Former GUNS N’ ROSES manager says band has been ‘creatively impotent’ for decades –


alan niven administered guns n roses from 1986 to 1991, before he was bitterly fired by Axl Rose. Since then, level he’s been throwing in little nuggets of history from his time in the band’s service and, perhaps not surprisingly, he doesn’t have too much good to say, barring a few jokes about the guitarist. slash (the enemy of my enemy is my friend, maybe?)

Commercial. Scroll to continue reading.

slash and I used to keep in touch, he even came and played at a benefit in our little Arizona mountain town.” level said. But since the meeting, we’ve grown apart. axel It’s a resentful, ungrateful pot of bile, and I guess it’s best to hope the lid stays on.”

level He continued: “I have no interest in seeing the band again; his time was February 2, 1988 [the date Guns N’ Roses: Live at the Ritz was filmed]. Tea aerosmith The tour was also very good: tremendous response from the band to tremendous response from the audience. I have no hope or interest in a new guns n roses disco… the tantrums of youth seem absurd in a sixty-year-old. It’s a shame they’ve been creatively impotent since 1991.”

Wow, sounds like some sour grapes in there, folks. Especially since it was only a few months ago that level was falling more disappearing guns n roses bombs, claiming that Axl Rose paid artist kostabi brand $75,000 for the use of your artwork on the covers of the use your illusion scrapbookwhich were republished this month, as well as all merchandise, with Niven claiming that Rose, not knowing that the images were in the public domain, and stating that the images could have been used for free. That comment prompted a response from Kostabi on this website. Anyway, I can tell you this for sure: the painting hangs over a grand piano in Axl RoseIt is home to this day.

“Niven is absolutely wrong. My painting, called use your illusionIt was not in the public domain. That would be like saying many of Andy WarholThe most valuable paintings are in the public domain because Warhol aforementioned davinci‘s mosa lisa or other old masters. Warhol he transformed the themes to his own style, cropped, changed colors, repeated in patterns, changed titles, etc. level$’s $75,000 quote is too wrong and how would you know? It is contractually protected private knowledge and as level said, he did not negotiate the deal for axel.

Commercial. Scroll to continue reading.

“Yes axel If I had used the public domain original from the Renaissance it would have had muted colours, not have my characteristic black and white chiaroscuro and sfumato contrasting with the simplified bright silkscreen colors in the background. I also might not have used my title: use your illusion (that my brother Paul Kostabi really stocked.) And in my opinion, it wouldn’t have sold as much because it would have looked dated. axel you now own the copyright to my transforming version of Raphael’s detail, so you can sue anyone who copies and sells the use your illusion estate. It was a great deal for everyone involved!”



Source link