Showing posts with label Robert Hunter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Robert Hunter. Show all posts

Saturday, February 12, 2011

Stories Told by Others as Stories of Their Own



ENG 363
March 5, 2010


Stories Told by Others as Stories of Their Own


    When sitting down after a holiday dinner with your extended family and the kids have gone to bed and the dishes are washed and dried and put away and the fire is burning finely in the hearth to keep at bay the cold rain and snow and another drink of whatever it may be your pleasure to have a glass of at such times and one of the elders of your family starts in on another story of the days that used to be there is rarely—if ever—an agent of the court at hand to insist the teller of such tales place their hand on the Good Book and swear before God and man that what they are re-telling in this family context is the Truth, the Whole Truth and nothing but.  Family stories are not the sort which are put forth before the bar to be judged for veracity citing witnesses and calling to hear from others who were involved in the plots revealed by the elder of your family when sitting down to share life's tales with their family on holiday evenings with a drink in hand and a fire in hearth.  Nor do we, as family members, readers, or other tellers of our own tales, expect such stories to be held up to the same scrutiny as testimony given in a room of polished wooden balusters and attorneys with shiny shoes and tailored suits.

    Family stories are given a certain leniency when it comes to the measure of veracity—and many times they are expected to stretch objective truth.  Tales grow taller, more dramatic, with age and each successive retelling.  Few people are satisfied or even able to tell the story of a family event from some time past without adding a certain spice, a certain dimension, to the narrative.  And the stories of family past in the trio of books we have journeyed through show—each with their own unique perspectives—that they are no exception to this expectation.

   Rooted Deep in the Pigeon Valley: A Harvest of Western Carolina Memories by Carroll Jones is centered on family stories; they are the focus of the narrative, plot, and theme of the work.  He sets out to give readers a comprehensive history of his ancestor.  Using them as such, it is understandable that Jones has based those stories he shares upon historical documents and personal diaries.  While neither is beyond reproach for pure validity, both are commonly accepted as being valid sources for historical information.  Diaries, although prone to the very exaggerations and subjectivity that separate family tales from sworn testimony, capture the voice of the person writing and the time period from whence they come.

   Upon introducing his great-grandfather, William Harrison Hargrove, Jones tells us directly, "I knew he was a Civil War veteran, but beyond that the details of his life and history were rather murky" (25), before leading through a whirlwind summary of his life's adventures —"His personal diary provides a record of his odyssey" (33)—leading up to the War Between the States, his time with the 21st Regiment North Carolina Infantry during the War, and his travels following it.

  It may come as no surprise that Jones makes Hargrove the hero of these adventures, complete with admirable character traits and few, if any flaws.  "It is a testament to William's character that he stopped off in in Petersberg to check on friends recovering from wounds and sickness in the hospital there.  He steadfastly remained at the side of the injured Garland Furgeson for almost two weeks waiting to assist his good friend home" (34).  Of course, no real, breathing person has a flawless life, but this idealizing is the result of selective telling. 

    Selective telling can come in different forms. One way is as Jones has done, taking all evidence at hand—historical documents and personal writings—and then picking which parts of the narrative to pass on.  Another is through assembled memory and habit of telling the story in a given manner.  This latter method is more indicative of Daniel Robb's shared family stories in Sloop.

    To his credit, Robb does tell us he fills in blank spots in the tales he passes along to readers, "There is a story my father has told me many times" (216), and starts off with the broad strokes of a story retold by someone who was not a participant in it, but quickly adds details to heighten the tension and dramatic effect of a situation where his father (as a young boy) and a friend take a boat out onto Buzzards Bay and almost sink it.  "'Keep bailin', man,' I imagine Jim sayin. 'We gotta keep bailin', or we'll be sailing her across the bottom.  And your mother wouldn't like that'" (217).  Robb contributes numerous details that he states are only "in his mind" (217) so vivid that they would likely not have been remembered by anyone actually experiencing the event.  But he does state that it is only his memory of the way the story was told and not a description of what actually happened.  "That's the story as far as I know it," he tells his readers, "It's the story I tell" (219).  In fiction terminology, this is the mark of an unreliable narrator.  But unreliable narrators are usually withholding a key piece of information from their audience.  In a non-fiction memoir, this device can easily raise questions about the veracity of anything the narrator imparts.  Complete with an odd comma inserted into his text, Robb does reveal his own unreliability: "I am not sure, that I have these stories exactly right, but that's how I recollected them for a while now.  That's how I tell them."  His memory, complete with imagined additions, replay the stories with details and information that certainly did not exist when they were originally told by the people they actually happened to.

    Perhaps the most authentic re-told family stories come in Half Broke Horses by Jeannette Walls.  Although the tales in Half Broke are a few shades more subjective than even Robb's partially made-up retellings, they come off sounding like just the sort one might expect from a family hand-me-down.  They adhere to neither historical veracity nor consistency between one another.  A story told exactly the same way twice is told, not from memory of the event (or story as it was originally heard) by out of habitual retelling.

    Walls narrates this "True-Life Novel" in the persona of her own grandmother.  This lends an air of credibility to the stories she relates which would not otherwise be present in the book coming from a more distantly involved narrator.  The family stores then seem to come from someone with direct personal interest in the events of these family stories rather than a removed descendent.  One example of this would be Walls (as her own grandmother) recounting "Dad's pa" serving under "Colonel Robert E. Lee ... stationed on the Texas frontier, fighting Comanches, Apaches, and Kiowa" (11).  Robert E. Lee had one of the most documented lives in human history, and a cursory glance at his military record shows that, while not an impossibility, it would take a most anguished stretch of the the concept of time and of the English language to have Robert Casey "serving" under Lee in that particular time and place.  Likewise would be the case of the family story told about Billy the Kid, "who had stopped at the Casey Ranch when Dad was a teenager" (35).  Although Walls does not provide the date of the narrative in which these stories were told, it is again factually unlikely that Adam Casey (Dad) was of the age where this was possible.  But, again, these are hand-me-down family stories, and they are told in Half Broke Horse under that auspice.  They sound as if they were originally told that way, and in an age long before the history of the world was accessible with a few keystrokes and access to the internet; they are re-told with the authenticity of a folk tale.  More intriguing then, are the conflicting stories about Adam Casey's temper and accusations he faced concerning a murder. 

    In what began as an argument over fence lines, Adam Casey was accused of murdering another man.  As Walls relates it, Adam "insisted he'd been framed ... and after serving three years in prison, he was set free" (8).  There are many reiterations that Adam didn't murder the man and yet successive unrelated stories Walls shares paint a contradicting portrait of the man.  One of these conflicting stories holds that "he had a terrible temper" and "impatience with folks who had trouble understanding what he said" (given that he had a limp and a speech impediment due to a horse having kicked him in the head when he was younger).  "He'd start sputtering and cursing, and ... pull out his pistol and plug away at things, aiming to miss people—most of the time."  One incident in particular Walls cites as having Adam so enraged as to attempt to murder a tinker who Adam thought "overcharged to repair the kettle."  Adam went to get his guns, but the Mexican woman who helped around the Casey house hid them.  "Dad worked himself into a lather, hollering about his missing guns, but I was convinced Lupe saved that tinker's life" (11-12).  This is not the description of a man who could rightfully claim innocence when accused of having carried out violent retribution upon another.  But it is evidence that all of the family stories as they came down to Jeannette Walls were ones that had been collected and compressed and retold by family members over the span of several generations.

    Just because the tales Jones, Robb, and Walls tell of their families have differing levels of credibility doesn't mean they aren't true.  There is a modern proverb from author Neil Gaiman which states, "Things need not have happened to be true. Tales and dreams are the shadow-truths that will endure when mere facts are dust and ashes, and forgot."  According to this, stories hold more longevity than factual events do.  Solidifying this point from another perspective is a line from a parable by lyrical poet and story-teller Robert Hunter: "Stories are as much a part of a human as their blood, their bones, their children, their lovers and their dreams."

    The family stories Jones, Robb, and Walls offer us are, by their very context and own admissions, not meant to be taken as literally and factually true.  They are, after all, stories told by others as stories of their own.  That makes them folklore of a sort, whether they remain within the bloodline of a family or are shared by someone in that family with an untold number of strangers reading the words on the page of a published book.  If fiction can be called a lie that tells the truth, can not the same be considered for the stories we hear on cold nights when we sit near a warm hearth with a preferred drink in hand and ears eager to hear the tales handed down one to another through the years, without holding them to the scrutiny we would wish from someone swearing before their personal Almighty that what they are telling you is as pure a form of truth as Socrates, Avicenna, Kant, or Nietzsche ever dreamt of in their small epistemological philosophies.


Works Cited

Gaiman, Neil. Sandman: Dream Country. New York: Vertigo, 1992. Print.

Hunter, Robert. "The Orfeo Files." Letter to Terence McKenna. May 1996. Online.

Jones, Carroll Clark. Rooted Deep in the Pigeon Valley: A Harvest of Western
    Carolina Memories
. Wilmington: Winoca, 2009. Print.

Robb, Daniel. Sloop. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2008. Print.

Walls, Jeanette. Half Broke Horses: A True-Life Novel. New York: Scribner, 2009.
    Print.


~•~

Saturday, March 6, 2010

Saturday Night at the Speedway

The final paper for Reading Popular Culture is something of a magna opus for me. I wrote this, and the following two final papers for my other English course over the span of about nine hours (fairly continuous span with breaks for a bit of food, more coffee, and less-than-healthy amount of breaks for stretches and peeing; such is the life I signed up for in doing this— I've been in the real world, this stuff is easy).

I'm still waiting to do my paper on musical hijacking of popular culture circa 1990-92, but like that one, the idea for this one has long been germinating.

The date it was due was precisely the fortieth anniversary of the concert.


~•~


ENG 384
December 6, 2009
Final Essay


Saturday Night at the Speedway

Exposing Altamont in a Textural Analysis of
the Grateful Dead's "New Speedway Boogie"


"Some things aren't true even if they did happen,"
Ken Kesey once said.
Altamont is like that.
―Ralph J. Gleason



"New Speedway Boogie" was written and recorded by the Grateful Dead two months after the Altamont Free Concert, and appeared in June 1970 on the album Workingman's Dead. Robert Hunter, lyricist and non-performing member of the band, penned the song in in direct response to a series of articles that had been written over the course of the previous summer by the music critic Ralph J. Gleason in the San Francisco Chronicle. It was in the column "On the Town" where Gleason first challenged the Rolling Stones to perform a free concert in the Bay Area of California and months later, after they did so, condemned most everyone involved with the event (never acknowledging his own role in antagonizing the Rolling Stones to stage the concert). In this context, "New Speedway Boogie" offers unflinching yet cryptic views of Altamont and—more importantly—the blameful aftermath of it.

Please don't dominate the rap Jack,
if you've got nothing new to say
If you please don't back up the track
this train has got to run today.

In the opening lines, Robert Hunter directly addresses us as listeners, using a proper name in a generic sense, calling us "Jack" just as if we might be called "son" or "friend." But with this use of Jack, Hunter cites Ralph J. Gleason by name, even if it is not his commonly used moniker, and suggests he not continue to use his words to fuel any more fires, unless he has something more useful to impart.

I spent a little time on the mountain,
I spent a little time on the hill
Like some say you better run away,
others say you better stand still.

The mountain, in this case, can be equated with the source of wisdom and understanding, a mythic place of retreat where one can rest a while to accumulate balance and objectivity. But just as quickly as we have ascended that mountain, we are sitting on a hillside, showing that our narrative guide isn't claiming superiority for having been to that mountain where wisdom may be found. In the lore of rock lyric analysis, the Marxist and/or Freudian baseline of measurement can be equated to the Beatles and Bob Dylan, it is difficult to make references to a hill and not come around to Lennon and McCartney's "Fool on the Hill." In this case, Altamont was a hill seated with 300,000 fools.

Now I don't know, but I been told
it's hard to run with the weight of gold
On the other hand I heard it said
it's just as hard with the weight of lead.

Once more—in a recurring theme not only to this song, but in much of Robert Hunter's repertoire—our story-teller assures us that they are not the authoritative voice on the subject, but they might know a thing or two nonetheless. The narrator has never done so, but has heard that being burdened with gold (ill-gotten or freely acquired) makes it difficult to move very quickly. However, a burden carried is still a burden no matter what the substance may be.
With Altamont, there was plenty of blame to go around and yet no one seemed to step forward and pick up any share of it. While it may be true that no one involved toted away sacks of money from Altamont, what weighed on the conscience of anyone who had been there was, in some respects, far heavier than lead.

Who can deny, who can deny,
it's not just a change in style?
One step gone and another's begun
and I wonder how many miles?

These lines offer a pair of rhetorical questions and express uncertainty about purpose and distance to reach what is needed or intended. Both of these factors—viewed with the benefit of hindsight—are easily placed upon the era in which Altamont took place. Following the success of the Woodstock Festival, the counter-culture of the late sixties felt they had achieved what few other cultures had in history, that of staging a libertarian ideal society—albeit, for only a few days in a relatively small location. Altamont would prove to be the undoing of any naïve considerations that such a congregation could be staged at will.

During the summer of 1969, Gleason used his column in the San Francisco Chronicle to harangue the Rolling Stones about exorbitant ticket prices and accused them of having contempt for their audience. Since they had given a free concert in London's Hyde Park in early July, Gleason antagonistically baited the band into offering a free concert in San Francisco. The band responded with plans to perform in Golden Gate Park at the end of their tour.

Logistics and city ordinances prevented Golden Gate Park from being the site of their planned show, and, after a location at the Sears Point Raceway fell through, a last-minute—literally two days before the event was scheduled—the Altamont Speedway was offered as a suitable site for the concert. Even amidst the planning of the concert, Gleason kept his antagonistic attitude in print, "Are the Rolling Stones seriously going to appear next weekend? Your guess is as good as mine" (Gleason, "A Few Guesses").

I spent a little time on the mountain,
I spent a little time on the hill
I saw things getting out of hand,
I guess they always will.

At some point in the process, the Hells Angels were hired to act as security at the concert. The decision to use the Hells Angels remains a source of contention among all parties involved. The Angels had often been present at Grateful Dead concerts around the Bay Area, and having been involved with Ken Kesey's Acid Tests, were considered to be the "noble savages" of the counter-culture movement in California. But Altamont was no Grateful Dead concert, and Ken Kesey's workingman's charisma was far closer to the Angels disposition than the androgyne prancing and preening of Mick Jagger. In the Maysles' film Gimme Shelter, Angel Sonny Barger can be seen glaring at Jagger with an unstoned look that would make contempt and disgust seem serenely pleasant.

In a diatribe heard the day after Altamont on KSAN radio station, Barger claimed that the Angels were asked to sit on the edge of the stage and keep people away from equipment and performers. But Barger also claimed that at one point in the evening he held a gun to Keith Richards' head and told him to keep playing or he'd be killed—a claim that has no corroborating witnesses. Various other stories hold that the Angels were given $500 in beer to police the event, or, as Gleason reported afterwards, a "truckload." Whatever specific arrangements were made between organizers and the Hells Angels, as the day progressed, and beer and other substances were consumed, the Angels seemed less like a security force and more like domineering vigilantes; like outlaw bikers. The pool cues they wielded—as ubiquitously seen in the film Gimme Shelter—were pre-loaded with lead weights, brought along with obvious intention on using them.

In a brief essay written for the Criterion Films release of Gimme Shelter, Stanley Booth shares a first hand opinion of the day. "The violence at Altamont, being completely unexpected, came afterward to seem inevitable." That sentiment is shared by many, regardless of their proximity to the event itself. Forty years later Robert Hughes quotes, "'It was a day that was oppressive and dark,' recalls Chris Hillman, whose Flying Burrito Brothers shared the bill, 'and the ending was the worst scenario you could imagine.'"

Even before mid-afternoon, there was something menacing in the air. "The Stones arrived by helicopter and walked, flanked by their mysterious New York musicians guards, through the crowd, when a long-haired youth ran at Jagger screaming, 'I'm gonna kill you! I hate you!' He slugged Jagger in the face. Jagger wasn't hurt, only bruised; but it was an ill omen for the day" (Gleason, "Aquarius Wept").

During the Jefferson Airplane's performance, singer Marty Balin jumped off the stage into a melee of Angels and audience members in an attempt to break up the fight. As Gleason recounts, "One of the Angels decked Balin and when Thompson [the Airplane's manager] asked, 'What did you do that for?' replied, 'He spoke disrespectful to a brother Angel.' Paul Kantner, still onstage, asked, 'What's going on? They're beating up on my lead singer!'" (Gleason, "Aquarius Wept"). Upon their arrival, Jerry Garcia and Phil Lesh of the Grateful Dead were told about the Hells Angels beating up Marty Balin and that the scene was rapidly deteriorating—had gone from terrible to horrid. The Grateful Dead elected not to perform and quickly departed. But they would not remain silent about the event for long.

Now I don't know, but I been told
in the heat of the sun a man died of cold
Do we keep on coming or just stand and wait
with the sun so dark and the hour so late?

Once again citing an unauthoritative stance, our narrative guide offers up another paradox, this time in almost strictly folklore terms, of someone freezing to death as they feel the warmth of sunshine. It calls to mind a line in "Oh Susannah"—"the sun's so hot I froze to death, Susannah don't you cry."

We are also given another question, and even if it is rhetorical, it is asked with a sense of urgency as to what might happen if the question isn't at least addressed, if not answered outright.

Altamont is often cited as being the death of the sixties—the expiration of the ideal that seemed to have reached its epoch with the Woodstock Festival a few months earlier. In this light, the question asked by our nameless story-teller in "New Speedway Boogie" could be just that. Was Altamont the end of an era? Or was it just as likely that it exposed an era for what it really was—stripping away the Day-Glo paint and psychedelic visions for something cold and festering that lurks in the shadows the places sometimes better left unseen? Ethan A. Russell wrote, "Mick Taylor [of the Rolling Stones] responded when asked if he thought Altamont was the end of the '60s, 'Well, it was the end of the sixties, wasn't it? It was December 1969.'"

If, as Wavy Gravy stated numerous times about Woodstock, for a few days a cow pasture became a little piece of heaven (and Jimi Hendrix became the Celestial Gypsy at the summit of the psychedelic era), then for a few hours one dark evening, Altamont became a smoldering pit of hell (with Mick Jagger cast as Lucifer in brimstone).

You can't overlook the lack Jack,
of any other highway you ride
It's got no signs, no dividing lines,
and there's very few rules to guide.
I spent a little time on the mountain,
I spent a little time on the hill
Things went down we don't understand
but I think in time we will.

Regardless of medium—film, essay, radio rant, song—Altamont seemed doomed from the moment it was pressured into conception. It would be easy to formulate the situation as being one of a rape victim giving birth. Ralph Gleason, in this scenario, would be the rapist, the Rolling Stones a willing, if slightly reluctant, accomplice, and Altamont the unwanted child born. The victim would be not only Meredith Hunter, but also everyone who participated, even with the best of intentions. But, since we are discuss myth and folklore, it is fitting to cite the proverb about those intentions—that this road with no signs nor lines to guide, is smoothly paved en route to some infernal place up ahead in the unknown darkness, The experience at Altamont scarred the psyche of people who were there, the era which spawned it, and the history and mythology of rock and roll itself. What "went down we don't understand" and even forty years later, we struggle with the questions it has left us.

"Perhaps Ralph J. Gleason was responsible for Altamont," Norma Coates wrote in an lengthy essay about the event. She doesn't shy away from indicting numerous participants: "Or Mick Jagger? Sonny Barger? Woodstock? All or none of the above? After all, one could, based on the evidence, argue that it was the venerable San Francisco Chronicle music critic [...] who goaded the Rolling Stones into performing a free concert at the Altamont Speedway..." From these cutting remarks, Coates lapses into the dialogue of folklore, and strays from the evidence she so recently cited. "As the story goes, the Stones danced a little too close to the devil, in the form of the Hells Angels, that fateful day. The Angels beat up a lot of people and then killed a young black man, while Mick Jagger callously sang and danced along to 'Sympathy for the Devil'. Thus, the 1960s ended, along with the utopian promise of that decade and the youth counterculture."

Coates condemns Gleason, Jagger, and the Angels, but misses the tiny fact that Meredith Hunter came to the foot of the stage armed with a pistol, which he fired shortly before his grotesque demise. Perhaps that day was fated to be the taint of an era? As was previous quoted, "The violence ... seem[ed] inevitable" (Stanley Booth); "A day ... oppressive and dark" (Chris Hillman); and from Gleason himself: "Jagger wasn't hurt, only bruised; but it was an ill omen for the day."

Now I don't know, but I been told
if the horse don't pull you got to carry that load
I don't know whose back's that strong
but we'll maybe find out before too long...

If a pack animal—or, in modern terms, a motorized vehicle—ceases to haul what it should, the only immediate option is to pick up what is needed and move forward as best as is able. Concerning Altamont, the load to be shouldered is that of responsibility. But as Russell considers, "No one ever really took responsibility for what happened at Altamont. Not the Angels, not the people in the crowd, not the Rolling Stones. Each person involved seemed to conclude, each with their own reason, that somehow what happened had nothing [...] to do with them."

But even as no one wants the responsibility for the collision of cultural history with musical folklore at the foot of the stage in the Altamont Speedway the night of December 6, 1969, more than a few would like to offer their opinions on how it all went wrong and who should take the blame.

In a July 1972 Newsday article, Robert Christgau famously wrote, "Writers focus on Altamont not because it brought on the end of an era but because it provided such a complex metaphor for the way an era ended." But a paragraph later, Christgau gives us more than an apt summation of our interest in the complex metaphor of Altamont, instead of genuine facts in the transpiring of events, he lays a powerful cornerstone in musical folklore—that apocryphal rock and roll history that perhaps should have been but wasn't. "Denouement:" Christgau tells us, "An Afro-American bohemian is murdered by a lower-class white Hells Angel while the Englishmen do a song called 'Sympathy for the Devil.'"

Not that actuality survives long in the midst of rock and roll mythology, but fact of the matter was, when Meredith Hunter was murdered, the Rolling Stones were playing "Under My Thumb." But doesn't the story sounds better—more gruesome and grim; more dire and bleak—if the song being performed was "Sympathy for the Devil"?

When Stanley Booth commented that the violence at Altamont later seemed inevitable, we can place in the confluence of events up to Altamont—and the lingering bitterness of its blameful aftermath—something else that seems more metaphoric than real. In February 1969 the Rolling Stones recorded the song "Gimme Shelter" in which Jagger sings—
Rape, murder, it's just a shot away‚ it's just a shot away . . .
—it's seems only appropriately poetic a year later to hear the Grateful Dead reply in the last lines of "New Speedway Boogie":
One way or another
One way or another
One way or another, this darkness has got to give.

Which brings us back to Ralph Gleason's quote of Ken Kesey. "Some things aren't true even if they did happen."

Even a cursory glance at the matter shows that Altamont was just that.

It happened. But it can't possibly be true.





Bibliography

Altamont Free Concert. By Mick Jagger, Keith Richards,
The Hells Angels Motorcycle Club,
Ralph J. Gleason, Meredith Hunter.
Altamont Speedway, California.
6 Dec. 1969. Performance.
"Altamont Free Concert."
Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.
1 Dec 2009, 17:51 UTC. 2 Dec 2009.
Bangs, Lester, and etc. al.
"The Rolling Stones Disaster at Altamont: Let It Bleed."
Rolling Stone 21 Jan. 1970. Print.
Booth, Stanley. "The True Adventures of Altamont."
Gimme Shelter
Criterion Collection 99 (2000). Print.
Burks, John. "Rock & Rolls' Worst Day:
The Aftermath of Altamont."
Rolling Stone 7 Feb. 1970. Print.
Christgau, Robert. "The Rolling Stones:
Can't Get No Satisfaction."
Robert Christgau: Dean of American Rock Critics.
Robert Christgau. Web.
Coates, Norma. "Chapter 6: If anything,
blame Woodstock - The Rolling Stones:
Altamont, December 6, 1969."
Performance And Popular Music:
History, Place And Time
.
Ashgate, 2006. Print.
Dodd, David. "The Annotated "New Speedway Boogie"
The Annotated Grateful Dead Lyrics.
Univ. of Calif. at Santa Cruz,
6 Oct. 2003. Web. 1 Dec. 2009.
Gimme Shelter. Dir. Albert Maysles, David Maysles,
and Charlotte Zwerin.
Perf. The Rolling Stones.
Maysles Films, Cinema 5,
20th Century Fox, 1970. DVD.
"Gimme Shelter (documentary)."
Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.
5 Nov 2009, 04:40 UTC. 2 Dec 2009.
Gleason, Ralph J. "Aquarius Wept."
Esquire Aug. 1970. Print.
—. "Bad Vibes for the Rolling Stones."
San Francisco Chronicle 5 Dec. 1969. Print.
—. "A Few Guesses on Rolling Stones."
San Francisco Chronicle 28 Nov. 1969. Print.
—. "More Questions for the Rolling Stones."
San Francisco Chronicle 12 Dec. 1969. Print.
—. "The Rolling Stones Are Right On."
San Francisco Chronicle 5 Dec. 1969. Print.
—. "Stones’ Plans for Free S.F. Concert."
San Francisco Chronicle 24 Nov. 1969. Print.
—. "Who's Responsible for the Murder."
San Francisco Chronicle 19 Dec. 1969. Print.
Hughes, Robert. "Gimme Shelter and The Rolling Stones'
nightmare at Altamont."
The Times Online. The Times,
13 Sept. 2009. Web. 6 Dec. 2009.
Hunter, Robert, and Jerry Garcia.
"New Speedway Boogie." Rec. Feb. 1970.
Workingman's Dead. The Grateful Dead.
The Grateful Dead, Betty Cantor,
Bob Matthews, 1970. Vinyl recording.
Jagger, Mick, and Keith Richards.
"Gimme Shelter." Rec. Feb. and Nov. 1970.
Let It Bleed. The Rolling Stones.
Jimmy Miller, 1969. Vinyl recording.
Lydon, Michael. "The Decade That Spawned Altamont."
Gimme Shelter
Criterion Collection 99 (2000). Print.
Russell, Ethan Adam. Let It Bleed:
The Rolling Stones, Altamont,
and the End of the Sixties.
Springboard, 2009. Print.
Taubin, Amy. "Rock and Roll Zapruder."
Gimme Shelter
Criterion Collection 99 (2000). Print.
Wood, John "Hell's Angels and the Illusion
of the Counterculture."
Journal of Popular Culture 37.2 (2003):
336-351. Academic Search Premier.
EBSCO. Web. 1 Dec. 2009.


· • ·