Customer Reviews

'Scuse Me While I Kiss the Sky: Jimi Hendrix: Voodoo Child

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

Most reviews of this book do not understand what David Henderson is up to. Henderson is an artist in his own right and his biography of Hendrix is a great read. Henderson is an artist forged in the same cultural milieu as Hendrix. Henderson was an important figure in the Black Arts Movement and he is working in the New Journalism tradition (Hunter Thompson, Thomas Wolf etc.) so don't expect generic writing and a presentation of "facts." This is a poetic biography and it brings Hendrix to life. If you are put off by "slang" and are appalled by any deviation from the New York Times Style Sheet you should probably skip this book, but if you want to spend some time digging Jimi, his triumphs and tragedy you should get this book. If you were not at Monterey Pop, or Woodstock, or the Berkley Community Theater in 1970 when Hendrix dedicated the show to the Black Panther Party, you should get this book-- it is the next best thing to being there.

The author just takes so many liberties that the book loses its credibility. The author just make so much effort in painting a "Jimi Hendrix" the author would like to believe in that the book turns into a fantasy story loosely based on Hendrix's life. I think the book exaggerated the political views of Hendrix and drastically reduce his drug use. Add to that incorrect details about his guitar playing and equipment use, something that has been so much documented everywhere else, and the book loses its charm almost immediately. Finally, the authors views of a conspiracy theory about Hendrix's death set the tone for what turns out to be a very disappointing book. It should not be sold as a biography; it is misleading in its cover.

This is what we call a biographical novel. A mixture of fiction and fact about Jimi with the author's own personal agenda, sort of like Oliver Stone's take on Jim Morrison. Historical errors abound. He attributes far more radical political views to Hendrix than any other author I've read (eight books so far, most of them at least twice), or any documentary etc. He is so presumptuous he knows what Hendrix was thinking! Another reviewer says Henderson is an artist himself and we don't understand his poetic style etc. I understand perfectly. The man wrote a very readable novel based on the life of Jimi Hendrix and tries to pass it off as a biography.

I discovered this book close to 30 years ago. It was the first book on Hendrix I ever read. Thank God it wasn't the last! This is a warped representation of Jimi's art and life and I can only recommend this to absolute Hendrix fanatics who've already read everything else in print.

3/15/11 After being continually harassed by another reviewer for expressing my opinions of this book, I purchased an updated copy and reread it, comparing to the earlier edition for variations. My original conclusions were confirmed to me over and over. This book more often than not reads like a novel, with colorful prose about things that don't have to do with anything. This guy tells you what Hendrix "thought", "felt", "fantasized" etc. on dozens of occasions, and also the thoughts and feelings of others. I was told it's "childish" to say Henderson couldn't know what Jimi is thinking. I would think any rational mind would understand that no one knows exactly what another human being is thinking and I'll prove Henderson doesn't know. In the 1981 edition he has this big elaborate scene telling us everything Hendrix is thinking, feeling and seeing as he's dying. He follows one of Monika Dannemann's numerous accounts (this is the one where he dies in the ambulance because of stupidity on the part of the paramedics). Well in his new version Henderson has decided Hendrix was murdered so he has to change what Hendrix is thinking and feeling to fit that. Obviously he didn't know the first time, why believe him now? For those who like this style of writing, they're welcome to it, but it is not true biography.

Historical errors: I quote, "Alan Douglas, Michael Jeffery, Eric Burdon could have been angry - although they could have never expressed anything that would alienate themselves from Hendrix, the king of the music scene, and necessary to their success in the music business." What rubbish! Eric Burdon was successful before, during and after Jimi's career, and it never depended on Hendrix. Alan Douglas had a top 30 album with the Last Poets (at the time, and other successful records before that) and was not earning his living from Hendrix. Jimi was Mike Jeffrey's main meal ticket, but he managed other successful acts and owned several night clubs. David Henderson is a liar. He says Jimi was co-captain of his football team in school. Not according to his coach and his friends. His coach has even said Jimi wasn't much of an athlete and didn't get to play much. David says Hendrix's first exposure to white rock was "Wild Thing" by The Troggs in '66. Jimi was listening to white rock from the 50's onward (along with all kinds of other music irrespective of the color of the artist). He has Roger McGuinn and David Crosby in NY trying to form a band in '66. He says that at his audition for the Experience, Mitch Mitchell was "unable to hide a strange contempt for Jimi." Never heard that one before, and Henderson never gives any source for such inaccurate statements that abound in these pages. David says that "Jimi Hendrix inspired the idea for Track Records in the first place." Not according to ANY Who book I ever read (or other Hendrix book either). The Experience was the first act they signed, but Lambert and Stamp were already in the process of setting up Track Records before they heard of Jimi. "Almost all the writers who insist on Jimi's so-called color blindness are British writers who rarely ever talked to any of his African-American friends." Well the Allen twins, Juma Sultan, Billy Cox etc. are all Jimi's African-American friends and they all say Jimi didn't hang out or play music with people on the basis of color (anyone who's read anything other than Henderson knows that). The problem is Henderson. He has racist leanings (especially against white Englishmen) and he attributes his own feelings to Jimi. Henderson has Stephen Stills playing Joni Mitchel's Woodstock song before the festival took place. And on it goes.

The best thing about the updated edition is that Henderson prints several interviews Hendrix gave to various journalists in full (I wish someone would assemble all the Hendrix interviews into one volume). You can judge for yourself what Hendrix thought about race relations, how far his support went with the Black Panthers etc. Unfortunately, he had full song lyrics in the earlier edition and the new one just has a few lines here and there. Not enough good points to make me recommend this. If you're only going to read a book or two on Jimi, go for Room Full of Mirrors: A Biography of Jimi Hendrix and JIMI HENDRIX: ELECTRIC GYPSY. If those stir your interest, read everything and compare for yourself. Most important of all, LISTEN to all the wonderful music of Jimi Hendrix.

I bought this book as a present for my boyfriend for Christmas and he loves it!!!! Everyday since it arrived he could not put it down. He is always telling my little interesting facts he has learned. I would definitely recommend this book to anyone who is a fan.

All I will say is I have read about Jimi going back to issues of,"Rolling Stone" when He was still alive. I have listened to All of His recorded work. He was a very Complex man,as is any genius. As other reviewers have said. How can anyone climb into Jimi's head. Go elsewhere for better REAL information. There is a Huge Bias with this Work on Jimi. There is also the way he trys to paint Hendrix as a very political person,WHICH He was not. He wanted to play His guitar and explore the limits He wanted to take His music.

Biographies are not history and should not be judged on being 100% factually accurate. It goes with the territory. I think David Henderson did a great job with this book in creating a profile of a complex and interesting character living in a dynamic time. What I really liked was the immersive nature of the times, environment, and settings that Jimi Hendrix lived in, as painted by the author. Henderson being a poet, knows how to use language and vivid descriptions to get readers into the period. When reading this book, I kept flashing back to my late high school period when Hendrix was at his pinnacle. A good friend had worn out three copies of Electric Ladyland from playing them so frequently. I never tired of going over to his house and having him say "Sit down here...get comfortable...you gotta listen to this song...I mean REALLY listen to it." His enthusiasm was so pure and infectious that I never dared to suggest we listen to any of the other albums I had brought over. Even though I haven't seen this friend in 38 years, I hunted him down so that I could anonymously send him a copy of the Henderson book. He needs it and hopefully will enjoy it as much as I have.

The author superimposes his own thoughts,opinions, politics etc onto Hendrix the man way too often. There is far too much "Jimi thought this, Jimi felt that" to the point were he is putting actual thoughts into Hendrix's mind at various points in his life. Sorry David, that's not history, that's fantasy.No book that invents dialogue and actual thoughts is worthy as history.Biographies should be written from an objective, not subjective perspective.No book that you will read on any ones life can possibly be the whole story and keeping this in mind this one is not an unenjoyable read. It's just that it fails to live up to the basic tenets of good biography writing listed above.It is a good idea to read numerous bios of a particular subject to get a more rounded life story and there are much better ones out there on this musical genius.

I was disappointed in this book. Personally, I think it is boring and kept waiting for it to get better. It is all about his music, and there is much more to Jimi then that. Or, that I would like to read about. The part about his childhood was nice, I liked that. I think many people would find this book facinating, but not me. It is more a story about his music, and I would rather read about his life. I guess you could say his life was his music. And maybe there isn't much known about his personal life. His death was remnants of articles I had read, and already knew.

This book has got to be one of the most horribly written works I have encountered in a longtime. Rather than give us a lucid portrait of a musician who made an indelible impact on modern music, the author tries to write in a way that I can only assume is supposed to conjure the essence of Hendrix's playing. Unfortunately, instead of the vivid soundscapes of Jimi, the master musician, we get the insipid, fawning and downright inaccurate doodlings of the author. Give this one a miss.

Henderson was the first serious writer to come out with a Hendrix book after Jimi died. I read 'Voodoo Child Of The Aquarian Age' back in 1979 when it came out. After reading many other Hendrix books in the interim I was glad to read Henderson's 2009 revisement 'Scuse Me While I Kiss the Sky' and found it well-worth reading.

There's a real need to correct the wrongful and misplaced criticism of 'Scuse Me' voiced in some reviews. In light of Henderson's excellent writing and presentation of Hendrix I cringe at the injustice being done to what is otherwise some of the best Hendrix writing available. Of all the books I've read on Hendrix Henderson relates Hendrix, and all that surrounds him, in a colorful and vibrant way no other writer manages. As much as I hate to sully a review with mention of racial bias I think some of those who improperly attack Henderson do so because of unconscious racial motivations transferred into pseudo-criticisms of literary technique. What makes Henderson's writing great is the fact he's a black man writing about a famous black figure from a contemporary insider's perspective. Not only does Henderson's writing gain from this, but it serves as confirmation of both Jimi and Henderson, and their individual efforts to promote their people by means of the inherent quality of their work. Forgive me for pointing this out directly because Henderson's work is of such quality that it stands on its own without any mention of race. And that's why I think the unconscious motives of his unfair detractors need to be shown. Personally, I think Henderson's writing is so good and literarily complex that it is difficult for some people and they resent it. But not because it is bad writing, but because it is good writing and challenges the reader.

Henderson fulfills a much needed place in the Hendrix author universe by writing in plush literary style that uses his talents as a poet and writer to flesh-out Jimi and his life in colorful terms and contemporary texture using the words and form of the era. Race aside, Henderson gains a particular benefit from possessing a similar racial vantage point as Jimi and having similar artistic ambitions during the same period. Because of this Henderson moved in the same circles and experienced the same cultural evolutions as Jimi. What is best about 'Scuse Me' is the fact Henderson then uses this vantage point to flesh-out Jimi in vibrant terminology and educated text. He correctly senses that someone needed to attempt to veer from the usual life account-based writing on Hendrix and try to express the lushly artistic colorful realm Jimi tried to create. And I think Henderson does a good job of doing that while staying true to the actual facts of Jimi's life.

Even better I can't thank David Henderson enough for opening the book with Hendrix's controversial death. Those who are involved in this can see what Henderson is doing there and the purpose of its positioning in the book. When you get to the brief description of Jimi's death at the end the best thing to do is go back to the beginning and re-read the death scenario again. I think 'Scuse Me' was obviously written just before Tappy Wright's admission that Michael Jeffery confessed to murdering Jimi. However you can see from what Henderson provides that he was aware there were seriously as of yet unresolved issues.

What's extremely ironic is the fact the negative reviewers of Henderson, as well as the negative reviewers of this review, don't realize they are doing exactly what Henderson was pointing-out. They don't realize that their attacking both Henderson and my review for properly showing what affected Jimi and why only emphasizes its validity and shows a perfect example of what Henderson was trying to show. That is, that Jimi himself also suffered a similar visceral bias and was even murdered for it. The fact these people don't understand they are doing exactly what Henderson points-out was done to Jimi, and Jimi himself sensed and fought against, only proves its validity. They seem not to realize that my review, Henderson's book, and even Jimi himself were all attacked for it. They point to Jimi's silence but don't recognize Henderson's accurate elucidation of it. They fail to see the process they themselves play out and why.