the way he said, Felder's just a whiner." Wow folks, a text book of rationalization. We can still like the music a band produces without having to defend some its producers. There are a number of bands and musicians who I've loved over the years, and still do (including the Eagles), but I would never defend some of the kinds of things they have done or the way they have treated people - including each other. I wonder if Frey or Henley had written a similar book, and said similar things about Felder, if everyone would discount what they might say to such a degree. Guess I might have to look elsewhere for a more balanced discussion of the book and its tale of power and greed behind the music. RO

EagleLady
01-19-2009, 09:20 PM
I was looking for an Eagles site, having been a long time fan (still am and loved the concert in LA with the Dixie Chicks last year!), found this site, and registered. Some good stuff here. I recently finished Don Felder's book and thought I would see what other folks thought, but what a surprise. Interestingly, what I found was what appeared to be a forum for apologists for each person's pet Eagle - other than Don Felder. It was one of the least objective discussions I've seen. Almost nothing from the book seemed to be taken seriously by anyone. Instead, it seems more of a matter of what can we find wrong in order to defend our favorite Eagle. Frey is mostly refered to as Glenn, and Henley is mostly referred to as Don, but Felder is always Felder. Wow. Gee, just perhaps, it could be that much of what Felder said is actually true, and that Frey and Henley were, and have been, very not-so-nice people and really out of line in their dealings with other band member; but I see very little discussion of that - mostly, "Well so and so could have done that, but that's OK if he did"; or, "I'm sure they never did that"; or, "Even if that happened the way he said, Felder's just a whiner." Wow folks, a text book of rationalization. We can still like the music a band produces without having to defend some its producers. There are a number of bands and musicians who I've loved over the years, and still do (including the Eagles), but I would never defend some of the kinds of things they have done or the way they have treated people - including each other. I wonder if Frey or Henley had written a similar book, and said similar things about Felder, if everyone would discount what they might say to such a degree. Guess I might have to look elsewhere for a more balanced discussion of the book and its tale of power and greed behind the music. RO

Um EXCUSE ME, BUT on here we all have different opinions. That doesn't mean our favorite Eagle is our pet just because we choose to defend him.

sodascouts
01-19-2009, 09:51 PM
I was looking for an Eagles site, having been a long time fan (still am and loved the concert in LA with the Dixie Chicks last year!), found this site, and registered. Some good stuff here.

Thanks.


Frey is mostly refered to as Glenn, and Henley is mostly referred to as Don, but Felder is always Felder. When there are two "Don"s in the band, it's easier to use the last name of one of them. I'm not sure if it's productive to read a great deal into that.


Wow. Gee, just perhaps, it could be that much of what Felder said is actually true, and that Frey and Henley were, and have been, very not-so-nice people and really out of line in their dealings with other band member; but I see very little discussion of that - mostly, "Well so and so could have done that, but that's OK if he did"; or, "I'm sure they never did that"; or, "Even if that happened the way he said, Felder's just a whiner." Wow folks, a text book of rationalization. We can still like the music a band produces without having to defend some its producers. There are a number of bands and musicians who I've loved over the years, and still do (including the Eagles), but I would never defend some of the kinds of things they have done or the way they have treated people - including each other. I wonder if Frey or Henley had written a similar book, and said similar things about Felder, if everyone would discount what they might say to such a degree. Guess I might have to look elsewhere for a more balanced discussion of the book and its tale of power and greed behind the music. ROIt is true that your opinion of Felder is not shared by the majority, RO. If you are looking for a forum where everyone thinks like you do, I guess this isn't the place. This forum is best for people who are a bit more tolerant of different opinions, and don't condemn those who disagree with them.

TimothyBFan
01-20-2009, 06:53 PM
Geez--Excuse me!!:sad: Way to put me in my place! :-x

Just Another Hired Hand
01-20-2009, 09:16 PM
Interestingly, what I found was what appeared to be a forum for apologists for each person's pet Eagle - other than Don Felder. It was one of the least objective discussions I've seen. Almost nothing from the book seemed to be taken seriously by anyone.

My father once told me that those who can't work the system to either "work it" or "change it" will ultimately be destroyed by it. My 52 years have shown me he is right. Don Felder's book is living proof of it.

Don Felder is an illustration of what happens when business and the arts collide. It is a sad commentary on what has happened to so many groups that include the Cream, The Beatles and many others. Many of the forum members presented thought provoking views of Don Felder and his departure from the Eagles. No matter what your beliefs are on objectivity or its lack thereof, you can not change the fact that Don Felder is no longer an Eagle.

It is unfortunate what happened to Mr. Felder. It is somewhat tragic. But today's facts are difficult to challenge: Don Felder is no longer an Eagle, and the Eagles are just as good (if not better) as they have ever been. Don Felder is fulfilling his destiny which includes being an ex-Eagle.

Although I believe Don F's book only scratches the surface of what went on, one thing I got from the book was that he was totally rejected by his former band mmembers. No apologies here or there.

Just Another Hired Hand
01-20-2009, 09:27 PM
Frey is mostly refered to as Glenn, and Henley is mostly referred to as Don, but Felder is always Felder. Wow. Gee, just perhaps, it could be that much of what Felder said is actually true, and that Frey and Henley were, and have been, very not-so-nice people and really out of line in their dealings with other band member; but I see very little discussion of that - mostly, "Well so and so could have done that, but that's OK if he did"; or, "I'm sure they never did that"; or, "Even if that happened the way he said, Felder's just a whiner." Wow folks, a text book of rationalization. We can still like the music a band produces without having to defend some its producers. There are a number of bands and musicians who I've loved over the years, and still do (including the Eagles), but I would never defend some of the kinds of things they have done or the way they have treated people - including each other. I wonder if Frey or Henley had written a similar book, and said similar things about Felder, if everyone would discount what they might say to such a degree. Guess I might have to look elsewhere for a more balanced discussion of the book and its tale of power and greed behind the music. RO

To address the second point you raise, I always try to view arguments the way Thomas Aquinas would. Somewhere between the two views one finds the truth. My reality here is that while it makes for interesting conversation, in the end I really don't care past the point of curiosity. I don't care about Don Henley's favorite cause nor Frey's nor Schmit's nor Walsh's nor Felder's. I have my own. I just really like the music. People are the product of what they live through. I guess treating each other badly led this group to produce some great music.

When I saw the Eagles in Philadelphia on November 25, 2008, they were enjoying themselves and each other. They are definitely the best they have ever been.

Ive always been a dreamer
01-21-2009, 01:36 PM
I recently finished Don Felder's book and thought I would see what other folks thought, but what a surprise. Interestingly, what I found was what appeared to be a forum for apologists for each person's pet Eagle - other than Don Felder. It was one of the least objective discussions I've seen. Almost nothing from the book seemed to be taken seriously by anyone.

RO - If you are interested in "a text book of rationalization", maybe you should go back and read this thread a bit more carefully. There is quite a bit of serious discussion about Felder's book whether you agree with it or not.

MikeA
01-21-2009, 03:03 PM
RO - If you are interested in "a text book of rationalization", maybe you should go back and read this thread a bit more carefully. There is quite a bit of serious discussion about Felder's book whether you agree with it or not.

:yay:
http://www.mvabercrombie.net/Emoticons/x_j0424448.jpg

Freypower
01-22-2009, 08:07 PM
My father once told me that those who can't work the system to either "work it" or "change it" will ultimately be destroyed by it. My 52 years have shown me he is right. Don Felder's book is living proof of it.

Don Felder is an illustration of what happens when business and the arts collide. It is a sad commentary on what has happened to so many groups that include the Cream, The Beatles and many others. Many of the forum members presented thought provoking views of Don Felder and his departure from the Eagles. No matter what your beliefs are on objectivity or its lack thereof, you can not change the fact that Don Felder is no longer an Eagle.

It is unfortunate what happened to Mr. Felder. It is somewhat tragic. But today's facts are difficult to challenge: Don Felder is no longer an Eagle, and the Eagles are just as good (if not better) as they have ever been. Don Felder is fulfilling his destiny which includes being an ex-Eagle.

Although I believe Don F's book only scratches the surface of what went on, one thing I got from the book was that he was totally rejected by his former band mmembers. No apologies here or there.

Does anyone else see Felder's story as somewhat tragic?

To some extent it is sad, because he's been denied the chance to continue in the only career he knows. But in my opinion he brought everything that happened to him on himself. He had 14 years, and now has had 8 years, to prove that he had what it took to carve a separate career for himself, and he has been singularly unable to do so. Should he continue to blame Frey and Henley for this, or should he look within himself for the reasons? It's OK to talk about 'business and the arts' colliding but where is Felder's alleged art apart from his obsession with the fact that he co-wrote one song?

I honestly was prepared to give him a chance if he had tried to put the Eagles behind him the way both Bernie and Randy did. But he can't. In this instance, that is where I find myself agreeing with JAHH's use of the word 'tragic'.

As for his former bandmates rejecting him, perhaps Joe and Tim may not have wished to reject him, but I think that Glenn Frey would have told them in quite specific terms that they had no option. I think that Don Henley basically shares Frey's view on this.

MikeA
01-22-2009, 09:03 PM
This is more of an "observation" than a "justification" for Felder and it is opinion. I really have nothing to back it up.

Don Felder is a guitarist. And a Damn Good one. But a guitarist alone isn't going to go very far other than "session work" and Don has done a lot of that sort of work with other artists. What I mean is that Felder is not the type artist that is going to make it "solo". At best, he might put together another band in which he can contribute vocally and instrumentally.

Even with Hotel California, Felder's original contribution was to come up with a lick and improvise on it and it turned into a mega-hit. But the lyrics were derived by Henley mostly and Frey providing inspiration along the way as well.

What I'm saying is that it is no disgrace to be a fantastic guitarist and not be a solo star. Joe is an example of a great guitarist who also has the ability to come up with meaningful lyrics as well as the chops to bring it off. I'm not sure Felder was "blessed" with that talent.

From that standpoint, I do not fault him at all for not continuing a career after the Eagles first stopped playing as a group back around 1980. He did what he was capable of doing I think and that was play guitar. I do wish that he had joined forces with another band and offered to the public more of his work. He does have a lot to offer.

sodascouts
01-22-2009, 09:24 PM
I see no reason to believe Glenn told Joe and Tim not to be friends with Felder. Of course, I can't KNOW that, so I don't want to assume, but wouldn't Felder have nailed him for that amongst his other list of wrongs if he thought it were true?

MikeA
01-22-2009, 10:24 PM
Joe told me at the Chicago M&G (2003?) that he had nothing at all against Don and that he still considered him a friend and respected him as a musician but it was a strained situation with the lawsuit in progress. I'm sure that put a lot of stress on everyone.

SunPirate
01-23-2009, 12:04 PM
I've been an Eagle fan since I first heard "Take it Easy" but not so much that I knew all things about the band, members etc. I just like the music and listened accordingly. I saw them a few times in the 70's and was thrilled with the quality of the show they put on musically. Through the years I never really kept up with them, but I did in '94 watch The Hell Freezes Over show and again was impressed with the music and how great they all looked. Then I saw in 2004 another show and was shocked when I saw Felder was missing. Of course I went to the internet to see what was up and that is where I found out about the lawsuit, but none of the details. After reading the book, from my point of view for what it's worth, I can see that Felder is hurt for how he was treated. And those of you who "sided" with the band should be able to see the point that beyond the contributions made to writing and the bizarre relationships they seem to have etc, Felder saw his bandmates as friends. Remember, he is just writing from his point of view, how he felt and how he perceived himself being treated. If his perception was wrong, the rest of the guys did little to pull him aside and reassure him, or set him straight, and why should they, if they wanted a bigger piece of the pie. I've played in the same band for almost 20 years, I do most of the writing, in fact about 95% of it, and I would never treat my friends the way Felder was treated. But of course I'm not dealing with Millions of dollars and in my band we are friends first and business partners second. It takes the sum of all the parts to make a band what it is. To me, when I see the Eagles now, it just seems like something is missing. True, they have a great fill in guitarist, but he's just playing Felders part, note for note. An imitation of the real item. I have never understood the way that many people who have all the opportunity in the world forget what is important and begin to take thenmselves too seriously. If I were in that same position as Felder and had been treated like that, I would feel much as he did. And I would bet most of you would too. I never had a side before reading the book, and I know I that Felder's story in only one side. We have yet to hear from the others. Why? Both Meisner and Leadon, also left, when they were making big bucks at the height of success. Why? We have not heard from them, but maybe there is something to Felder's story. Henley and Frey, have had much greater success than Felder solo, however, they were not alone in their efforts and had a lot of help from other writers etc. I wish they'd just all get over themselves and make it right. But I'm sure too much water water has passed under the bridge and I don't think any of them are probably big enough people to do what they'd have to do in order to be friends again. As Arsitotle said, the only thing in this world that is constant is change, The Eagles were what they were, and back in the 70's that was awesome. That couldn't last, life has taken it's course, and they are what they are. But to me, it's just not same anymore. The bottom line for me is to put myself in someone's shoes before I pass judgenment. I tried objectively, with the knowledge I had, culled from not only Felder's book but also a few different sources, and while I can see justification for Felder's emotions and reason's, I see little to support the others. I could be totally off the mark here, but something tells me I'm not. Anyway beside the "Band Drama" it was a good read from the stand point of Rock and Roll history, and who was where when. I found that interesting, especially how connected many of these guys were before they all became famous separately.

Freypower
01-23-2009, 05:16 PM
I see no reason to believe Glenn told Joe and Tim not to be friends with Felder. Of course, I can't KNOW that, so I don't want to assume, but wouldn't Felder have nailed him for that amongst his other list of wrongs if he thought it were true?

If that happened (I repeat 'if' because as you say we can't just assume it), it was after Felder was fired, and therefore Felder was not aware of it. I just thought that Glenn would not have wanted any 'fraternisation' to occur once Felder was no longer an Eagle and that he would have made that clear to his bandmates.

To Sun Pirate, (welcome) of course you can find reason to support Felder's emotions and reasons, as Frey and Henley's are completely ignored. Any idea that they may have had justification for what they did is brushed aside. Of course I can understand that Felder is only going to present his side. As far as them never tellling him that he was doing anything wrong, or setting him straight, yes, perhaps they were wrong there. But as Dreamer has said on numerous occasions, Felder AGREED TO the new terms and his reduced ownership.

If Frey was Felder's friend, Felder has a very strange way of showing it. He manages to make some positive statements about the other band members.

Just Another Hired Hand
01-24-2009, 12:20 AM
If that happened (I repeat 'if' because as you say we can't just assume it), it was after Felder was fired, and therefore Felder was not aware of it. I just thought that Glenn would not have wanted any 'fraternisation' to occur once Felder was no longer an Eagle and that he would have made that clear to his bandmates.

To Sun Pirate, (welcome) of course you can find reason to support Felder's emotions and reasons, as Frey and Henley's are completely ignored.


Let me start out by saying, "Welcome to the Border." Of all of the threads I have posted to this is one of my favorites.

As you get to the end of the book, you get the impression from Frey's reaction to Felder's call that it was strictly reactive. He is weak with detail about what happened just prior to his firing. There was some sort of confrontation taking place. I don't think Felder was expecting the reaction that he got (getting fired). Because of the lawsuit and its subsequent settlement, he probably can't talk about what went on, but something (from Don Felder) provoked it. I also think the relationship between Felder and Frey was not perceived equally between the two of them. I believe Don Felder believed he had a relationship with Glen Frey that just did not exist except in Felder's perception of it.

I feel for Felder. I think he is a "tragic" figure that had a fatal flaw that led to his undoing. There is no denying his contributions to the band's music. I think he overrated his role in the band. His departure has had minimal effect on them as a band. In fact, in my opinion they have never been better.

The Don Felder story reminds me of what happened to John Fogarty and the Creedence Clearwater Revival. Fogarty was the work horse of the band. As a result he wanted a bigger share of the proceeds. The other band members would not agree. As you know the Creedence is no more. The band's works were tied up for years in litigation. Recently, suits got settled and Fogarty went on the road again as a solo act. Like the Eagles he is probably the best he's ever been. Does it sound familiar? It is a classic example of what happens when art and business collide.

Ive always been a dreamer
01-24-2009, 11:29 PM
First of all, very well said JAHH.

And welcome to The Border from me as well, SunPirate. I also appreciate you sharing your viewpoint even if I don’t agree with you on many points. I think that it is possible for intelligent, logical adults to perceive events differently and arrive at different conclusions based on individual personalities and belief systems. I also believe that this is possibly what happened between Felder and his fellow bandmates. As the saying goes, there are three sides to every story – there’s yours, there’s mine, and the cold hard truth. Although none of us will probably ever know all of the facts here, I believe it is fair to say that all members of the band share the blame regarding the discourse that occurred throughout the years. None of them were always right or always wrong. But, I think it is also fair to say that Felder’s side of the story is not completely objective. And yes, if any of the other band members should ever decide to tell their version of the story, I would guess that their version would also be biased.

So having said this, I tried to form my opinions on the facts that I knew to be true. I see a lot of inconsistencies in Felder’s accounts and, therefore, have come to the conclusion that his perceptions and recollections may not always be accurate. I’ve said this before, and I will repeat it that I do not believe that Felder is intentionally lying. But most of these inconsistencies that I’m referring to are in Felder’s own words, not others. When you carefully compare what he says in his book and in subsequent taped and print interviews, there are many contradictions and/or inaccuracies. I will spare everyone and not repeat them because I’ve already pointed out many of them in my previous posts in this thread.

However, I will cite a few new ones that I see in the most recent Night Talk interview that Soda posted. He tells the story of when the Eagles first started that there were five of them. Now, of course, this is not true. He “forgets” that he was not an original Eagle. Next, when directly asked, he claims that the band’s name is “The Eagles” rather than “Eagles”. Now surely, someone that was in the band as many years as he who was the CFO of Eagles, LTD. should know this, but I don’t own a single Eagles item that has the name “The Eagles” on it. If the name of the band is “The Eagles”, it is news to me. Now, is this all nitpicking? Perhaps, but I’m just trying to illustrate that we can’t accept everything that he says as the gospel truth.


“The bottom line for me is to put myself in someone's shoes before I pass judgenment. I tried objectively, with the knowledge I had, culled from not only Felder's book but also a few different sources, and while I can see justification for Felder's emotions and reason's, I see little to support the others. I could be totally off the mark here, but something tells me I'm not.”

SunPirate – I did exactly the same thing you did, but came to the totally opposite conclusion. Now, it would be great if any of the other band members decided to present their side of the story, but again, we probably wouldn’t be able to accept their version as the gospel truth either. I’m not sure we can read anything into the fact that the others aren’t talking. All I know is that there was long, contentious history of what some band members perceived as Felder’s bitching and complaining that dates back to the time when he first joined the band. Then, when Felder was fired, none of the band members came to his defense. Read into this what you want, but the fact of the matter is that the band has functioned better after his departure. However, as others have stated, I do think it is a very sad story that someone who contributed so much to the band, was forced to depart in this way. Apparently, the general consensus among the four other band members and their management was that the bad things outweighed the good, and that the band was better off without him. I do not believe that Glenn Frey dictates to the other band members who they can befriend. They apparently each decided to part ways with Felder permanently, but that doesn’t make them bad people, IMHO.

Freypower
01-26-2009, 05:35 PM
If you read the Rolling Stone cover story, Henley states something to the effect that 'Glenn decided a change was necessary and I agreed'. I don't think the other two had much, if any, input into this, although they were obviously told. If Tim and Joe did not come to his defence it was because they realised that it was in their interests not to, so to speak.

sodascouts
01-26-2009, 08:38 PM
After reading the book, from my point of view for what it's worth, I can see that Felder is hurt for how he was treated. And those of you who "sided" with the band should be able to see the point that beyond the contributions made to writing and the bizarre relationships they seem to have etc, Felder saw his bandmates as friends. Remember, he is just writing from his point of view, how he felt and how he perceived himself being treated. If his perception was wrong, the rest of the guys did little to pull him aside and reassure him, or set him straight, and why should they, if they wanted a bigger piece of the pie.

You're absolutely right - this is all coming from Felder's perceptions. I am sure he was indeed genuinely hurt and felt mistreated by people. I'm not sure what you mean about no one reassuring him - how could they reassure him? And what does reassuring him have to do with them getting a "bigger piece of the pie"?



It takes the sum of all the parts to make a band what it is. To me, when I see the Eagles now, it just seems like something is missing. True, they have a great fill in guitarist, but he's just playing Felders part, note for note. An imitation of the real item. I have never understood the way that many people who have all the opportunity in the world forget what is important and begin to take thenmselves too seriously. If I were in that same position as Felder and had been treated like that, I would feel much as he did. And I would bet most of you would too.
I can't really answer this because I don't know the whole story. Certainly, Felder presents his case well. He's won over many people with his book. I, however, am a bit more skeptical than your average reader. I know a heck of a lot about this band - enough to know that some of his stories just don't add up.


I never had a side before reading the book, and I know I that Felder's story in only one side. We have yet to hear from the others. Why? Both Meisner and Leadon, also left, when they were making big bucks at the height of success. Why? We have not heard from them, but maybe there is something to Felder's story. Henley and Frey, have had much greater success than Felder solo, however, they were not alone in their efforts and had a lot of help from other writers etc. I wish they'd just all get over themselves and make it right. But I'm sure too much water water has passed under the bridge and I don't think any of them are probably big enough people to do what they'd have to do in order to be friends again.
Undoubtedly, each of these guys left the band with hard feelings. But that's the case for most big bands. When Lindsey Buckingham left Fleetwood Mac in 1987, he almost choked Stevie Nicks first. When Steven Adler was kicked out of Guns N'Roses, he was never talked to by any of the band members again. The bad blood between David Lee Roth, Sammy Hagar, Michael Anthony, and the Van Halen brothers interfered even in Van Halen's Hall of Fame induction. Those are just a few examples; The list goes on and on. Leaving a band is like a divorce. More often than not, there are hard feelings. I don't see that so much as a reflection on the players as a sad reality of any "break-up."


The bottom line for me is to put myself in someone's shoes before I pass judgenment. I tried objectively, with the knowledge I had, culled from not only Felder's book but also a few different sources, and while I can see justification for Felder's emotions and reason's, I see little to support the others.You can see justifications for Felder's emotions and reasons because he provided them to you. Frey and Henley have not. Perhaps if they did, folks would feel differently.

RoryO
01-26-2009, 10:45 PM
Well, I guess I don't see DF's story as either tragic or sad. I also don't see any relationship between his non-Eagles career and the what we should or shouldn't think of him. Having once been in the music business and living/seeing much of what he described, I thought it was a very good portrait of what happens when big money influences former values. If what DF recounted is in any way true, it once again reveals the hypocrisy of former "all for one and one for all" bandmates when it comes to both personal self-agrandizement and big money (including their manager). My inclination is to think there's probably a great deal of truth in what he says, both because of his own self-critical remarks and because of my experience with some of the other "big names" in the business - watching how they treated each other despite their public espousals. I agree, the music is still great (saw them with the Dixie Chicks recently - a great show) and I love their newest CD. No criticism of the music, but an interesting behind the scenes recounting of big money, drugs, and human frailties. I'm afraid I could recount many other similar stories in the music industry (though this is not the only place it happens certainly), though I suspect most folks know that already. Glad to hear the particulars of one long time Eagle's experience. Also, nice to know that the remaining Eagles settled with DF over the money disagreements before it went public in court. RO


Does anyone else see Felder's story as somewhat tragic?

To some extent it is sad, because he's been denied the chance to continue in the only career he knows. But in my opinion he brought everything that happened to him on himself. He had 14 years, and now has had 8 years, to prove that he had what it took to carve a separate career for himself, and he has been singularly unable to do so. Should he continue to blame Frey and Henley for this, or should he look within himself for the reasons? It's OK to talk about 'business and the arts' colliding but where is Felder's alleged art apart from his obsession with the fact that he co-wrote one song?

I honestly was prepared to give him a chance if he had tried to put the Eagles behind him the way both Bernie and Randy did. But he can't. In this instance, that is where I find myself agreeing with JAHH's use of the word 'tragic'.

As for his former bandmates rejecting him, perhaps Joe and Tim may not have wished to reject him, but I think that Glenn Frey would have told them in quite specific terms that they had no option. I think that Don Henley basically shares Frey's view on this.

Ive always been a dreamer
01-27-2009, 12:57 AM
First of all, FP, I did not mean to imply that Joe or Tim had a deciding ‘vote’ with regard to Felder’s dismissal. However, I also don’t believe that Glenn would advise them on whether they should remain on friendly terms with him or not. Of course, none of us know for sure, but I believe that they were free to decide that for themselves. Having said that, in all probability, all of the band members may have been subjected to prohibitions or gag orders while the lawsuits were being litigated.


Having once been in the music business and living/seeing much of what he described, I thought it was a very good portrait of what happens when big money influences former values. If what DF recounted is in any way true, it once again reveals the hypocrisy of former "all for one and one for all" bandmates when it comes to both personal self-agrandizement and big money (including their manager). My inclination is to think there's probably a great deal of truth in what he says, both because of his own self-critical remarks and because of my experience with some of the other "big names" in the business.

RO – this is a fair observation based on your unique experiences. Most of us here have no such experiences. However, I have heard enough stories to believe there is probably quite a bit of truth in some of the things that Felder claims. I don’t recall anyone who posted in this thread who claims that there were no truths in the book. I think we can all accept that there were money, power, and ego struggles that occurred and that these things can be destructive. However, my problem with Felder is that he gives the impression that he is exempt from this, and all he cared about was the music.

I also think it is true that when we discussed the book in this thread, we made more judgments about Felder than we did the other band members. We judged Felder based on his own accounts and perceptions that he himself gave us. We don’t have that same information to judge the other band members. Speaking for myself, when I made a judgment or said I thought Felder was wrong about something, that doesn’t necessarily mean that I thought Don Henley or Glenn Frey was right and vice versa. I judged Felder based on the facts that I knew and his own words – not what others said. The difference is that I don’t have Henley or Frey’s accounts, so I can only judge them on the facts I know. It is no more fair to judge them on what Felder says, than it is to judge Felder on what Henley or Frey say.

MikeA
01-27-2009, 11:24 AM
While the lawsuit was in full swing, there was according to Joe a "gag" on discussing anything having to do with it. When directly asked about it, he confirmed that none of the current members of the band were allowed to discuss it by advisement of their legal representatives (lawyers I presume though it might have been issued by the court). As I said before, Joe indicated no personal animosity toward Felder...but he didn't indicate a "blood brother" relationship with him either. He respected him as a musician indicated some remorse that he couldn't maintain close contact because of the legal actions in process. He was guarded about his comments about Don, weighing each statement carefully before commenting. Clearly he was uncomfortable discussing the issue.

But it is very common to have legally binding restraints about any discussion of the end results of legal actions such as that connected with the out of court settlement of something like this Felder vs Eagles Ltd lawsuit.

The current abstinence of comments about either Felder or the suit by the Eagles concerning it could be either mandated by the settlement or it could be from legal advice or it could simply be orders mandated by the Eagles Ltd to their employees NOT to discuss it.

Fact is they are NOT discussing it for whatever reason and I suspect that is the way it will remain. It obviously is not in their best interests to focus on the "event" which implies strongly to me anyway that if they have talked about it by now they are NOT going to talk about it in the future. Whatever speculations anyone makes about it at this point are just going to be speculations given the lack of information of what has become part of the record available to fans and other curious parties <smile>

Glennhoney
01-27-2009, 02:27 PM
..okay, now I don't want to ruffle any feathers..just stating my opinion...

I read Heaven and Hell in November 2007...had a friend send it over from England..and it was basically what I thought it would be...a "not my fault" biography....Don Felder tried to get some more money, have more say and he lost....happens all the time...whether it's in a rock'n'roll band or just your ordinary day job...

What I didn't appreciate was the blame he put on everybody else for his mistakes...like cheating on his wife...well Randy was married and he was doing it too...pppllease...

And it seemed to me that Glenn and Don Henley were ALWAYS the cause of the problems...hey I've learned over the years that the others are not always at blame...sometimes we tend to have a little something to do with it ourselves...such is life...

I laughed when I read the part...and I can't recall what band he was talking about...but he was saying how "that band" got along great and even went on vacation together...get real...who wants to go on vacation with people you work with everyday??????

Now as much as I love Joe and Tim..and I DO love them...the band EAGLES is Glenn Frey and Don Henley...you can change the bass player, you can change the lead guitar player, but you can't have the EAGLES without Glenn and DOn........and that's the way it will always be...they are the "Gods", without whom you would never have had the amazing past 40 years or so........

So unfortunately, Don Felder learned that he COULD be replaced...like the saying goes.."even the pope can be replaced.."nobody is indispensable...and although I DO miss him as part of the group...the band is doing quite well without him...so who's the loser here???????????

EagleLady
01-27-2009, 02:31 PM
Well Put GH, and I agree 100 % :thumbsup:

Brooke
01-27-2009, 02:34 PM
Very good points Gh. But this one is the best:


...the band EAGLES is Glenn Frey and Don Henley...you can change the bass player, you can change the lead guitar player, but you can't have the EAGLES without Glenn and DOn........and that's the way it will always be...they are the "Gods", without whom you would never have had the amazing past 40 years or so........


Here, here! :applause:

TimothyBFan
01-27-2009, 02:38 PM
..okay, now I don't want to ruffle any feathers..just stating my opinion...

I read Heaven and Hell in November 2007...had a friend send it over from England..and it was basically what I thought it would be...a "not my fault" biography....Don Felder tried to get some more money, have more say and he lost....happens all the time...whether it's in a rock'n'roll band or just your ordinary day job...

What I didn't appreciate was the blame he put on everybody else for his mistakes...like cheating on his wife...well Randy was married and he was doing it too...pppllease...

And it seemed to me that Glenn and Don Henley were ALWAYS the cause of the problems...hey I've learned over the years that the others are not always at blame...sometimes we tend to have a little something to do with it ourselves...such is life...

I laughed when I read the part...and I can't recall what band he was talking about...but he was saying how "that band" got along great and even went on vacation together...get real...who wants to go on vacation with people you work with everyday??????

Now as much as I love Joe and Tim..and I DO love them...the band EAGLES is Glenn Frey and Don Henley...you can change the bass player, you can change the lead guitar player, but you can't have the EAGLES without Glenn and DOn........and that's the way it will always be...they are the "Gods", without whom you would never have had the amazing past 40 years or so........

So unfortunately, Don Felder learned that he COULD be replaced...like the saying goes.."even the pope can be replaced.."nobody is indispensable...and although I DO miss him as part of the group...the band is doing quite well without him...so who's the loser here???????????

:applause::applause::applause::applause: Well stated!!

Please don't replace the bass player :pray: please don't replace the bass :pray:

Scarlet Sun
01-27-2009, 03:47 PM
Here, here! :applause:
Please excuse my correction, but it's actually "hear, hear!"

I actually like what the Eagles did before Felder joined the group better

EagleLady
01-27-2009, 03:52 PM
Please excuse my correction, but it's actually "hear, hear!"

I actually like what the Eagles did before Felder joined the group better

You are correct it is hear hear :oops:

Brooke
01-27-2009, 04:44 PM
Please excuse my correction, but it's actually "hear, hear!"



:oops: My bad!

GlennLover
01-27-2009, 09:14 PM
Now as much as I love Joe and Tim..and I DO love them...the band EAGLES is Glenn Frey and Don Henley...you can change the bass player, you can change the lead guitar player, but you can't have the EAGLES without Glenn and DOn........and that's the way it will always be...they are the "Gods", without whom you would never have had the amazing past 40 years or so........


I couldn't agree with you more GH. That has always been my opinion too, although I too love Joe & Timothy. Of course you know that I am biased towards a certain Mr. Frey!

Maleah
01-28-2009, 02:27 AM
:oops: My bad!

*gasp* How dare you Brooke?! It's 50 lashes with wet noodles for you! :D

teeheehee...just kidding obviously. lol I hardly think you owed us an apology considering I still haven't figured out how to spell "phenomonal." (er.....did I guess right? :shrug: )


As far as the book goes, gotta agree with pretty much everything GlennHoney said! I found it really amusing how he kept bringing up Randy and his relations with other women as well. Trying to make himself feel better by throwing others under the bus?

I don't think anyone here is saying that Don and Glenn are perfect. Far from it actually. But then, neither is Don F. who, in my opinion, tries to make himelf appear pretty darn close. When friendships fail, relationships fall apart, divorces take place.....it's seldom one persons fault. There usually is an action to require a reaction. The fact of the matter is none of us will never know what TRULY happened. Only the band members know what took place. Heck, not even all of them might know everything that happened. I know when I was a kid, if me and my brother got in a fight and my Mom came running......I did my darn best to make it appear like he started it and was horribly mean and I was the perfect, innocent angel. lol It usually worked too ;)

MikeA
02-01-2009, 06:52 PM
Questions had been asked and statements made as to Joe's attitude toward Felder. The following is from an "In Music We Trust" interview. This isn't "exactly" what he said at the Chicago M&G but it is close enough for bank work.

IMWT: How has Felder's departure affected the band? Is there a replacement guitarist?

JW: Well, there was a friction there-- I can't say a lot because it's pending court rule. But that didn't involve me; the band was together a long time before I joined. There's a lot less friction now and we're getting along better than we ever have. [The replacement guitarist] is Stuart Smith. Sometimes I really hate him, 'cause he's really good. He really makes me play.

eaglesvet
02-01-2009, 10:22 PM
Interesting! BTW, back East we say "close enough for government work!" :spin:

MikeA
02-02-2009, 10:04 AM
Interesting! BTW, back East we say "close enough for government work!" :spin:

Your's is the "traditional" quote EV. I worked in the Banking Industry for 30 years and we had altered it to the way I quoted it. Old habits die hard.

eaglesvet
02-02-2009, 01:16 PM
Oh!:lol: Outside your industry, "banker's hours" are all I ever heard about!

MikeA
02-02-2009, 01:23 PM
Oh!:lol: Outside your industry, "banker's hours" are all I ever heard about!

It was very much an "inside joke". "Close enough for Bank Work" was truly a jibe at the Banks because they would put an entire staff to work to locate a penny outage. No outage at all was permissible. Still, there were times when they did have to "give up" and would write the outage up to an account on their General Ledger called "Over and Short". If a customer called in complaining that their checkbook was out of balance with their statements, then an examination of the overage or shortage was researched using the "Over & Short" account transactions and if one matched, they pulled the money out of that account to reimburse the customer with it. The books must balance in the Financial Industry....even when they are out of balance, the slush account (O & S) accounted for the difference.

Just Another Hired Hand
02-07-2009, 10:32 AM
Interesting! BTW, back East we say "close enough for government work!" :spin:

I work for the government...trust me, close enough for government work is a wide latitude for just about anything, east, west countrywide!

Outlaw Man
02-27-2009, 11:03 PM
As promised in the Felder live thread, here are a few of thoughts after reading the book, while it's still fresh in my mind.

First, let me state that after about 10 pages of this thread, it got mind-numbing and my eyes were just about crossed. A lot of posts are of the variety "how dare he say anything negative against Don Henley and Glenn Frey!" or since he's out of the band he's no damn good and wasn't really an important contributor.

Somebody knocked the book for describing his early life. Are you kidding me? Show me an autobiography or memoir that doesn't provide youth as a basis for the whole story.

Somebody complained about the book for discussing subjects, which were covered in other Eagles biographies. So...why is this a problem? Besides, not everybody has read those, and if the stories mesh, then no harm/no foul.

A few posts have been about the end of his marriage and divorce. How did he blame his wife? :confused: He was very clear about the guilt he felt, calling home while she was pregnant. When there were problems with his son, he appeared to be contrite, by admitting that he wasn't around enough. Not to condone his behavior on the infidelity, but married rock stars having trysts with groupies could've been written by just about anybody in the business. The purpose for singling him out is lost on me. He gave into temptation during the 70's, but supposedly avoided it during the HFO tour. That seems to make sense, as the family was along for several dates.

Somebody expressed skepticism about DF not being certain of long-term success by joing the band. He was absolutely correct not to feel secure. He was newly-married with a baby on the way, living in a new city. Bernie Leadon had already informed him of the tension. Sales of Desperado were not as solid as for the 1st record, even though the latter is regarded as classic by many. It was no sure bet that the Eagles would last the decade at that point.

He didn't 100% disagree with everything that Don Henley and Glenn Frey said or did. When he agreed, he said so, and when there were songs or theirs, which he really enjoyed, he gave credit. When there were good moments/memories, he acknowledged.

Let me start off with issues I disagreed with or didn't care for in the book:

Repeated overemphasis on the sex and drugs. It's understood that this is the sort of content which publishers seek, but it was also the least interesting part to me in the Clapton autobiography (along with graphic details of the drinking).

IIRC, he took a shot at The Who with some derisive comment about rock operas. I happen to love and respect The Who, and feel that a lot of their music will live for many years after they're done. That can be just attributed to taste, so no big deal.

He was ashamed about having his name attached to "Teenage Jail." Not sure what was supposed to be so horrible about the song, esp. when the song which comes after it is the true garbage from TLR - "The Greeks Don't Want No Freaks." That song was nothing more than a novelty tune, trying to capture some of the popularity from "Animal House."


Did like:

Learning about early associations/friendships with Stephen Stills, Duane Allman, Tom Petty and Bernie Leadon.

Deconstructing the composition process for "Hotel California" was quite informative, as was learning of the pressure to develop an acoustic intro. (Glenn Frey might well have been terse in the request/demand, but DF said along along that he wanted opportunities for improvisation. Enough time was given to prepare, even if the way it was issued might not have been in the most cordial manner.)

Finding out about the "Malibu Men's Choir." It never made sense to me why the Eagles were doing a song written by Paul Carrack and Jim Capaldi - "Love Will Keep Us Alive." Another Paul Carrack song surfaced on LRooE. Maybe this was another one leftover from those sessions? DF never surmised as to the reasons that Irving Azoff put the freeze on that project. Just a guess here, could it be that it was holding out for a full blown Eagles reunion?

I referenced the $100 ticket prices from HFO in the other thread, and remember this well. The press were absolutely right to raise the subject. So, it was useful to learn that DF was sensitive but claimed to have no influence. No reason to doubt. The fact that it only cost $30 for 8th row seats confirms that he's not gouging. OTOH, a pair of tickets for a Seal concert just arrived in the mail yesterday. Order processing fee: $4.35 (no problem) but with a $21.00 "convenience fee." What convenience? For those who aren't aware, Irving Azoff happens to be CEO of Ticketmaster. Enough said.

This next issues was kind of a known quantity, before reading the book. It's ironic that Bernie Leadon was his best friend in the band, but their musical styles led to differences of opinion on the direction of the band. Bernie was country-oriented and DF was rock.

Knowing that DF like some of the musical acts as me, like Miles Davis and Yes.

Onto the controversial stuff....

As stated in the other thread, my opinion was completely impartial about Don Felder and the split. That began to change after seeing them on the Farewell Tour. Although Steuart Smith is clearly a talented Nashville player, DF absense was extremely evident to me on that evening and the same for the DVD. DF was clearly an important contributor to the band's sound, as indicated by a quote from Glenn Frey (even if the guys were coked up at the time). They wanted to go in a rock direction, and DF's entry into the band catapulted them in that direction. His writing credits began to increase as time went on, and maybe some worthy songs were rejected.

To my mind, the departures of Bernie and Randy were legitimate points of discussion, both from providing perspective on the approaches of DH and Glenn, but also from the legal standpoint. Although neither had Henley & Frey begging for their reconsiderations of their respective decisions, it was voluntary in both instances. They sacrificed their shares of Eagles Ltd., according to the agreement. DF did not quit the band. That was the difference.

No reason for me to doubt that the existing contract has stipulated equal shares for each of the original members, until termination, and DF was offered that same agreement after becoming a full-fledged member of the band. Later, it was amended Henley and Frey receiving 20% each with Felder, Walsh and Schmitt receiving 10% each. Is anybody disputing this as fact? This was discussed often during reviews of the book and during rounds DF made for interviews. Prior to that, DF claimed that made numerous inquiries into the accounting and financial statements, but was rebuffed. Again, is this in dispute?

From the time of the Millenium Concert to the exact time of termination, DF gave a thorough explantion of all contact with band management and other members. It wasn't always a pretty picture.

Henley and Frey's contention was along the lines that they were founding members and had contributed more in terms of songwriting. Mostly true, with some exceptions - the comment about GF with "a word for a third" was rather comical and DF deserved a writing credit for working out the bass part on "One of These Nights," but that's splitting hairs, and wasn't the gist of the lawsuit.

It appeared that they had been planning for Felder's dismissal for some time before the official notification/announcement. One red flag to me was that there no known record of accepting Felder's request to review financial records and renegotiate the original agreement. Even if Henley and Frey were entitled to a larger share, Felder might've accepted a revised offer if not being treated as a "sideman." Walsh and Schmitt had nothing else going on, so they really has no stong position, unless they'd formed a single united front with Felder against the new Eagles Ltd. contract. Even with Henley & Frey being the two most important members, the public wouldn't accept them as the Eagles with all replacements. (As an aside, it's credible for The Who because the replaced members are deceased and the replacement musicians are highly competent and had been worked into the lineup over a number of years.) This scenario was never considered, so it's purely speculative and, for the most part, immaterial.

Verdict:

My inclination is to believe DF's version of events to a large extent, but conceding the point that he was probably oversensitive. (Although I sympathise with anybody who is 'unfairly' dismissed, it's everyday stuff in the "outside world" and to people who have a lot less means, present party included.) After all, even though the rejection from the band had to have been regrettable and traumatic, it had to have also been a great relief as well. Presumably, he is not hurting for cash, even after the divorce. He has a beautiful, supportive fiancee. He's still got some nice friends (eg Cheech, Jimmy Pankow from Chicago, Dennis Quaid). He can record music and perform live on his own terms.

As for the remaining Eagles, I listened to LRooE the other day, and enjoyed it more than previous listens, which is a good thing. Another poster said that it has some filler, and probably could've been reduced to a single disc. That's true, but at $11.98 for 2 CD's, who's complaining? It'll probably be their last studio effort. I feel little desire to see them in concert again, particularly with those ticket prices. Would love for them to issue classic restored/remasted concerts on DVD from the 70's, but not sure how likely it would ever happen.

It's not black and white. It's still possible to support some of what DF does and some of what the Eagles do without there being conflict. It's also possible to respect them as musicians and songwriters but not approve of things they do as human beings. My impression of them is that they're more about the money and keeping up appearances than the music and friendship. Still, they were my favorite band when I saw them on TLR tour at 13 years old.

This might not be the appropriate place to share this story, but it adds to my overall impression. On another message board, a poster shared the story of how his school won a contest for the Walden Woods project, sponsored by Don Henley. DH offered to show up at the winning school to speak to the students and perform a few songs. Apparently, a date had been rescheduled, but the assembly was set up a specified time. DH finally arrived, but a few hours late, after many students and staff had gone home. He pulled up in a limousine, peaked out the window and said he had about 15 minutes time to speak then he had to go. A teacher gave him a piece of mind. The window quickly rolled up, and the limo then sped off. The bottom line is that maybe, sometimes, they really can be capable of being pricks?

tbsfan
02-28-2009, 12:20 AM
Finding out about the "Malibu Men's Choir." It never made sense to me why the Eagles were doing a song written by Paul Carrack and Jim Capaldi - "Love Will Keep Us Alive." Another Paul Carrack song surfaced on LRooE. Maybe this was another one leftover from those sessions?

According to an interview Timothy did when LROOE was released, Carrack played a piece of IDWTHAM backstage for Timothy (they're apparently old friends) at one of the Eagles' UK shows during their last European tour. When the songs Timothy submitted for LROOE "didn't fly" Timothy remembered the song and got IDWTHAM from Carrack. Along with the royalty checks, Carrack was repaid when Timothy and Henley sang backing vocals on Carrack's version of the song on his most recent solo album.

I saw a 1992 interview with Timothy where he talked about that band project he was involved in with Felder and the others.

Ive always been a dreamer
02-28-2009, 01:56 PM
Wow OM - thanks for posting your impressions of the book. Unfortunately, I haven't got much free time over the weekend, but I'll definitely read this in detail as soon as I get a chance.

sodascouts
03-04-2009, 12:49 PM
Your thoughts are very interesting, Outlaw Man. I wanted to take a moment to discuss some of your questions and concerns.


A few posts have been about the end of his marriage and divorce. How did he blame his wife? :confused:

He said that her new job making and selling jewelry made her a workaholic who had no time for him. At first he said that he told himself he couldn't blame her because he used to work all the time too, but in the end he still gives the impression that he would have been happy to stay with her if only she hadn't become so "obsessed" with making jewelry. "It wasn't that I didn't love her anymore. I always would, but her jewelry business was her life now." "I felt starved of affection and horribly lonely in my own home." He links the divorce DIRECTLY to her behavior, and only indirectly to his own (at best). He admits that the divorce was a total shock to her; she had not sought it; he sought it as a result of her actions such as skipping out on romantic dates with him. This was in the late 90s. At that point, the couple was long past his 70s infidelity. This was all in Chapters 18 and 19, if you want to look it up.


He didn't 100% disagree with everything that Don Henley and Glenn Frey said or did. When he agreed, he said so, and when there were songs or theirs, which he really enjoyed, he gave credit. When there were good moments/memories, he acknowledged. He did do some of this; I just wish there had been more of it. Sometimes I felt like I was reading a laundry list of wrongs that he had been filing away in his brain for 30 years, many of them rather petty (They had more security than I did. They had bigger rooms. They had better transportation.) Also, I wish he would have acknowledged that casting recriminations for insults said 30 years prior and actions done 30 years ago doesn't allow for the fact that these guys have matured. I'm sure Felder said stuff back then he'd never say now and even he admits he's done things he's regretted, but we're supposed to look past his behavior in his 20s to see the man he's become. He doesn't grant that pass to Glenn Frey or Don Henley; we're supposed to condemn them for all the things they said to him or did to others when they were in their 20s. The later wrongs having to do with money at least are more representative of current attitudes, but they don't make up the majority of the book.


He was ashamed about having his name attached to "Teenage Jail." I thought it was unprofessional of him to diss the work of his bandmates, and seemed more of a dig designed to hurt Frey and Henley than any substantive criticism. Admittedly, I don't care for the tune either, but he benefited from the strong songs on the album that he had nothing to do with in terms of songwriting. He was happy to join on the gravy train that resulted from songs like Heartache Tonight. All or nothing, in my opinion. If you're "ashamed" of being associated with the band in any way, quit.


Learning about early associations/friendships with Stephen Stills, Duane Allman, Tom Petty and Bernie Leadon.I liked this too. Who knew that he gave lessons to Tom Petty? If only there had been more positives like these stories in there.


Finding out about the "Malibu Men's Choir." It never made sense to me why the Eagles were doing a song written by Paul Carrack and Jim Capaldi - "Love Will Keep Us Alive." Another Paul Carrack song surfaced on LRooE. Maybe this was another one leftover from those sessions? DF never surmised as to the reasons that Irving Azoff put the freeze on that project. Just a guess here, could it be that it was holding out for a full blown Eagles reunion?I think this was the conclusion Felder intended us to draw.


I referenced the $100 ticket prices from HFO in the other thread, and remember this well. The press were absolutely right to raise the subject. So, it was useful to learn that DF was sensitive but claimed to have no influence. No reason to doubt. The fact that it only cost $30 for 8th row seats confirms that he's not gouging. OTOH, a pair of tickets for a Seal concert just arrived in the mail yesterday. Order processing fee: $4.35 (no problem) but with a $21.00 "convenience fee." What convenience? For those who aren't aware, Irving Azoff happens to be CEO of Ticketmaster. Enough said.All fans agree that the ticket prices are too high, and I believe Felder when he says he had no control over the matter. That said, he didn't refuse to take his share of the enlarged profits generated from those high prices.


Although Steuart Smith is clearly a talented Nashville player, DF absense was extremely evident to me on that evening and the same for the DVD. DF was clearly an important contributor to the band's sound, as indicated by a quote from Glenn Frey (even if the guys were coked up at the time). They wanted to go in a rock direction, and DF's entry into the band catapulted them in that direction. His writing credits began to increase as time went on, and maybe some worthy songs were rejected.Felder is indeed missed musically, although someone pointed out to me once that his absence and Smith's replacement gave us some great songs on Long Road Out of Eden such as Waiting in the Weeds. As far as "worthy" songs being rejected, I believe Felder has said that he included several rejected songs on his solo album Airborne. I leave you to judge whether or not that material was up to Eagles standards.


To my mind, the departures of Bernie and Randy were legitimate points of discussion, both from providing perspective on the approaches of DH and Glenn, but also from the legal standpoint. I have to admit, I was interested in hearing how these things with down. That information and information about the final night at Long Beach in 1980 were the only negative things I wanted details about. I appreciated the level of detail regarding Bernie and Randy's departures, but the Long Beach episode didn't ring true to me. What did you think of it?


No reason for me to doubt that the existing contract has stipulated equal shares for each of the original members, until termination, and DF was offered that same agreement after becoming a full-fledged member of the band. Later, it was amended Henley and Frey receiving 20% each with Felder, Walsh and Schmitt receiving 10% each. Is anybody disputing this as fact? This was discussed often during reviews of the book and during rounds DF made for interviews. Prior to that, DF claimed that made numerous inquiries into the accounting and financial statements, but was rebuffed. Again, is this in dispute? The equal shares aspect is not in dispute, although I found it interesting that as early as 1976, Felder believed Henley and Frey (in cahoots with Azoff) were taking more than their fair share from property partnerships... twice Felder's share, in fact. Seems the HFO arrangement wasn't really THAT much out of left field...

I think you have the numbers wrong for the amended contract. I believe that it has been said that the shares were divided into sevenths, with Henley and Frey receiving 2/7s each while Felder, Walsh, and Schmit received 1/7 each. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure I read that somewhere.

It is hard to know how things were treated regarding financial inquiries, but I do believe they resented his questions. I also believe the story about the call from the lawyer enraging Frey and being the impetus for Felder's firing.


Henley and Frey's contention was along the lines that they were founding members and had contributed more in terms of songwriting. Mostly true, with some exceptions - the comment about GF with "a word for a third" was rather comical and DF deserved a writing credit for working out the bass part on "One of These Nights," but that's splitting hairs, and wasn't the gist of the lawsuit.While one can argue what credit Felder deserved, I thought his "change a word, gain a third" snipe was nothing less than a deliberate misrepresentation. He thew the accusation out there without any specifics to back it up, but gave the impression it was Randy's songs. However, Randy only shared co-writing credits with Glenn on Certain Kind of Fool, Saturday Night, and Take It to the Limit. The majority of Randy's songs are individually credited, or credited with another co-writer. Most people don't know this though; they'd take Felder's statement at face value and believe that Glenn was always swooping in on Randy's material and trying to steal credit. This is not the only time Felder misleads-without-technically-lying.... such misrepresentation is disingenuous and unethical.


It appeared that they had been planning for Felder's dismissal for some time before the official notification/announcement. One red flag to me was that there no known record of accepting Felder's request to review financial records and renegotiate the original agreement. Even if Henley and Frey were entitled to a larger share, Felder might've accepted a revised offer if not being treated as a "sideman." Speculation is hard to counter. My personal belief is that Frey and Henley had thought that Felder was expendable ever since giving him the "Take it or leave it" offer at HFO, knowing it was possible he wouldn't take it. However, I think they planned on keeping him as long as he DID take it.

Felder's contention has always been that he deserved an equal share, so I'm not sure why we should believe that he would have been satisfied with less than that if Henley and Frey had attempted to renegotiate the offer.


Walsh and Schmitt had nothing else going on, so they really has no stong position, unless they'd formed a single united front with Felder against the new Eagles Ltd. contract. Even with Henley & Frey being the two most important members, the public wouldn't accept them as the Eagles with all replacements. (As an aside, it's credible for The Who because the replaced members are deceased and the replacement musicians are highly competent and had been worked into the lineup over a number of years.) This scenario was never considered, so it's purely speculative and, for the most part, immaterial.It's simple: if Walsh and Schmit had joined Felder against Henley and Frey, the Eagles reunion would not have taken place. Schmit and Walsh understood this, and knew that they needed 1/7 of billions of dollars of revenue rather than an equal share of nothing.

Henley and Frey, on the other hand, did not need the money or reunion so desperately, as evinced by the fact that Frey was ready to walk away from a reunion (and did in 1990). Whether Felder wants to admit it or not, he was in the same boat as Schmit and Walsh. If he weren't in that boat - if he were truly indispensable - Frey and Henley would have treated him accordingly. This wasn't personal; it was business.

I think that the fundamental problem here is that - understandably - Felder had a hard time swallowing the fact that he wasn't indispensable. I think he also was hurt by the fact that even though he was of lesser importance in the band, he wasn't treated equally for old time's sake. I think this latter problem is where most readers also feel bad for Felder. They figure that Henley and Frey should have overlooked Felder's lesser position and let him continue to take an equal share because of the fact that they "made it" together, and that they shouldn't lord it over Felder when they all started off on equal footing. For most people, it's not about legalese, it's about Felder's emotional appeal, and I think his book is effective in that regard.

Unfortunately, that effectiveness is partially based on misrepresentation: they did not start on "equal footing" emotionally. Frey and Henley started the Eagles, and Felder was brought in later. Their first number one hit, "Best of My Love," was recorded before Felder joined the band. These are facts he often omits in interviews, when he seems eager to represent the band as struggling musicians "wearing ripped jeans" before he joined and they hit it big. Again, a very romantic picture that appeals to people's emotions, but one that is not entirely accurate.


It's not black and white. It's still possible to support some of what DF does and some of what the Eagles do without there being conflict. It's also possible to respect them as musicians and songwriters but not approve of things they do as human beings. Very true.


This might not be the appropriate place to share this story, but it adds to my overall impression. On another message board, a poster shared the story of how his school won a contest for the Walden Woods project, sponsored by Don Henley. DH offered to show up at the winning school to speak to the students and perform a few songs. Apparently, a date had been rescheduled, but the assembly was set up a specified time. DH finally arrived, but a few hours late, after many students and staff had gone home. He pulled up in a limousine, peaked out the window and said he had about 15 minutes time to speak then he had to go. A teacher gave him a piece of mind. The window quickly rolled up, and the limo then sped off. The bottom line is that maybe, sometimes, they really can be capable of being pricks?I'm sure they can be jerks at their worst moments, especially because they have been accustomed to getting special treatment - that can go to one's head (although I imagine becoming husbands and fathers counteracted that a great deal)! However, I will warn you that you should take what you read on a message board with a grain of salt. There is no accountability on the internet. I've seen firsthand how lies are spread indiscriminately just because someone decided to "exaggerate" an account for reasons of his/her own. I wouldn't make a lot of harsh judgments based on anecdotes you glean from message boards.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I don't think Don Felder is a bad person. I think he spoke from his heart when he wrote his book, and I think he truly believes he has been wronged and victimized by the Eagles for 30 years. However, I also think that this belief has colored his perceptions and his memories of events. Sometimes he even speaks about the motivations of the other guys, as if he knew what they were thinking in their hearts, all based on his perceptions of their behaviors. That's simply not fair. Still, it's hardly surprising; autobiographies are inevitably biased. I just wish more folks would remember that before condemning those he criticizes.

TimothyBFan
03-04-2009, 01:55 PM
You have a way with words my friend! :applause:

Outlaw Man
03-06-2009, 01:40 PM
Your thoughts are very interesting, Outlaw Man. I wanted to take a moment to discuss some of your questions and concerns.

This is going to be my only time doing this, because my reason for participating was NOT to come here to debate or argue the Henley/Frey vs. Felder schism. The post above was to include my impressions. I went to the trouble of explaining my background and position with the understanding that others (particularly here) hold different views. Throughout this thread, though, the moderators have a tendancy to dogpile anybody who says anything positive about DF, expcept to concede that he was a good guitarist/musician.


He said that her new job making and selling jewelry made her a workaholic who had no time for him. At first he said that he told himself he couldn't blame her because he used to work all the time too, but in the end he still gives the impression that he would have been happy to stay with her if only she hadn't become so "obsessed" with making jewelry. "It wasn't that I didn't love her anymore. I always would, but her jewelry business was her life now." "I felt starved of affection and horribly lonely in my own home." He links the divorce DIRECTLY to her behavior, and only indirectly to his own (at best). He admits that the divorce was a total shock to her; she had not sought it; he sought it as a result of her actions such as skipping out on romantic dates with him. This was in the late 90s. At that point, the couple was long past his 70s infidelity. This was all in Chapters 18 and 19, if you want to look it up.

Yeah, I did read it. (Hopefully, that last sentence wasn't intended to seem sarcastic or condescending.) All that past before my eyes was that he explained the circumstances. It was a reason. They drifted apart. It's not as if he vented on her: "you freaking bitch!"


I just wish there had been more of it. Sometimes I felt like I was reading a laundry list of wrongs that he had been filing away in his brain for 30 years, many of them rather petty (They had more security than I did. They had bigger rooms. They had better transportation.) Also, I wish he would have acknowledged that casting recriminations for insults said 30 years prior and actions done 30 years ago doesn't allow for the fact that these guys have matured. I'm sure Felder said stuff back then he'd never say now and even he admits he's done things he's regretted, but we're supposed to look past his behavior in his 20s to see the man he's become. He doesn't grant that pass to Glenn Frey or Don Henley; we're supposed to condemn them for all the things they said to him or did to others when they were in their 20s. The later wrongs having to do with money at least are more representative of current attitudes, but they don't make up the majority of the book.

Not sure why all of this was being laid out within the context of my post, but OK let me take the bait. In the early days, they were also more of a band and a higher premium was placed on friendship.

From memory, he did explain how the issue with the hotel rooms came up. He got some imenity, and apparently, they saw to it that nobody would get something that they didn't. Hope it's true, because then it's a question of who's being more petulant - DF for making mention of it...or Henley/Frey going through road management to see that their every comfort and convenience take top priority.


I thought it was unprofessional of him to diss the work of his bandmates, and seemed more of a dig designed to hurt Frey and Henley than any substantive criticism. Admittedly, I don't care for the tune either, but he benefited from the strong songs on the album that he had nothing to do with in terms of songwriting. He was happy to join on the gravy train that resulted from songs like Heartache Tonight. All or nothing, in my opinion. If you're "ashamed" of being associated with the band in any way, quit.

Kind of like the song, myself, but saw nothing more than a little overreaction here. Clapton did the same thing about the Yardbird's song "For Your Love" in his autobiography, and it was contributing factor to his departure. We could sit here all day and discuss Beatles songs that the others didn't like. John & George didn't like "Obladi Oblada" and Paul & George didn't like "Revolution #9." After his departure, Roger Waters never resisted an opportunity to publicly slam whatever his former Pink Floyd mates were doing.


I liked this too. Who knew that he gave lessons to Tom Petty? If only there had been more positives like these stories in there.

Maybe because he shared all the stories he had from the earlier part of his life?

Not sure about the "positives" as the subtitle, after all, was "Heaven and Hell." He delved into the good times, too. OTOH, for those who want everything sugar-coated, the band could always authorize a bio from some hand-picked writer.



I think this was the conclusion Felder intended us to draw.

Probably so, since he remarked later that "Love Will Keep Us Alive" was suddenly deemed worthy for release.


All fans agree that the ticket prices are too high, and I believe Felder when he says he had no control over the matter. That said, he didn't refuse to take his share of the enlarged profits generated from those high prices.

What exactly is your point? Just to find an excuse to carry on your crusade against Felder? "He didn't refuse..." All it stated in the book was that he did feel that the issue was legitimate. It wasn't a rant from his end and he didn't carry on about it.


Felder is indeed missed musically, although someone pointed out to me once that his absence and Smith's replacement gave us some great songs on Long Road Out of Eden such as Waiting in the Weeds.

We've already been through this discussion. Nevertheless, LRooE was a fine record, but it's not going to stand the test of time.


As far as "worthy" songs being rejected, I believe Felder has said that he included several rejected songs on his solo album Airborne. I leave you to judge whether or not that material was up to Eagles standards.

Never heard it, but it'd be just as easy to heap scorn & ridicule on Tim's solo career, Joe Walsh's "ILBT's" and whatever Glenn Frey did after "Miami Vice." That's not really the point, though. Besides, wasn't "Heavy Metal" a work-in-progress at the time? That song holds up.

Some of what emerged wasn't up to snuff either - "The Greeks Don't Want No Freaks," as was already mentioned. Certainly, some of Felder's musical ideas could've been further developed into something better than a novelty tune.

He did a reasonable job of explaining the pressure on the band leading up to, and during the recording of, The Long Run. This was common knowledge at the time that there were very high expectation to follow-up HC with another blockbuster.


I have to admit, I was interested in hearing how these things with down. That information and information about the final night at Long Beach in 1980 were the only negative things I wanted details about. I appreciated the level of detail regarding Bernie and Randy's departures, but the Long Beach episode didn't ring true to me. What did you think of it?

Had read previous accounts of the incident, but nothing contradicted it. Otherwise, there are no strong feelings one way or the other, except that there was a quote, which wasn't included. One story mentioned the exchange b/t Felder and Frey, when one of them said something along the lines of "After this is over, I'm gonna kick your ass." (That was included.) Then, the reply was "Good, I can't wait!" If that wasn't true, but it's kind of amusing to think that it did go down that way.


The equal shares aspect is not in dispute, although I found it interesting that as early as 1976, Felder believed Henley and Frey (in cahoots with Azoff) were taking more than their fair share from property partnerships... twice Felder's share, in fact. Seems the HFO arrangement wasn't really THAT much out of left field...

Then, good for Felder at finally taking what he thought to be a principled stand.


I think you have the numbers wrong for the amended contract. I believe that it has been said that the shares were divided into sevenths, with Henley and Frey receiving 2/7s each while Felder, Walsh, and Schmit received 1/7 each. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure I read that somewhere.

It was 2/7 for them and 1/7. My mistake.


It is hard to know how things were treated regarding financial inquiries, but I do believe they resented his questions. I also believe the story about the call from the lawyer enraging Frey and being the impetus for Felder's firing.

Of course they'd resent the questioning, because they didn't want the records divulged.

Three years ago, my father passed away. After 8 months, I requested - as a beneficiary - to views documents and statements, related to the estate. The response? Threats and harrassment from other parties and stonewalling from the attorney. Even though it's not the same thing, it's not hard to relate.



While one can argue what credit Felder deserved, I thought his "change a word, gain a third" snipe was nothing less than a deliberate misrepresentation. He thew the accusation out there without any specifics to back it up, but gave the impression it was Randy's songs. However, Randy only shared co-writing credits with Glenn on Certain Kind of Fool, Saturday Night, and Take It to the Limit. The majority of Randy's songs are individually credited, or credited with another co-writer. Most people don't know this though; they'd take Felder's statement at face value and believe that Glenn was always swooping in on Randy's material and trying to steal credit. This is not the only time Felder misleads-without-technically-lying.... such misrepresentation is disingenuous and unethical.

Looked to me as if it was Bernie and DF, who used the "word for a third" expression. It seems to have infuriated you but it amused me.


Speculation is hard to counter. My personal belief is that Frey and Henley had thought that Felder was expendable ever since giving him the "Take it or leave it" offer at HFO, knowing it was possible he wouldn't take it. However, I think they planned on keeping him as long as he DID take it.

That's probably exactly how it was, esp. since the "reunion" lineup had only been together for one LP and the supporting tour. They'd gone through other personnel changes, so another wasn't going to sink the ship.


Felder's contention has always been that he deserved an equal share, so I'm not sure why we should believe that he would have been satisfied with less than that if Henley and Frey had attempted to renegotiate the offer.

The bottom line is what the courts thought. If Felder's contention was "without merit," it would've simply been thrown out. Henley/Frey/Azoff never approached him about renegotiating, so we'll never know for sure what Felder would've accepted. However, the eventually settlement must've been more than enough to make DF happy.


It's simple: if Walsh and Schmit had joined Felder against Henley and Frey, the Eagles reunion would not have taken place. Schmit and Walsh understood this, and knew that they needed 1/7 of billions of dollars of revenue rather than an equal share of nothing.

By '94, none of them had anything important happening. Henley's solo career was obviously the most successful, but even then, it was 1/2 a decade since The End of the Innocence.


Henley and Frey, on the other hand, did not need the money or reunion so desperately, as evinced by the fact that Frey was ready to walk away from a reunion (and did in 1990). Whether Felder wants to admit it or not, he was in the same boat as Schmit and Walsh. If he weren't in that boat - if he were truly indispensable - Frey and Henley would have treated him accordingly. This wasn't personal; it was business.

Then, there you have it - money over music or friendship. Considering Frey's speech at the Hall of Fame induction ceremony and body language, one is left to wonder why he felt the need to maintain that things were all rosy over 90% of the time. Make no mistake, that band has always had a lot of tension.


I think that the fundamental problem here is that - understandably - Felder had a hard time swallowing the fact that he wasn't indispensable. I think he also was hurt by the fact that even though he was of lesser importance in the band, he wasn't treated equally for old time's sake. I think this latter problem is where most readers also feel bad for Felder. They figure that Henley and Frey should have overlooked Felder's lesser position and let him continue to take an equal share because of the fact that they "made it" together, and that they shouldn't lord it over Felder when they all started off on equal footing. For most people, it's not about legalese, it's about Felder's emotional appeal, and I think his book is effective in that regard.

Everybody knows that it was his book, his story, his version of events. As far as Henley and Frey were concerned, it must've contained enough juicy tidbits for them to take action to prevent US publication. In the end, that increased anticipation and, most likely, sales.


Unfortunately, that effectiveness is partially based on misrepresentation: they did not start on "equal footing" emotionally. Frey and Henley started the Eagles, and Felder was brought in later. Their first number one hit, "Best of My Love," was recorded before Felder joined the band. These are facts he often omits in interviews, when he seems eager to represent the band as struggling musicians "wearing ripped jeans" before he joined and they hit it big. Again, a very romantic picture that appeals to people's emotions, but one that is not entirely accurate.

Maybe exaggeration for effect, but if he wanted to be recognized for helping to lift the Eagles to a higher level, then he does have some leverage. On the Border sold more copies than Desperado (truth be known, the latter is my preferred album), partly on the transition to a more rock sound than country-rock. DF was clearly a big part of facilitating that change of direction, which they sought at that time. We could play "what if?" and "Best of My Love" would've still sold millions of single copies, but then where would the band have gone as a four piece. They could've gone the way of America, and fade away by the mid 70's. Country rock was mostly out of vogue by the end of the decade.




I'm sure they can be jerks at their worst moments, especially because they have been accustomed to getting special treatment - that can go to one's head (although I imagine becoming husbands and fathers counteracted that a great deal)! However, I will warn you that you should take what you read on a message board with a grain of salt. There is no accountability on the internet. I've seen firsthand how lies are spread indiscriminately just because someone decided to "exaggerate" an account for reasons of his/her own. I wouldn't make a lot of harsh judgments based on anecdotes you glean from message boards.

Yeah, I'm well aware of what people can do on a message board. This was not an Eagles message board, and the poster was not even a fan or non-fan of the band. He was just recounting the experience, which carried no emotional impact. It was the fact that the kids went to a lot of work to win the contest, and were treated like an afterthought by the rock star, who didn't have but 15 minutes to offer. Not so hard believe. Somebody, from the Boston area, added that the main reason for the Walden Woods project is to provide a buffer for some ritzier neighborhood to keep the lesser socio-economic classes out. Decide for yourself. At the time, there was no reason for my to question it and it affirmed that a lot of what DH does is for the publicity. Again, I like much of his music, but maybe he's not such as swell guy, personally.


I've said it before and I'll say it again: I don't think Don Felder is a bad person. I think he spoke from his heart when he wrote his book, and I think he truly believes he has been wronged and victimized by the Eagles for 30 years. However, I also think that this belief has colored his perceptions and his memories of events. Sometimes he even speaks about the motivations of the other guys, as if he knew what they were thinking in their hearts, all based on his perceptions of their behaviors. That's simply not fair. Still, it's hardly surprising; autobiographies are inevitably biased. I just wish more folks would remember that before condemning those he criticizes.

So what if he had an axe to grind? If you get dismissed from a job, it's only reflexive to start thinking of the disturbing things that you tolerated or ignored as an employee. The "management" could paint you as a "disgruntled former employee" but that doesn't necessarily make your wrong, though, either, does it?

Don Felder did an undeniable number of classy things. He drove Joe Walsh to treatment, he sent flowers to Glenn Frey when he was in the hospital and he wrote to the other during times of distress.

sodascouts
03-06-2009, 06:40 PM
This is going to be my only time doing this, because my reason for participating was NOT to come here to debate or argue the Henley/Frey vs. Felder schism. The post above was to include my impressions. I went to the trouble of explaining my background and position with the understanding that others (particularly here) hold different views. Throughout this thread, though, the moderators have a tendancy to dogpile anybody who says anything positive about DF, expcept to concede that he was a good guitarist/musician.

Outlaw Man, I'm surprised you seem affronted that people have responded to your post! This is what happens on message boards - surely you know that, as you've posted on them before - people discuss things with each other, going back-and-forth. Apparently that's not what you came here for, since you have declared your intention of leaving rather than engage in a conversation. If you'd like to drop it, fine, but don't get agitated when people respond to you.

And what dogpile? So far, I'm the only administrative member who has responded to your points, although I see no problem with moderators expressing their opinion as freely as any other members, including yourself.


Yeah, I did read it. (Hopefully, that last sentence wasn't intended to seem sarcastic or condescending.) All that past before my eyes was that he explained the circumstances. It was a reason. They drifted apart. It's not as if he vented on her: "you freaking bitch!" I wasn't aware that you needed to call a woman a "bitch" to assign blame. I think it's quite clear what he feels precipitated the divorce. Why pretend he did not say that his wife's behavior was the cause of the divorce? It doesn't make him a bad person because he feels this way - people often blame their spouse when they seek a divorce, saying the spouse drove them to it - no one wants to be the bad guy. Still, I was unimpressed by it, in truth.

I pointed out places in the book where the information was located because I thought you might have skimmed over the latter chapters (many people often do). After all, it's a long book, and you read it relatively quickly since you did not even start it until after posting your Felder review. I believed you might have skimmed those chapters because you were talking about their marital issues from the 70s with regard to their divorce. I thought you might have been confused about when their marriage ended. I see now that was not the case; my apologies.


Not sure why all of this was being laid out within the context of my post, but OK let me take the bait. Why must you characterize this as if it's some kind of trick? Why is answering some of your points "baiting" you? I didn't accuse you of "baiting" us by making those points. I wish you would extend other posters the same courtesy and allow them to express their opinions without acting as if they're doing something wrong.


From memory, he did explain how the issue with the hotel rooms came up. He got some imenity, and apparently, they saw to it that nobody would get something that they didn't. Hope it's true, because then it's a question of who's being more petulant - DF for making mention of it...or Henley/Frey going through road management to see that their every comfort and convenience take top priority.I see your point. They were being petty too, back in those days.


Not sure about the "positives" as the subtitle, after all, was "Heaven and Hell." He delved into the good times, too. OTOH, for those who want everything sugar-coated, the band could always authorize a bio from some hand-picked writer.Perhaps expecting more positives from Felder is indeed expecting too much. These books are all about the dirt, after all, and the title did promise it; you're right about that.


What exactly is your point? Just to find an excuse to carry on your crusade against Felder? "He didn't refuse..." All it stated in the book was that he did feel that the issue was legitimate. It wasn't a rant from his end and he didn't carry on about it. My point was that he benefited from the ticket prices, so to criticize them seems a bit hypocritical.... at least to me. Obviously you have no problem with it.


Never heard it, but it'd be just as easy to heap scorn & ridicule on Tim's solo career, Joe Walsh's "ILBT's" and whatever Glenn Frey did after "Miami Vice." That's not really the point, though. Besides, wasn't "Heavy Metal" a work-in-progress at the time? That song holds up.I never heaped scorn upon Airborne in my post. If you examine my post, you'll see that I left it to your judgment whether or not you think it's high quality. Perhaps you should listen to it - as I have - before comparing it to the other members, whose work you seem to be more familiar with. Certainly, Frey, Henley, and Walsh have had more commercial success, so the fact that you know their work better is understandable. As a fan of Felder's, perhaps you'd like Airborne. You can purchase it here for a reasonable price. It has some great guitar work.


Had read previous accounts of the incident, but nothing contradicted it.I guess you haven't read some of the versions I've read. There actually are disputes as to what went down that night and other versions of what happened. I'm not sure that you'd want to hear them, though, because Felder doesn't come off as well in them. Let me know if you are interested and I'll take the trouble to type them out; otherwise, we'll leave it at that.


Otherwise, there are no strong feelings one way or the other, except that there was a quote, which wasn't included. One story mentioned the exchange b/t Felder and Frey, when one of them said something along the lines of "After this is over, I'm gonna kick your ass." (That was included.) Then, the reply was "Good, I can't wait!" If that wasn't true, but it's kind of amusing to think that it did go down that way.I admit, that made me laugh as well!


Of course they'd resent the questioning, because they didn't want the records divulged.That's certainly a reasonable conclusion to draw, especially considering the bad experience you've had with your inheritance. In this case, however, we can't know for sure, so I hesitate to draw such conclusions.


Looked to me as if it was Bernie and DF, who used the "word for a third" expression. It seems to have infuriated you but it amused me.I looked it up and no mention was made of Bernie saying this, which is unsurprising because he rarely co-wrote with Frey on songs. The notable exception is Hollywood Waltz, which I believe was largely constructed by him and his brother with Frey and Henley only coming in at the end. But you're right, Felder obviously thought this way as well as Randy. I am assuming he is talking about Visions when doing so, since he has never claimed lyrical input on the other songs that I know of. Obviously, Frey wasn't hell-bent on stealing credit from them at every turn; that was my point. Felder made it sound like he was sitting there taking credit for everyone's work, and that simply isn't the case. The song credits bear me out.

EDITED TO ADD: I just looked it up and realized Visions was co-written with Henley, not Frey. So honestly I have no idea which of his songs Felder could be referring to where Frey "changed a word and gained a third." I would think, objectively, such a lack of evidence for his accusation would be problematic to any reader.


The bottom line is what the courts thought. If Felder's contention was "without merit," it would've simply been thrown out. Henley/Frey/Azoff never approached him about renegotiating, so we'll never know for sure what Felder would've accepted. However, the eventually settlement must've been more than enough to make DF happy.Indeed! I imagine he is set for life. Settlements do imply there is no clearly innocent party - on either side - since neither chose to duke it out and take their chances with a jury.


By '94, none of them had anything important happening. Henley's solo career was obviously the most successful, but even then, it was 1/2 a decade since The End of the Innocence.Certainly NONE of the Eagles can make the kind of money solo that the Eagles can make as a band. My point was that both Henley and Frey were in a financial position to walk away, as Frey had done a couple years prior. They were in this financial position because their solo careers were more successful than Felder's; hence, they were more important in the eye of the public than Felder. That's only logical.

Felder recognized this fact, albeit reluctantly, when he agreed to sign for a lesser share in order to participate in the reunion. He knew he couldn't hold out for more - that they'd rather let him go than give him more. Yes, it would have been nicer of them to let him have an equal share because they were all friends at one point. I guess that's where most people have a problem with it; it's not so much that it wasn't fair, as that it wasn't friendly. But I don't think they were trying to screw Felder. I think they truly believed they were entitled to more than he was.


Then, there you have it - money over music or friendship. Considering Frey's speech at the Hall of Fame induction ceremony and body language, one is left to wonder why he felt the need to maintain that things were all rosy over 90% of the time. Make no mistake, that band has always had a lot of tension.I honestly have wondered about that too - it was kind of an odd thing to throw in, but I guess he was trying to make it a feel-good moment. I will add that Randy Meisner has said the exact same thing though - that the good times outweighed the bad. Coming from someone who left under a cloud albeit of his own volition, the lack of bitterness is refreshing.



Everybody knows that it was his book, his story, his version of events. As far as Henley and Frey were concerned, it must've contained enough juicy tidbits for them to take action to prevent US publication. In the end, that increased anticipation and, most likely, sales.True. And according to Felder, there were actually many things removed to boot! Makes you wonder why it was apparently going to get him into legal trouble to keep those things...


Maybe exaggeration for effect, but if he wanted to be recognized for helping to lift the Eagles to a higher level, then he does have some leverage. On the Border sold more copies than Desperado (truth be known, the latter is my preferred album), partly on the transition to a more rock sound than country-rock. DF was clearly a big part of facilitating that change of direction, which they sought at that time. We could play "what if?" and "Best of My Love" would've still sold millions of single copies, but then where would the band have gone as a four piece. They could've gone the way of America, and fade away by the mid 70's. Country rock was mostly out of vogue by the end of the decade.Yes; there was a reason for Felder's hiring. They knew he would be an asset to the band... and he was. I just wish he wouldn't exaggerate his role in their initial success. It cheapens his legitimate contributions.


So what if he had an axe to grind? If you get dismissed from a job, it's only reflexive to start thinking of the disturbing things that you tolerated or ignored as an employee. The "management" could paint you as a "disgruntled former employee" but that doesn't necessarily make your wrong, though, either, does it?No, it doesn't.


Don Felder did an undeniable number of classy things. He drove Joe Walsh to treatment, he sent flowers to Glenn Frey when he was in the hospital and he wrote to the other during times of distress.Yes, that was nice of him. I've said in my prior post that I don't think he's a bad person. The thing is... I don't think Glenn Frey or Don Henley are bad people either. I give 'em all the benefit of the doubt that they were well-intentioned and doing what they thought was right. I think that's the main difference between your viewpoint and mine. You extend the benefit of the doubt solely to Felder.

Ive always been a dreamer
03-06-2009, 08:58 PM
First of all, thanks for your comments, OM. Even though I don’t agree with some of what you said, I appreciate very much that you took the time to post your thoughts. I always enjoy reading different perspectives and opinions especially when they differ from mine. However, I, too, am very perplexed that you would post the comments without expecting some of the members here to respond. Sorry if you feel that people who say anything about Felder get dogpiled here. It seems to me that you think that Felder’s supporters should be able to say whatever they want without being challenged or asked to defend their position.

And Soda, thank you for saving me a lot of time. :wink: You’ve already said very well much of what I wanted to say.

I do want to respond to a few of OM’s remarks, so here goes:


Somebody complained about the book for discussing subjects, which were covered in other Eagles biographies. So...why is this a problem? Besides, not everybody has read those, and if the stories mesh, then no harm/no foul. This was one of my complaints. What’s wrong with it from my perspective is that I would have preferred a lot more new stories rather than a rehash of old ones I already have read about. To me, since I spent my hard-earned cash to purchase his book, I don’t think that is unreasonable to expect an author to provide us with original content. I’m not saying that there was nothing new in the book, but a large portion of the Eagles stories were a rehash.


When there were problems with his son, he appeared to be contrite, by admitting that he wasn't around enough. Not to condone his behavior on the infidelity, but married rock stars having trysts with groupies could've been written by just about anybody in the business. The purpose for singling him out is lost on me. Now, normally, I would not be critical of Felder’s problems with his son. I feel bad that his son is apparently battling his own demons. However, since Felder brings it up, I believe it is fair game to point out contradictions in his accounts. Felder says that he did not actively pursue his musical career during the ’14-year vacation’ because he wanted to spend his time mending his family. But then, he goes on to say later that his son (who grew up during the ‘14-year vacation’) blamed him for not being around enough. Felder also says that he told Irving that anytime the Eagles were ready to reform to count him in. I just see a lot of inconsistencies here.

As far as singling Felder out on his infidelity, I don’t recall anyone doing that. We did comment on HIS accounts in HIS book. It is fairly obvious that Felder was not the only unfaithful rock star in the ‘70’s.


From the time of the Millenium Concert to the exact time of termination, DF gave a thorough explantion of all contact with band management and other members. It wasn't always a pretty picture. I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree here, but I do not consider Felder’s account of his post-Millennium Concert contact with band management and other members to be a thorough explanation. And even if it were, again, we would have to accept that it is biased. Obviously, at the point leading up to his termination, relations were more than strained, so it is understandable that it wasn’t a pretty picture.


He can record music and perform live on his own terms. I hope he will continue to do this, and wish him much success in this endeavor. I think if he could release a successful solo album that it would be his ‘chicken soup for the soul’ to help him get beyond the past.


It's not black and white. It's still possible to support some of what DF does and some of what the Eagles do without there being conflict. It's also possible to respect them as musicians and songwriters but not approve of things they do as human beings. My impression of them is that they're more about the money and keeping up appearances than the music and friendship. Still, they were my favorite band when I saw them on TLR tour at 13 years old. I agree. I don’t think anyone here has ever claimed that Felder was 100% wrong or that Henley and/or Frey were 100% right. As the old saying goes, I’m sure there is enough blame to go around to all of them. However, I agree with Soda. I prefer to think that all of them are decent human beings. Do they have faults? Have they made mistakes? Of course. But, let’s not forget, throughout most of the 70’s and 90’s when the band was together, Felder was right there with them step for step. JMHO, but I find it hypocritical of him to now try to separate himself from all of the bad things, and portray himself as a victim.

MikeA
03-07-2009, 03:17 AM
I wonder if the conclusion that Felder has been more successful as a Solo Author than as a Solo Musician these past 9 years? I suspect that he's "made expenses" with the book and that between it and the money from the settlement, he can if nothing else, continue music as a hobby if not a profession.

Does anyone know if he is doing any session work or collaboration with other artists?

Outlaw Man
03-07-2009, 12:23 PM
I wonder if the conclusion that Felder has been more successful as a Solo Author than as a Solo Musician these past 9 years? I suspect that he's "made expenses" with the book and that between it and the money from the settlement, he can if nothing else, continue music as a hobby if not a profession.

Does anyone know if he is doing any session work or collaboration with other artists?

He claimed in an interview that he was putting material together for new disc, but will take time. You have it about right, though. This current tour only touches 4 locations. All dates and cities are greatly spread apart. So, it's nice that he's relaxed enough to go off and do his own thing. Sooner or later, he's going to have to step out of the spotlight more with his own material. Otherwise, it's just a decent casino concert.

MikeA
03-07-2009, 01:40 PM
I do think it a cryin' shame OM that he doesn't just get away from most of the stuff he did with the Eagles and just go for doing his own thing on guitar. Believe me, I'd buy anything he did that showcased his ability on the wires. He really was good....and I suspect he still is though he might need some intense time to get his chops back together. Then again, maybe not. I just don't know what he's been doing other than promoting the book.

sodascouts
03-07-2009, 05:18 PM
I think he's said his album may be out sometime this year, but artists often take longer than they initially estimate to complete a project. I imagine, if he tours to support it, he'd include more of his own material. I'm surprised he doesn't include "Bad Girls" in his set currently. I don't know how high it got on the charts, but it was the song that received the most promotion and airplay off of Airborne.

I heard the Fallsview Casino's ballroom was pretty full for his shows, so he can still sell tickets. I guess it's up to him how much time he wants to invest in touring.

ticky
03-26-2009, 12:23 PM
I dunno if ya'll have heard or seen these, but its pretty interesting..
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaY4nPMiGug&feature=PlayList&p=A94AE6E0E21F945C&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=14

Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXATXDU7bBs&feature=PlayList&p=A94AE6E0E21F945C&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=15

Part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNhaksKPPHk&feature=PlayList&p=A94AE6E0E21F945C&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=16

Brooke
03-26-2009, 01:31 PM
Very interesting! I loved his slip-up there at the end; 'it's all about the money, er, the music'. :hilarious:

He seemed very decent there, really.

GlennLover
03-26-2009, 07:35 PM
Yes, that was interesting, but doesn't he know that the name of the band is "Eagles", not "the Eagles"?

MikeA
03-27-2009, 08:38 AM
Hmmm.....wonder :headscratch:

If we really did start that basement band and it became successful and we released a recording and called ourselves "The Eagles"; I'm sure we wouldn't run into trouble with "Eagles LTD".
:band:
I thought that was a pretty bad slip at the end on the "money" too. I don't know why being in it for the "money" is such a bad thing. I've never heard of a musician who willingly turned down wealth!
:doh:

Ive always been a dreamer
03-27-2009, 01:11 PM
On the positive side, this is a really good interview. Don comes across as a likable, nice guy. He is interesting to listen to, and is very good at story-telling.


Hmmm.....wonder :headscratch:

If we really did start that basement band and it became successful and we released a recording and called ourselves "The Eagles"; I'm sure we wouldn't run into trouble with "Eagles LTD".
:band:



I totally agree Mike. But just wondering what should the name of our first song be - what about something catchy like Hotel Arizona. Hmmm - I may have some lyrics - let's see how about "I was drivin' 'round the corner from Hotel Arizona". :rockon:


I thought that was a pretty bad slip at the end on the "money" too. I don't know why being in it for the "money" is such a bad thing. I've never heard of a musician who willingly turned down wealth!
:doh:

I also agree with you here. What's wrong with wanting to make money? What I find wrong is the hypocrisy in saying that it wasn't important to you, and then filing a lawsuit that drags on for more than 7 years only to settled for millions of $$$$.

Once again, at the beginning of the interview he tells the story of how the band started with 5 members. NOT!!! And then, at the end proclaims that he is merely a victim. :sigh:

ticky
03-27-2009, 01:37 PM
I totally agree Mike. But just wondering what should the name of our first song be - what about something catchy like Hotel Arizona. Hmmm - I may have some lyrics - let's see how about "I was drivin' 'round the corner from Hotel Arizona". :rockon:




How about Hotel Oregon,
"On a wet slippery interstate, I smashed into a log truck."
of course, that'd be the end of it..

MikeA
03-27-2009, 01:55 PM
How about Hotel Oregon,
"On a wet slippery interstate, I smashed into a log truck."
of course, that'd be the end of it..

Short, but it has a great "impact".

sodascouts
03-28-2009, 12:12 PM
LOL!

amusefilms
04-21-2009, 03:10 PM
I wanted to give my two cents on this post as well. I was doing a search about Don Felder’s book and that’s how I found this site (which I love). But I wanted to finish the book before I posted (I had two or three chapters to go).
At first reading all your posts, I was like “What?” You’re being too hard on this guy. I really loved this book and enjoyed the “tell-all” tales. And for most of the book I felt that he was being honest (as anyone can be) with his side of the story…
But the last chapters….Oh my gosh!! I couldn’t believe it… It’s like a different book.
The way he left his wife??? He talks about one night when things didn’t go well. I’ve been married for 19 years, I’ve had more than a few of those. But to end a marriage over that? And to do it over the phone? That’s weak! And by coincidence he meets a woman 20 years younger? I find this all hard to believe. I know personal stuff is personal but if you apply this same stuff to the break up…I can easily see why Don and Glenn didn’t want to deal with it anymore. Personally, I LOVE Felder’s playing, I think he added much to the band and he’s a very gifted musician. But it sounds like the story of people being together for too long. The Eagles have always had a turbulent relationship. They’re older now and I bet they just said “you know what…I don’t need this.” And they decided to call it quits with him. I have to say I was very disappointed with the last few chapters of that book.

anne-o-gg
05-02-2009, 07:05 PM
I just got this book today at my library and have yet to read a word of it...I thought, well, I'm gonna get it, but I'll check out the boarder first so I know what to expect.

Initially, here is my thought process...

ok, you have five guys in a band...four of the guys get along and still tour today...one guy can't seem to get along with two of the guys, but it's never his fault...hmmm...it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that just probably the fifth guy #1) is jealous of the said two guys...#2) will not be satisfied being a number two (though these are SO needed) #3) has a perspective that is clearly filtered through his hate for one of "the gods"...

So, I'm off to read this book...my thanks to everyone's comments...I didn't want to read it and then have a "yuck" feeling when I listened to my favorite band ;)