Why did Steve Harris fire Clive Burr ?

soundwave said:
I think the key point here is that it's not what we can discern from demos, it all comes down to Steve's perception. It's pretty evident from the Mick Wall book that Steve was getting really nervous about Clive, and Steve didn't think Clive was taking it seriously enough. It doesn't really matter if Steve's nervousness was justified or not; he's the boss.

I think context is important here. 1982 was a crazy time for the band, and the stakes were getting higher at an exponential pace -- there was a lot on the line as they had evolved from a east-end pub band into a professional business in only a few short years . Clive might have been able to handle his drinking/partying, but if Steve was perceiving that Clive wasn't going to be able handle the increasing stress/workload/high profile gigs, especially when careers and salaries (and big money) are on the line, then Clive's days would be numbered. I think this is supported by Bruce's quote in the Wall book that he regrets that Clive wasn't "given more time to sort himself out" - which implies that things were moving fast, and Steve wasn't taking any chances during the band's meteoric trajectory.

It sucks for Clive as he could be totally innocent, but it's just like at work - if the CEO loses confidence in you (for whatever reason - whether it's quantifiable or not), you're done.
Click to expand...

I think this is really it ... Maiden had not broken through yet .. they were on the cusp of breaking through .. but you can name a ton of bands on the cusp that never made it. Steve was driven and wanted Maiden to break and anything/anyone that would have prevented that was tossed. Rightly or wrongly, he thought Burr was an impediment to Maiden making it. That drive certainly makes him seem like a dick at times, but on the other hand without it we might be looking at Maiden today as one of those "too bad they did not make it, they had a few good albums" kind of band
 
matic22 said:
There is one thing to be said about money during Beast On The Road tour. Band members recieved 100 pounds per week (I read that in an interview with Bruce). Rod, being a true Yorkshireman was saving up money for production of the next albums and tours. The first big paycheck that the members recieved was after World Slavery Tour.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I have a lot of respect for their self-imposed frugal per diem. That was even back in the day of massive advances from the label, so I admire the willpower.
 
soundwave said:
It's pretty evident from the Mick Wall book that Steve was getting really nervous about Clive, and Steve didn't think Clive was taking it seriously enough.
Click to expand...
Evident? It was a made up story that comes off better than Clive's story. I honestly do not believe Clive is lying (have you read his take on it? ++> see third post of this thread) rather thinking that the band needs to keep a "clean" story.
It sucks for Clive as he could be totally innocent, but it's just like at work - if the CEO loses confidence in you (for whatever reason - whether it's quantifiable or not), you're done.
Click to expand...
For whatever(!) reason... apparently you (and the people who liked your post) do not care so much about the real reason? I rather hear an honest interview about this, one day, 10 years after the band call it quits, or after Rod dies.
 
The fact of that matter is that it's Steve's band. He's the boss and if someone isn't fit for the band in his eyes, he doesn't really owe anyone else an explanation. But we did get an explanation and I don't see much reason to believe Clive over Steve besides a desire to make Steve out to be the bad guy.

I doubt neither Clive or Steve were completely truthful, they aren't exactly unbiased sources. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle of their stories.
 
Forostar said:
Evident? It was a made up story that comes off better than Clive's story. I honestly do not believe Clive is lying (have you read his take on it? ++> see third post of this thread) rather thinking that the band needs to keep a "clean" story.

For whatever(!) reason... apparently you (and the people who liked your post) do not care so much about the real reason? I rather hear an honest interview about this, one day, 10 years after the band call it quits, or after Rod dies.
Click to expand...

I totally understand where you're coming from, and I would LOVE to be a fly on the wall back in '82, but I don't think we'll ever know because we can't get into Steve's head (and he's not exactly an open book... so we can only conjecture) As @Mosh said, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Clive probably wasn't falling down drunk during a run of gigs (but probably did act immature or did something stupid to piss Steve off) and Steve probably wasn't a soulless dickhead of a boss (but probably was going into strict no-nonsense manager mode). Just my two cents.
 
Last edited:
However dickheadish or not: to Clive and, his family and fans a more detailed explanation would be very respectful. All I hope for is more than what Maiden sources have said until this day. Clive has the most detailed account, and I can't imagine he'd lie about anything he said there. Maybe he left stuff out, but then why would he be so extra sore about it? Maiden has a chance to fill the gaps. They might not have exactly lied either, but they emphasized the partying and left other stuff out. I'd be glad if they came out and said more about it. This would do fine: "We preferred Nicko. We found that out when he stood in for Clive during the NOTB tour. The way it went, that was very sad for Clive and we should have communicated it better. We'll also update the biography when a new version comes out."

Or anything else, as long as it makes more sense and fits to what really happened. At least the death of Clive's father could be mentioned and the fact that Nicko filled his shoes around that time.
 
Last edited:
Must have been interesting an interesting sight with Steve backstage in the 80s given his self-discipline. Those were the ultimate decadent party days for rock bands; I picture him in the corner studiously reading a history book while the opening band runs by trying to snort lines of coke off of each other.
 
Forostar said:
However dickheadish or not: to Clive and, his family and fans a more detailed explanation would be very respectful. All I hope for is more than what Maiden sources have said until this day. Clive has the most detailed account, and I can't imagine he'd lie about anything he said there. Maybe he left stuff out, but then why would he be so extra sore about it? Maiden has a chance to fill the gaps. They might not have exactly lied either, but they emphasized the partying and left other stuff out. I'd be glad if they came out and said more about it. This would do fine: "We preferred Nicko. We found that out when he stood in for Clive during the NOTB tour. The way it went, that was very sad for Clive and we should have communicated it better. We'll also update the biography when a new version comes out."

Or anything else, as long as it makes more sense and fits to what really happened. At least the death of Clive's father could be mentioned and the fact that Nicko filled his shoes around that time.
Click to expand...

That would be pretty cool if they did that. I wonder if it's a culture thing though. The British side of my family is really careful about revealing "family dirty laundry" and carefully controlling the presentation of things (that whole "stiff upper lip" British cliche - say something vague one time and then move on), whereas my American side doesn't give a shit. I know those are stereotypes, but maybe that has something to do with it in some small way.
 
That and obviously Clive is gone, people generally do not like to speak I'll of the dead...and I think it probably was a business decision not a personal one.
 
We'll do as we please. :) It's also become a "research"-update topic, trying to find out when Nicko filled in for Clive (see e.g. previous page).
 
soundwave said:
Must have been interesting an interesting sight with Steve backstage in the 80s given his self-discipline. Those were the ultimate decadent party days for rock bands; I picture him in the corner studiously reading a history book while the opening band runs by trying to snort lines of coke off of each other.
Click to expand...

Nicko's quote in Run to the Hills about the time he joined the band is quite clear, mentioning that everyone bar Steve and Bruce were indulging. Most of the time it was alcohol, but other drugs were tried too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top