#28

It’s not an obit, it’s a personal reminiscence. Sean was clearly more complicated than the public persona would have led you to believe.

I do agree that the timing of this stinks. He’s not even been buried yet.

3 Likes
#29

Just don’t really get why you would want to publish an article like that. Just seems a bit bitter really

4 Likes
#30

He was a public figure… it seems like an honest and heartfelt response from many people who knew him - it’s more honest and valuable than recycling bland pleasantries. You can argue about the timing, but I can’t fault people for telling the truth.

1 Like
#31

I saw a tweet yesterday, asking when it was the right time to speak up about someone who had recently died and was being eulogised when they were actually a prick to women. No name though so they obviously decided it was a bit soon. Michael Hann clearly thought no time like the present !

#32

valuable to whom? people gawping at someone’s personal life and failings once they’re dead? it’s in very bad taste, a wonder they didn’t stay friends…

#33

To the public record. To human knowledge. None of us actually knew him. Why write anything about him at all? What does his death matter to any of us?

#34

Your perception of bad taste will always vary in inverse proportion to how much you revere the person who died though. It’s subjective.

Furthermore there’s the ‘way it’s done’. I thought that piece balanced and compassionate, far from a hatchet job.

#35

well, yeah, my opinion on an article is subjective, obviously

That isn’t true though. I never liked the guy.

#36

Ok fair enough.

#37

Doesn’t come across that way to me at all. Agree with silentcommand on timing

#38

But whats the point? I read through the article and its just that he seemed to have a bit of a nasty edge at times and didnt always keep his mates. Which is not exactly surprising.

Just seems a bit crass that in the week someone died, someone who says they were a former friend decides to write about why maybe he wasnt so nice.

Plus i looked at his twitter and he says evrry band needs a Mike Love so hes obviously a moron

#39

It was a little more than that i think.

#40

Surely the ‘Mike Love’ article was a light hearted piece based on the jokey premise that to stop bands getting ripped off they all need to employ a ‘bread head’ band member to sort out the money side. It wasn’t a manifesto.

1 Like
#41

I think there’s far more “point” in writing a nuanced portrait of a complicated figure than in churning out a bland litany of pleasantries but we’re all just :meat_on_bone: :spades: :skull_and_crossbones: so whatever.

2 Likes
#42

Mucky article, written by a bit of a self-regarding prick.

I’m sure the people who gave the statements meant them wholeheartedly, but in its attempt to provide some balance against his pubic persona, it goes way too far the other way and loses anything good (of which there was lots.)

Timing utterly unforgiveable when he’s not even getting buried until Monday.

1 Like
#43

snigger

(Sorry)

5 Likes
#44

Yeah this has kind of changed my mind m.facebook.com/CarlDonnellyComedy/posts/10154834176708414

2 Likes
#45

That Guardian piece kind of reminded me of this, but re-reading, I think it’s alright and quite sweet

1 Like
#46

Yeah and the fact is that the timing is the whole point. He had to get it in this week, because in a month’s time nobody’s going to pay him to write it. So screw common decency, there’s bills to pay.

2 Likes
#47

ah I really enjoyed 12 Grand. pretty sure I read Garden Hopping as well at some point.