Talk:Marianne Faithfull/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1


Mick Jagger

Made some changes. Mick and Marianne never married (and hence never divorced), but cohabitated for a long time.

A Face in the Crowd

(one woman's take - )by "A face in the Crowd" 76.211.19.64 Nan Nicks

i am in awe that a woman so deemed fragile...(arent titles decieving?) never gone...just didnt seek attention. i am at once struck by the earthy simplicity of Ms Faithfull's beginning works....& dont care for the history...(i have my hall of mirrors too....& no one believed me either)she knows much of life, possesses wisdom and uncanny timing. after not hearing that amazing voice for many years...i did....a forerunner and silent audience to many who endured love in the way she so effortlessly has describedd in the giving rise to her voice.... this is one woman...who among millions touched my heart....claims no pretense twould appear...and i am intruiged that not more actually saw this phenom until it was passed in time.... however...regret isnt something she advertisees...she speaks a truth, and many languages of it at that. few i have ever heard...can so effortlesly sing in what seems to be one breath...making me weep inside. i may never hear all of her works....but, will not forget the emblazened scar of bitersweet reality of my own 'certain days'....this i know to be true. i am not fond of crowds....i deal with it....Ms Faithfull is a strong woman....proved points...& passed through a myriad (it seems) transformations.... honesty a virtue? here it is the appetizer. no, i may never see her perform...though we all have that once upon a time....Ms. Faithfull thank you for having been a part of mine. I can only say i still (sometimes )cry at the rising of your voice...and smile...even stiller than i knew myself to be...please know, that one who (me) doesnt make a rule of postings...has had to make an exception. here is a fair fine and genuine genius...i can only say....Ms. Faithfull i wish you well..always...and Thank you --- all i can now say spent of myself... is please write...and know though we cant express as you do....the feeling is there to repay...which i cant in kind...tho' life being so fluid..on the wings of time..i wish you well..knowing ...thats one lady who never backed down...had an unkind word..whose honesty was so pure it nearly drove a psyche mad.....(not mine) -- "sister sister hear me now...if i could i would just to know...that you would be,only if you chose to....requalify, laugh in the face of demons....if i could ever take that pain for what your music gave to me i would..." so much for intentions. hello...i lied..but this i meant. back to self styled seclusion. thanks for bearing with my waxing here..not my intention. bye.

Now Gone...."A Face in the Crowd" Nen Thank You 04 02 05 7:52 a.m.

Revert

Being bold, I have reverted the last edit. It didn't add anything to the article, but replaced it entirely, and with text that was not very encyclopediaic or NPOV. The new information in it could be added to the current one in a better way, and I find it sensible to revert for now. If you disagree, do let me know. EldKatt 16:10, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

How is she related to Leopold von Sacher-Masoch?

I would have entered a link to him, but I wasn't sure how they are related. Some sources say her mother was his daughter & call her Eva von Sacher-Masoch, others say she was his great-niece and call her Eva Erisso. Does anybody besides her know for sure? Tweeq 15:43, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

An 2004 article in the Independent claimed her to be his great-niece, her mother being Eva Baroness Erisso. You can find the article at http://news.independent.co.uk/people/profiles/article28271.ece , but you have to pay if you want to read the whole thing. Sources for the claim are not stated in this article.

She has inherited her mother's title, but has changed the style from "Baroness Erisso" to "Baroness Sacher-Masoch", substuting the maternal surname. Doubtles she values the connection with her illustrious great-uncle, and Erisso doesn't mean very much - it seems to be a village in northern Greece.24.108.37.224 (talk) 21:49, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Mars Bar incident

I have reverted the deletion of the reference to the Mars Bar incident as it is a oft-mentioned aspect of MF's early life (so much so that it is raised directly with her in national newspaper interviews). It is therefore incumbent on Wikipedians to (a) acknowledge the reality of the claim (b) reflect the fact that she has denied it ever taken place (c) reflect the fact that her account has been confirmed by others. Robma 07:20, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Category

I have removed the category "Category:Jewish-British people|Faithfull, Marianne". Faithfull is 1/3 Jewish. Does this really qualify her to be listed in the category? I could see if someone were fully Czech, or even a half Nigerian, but a third is sort of over reaching, isn't it? Hyacinth 00:11, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Sorry, that was me and not intentional! Merely forgetfulness! ExRat 03:31, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I think that being a third anything is mathematically difficult, but I have a feeling that being Jewish comes through the female line. Incidentally, if you look at the list of Irish Americans you'll find quite a few who are quarter Irish at most. Millbanks 22:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

She is now in the category English people of Jewish descent; partial ancestry qualifies a person for extraction-based categories. Many people with only a quarter, or even only an eighth, of a given ancestry are in such categories. F W Nietzsche (talk) 04:17, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Place of birth?

The Independant newspaper reported Hemel Hempstead as her birth place in an interview recently, but most sources say Hampstead. Which is correct? Lumos3 17:16, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I've done a search of all UK national newspaper interviews with MF over the last 20 years, and only the Independent interview (published 16/10/2004) gives Hemel Hemstead as her birthplace. Indeed, the Independent itself stated Hampstead to be her place of birth in an interview published on 17/11/1999. So in the absence of any good evidence to the contrary, I think we should stick with Hampstead, as per the current edit.Robma 07:54, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Down and out / Mars bar?

I remember hearing from BBC Radio4 that she was homeless on the streets at some point - I'd like to know more about it. And the Mars Bars incident - please supply more info about this fictional event as it sounds very intriguing!

Google Marianne + "mars bar". The first hit is Snopes which has the full story, or non-story if you will.

I really don't see the relevance of mentioning Faithfull's supposed parentage of an Austrio-Hungarian baroness, since the Hapsburg dynasty ended 30 years before she was born, and Austria-Hungary was broken up, and Austria became a republic without a monarchy. The woman who gave birth to her may have been a baroness at one time, but certainly not when she was born.

I think that such people were allowed to keep their titles, meaningless though they'd become. Millbanks 22:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Millbanks is right, most European countries thart have abolished monarchy still use the titles, although they grant the holder no right or privileges, except prestige, and maybe family holds and parts of land. The example of France illustrates this very well, where during the Revolution, many nobles and aristocrats were chased and executed, yet the survivors were allowed to hold their titles. Baron Ernest-Antoine Seillière comes to my mind, one of France's most prominent aristocrats, very powerful, but not because of his title. --Mister Denial (talk) 12:34, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
My bad, forget the example of Seillière, I just checked his english wiki page and found out that while he is globally known as Baron, he does not actually hold any inherited title. But the point about nobles keeping there titles is still valid, and in the case of Marianne Faithfull, her title is relevant because it connects her to an aristocrat famous for his "depraved" lifestyle, and could be considered a parallel to her own life.--Skehrkrow (talk) 12:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
These questions are addressed in her autobiography, Faithfull: An Autobiography. The Mars bar story was presented by police to the press when the police were running a smear campaign against the Rolling Stones, according to her. Apparently the conservative 60's British establishment felt completely justified in using such tactics.
Later on, after breaking up with Mick, Marianne was "on the streets" using heroin, "squatting" (residing illegally) in ruined, abandoned apartments in London (There were still quite a few places back then left in ruin from WWII bombings) She said she survived in part because she found much generosity and kindness among the other poverty-stricken homeless people there. Cuvtixo 05:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

You can also check out her website at http://www.mariannefaithfull.org.uk/BIOGRAPHY.HTML

Cleanup

I did some minor grammatical tweaking on this article....

The structure isn't so bad as it is now, but this article really, REALLY needs some serious citations and sources for its content. There are almost no sources cited in here, and a few of these things are questionable. I am going to try and search for some good source documents that will support much of what's written in here. NickBurns 14:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

More cleanup.....

I now have her bio/autobio and am probably going to do some restructuring of the article based on what citations I find, etc. Just an FYI.....NickBurns 02:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Marianne v. Marian

In August this year, MF's name was changed to "Marian" on the basis of a single reference from a relatively obscure website. In contrast, there is not a single usage of this spelling in any of the 3000+ citations to MF on the Lexis-Nexis database of international press cuttings dating back over 20 years. Indeed, only two interviews mention her middle name; both give the conventional spelling of her first name as Marianne (see eg Evening Times (Glasgow) on July 28, 2003 Pg. 19). In addition, references to "Marianne Faithfull" outnumber those to "Marion Faithfull" by 1,800 to 1. I'd suggest, therefore, that the appearance of "Marian" in the cited ref is the result of a simple spelling error Robma 19:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. In any case, even if the person's legal or birth name is different, the name by which they are best known (and, also, the one that the article is attached to) should be in that first sentence. Then, of course, details about birth names, alternate spellings, etc. can be included. NickBurns 20:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I've reverted the reversion re Marian as there is, as my original comment stated, no evidence from Lexis-Nexis profiles showing that this spelling was ever applicable to MF, at birth or professionally. Of course, if you know of credible evidence, please cite, then revert. Robma 20:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I have now received email confirmation from MF's agent, Sara Bessadi, that the original spelling was Marian, and have amended the relevant parts of the entry accordingly. Robma 14:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia guidelines (re: name)

Here's Wikipedia's guidelines on bios. It doesn't really suggest one correct way over the other.

While the article title should generally be the name by which the subject is most commonly known, the subject's full name should be given in the lead paragraph, if known. Many cultures have a tradition of not using the full name of a person in everyday reference, but the article should start with the complete version. For example:

In some cases, subjects have changed their names at some point after birth. In these cases the birth name should be given as well:

It is common to give the maiden surname of women better known under their married name, for example:

An alternate form Lucy (Payne) Washington is also widely accepted in genealogical circles.

But in all cases, a woman should be called by the name she is most widely known under. Elizabeth Taylor, even though she was married eight times, would not be referred to under those other surnames.

For people who are best known by a pseudonym, the birth name should usually appear first in the article, followed closely by the pseudonym. Follow this practice even if the article itself is titled with the pseudonym:

Alternatively, the birth name can appear in apposition to the pseudonym:

  • Boris Karloff (November 23, 1887 – February 2, 1969), born William Henry Pratt, was an actor best known for his roles in horror films. He was initially billed as "Karloff" and sometimes as "Karloff the Uncanny".

It is not always necessary to spell out why the article title and lead paragraph give a different name. Care must be taken to avoid implying that a person who does not generally use all their forenames or who uses a familiar form has actually changed their name. Therefore: "Johnny Reid "John" Edwards (born June 10, 1953) …" is preferable to saying that John Edwards was born with the name Johnny Reid Edwards.

Once the most common name has been determined, remember to add the full names and alternate names as redirects. For example, "William Jefferson Clinton" would be added as a redirect to "Bill Clinton". This will prevent others from moving the article later, to what they may believe is the proper name for the article. This also lets future editors know that the chosen shortened name was not an oversight, but was carefully planned. NickBurns 16:40, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

More pictures?

I am going to attempt to put up the picture from the cover of Faithfull: A Collection of Her Best Recordings because it kinda reflects the damage drugs and hard living did when compared to the early photos. She's made up more pretty in later CDs, but still obviously aged. Is there any public domain pictures from around the time of the Broken English Album? Cuvtixo 09:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced personal material removed

I have removed material from this article that does not comply with our policy on the biographies of living persons. Biographical material must always be referenced from reliable sources, especially negative material. Negative material that does not comply with that must be immediately removed. Note that the removal does not imply that the information is either true or false.

Please do not reinsert this material unless you can provide reliable citations, and can ensure it is written in a neutral tone. Please review the relevant policies before editing in this regard. Editors should note that failure to follow this policy may result in the removal of editing privileges.--Docg 18:04, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Bloody stupid rule imho. Sod the lot of you Nazi editor types. Sometimes there is a lot of info to be found in less well documented sources. And you can eff off with regard to my privileges cos I don't have any to start with. In fact it's the Nazi attitude of Wikipedia editors that prevents me from contributing a whole life's worth of knowledge to an otherwise worthwhile venture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.134.166.188 (talk) 14:53, 19 November 2013 (UTC)


Bisexual/LGBT categories removed (again)

Though Ms. Faithfull discusses experimentation with bisexuality in her first memoir, and also discusses significant friendships with women in her second memoir, she is also very concise in her clarity of these experiences as experimentation and in fact, does not ever self-identify as either bisexual or LGBT.[1] [2]

It is for these reasons that those categories are being removed. Should Ms. Faithfull at a later date self-identify, that would be the only reason either category should be included again.

Recovery

I'm sure we all do wish Marianne a good recovery from her ill health, but statements to such effect are, to use that rather pompous word, "unencyclopaedic". BONNUIT (talk) 09:30, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Overshadowing intro

Twice is her work overshadowed already in the intro. At least once too many, if you ask me... CapnZapp (talk) 10:16, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Why'd Ya Do It

Is there a source for the musical description of the song as a "tango in 4/4 time, with an opening electric guitar riff by Barry Reynolds in which beats 1 and 4 of each measure are accented on the up-beat, and beat 3 is accented on the down beat." While that would be a rhythmically displaced tango, the guitar riff doesn't use that rhythm. In fact, the only up-beat that's emphasized is beat 3 and the down beat on 3 isn't played at all. 71.190.83.53 (talk) 05:56, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, that's an incoherent mess. In the first place, a tango is by definition a 4/4 or 2/4 (halving the notated values) rhythm pattern. Apparently by "beats 1 and 4 of each measure are accented on the up-beat" the original editor and you mean the eighth note following beats one and four. The phrase "accented on the up-beat" is meaningless; a beat or off-beat is either accented or it isn't. TheScotch (talk) 12:44, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Wild Horses

This article asserts alternately that Wild Horses (The Rolling Stones song) was "inspired" by Faithfull (in the lede), and that it was "influenced" by Faithful (in the body). Yet the article about that song quotes Jagger saying that the song was not influenced by her. Which is it? I have a feeling we need to go beyond the sources here, because sources on rock music often make unsupportable claims about who influenced what. At best we should have an inline citation that says who claims this. Thoughts? - Wikidemon (talk) 08:54, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I used to have a 1971 issue of Rolling Stone with an interview by Keith Richards. He discussed Wild Horses. I don't recall his ever saying the song was inspired by Faithfull. He alluded it was actually about Anita Pallenberg. I think there needs to be an inline citation here to a RS.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:16, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Sister Morphine

Re: "...she herself wrote 'Sister Morphine'."

Toward the beginning of the article it says "co-wrote". Which is it? If it's "wrote", we need a citation, since the authorship appears to be in dispute (first credited to Jaggar/Richards, then after a legal battle to Jaggar/Richards/Faithfull, never, it would seem, to just Faithfull). TheScotch (talk) 12:37, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Large amount of recent changes by 2.27.../2.30....

It's clear that the recent edits by 2.27...../2.30...... are from the same user., probably dynamic IP's from a host. These consist of a large amount of random changes including many (IMO) slightly for the worse plus putting in a lot of overlinking. All with no edit summaries, and they keep putting them back in after being reverted. 2.27/2.30, please take this to talk before re-inserting them. Or, as a minimum, please seperate them and provide your rationale for the change in edit summaries. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 11:18, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


Incarceration of a flower child

How could this immensely thorough article be missing a mention of this song? North8000 (talk) 23:55, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I put a couple of sentence in on it. North8000 (talk) 00:20, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

The current photo is exploitative - there are many photos of Marianne in the public domain - do we really have to use this one? Is it in keeping with the spirit of Wikipedia?188.221.175.238 (talk) 22:27, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

"exploitative" ? We are talking about a women regarded as one of the most sexually attractive persons of her generation. Give it an effing break, ffs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.134.166.188 (talk) 15:00, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Should we separate the sections on the personal life and music career as is the norm with other biographical articles?

I am still learning the ropes on editing wikipedia, so if someone wants to take the lead on this, you are more than welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prashantverma999 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

English/British edit warring

I've restored the initial edit by the ip as the edit was clearly not vandalism. Please discuss the disputed bit here. Both users involved were involved in edit warring and need to back off a bit and discuss. Vsmith (talk) 13:39, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

One Youthful Photo Should Be Added

There are three photos of Faithfull in the article. For some reason every one of them shows her in her strong-faced and handsome, but also stout and matronly 60's. It would not be exploitative to include a picture from her young years, since her beauty was a glamorous part of her persona at the time. The article should portray her accurately at every stage of her life. Younggoldchip (talk) 18:24, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Marianne Faithfull. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:11, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Marianne Faithfull. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:20, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Daily Mail

Yes, possibly "a tabloid." But didn't the very long, protracted and controversial RfC about that newspaper conclude that it could, in some very limited circumstances, be used as source, such as, for example, if it had an exclusive one-to-one interview with a person? Admittedly, the material removed, that was sourced to the Daily Mail, might not all be very encyclopedic. But that's a different argument. I fully expect the editor who has recently removed this material will have searched diligently for it elsewhere, but with the growing suspicion that the DM had an exclusive interview with Faithful, meaning that no other publication would have it. So should any of it be replaced here? Martinevans123 (talk)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Marianne Faithfull. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:31, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Marianne Faithfull. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:35, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ Faithfull
  2. ^ Memories, Dreams and Reflections
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Marianne_Faithfull/Archive_1&oldid=1073141123"