Bruce Dickinson

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anonymous
  • Start date Start date
I would have liked to read more about the tensions in Maiden, but as I said previously, we have learnt more about Clive and Adrian's departure from Bruce's book than from Mick Wall's hagiography.
This! We don't to really how the band works. There are a few words about a so-called triumvirate of him (he always puts him first!), Steve and Rod, but that doesn't say a lot about the dynamics. And I would definetely love to know how certain issues were solved: we know Steve and him didn't agree on the tempo of Flight of Icarus, but we don't have a clue about the way it was sorted out. How do they actually work as a band? This is why I first bought the book, not being that interested in the man himself, and I didn't get what I expected. That said, his book is miles ahead of the bullshit musicians usually come up with. Steve has recently said he would consider to write his autobiography, as he could document the whole Maiden story. It wouldn't be a valuable piece of litterature, to say the least, and I guess we wouldn't get much about his private life (apart from the usual bits about his divorce and the subsequent doom metal masterpiece), but maybe we could expect more about the actual dynamics within the band.
 
There are a few words about a so-called triumvirate of him (he always puts him first!), Steve and Rod, but that doesn't say a lot about the dynamics.

There are plenty of examples in the book where he doesn't. ;)

And I would definetely love to know how certain issues were solved: we know Steve and him didn't agree on the tempo of Flight of Icarus, but we don't have a clue about the way it was sorted out.

Adrian and Bruce put their foot down, quite probably with Martin Birch's approval, and Nicko and Steve reluctantly agreed?

How do they actually work as a band?

In terms of steering the ship, as a triumvirate, at least when it comes to making the most important decisions (especially since 1999). Do you think that is a coincidence that Steve and Bruce are the only ones discussing checking stage set in the footage shown in Behind the Beast? :)

In terms of the creative aspects, each musician tends to gravitate towards the other band member(s) with whom the creativity flows best. To be honest, I do not know what much Bruce could have added to that.

This is why I first bought the book, not being that interested in the man himself, and I didn't get what I expected.

You did check you were buying Bruce's autobiography, not a book about his time in Iron Maiden, didn't you? ;)

Steve has recently said he would consider to write his autobiography, as he could document the whole Maiden story. It wouldn't be a valuable piece of litterature, to say the least, and I guess we wouldn't get much about his private life (apart from the usual bits about his divorce and the subsequent doom metal masterpiece), but maybe we could expect more about the actual dynamics within the band.

That would be certainly an interesting read, especially anything he could add about those whose contributions have been (allegedly) erased from the official history of the band (e.g. Paul Cairns playing on The Soundhouse Tapes). Anyway, I do not think we are never going to know how the band works even if Steve writes an autobiography himself, as they have always been quite private about this. It keeps the mystique!

By the way, as you know Steve's life much better than most, is there any truth in what was apparently reported by the press in the early 90s, that his divorce was a result of him having an affair with his kids' nanny? It was mentioned over at the Iron Maiden official fan club forum many years ago, but has not resurfaced since.
 
By the way, as you know Steve's life much better than most, is there any truth in what was apparently reported by the press in the early 90s, that his divorce was a result of him having an affair with his kids' nanny? It was mentioned over at the Iron Maiden official fan club forum many years ago, but has not resurfaced since.
There have been allusions to a few "affairs", but of course I don't know if this is true. The only one that is definetely true is when Dave and Clive recorded a tape of Steve having sex in the next room with a fan, in 1982. I guess his wife must have been very pleased to read that.
 
There have been allusions to a few "affairs", but of course I don't know if this is true. The only one that is definetely true is when Dave and Clive recorded a tape of Steve having sex in the next room with a fan, in 1982. I guess his wife must have been very pleased to read that.

:eek: :facepalm:

Thanks. The bit about the nanny was apparently in one of the tabloids at the time, but it could have been made up by the original poster.
 
:eek: :facepalm:

Thanks. The bit about the nanny was apparently in one of the tabloids at the time, but it could have been made up by the original poster.

I don't like to speculate about curcumstantial evidence, but he doesn't seem to have fallen out with any of his kids which you might expect if he'd betrayed their mother with their nanny.
 
I don't like to speculate about curcumstantial evidence, but he doesn't seem to have fallen out with any of his kids which you might expect if he'd betrayed their mother with their nanny.

Fair enough. The source, if I remember correctly the original poster, does not tend to post bullshit over at the official Fan Club forum, but it could have been just a rumour or merely tabloid bullshit.
 
Fair enough. The source, if I remember correctly the original poster, does not tend to post bullshit over at the official Fan Club forum, but it could have been just a rumour or merely tabloid bullshit.

Like I said, it's circumstantial evidence, just because you wouldn't expect it to happen doesn't mean that it wouldn't happen. There was obviously some reason for the divorce.
 
I gave the book 2 reads by now,and i enjoyed re-reading the book more than reading it for the first time. I think the reason is smple-expectations vs reality.Before i started to read the book for the first time i expected a book about Bruce Dickinson the singer for Iron Maiden.Now i know that's not what it was about, now i can relax and to appreciate the book for what it actually is-a story about incredibly talented diverse and creative peson written by the man himself.
I'm aware of the fact that many expected to read inside stories regarding the band's ways to work, to record etc,but i think Bruce is absolutely right not giving out this information as it would be unfair to others and the band itself.
Writing about someone's personal development even your own in a direct manner without being boring is a hard task.Bruce tried to tell us some things through his adventures.
Having said all that i would be happy to know more about Bruce's decision to re-join Maiden and how it all worked out in a such great way.I read RTTH book but still would be happy to hear more from Bruce's personal point of view.
 
Last edited:
The man is a musician, first and foremost...
Says who?
You might just as well claim he's a pilot first and foremost, since flying had been taking up as large a part of his life as singing has in the past few years, if not bigger. Or you could say he's been a businessman first and foremost lately. Who could know how Bruce sees himself these days? It's entirely up to him. Saying you are disappointed after reading the book is one thing, but telling him what to write about is completely out of our reach. And rightfully so.
 
It's definitely an expectation thing from Maiden fans: Bruce is most famous for being the lead singer of Iron Maiden so in theory his book should cater to Iron Maiden fans. And it does, but not very much.

I deduce from reading the book that Bruce is the kind of guy always looking for something to conquer. I think he falls in love with whatever career he has, climbs that career to it's inevitable peak, and then finds something else to love. He does it with music, fencing, piloting, beer making, hell, he even does it with cancer. He's a man out to conquer the world. The only difference with Iron Maiden is that it's his primary source of income and so it will never go away. That's not to say that he doesn't love music and being creative, but I think currently he's more in the mental headspace of a pilot.
 
I quite admire the way he has found ways of succeeding in the hobbies he has chosen to keep himself sane in the crazy world of rock and roll, becoming a competitive fencer and a commercial pilot as byproducts. Not too bad for someone who was bullied relentlessly as a teenager.

I personally think we can count ourselves lucky to have someone as interesting as the frontman and singer of the band rather than a stereotypical rock star. He is not without flaws by any means, but I'd rather have him as someone to admire than Ozzy Osbourne, to name just one example.
 
Ozzy Osbourne, to name just one example.

speaking of which, there was a Sabbath documentary on Sky Arts last night, I watched a little of it in between flicking channels. Ozzy was recounting a story of how he was inebriated and pissing himself and trying to pass that off as being jetlagged. All the while the story had to have subtitles.

Bruce has done OK for himself ;)
 
Bruce is a phenomenally interesting person. What we got was a moderately interesting book. It doesn't jive.

Like all works done outside of the subject's main profession, it should have had more outside help. Should've been written by Bruce, re-written by another writer with experience in the genre (who could also interview Bruce further and turn those interviews into prose).
 
Back
Top