Who do you guys side with? Felder or Henley/Frey?

[Glennhoney]

I myself didnt think much about it until I read Felder's book. To me- the book makes Felder looks bad. His not stop whining and taking credit for everything. To hear him tell it, he taught the bass players how to play songs and everything was about his influence. Then he even blames Henley and Frey for his infidelity on the road. I agree with an earlier comment- at this time in their lives I dont see how anyone could be forced to work with someone they didnt want to. I would say the Eagles continued fine without him, where Felder's career hasnt exactly flourished. I guess to me the straw that broke the camel's back was him complaining that he wasnt invited to join them at the Grammy Awards to pay tribute to Glenn Frey. He is still demanding his equal billing on Frey's death.

I couldn't agree more....

[sodascouts]

He doesn't blame Frey and Henley for his infidelity by name, but he does provide a rather lame excuse of peer pressure that includes all of his bandmates:

"I was thrown in with four crazy bachelors (Randy overlooked his marriage vows) who were doing drugs, drinking, and screwing everything that walked. Half the time I was so high I didn't know what I was doing anyway. It was such an extreme situation. I defy any man to resist temptation in such circumstances.
[...]
I was led along by the crowd in the circus of life on the road. The others would have been very suspicious of me if I hadn't joined in" (pgs 149,150).

Hilariously, another quote from pg. 150: "I make no excuses for my behaviour." LOL.

[chaim]

Like I've said before, one thing horribly wrong with autobiographies is that you get to explain all your words and actions and write about other people's words and actions from your perspective - and your perspective only. Even when you did nothing to help someone in some situation, you can say that you were wondering if you still had the person's number so that you could ask if there's anything you can do. Even if you didn't actually make the call, you were thinking of it. (This example is from Felder's book.) But when it comes to everyone else, we only get to read about their words and actions, as they are not there to explain why they may have done or said something (Glenn's "I'll tell you when" etc. etc.). An autobiography is a dangerous thing to lean on when you decide to side with somebody and "hate" somebody else.

This is one of the reasons I love The Dirt by Mötley Crüe. The band members may bash some person, but then the person gets to offer his/her side of the story. This is a lot more mature IMO.

[sad-cafe]

it is my opinion after watching the doc, reading the trashbook and watching him and listening to interviews.

I think:

Felder thinks he is "above or better" than the other guys. In the book, all the bad stuff was someone else's lead.

He arranged the music (haha) and he was the glue that kept them going...right............

Then at the RaR HOF he just couldn't wait to come off superior. "Charming suit Joe"

he should have not even mentioned it. Joe is Joe and will do what he wants but Joe was far more normal and human and personable. Felder came off as smarmy and "above the rest"

but that is my opinion and how I interpret things.

Sorry if it offends

[Ive always been a dreamer]

Like I've said before, one thing horribly wrong with autobiographies is that you get to explain all your words and actions and write about other people's words and actions from your perspective - and your perspective only. Even when you did nothing to help someone in some situation, you can say that you were wondering if you still had the person's number so that you could ask if there's anything you can do. Even if you didn't actually make the call, you were thinking of it. (This example is from Felder's book.) But when it comes to everyone else, we only get to read about their words and actions, as they are not there to explain why they may have done or said something (Glenn's "I'll tell you when" etc. etc.). An autobiography is a dangerous thing to lean on when you decide to side with somebody and "hate" somebody else.

Absolutely right on Toni!

[sad-cafe]

but when we have other venues to compare ie. Interviews, statements, FB and things sometimes our intuition is confirmed.

[alreadygone]

initially I sided with Henley/Frey as the gist I got is that Felder should have shown gratitude that he was in the eagles because without them he would be a nobody etc. However, when realizing that there conflict with Frey also made Leadon and Meisner quit the band, I reconsidered.

Either way, the music biz does terrible things to people - especially the litigation aspect of it which amounts to splitting hairs for no apparent reason.

[UndertheWire]

initially I sided with Henley/Frey as the gist I got is that Felder should have shown gratitude that he was in the eagles because without them he would be a nobody etc. However, when realizing that there conflict with Frey also made Leadon and Meisner quit the band, I reconsidered.

Either way, the music biz does terrible things to people - especially the litigation aspect of it which amounts to splitting hairs for no apparent reason.

I disagree with the part of your post that I've bolded. What I've learned from recent comments is that this was a band that was always breaking up, and then a little time would pass and they'd start calling their manager and ask "Are we back together again?" Leadon left at least two times and was persuaded back before he left and didn't return for 38 years. Meisner had problems with Henley before he had problems with Frey but then he lost Frey's support as well. Of course, this doesn't mean that Frey wasn't irritating and high-handed and that arguments with him weren't a factor. It's more that they didn't make up after last fight.

ETA: I'm finding it hard to express all this without getting into the whole, "he said, he said" stuff. Just that it's more complicated and subtle than Leadon and Meisner leaving because of Frey. Maybe it's noteworthy that Felder has never put the blame on Frey for Leadon and Meisner leaving.

ETA 2: I'm reading a book on country rock and I've just come to the part where Randy Meisner quites The Stone Canyon Band because he wasn't getting to express himself. Earlier in the book, he quit Poco because he wasn't allowed in the studio to listen to the mixes for their first album. Leadon also had a history of quitting bands. None of this was unusual. What was unusual was members of a band staying so perhaps Frey deserves credit for Leadon and Meisner staying for as long as they did.

[jms18222]

I never took "sides" with this. It was a band decision so it is what it was. I did like Don Felder and thought he was an amazing guitar player. I still do.

Then I read Heaven & Hell. Glad I borrowed it from the library and didn't pay for it. I found it to be self serving. I did not appreciate the "GODS" reference being thrown around on every other paragraph. Henley & Glenn were young, single, successful men in the 70's. They did what they did. They aren't those men anymore so why that much crap up. If the other guys want to write their own book let them discuss it if the choose.

Like it or not, HFO was a NEW contract just like in sports when players resign a new contract.Don Felder had his choice to sign or not sign. He didn't like the new terms but he signed anyway because he realized that being a part of the Eagles was better than not being an Eagle. The part about them all being separate, not sitting down to have beers to talk things through. These guys were all married men bringing their families with them on tour. Joe was so new in his recovery, why would you want to sit him down in front of his demons!

Again, even after the book I still liked Felder but I wouldn't pay to see him play. His remark after the Grammy performance..no! That did it for me. He didn't play on Take It Easy so why think you would be asked to be a part of that!

[alreadygone]

[quote=UndertheWire;324510]What I've learned from recent comments is that this was a band that was always breaking up, and then a little time would pass and they'd start calling their manager and ask "Are we back together again?"

What I don't get then is why did they form in the first place if it was always going to cause a shitstorm in the recording studio? I mean most groups tend to be tight knight for years before something goes down. John Paul and George had been a fairly tight knit group of guys for ten years before the conflicts emerged around the time of the white album. Dave and Roger had been in the same band for seven years before they finally started arguing around the time of Wish You Were Here. Led Zeppelin probably would have kept recording/touring if Bonzo hadn't OD'd.