Gilby Clarke on the Reunion: "I don't think it's going to happen"

[DieselDaisy]

Unreliable? I've never seen any evidence that Gilby Clarke is unreliable? You cannot market a reunion if you have no reunion. Combining Axl and Slash with Pitman, Fortus and all these nugnr wankers would be nonsensical.

Axl speaks a load of bollocks.

[Rustycage]

You cannot argue with Rusty. He insists on Gilby being a 'touring musician' despite the fact that Gilby played on a studio album. He insists on Gilby being on the same pedestal as 'Tracey and Roberta' despite the fact that Gilby was marketed as a 'Guns N' Roses' member. He insists on Gilby merely being a temporary non-songwriting thing despite the fact that Slash (and Matt) collaborated with him on GN'R demos.

It is like talking to a bucket of shite.

Angry man.

Gilby doesn't matter. Fortus doesn't matter. Dizzy doesn't matter. Paul doesn't matter. Tracey and Roberta do not matter. Wake up and smell the bucket of shite.

By your logic, a reunion merely has to be Axl and Slash. Duff does not matter. Matt, Adler, Izzy - none of these people matter.

Yet that isn't what I have said. It's like arguing with a bucket of strawmen.

Well it would not be a reunion. It would be an individual reunion between Axl and Slash but it would not be a 'Guns N' Roses' reunion.

When Page and Plant reunited in 1994 they didn't call it 'Led Zeppelin'.

Again the strawman. The main focus is Axl and Slash. Always has been and always will be. That is where the great rift is or was. That is not the same as saying the rest do not matter.

Axl, Slash and Duff are absolutely necessary. Izzy and Adler/Sorum is a bonus. Anything else are simple replacements. <Is that really hard for you to comprehend? If you don't agree, I don't give a shit. You won't change my mind on it.

Oh so Duff is 'necessary' now! I do not agree in the slightest. Firstly, you are arguing from the perspective of the dumb casual who only knows September Rain and Axl and Slash. Most rock fans are better informed and know of the other members. Secondly, most reunions refer to a distinct line-up and thus include peripheral members. They usually do not entail a mere rapprochement between two individuals. When Kiss reunited in 1996 it was the 1970s Love Gun era line-up. If Peter Criss was not present it would have been something less than a reunion.

Do you need me to requote my posts from yesterday so you can read them again regarding Duff? Do you even bother to read the posts now or are you just so determined to defend Gilby from the phantom attacks that you see what you want to see and just run with it?

[The Glow Inc.]

Unreliable? I've never seen any evidence that Gilby Clarke is unreliable? You cannot market a reunion if you have no reunion. Combining Axl and Slash with Pitman, Fortus and all these nugnr wankers would be nonsensical.

Axl speaks a load of bollocks.

I wasn't talking specifically about Gibly. I was more thinking Adler and Izzy.

I mean, there is a reason why they are barely on any Slash or Axl material after they left the band...

Izzy doesn't really seem interested and Adler is too much of a pain in the ass.

I mean, there was an Adler interview saying "Slash, Duff and Axl don't think I'm cool, they don't think I am sober" less than ten days ago...

Edited October 7, 2015 by The Glow Inc.

[DieselDaisy]

Look at the lack of logic in your own argument. How is Slash and Fortus supposed to be a 'reunion' when they have never even played together?

Unreliable? I've never seen any evidence that Gilby Clarke is unreliable? You cannot market a reunion if you have no reunion. Combining Axl and Slash with Pitman, Fortus and all these nugnr wankers would be nonsensical.

Axl speaks a load of bollocks.

I wasn't talking specifically about Gibly. I was more thinking Adler and Izzy.

I mean, there is a reason why they are barely on any Slash or Axl material after they left the band...

Izzy doesn't really seem interested and Adler is too much of a pain in the ass.

I mean, there was an Adler interview saying "Slash, Duff and Axl don't think I'm cool, they don't think I am sober" less than ten days ago...

That is why I would support Gilby as a replacement for Izzy, and Sorum as a replacement for Adler.

[The Glow Inc.]

Do you think the tour is going to be called "Guns n' Roses : REUNION TOUR ( the REAL THING with GILBY CLARKE )" or simply "Guns n' Roses : Tour 2016" ?

The mere news of Slash and Axl back together, the thing is going to market itself, no need to call it anything...

[Rustycage]

Look at the lack of logic in your own argument. How is Slash and Fortus supposed to be a 'reunion' when they have never even played together?

Tell me again about the bucket......

To the public the reunion of GNR are it's main parts. Those main parts are Axl, Slash and Duff. From a more informed fan's perspective, Izzy as well. Even in YOUR argument, you legitimized GNR with Sorum and Gilby. Replacements!

The general public are not purists. The focus is Axl, Slash and Duff. Anyone else is a bonus.

Edited October 7, 2015 by Rustycage

[Mr. Dude]

If you go back to that quote where Axl said Slash and Duff were capable but Steven/Izzy werent he also said you could get Illusion guys (So Matt and Gilby are those guys). I guess illusion guys are closer to a reunion.

Axl has a lot of options to do a "reunion". For Vegas opens up some options, for a world tour maybe Illusion guys. Then theres hybrid. That maybe work for a self titled record.

Depends how stubborn Slash is over Steven. Axl seems not give much of a fuck about Izzy or anyone causing him trouble. The money is for Slash and Duff and thats how most/media see a reunion.

I would lean more towards nothing happening. Then a hybrid. Then UYI line up. Then least likely AFD line up.

Perhaps Doug Goldstein is back in the mix and the fruition of the Rose Festival is in the works.

[DieselDaisy]

But it is not a reunion of anything! Axl, Slash, Duff with Fortus and the other dicks do not represent anything. They have never existed as a band! What actually are you reuniting here?

[The Glow Inc.]

But it is not a reunion of anything! Axl, Slash, Duff with Fortus and the other dicks do not represent anything. They have never existed as a band! What actually are you reuniting here?

Just Axl and Slash...and that's more than enough to sell out a world tour...

[RussTCB]

Look at the lack of logic in your own argument. How is Slash and Fortus supposed to be a 'reunion' when they have never even played together?

Tell me again about the bucket......

To the public the reunion of GNR are it's main parts. Those main parts are Axl, Slash and Duff. From a more informed fan's perspective, Izzy as well. Even in YOUR argument, you legitimized GNR with Sorum and Gilby. Replacements!

The general public are not purists. The focus is Axl, Slash and Duff. Anyone else is a bonus.

I'd go so far as to say that the general public doesn't even care if Duff is there.

I like Duff and I'm a fan of his, so don't take that as me saying "Duff doesn't matter". I just think that Slash & Duff are all Joe Public cares about.

[Rustycage]

But it is not a reunion of anything! Axl, Slash, Duff with Fortus and the other dicks do not represent anything. They have never existed as a band! What actually are you reuniting here?

lol

It is reuniting of the main focus of GNR. Axl and Slash! Duff to a slightly lesser extent.

Even YOU accept 2 replacements as legitimate. The general public cares less than you do. A pure reunion is only Axl, Slash, Izzy, Duff and Steven.

Look at the lack of logic in your own argument. How is Slash and Fortus supposed to be a 'reunion' when they have never even played together?

Tell me again about the bucket......

To the public the reunion of GNR are it's main parts. Those main parts are Axl, Slash and Duff. From a more informed fan's perspective, Izzy as well. Even in YOUR argument, you legitimized GNR with Sorum and Gilby. Replacements!

The general public are not purists. The focus is Axl, Slash and Duff. Anyone else is a bonus.

I'd go so far as to say that the general public doesn't even care if Duff is there.

I like Duff and I'm a fan of his, so don't take that as me saying "Duff doesn't matter". I just think that Slash & Duff are all Joe Public cares about.

I can agree with that. But those are the spotlight guys. Duff's bass and backing vocals, Slash's tone and style and stage swagger and Axl is all they need to surely satisfy not only the general public but a lot of the hardcore base. I seriously doubt one person on any of these boards would boycott the opportunity to see the reunion tour if it only included those 3 original members from the old days.

[DieselDaisy]

You are really catering towards a low dumb denominator here if you feel Axl and Slash would suffice. Stradlin for instance wrote more songs than Slash. Sure, a bunch of housewives would probably accept Axl, Slash and a bunch of randoms as being bona fide but not a paying rock audience. That simply would not be Guns N' Roses for most knowledgeable music fans.

[Rustycage]

So condescending. Those that disagree with your version of GNR are dumb.

Axl, Slash, Duff, Fortus and Matt is certainly a good reunion of what the public consider to be the main parts of GNR. You think Gilby instead of Fortus will sell more tickets? lol The only thing more appealing is Izzy being there and possibly Adler since that is your pure reunion.

[RussTCB]

You are really catering towards a low dumb denominator here if you feel Axl and Slash would suffice. Stradlin for instance wrote more songs than Slash. Sure, a bunch of housewives would probably accept Axl, Slash and a bunch of randoms as being bona fide but not a paying rock audience. That simply would not be Guns N' Roses for most knowledgeable music fans.

Neither is anything that's come along since 1996 and that's beside the fact that we're not talking about most knowledgable music fans, we're talking about the general ticket buying public.

[DieselDaisy]

How could you market a reunion which isn't in fact a reunion as it consists of a line-up that has never existed in history? When Kiss marketed their 1996-7 tour it was a reunion of the original four recreating Love Gun era Kiss. It represented a turning the clock back to 1977 so to speak. That is generally what happens with reunions, not some weird, semi-reunion, mish-mash hybrid. A 'reunion' with Fortus in fact would be a complete misnomer.

[Rustycage]

A 'reunion' with Fortus in fact would be a complete misnomer.

As would a reunion with Gilby. The general public weren't watching Gilby during his stint on the UYI tour. No one cares if Dizzy is there either. They're the backing replacements and session musician in Dizzy's case since he was just covering Axl's piano.

Dizzy is more relevant to GNR than Gilby and do you think ticket sales would go down if Dizzy weren't in the reunion? lol

Edited October 7, 2015 by Rustycage

[RussTCB]

How could you market a reunion which isn't in fact a reunion as it consists of a line-up that has never existed in history? When Kiss marketed their 1996-7 tour it was a reunion of the original four recreating Love Gun era Kiss. It represented a turning the clock back to 1977 so to speak. That is generally what happens with reunions, not some weird, semi-reunion, mish-mash hybrid. A 'reunion' with Fortus in fact would be a complete misnomer.

Again.......... for Joe Public, Reunion = Axl & Slash.

[t-p-d-a]

i like Gilby Clarke... I prefer Clarke over Richard Fortus

[ChineseIRS]

Axl speaks a load of bollocks.

Whether you like it or not, Axl is a catalyst in deciding whos involved or not if Izzy doesnt want to do it.

And a few pages back you made it seem Axl had some evil, secret plan to weed out Gilby in '94 so he could bring Paul in, where 3 years earlier when Gilby first joined he said he didnt know if Gilby would be involved in the next album. Its not like he was hiding it from anyone.

As recently as 2011/2012 Axl said a reunion would pretty much be Slash, Duff, and himself and he didnt know if Izzy would commit to what a reunion tour would be. Which coincides with his statement from '92 that Guns N' Roses is pretty much Slash, Duff, and himself. Minus the Doug Goldstein part. Thats his stance on it if Izzy isnt involved.

Edited October 7, 2015 by ChineseIRS

[DieselDaisy]

A 'reunion' with Fortus in fact would be a complete misnomer.

As would a reunion with Gilby. The general public weren't watching Gilby during his stint on the UYI tour. No one cares if Dizzy is there either. They're the backing replacements and session musician in Dizzy's case since he was just covering Axl's piano.

Dizzy is more relevant to GNR than Gilby and do you think ticket sales would go down if Dizzy weren't in the reunion? lol

It does not have to be a reunion of the classic line-up to still constitute a reunion. A reunion with Gilby, Matt and Dizzy would effectively recreate the 1992-93 line-up, the line-up which was seen by more people than any other line-up and arguably represented GN'R at their absolute peak in terms of popularity. When Deep Purple reunited in 1984 it was not the original line up which reunited but the early 70s line-up, Mark II. Sticking Fortus in there would mean it would not be a reunion of anything. It would be a contradiction in terms.

[Rustycage]

A 'reunion' with Fortus in fact would be a complete misnomer.

As would a reunion with Gilby. The general public weren't watching Gilby during his stint on the UYI tour. No one cares if Dizzy is there either. They're the backing replacements and session musician in Dizzy's case since he was just covering Axl's piano.

Dizzy is more relevant to GNR than Gilby and do you think ticket sales would go down if Dizzy weren't in the reunion? lol

It does not have to be a reunion of the classic line-up to still constitute a reunion. A reunion with Gilby, Matt and Dizzy would effectively recreate the 1992-93 line-up, the line-up which was seen by more people than any other line-up and arguably represented GN'R at their absolute peak in terms of popularity. When Deep Purple reunited in 1984 it was not the original line up which reunited but the early 70s line-up, Mark II. Sticking Fortus in there would mean it would not be a reunion of anything. It would be a contradiction in terms.

You're only arguing semantics. The general public does not care about that. The reunion is the reconciliation of Axl and Slash, the two biggest icons of the biggest band of the 90's sharing the same stage. Duff and Izzy to a lesser extent and the rest is just landscape.

You can repeat yourself too but it's not going to change that this is much ado about nothing.

Simple question that I'll ask you again:

Do you think a tour by the UYI lineup with Fortus instead of Izzy would sell less than the lineup with Gilby in place of Izzy?

[DieselDaisy]

A 'reunion' with Fortus in fact would be a complete misnomer.

As would a reunion with Gilby. The general public weren't watching Gilby during his stint on the UYI tour. No one cares if Dizzy is there either. They're the backing replacements and session musician in Dizzy's case since he was just covering Axl's piano.

Dizzy is more relevant to GNR than Gilby and do you think ticket sales would go down if Dizzy weren't in the reunion? lol

It does not have to be a reunion of the classic line-up to still constitute a reunion. A reunion with Gilby, Matt and Dizzy would effectively recreate the 1992-93 line-up, the line-up which was seen by more people than any other line-up and arguably represented GN'R at their absolute peak in terms of popularity. When Deep Purple reunited in 1984 it was not the original line up which reunited but the early 70s line-up, Mark II. Sticking Fortus in there would mean it would not be a reunion of anything. It would be a contradiction in terms.

You're only arguing semantics. The general public does not care about that. The reunion is the reconciliation of Axl and Slash, the two biggest icons of the biggest band of the 90's sharing the same stage. Duff and Izzy to a lesser extent and the rest is just landscape.

You can repeat yourself too but it's not going to change that this is much ado about nothing.

But how is this, predominance of Axl and Slash, any different from other bands? You seem to be arguing that Axl and Slash's role is exceptionally inflated. All bands have one-two members which are more well known publicly but that does not necessarily relegate the other members. You could equally argue that Ian Gillan and Blackmore had an Axl and Slash dominance yet do you believe that would have sufficed as a Mark 2 reunion (minus Glover, Paice, Lord)? No is the answer. And again, I repeat, why did Page and Plant not call their 1994 reunion 'Led Zeppelin'? No John Paul Jones is your answer.

[Rustycage]

[WAR41]

Rustycage, what did you think of Gilby playing with the band at the RNR HOF ceremony? Personally I thought it was great and there isn't any other guitarist in GNR's history I would have rather seen stand in for Izzy except him. If you had to pick another guitarist to fill in for Izzy at the RNR HOF who would it have been? And please don't cop out and say you would have rather they not played at all or something like that.

[Rustycage]

Rustycage, what did you think of Gilby playing with the band at the RNR HOF ceremony? Personally I thought it was great and there isn't any other guitarist in GNR's history I would have rather seen stand in for Izzy except him. If you had to pick another guitarist to fill in for Izzy at the RNR HOF who would it have been? And please don't cop out and say you would have rather they not played at all or something like that.

I don't have a problem with Gilby. Again and again and again I have said that I do not feel he is as important in any form of reunion as stated. Gilby is great for covering Izzy. I give him that. He fulfilled his role as a touring replacement well on the tour.

I don't think he is relevant at all in a reunion because he was a temporary replacement and I think the most likely choice of a replacement for Izzy would be Fortus since:

1. That is already his job
2. Slash is willing to work with him
3. Duff has shared the stage with him
4. He is Axl's guy
5. The reunion will only take place if Axl can maintain some sense of integrity

Because compromise.