What do you think?
Rate this book
33⅓ Main Series #41
Use Your Illusion I and II
It was the season of the blockbuster. Between August 12 and November 26 1991, a whole slew of acts released albums that were supposed to sell millions of copies in the run-up to Christmas. Metallica, Michael Jackson, Pearl Jam, Nirvana, Garth Brooks, MC Hammer, and U2 - all were competing for the attention of the record-buying public at the same time. But perhaps the most attention-seeking act of all was Guns N Roses. Their albums Use Your Illusion 1 and 2 , released on the same day, were both 75-minute sprawlers with practically the same cover design - an act of colossal arrogance.
On one level, it worked. The albums claimed the top two chart positions, and ultimately sold 7 million copies each in the US alone. On another level, it was a disaster. This was an album that Axl Rose has been unable to follow up in fifteen years. It signaled the end of Guns N Roses, of heavy metal on the Sunset Strip, and the entire 1980s model of blockbuster pop/rock promotion. Use Your Illusion marked the end of rock as mass culture.
In this book, Eric Weisbard shows how the album has matured into a work whose baroque excesses now have something to teach us about pop and the platforms it raises and lowers, about a man who suddenly found himself praised to the firmament for every character trait that had hitherto marked him as an irredeemable loser.
On one level, it worked. The albums claimed the top two chart positions, and ultimately sold 7 million copies each in the US alone. On another level, it was a disaster. This was an album that Axl Rose has been unable to follow up in fifteen years. It signaled the end of Guns N Roses, of heavy metal on the Sunset Strip, and the entire 1980s model of blockbuster pop/rock promotion. Use Your Illusion marked the end of rock as mass culture.
In this book, Eric Weisbard shows how the album has matured into a work whose baroque excesses now have something to teach us about pop and the platforms it raises and lowers, about a man who suddenly found himself praised to the firmament for every character trait that had hitherto marked him as an irredeemable loser.
136 pages, Paperback
First published December 15, 2006
8 people are currently reading
195 people want to read
About the author
Eric Weisbard
11 books4 followersEric Weisbard is Associate Professor of American Studies at the University of Alabama and the author of Top 40 Democracy: The Rival Mainstreams of American Music.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 34 reviews
March 15, 2009
Dear Eric Weisbard,
If you hate a band, why write about them? This wasn't some forced album review that you *had* to do. Rather than discuss, as the series suggests, the importance of a record, or how it was made, etc., Eric takes apart the UYI albums.
I didn't expect it to be the dribbly fan prose my personal reflections on the book would have been, but I also didn't expect him to be so self-righteous. Why do I know more about Eric's married life (he has a kid, he's married to a girl he used to listen to one track of GNR with repeatedly) than the album or what it meant? Apparently this album (for the author) heralded the end of rock.
Clearly Mr. W wanted to write the review of Pearl Jam's "Ten" and didn't get the gig. So we have to listen to him rag on the band's persona (rather than their songwriting). He blathers on, and I found myself checking how many pages were left (the book only rings in at a hefty 125, but it feels like War and Peace the way he writes).
He even gets as arrogant as to talk about if *he* had ordered the tracks, what order he would have done, and what he would have kept. You know what *I* would have done, Eric Weisbard? I would have hired an editor :)
But that's not the worst of it. At one point early on he refers to an art critique and decides to bite the style and review the albums WITHOUT LISTENING TO THEM. then, in the final chapter, we're supposed to be grateful that he did so and pour over his pontifications. EXAMPLE GIVEN - this is one gem I dog-eared in my book to share with you all:
"Also, if you hit the same note at the end as you had in the beginning, just more torn and frayed, then nothing has moved forward. Gothic imperatives that have long counterposed Puritan skepticism to the smiley faced motto of American revivalism: "all may be saved"".
If any of you understand what the hell he's on about (this was in reference to the song "Don't Cry", which the author has particular disdain for", lemme know.
This book McSucked. Goodreads, can you add zero stars to the options? thanks.
I'd like to quote the great William Bailey and tell Eric Weisbard to GET IN THE RING M***********!
If you hate a band, why write about them? This wasn't some forced album review that you *had* to do. Rather than discuss, as the series suggests, the importance of a record, or how it was made, etc., Eric takes apart the UYI albums.
I didn't expect it to be the dribbly fan prose my personal reflections on the book would have been, but I also didn't expect him to be so self-righteous. Why do I know more about Eric's married life (he has a kid, he's married to a girl he used to listen to one track of GNR with repeatedly) than the album or what it meant? Apparently this album (for the author) heralded the end of rock.
Clearly Mr. W wanted to write the review of Pearl Jam's "Ten" and didn't get the gig. So we have to listen to him rag on the band's persona (rather than their songwriting). He blathers on, and I found myself checking how many pages were left (the book only rings in at a hefty 125, but it feels like War and Peace the way he writes).
He even gets as arrogant as to talk about if *he* had ordered the tracks, what order he would have done, and what he would have kept. You know what *I* would have done, Eric Weisbard? I would have hired an editor :)
But that's not the worst of it. At one point early on he refers to an art critique and decides to bite the style and review the albums WITHOUT LISTENING TO THEM. then, in the final chapter, we're supposed to be grateful that he did so and pour over his pontifications. EXAMPLE GIVEN - this is one gem I dog-eared in my book to share with you all:
"Also, if you hit the same note at the end as you had in the beginning, just more torn and frayed, then nothing has moved forward. Gothic imperatives that have long counterposed Puritan skepticism to the smiley faced motto of American revivalism: "all may be saved"".
If any of you understand what the hell he's on about (this was in reference to the song "Don't Cry", which the author has particular disdain for", lemme know.
This book McSucked. Goodreads, can you add zero stars to the options? thanks.
I'd like to quote the great William Bailey and tell Eric Weisbard to GET IN THE RING M***********!
March 22, 2011
Like the other books in the 33 1/3 series, a quick read. Also what is interesting is how the author looks at a record that he doesn't particularly like. This sounds like a disaster to read, but actually its an interesting way to walk through a work or record. The main interest in Eric Weisbard's study on "Use Your Illusion Parts 1 & 2 is not really the music itself but the concept of the big blockbuster album in the early 1990's. Especially when the young turks (Kurt Cobain) are literally around the corner.
Like a slow motion car wreck there is something absolutely fascinating about Axel Rose. One can say he's a villain of sorts, but he's more of an average joe with interesting traits or put in a very specific and strange situation - which is rock stardom. And Axel plays the rock star very very well. Its his performance that everyone finds intriguing - both off and on the stage. He has an unique voice and for me that what makes him stand out compared to the 'other' jerk rock n' roll guy.
The story has been told many many times. Elvis being one, of someone trapped in his culture. Axel wants to experiment, but he never lets himself free. The obsession of his records is that he takes so long to complete it - and that becomes the story itself. Which is fatal in rock n' roll terms. The fast, the speed of the music have to at least appear to be effortless and wild. When I hear a Guns n' Roses record, it seems to be an academic study on the making of "rock." And with respect to Axel and Co. it wasn't meant to be that way.
Weisbard's book is interesting when he writes about the business end of the last era of rock product, but its kind of a drag that he doesn't like "Use Your Illusion." I would have like to have him defend this work in that type of setting, but alas, his feelings for the album is not really blah, but more with a sense of strange passion on his part. Him going track-by-track at the end of the book was not necessary. In the back of this title it mentions that Weisbard is writing a book about crossover artists. That sounds fascinating and I will read that for sure.
Like a slow motion car wreck there is something absolutely fascinating about Axel Rose. One can say he's a villain of sorts, but he's more of an average joe with interesting traits or put in a very specific and strange situation - which is rock stardom. And Axel plays the rock star very very well. Its his performance that everyone finds intriguing - both off and on the stage. He has an unique voice and for me that what makes him stand out compared to the 'other' jerk rock n' roll guy.
The story has been told many many times. Elvis being one, of someone trapped in his culture. Axel wants to experiment, but he never lets himself free. The obsession of his records is that he takes so long to complete it - and that becomes the story itself. Which is fatal in rock n' roll terms. The fast, the speed of the music have to at least appear to be effortless and wild. When I hear a Guns n' Roses record, it seems to be an academic study on the making of "rock." And with respect to Axel and Co. it wasn't meant to be that way.
Weisbard's book is interesting when he writes about the business end of the last era of rock product, but its kind of a drag that he doesn't like "Use Your Illusion." I would have like to have him defend this work in that type of setting, but alas, his feelings for the album is not really blah, but more with a sense of strange passion on his part. Him going track-by-track at the end of the book was not necessary. In the back of this title it mentions that Weisbard is writing a book about crossover artists. That sounds fascinating and I will read that for sure.
October 16, 2017
A more-or-less enjoyable rant, one that feels more like a starting point than a final product. True to any rant, it fixates on certain things too long, spins into new subjects, becomes difficult to follow and doesn't quite all come together, at least for anyone's mind other than the author's.
There are two glaring features of the book that hold it back:
(1) The writer presents himself as much smarter than the subject he is writing about, which doesn't work as well for him as it does Chuck Klosterman. He outright puts down the double album, rarely returning to give it (or the band) some deserved praise. That reserves this book for a niche market of folks who enjoy the album enough to read an entire book about it, but don't mind having their taste insulted or considering Use Your Illusion I and II to be an extremely flawed works of art. ...I imagine this group of potential readers is small, though I myself am a part of it.
(2) The writer boldly(?) declares he will not re-listen to the album until he has written all but the last chapter. (He does this to echo another work that does something similar: Nicholson Baker's U and I, a book devoted to author John Updike.) This decision acts more as a barrier than it amounts to any kind of inspired choice. It gives the book the feel of an outline before the scholarly research has been done.
Not half-bad. Not half-good either.
There are two glaring features of the book that hold it back:
(1) The writer presents himself as much smarter than the subject he is writing about, which doesn't work as well for him as it does Chuck Klosterman. He outright puts down the double album, rarely returning to give it (or the band) some deserved praise. That reserves this book for a niche market of folks who enjoy the album enough to read an entire book about it, but don't mind having their taste insulted or considering Use Your Illusion I and II to be an extremely flawed works of art. ...I imagine this group of potential readers is small, though I myself am a part of it.
(2) The writer boldly(?) declares he will not re-listen to the album until he has written all but the last chapter. (He does this to echo another work that does something similar: Nicholson Baker's U and I, a book devoted to author John Updike.) This decision acts more as a barrier than it amounts to any kind of inspired choice. It gives the book the feel of an outline before the scholarly research has been done.
Not half-bad. Not half-good either.
April 27, 2009
I've noticed many of the books in this series veer hard into "personal memoir" territory. I don't care for that kind of self-indulgence, and this book only occasionally goes in that direction. Most of the writing is focused on the album and the band, and unlike some of the other books in the series (OK Computer, Jeff Buckley's Grace), I actually learned quite a bit about the album's creation and impact. Still, the fact that the author decided not to listen to the album until he wrote the very last chapter is pretty lame. He likes to comment on the embattled state of rock criticism these days, and maybe it's this kind of self-indulgence that makes pop music writing less than tolerable.
November 3, 2020
Eh, this was not a good book. I owned Use your Illusion 1 and listened to it. I was 12. It did not focus my musical tastes or live on as anything I listened to after that. I am not a GNR fan. But, I do like this book series, so here we are.
This book was good in that it was an overview of the musical time when I was young. But much of that music was also bad. After this overview the book meanders and I almost just got out of it, then the premise was laid out. He was going to review the album from memory and that was intriguing to me.
It did continue to meander though and was more about Appetite for Destruction than anything else. The final chapter was the author going through song by song and listening offering small critiques.
This book was good in that it was an overview of the musical time when I was young. But much of that music was also bad. After this overview the book meanders and I almost just got out of it, then the premise was laid out. He was going to review the album from memory and that was intriguing to me.
It did continue to meander though and was more about Appetite for Destruction than anything else. The final chapter was the author going through song by song and listening offering small critiques.
May 19, 2024
2.5 ⭐️
September 30, 2022
This was the first of the 33 1/3 books I've tried out, I picked it up at the Rock 'n Roll Hall of Fame. It was published in 2006, so it's written at a point where Chinese Democracy hasn't been released, Guns n' Roses haven't reunited, and maybe the band was at its least cool following a somewhat disappointing "comeback" on the Video Music Awards.
The result is a book that is kind of punching down at the band throughout 98% of it. The author communicates how he rushed out and bought the Use Your Illusion albums right when they came out and listened to them a lot, but I didn't get the feeling he was as big of a fan as most people that would pick up the book. Even in the sections where he's praising a few GNR songs, he talks about the bad Izzy Stradlin songs like it's obvious nobody could like them (sorry, 14 Years, Dust 'n Bones, and Double Talking Jive all kick ass). Then there's his general distaste for Don't Cry and Estranged, which he only comes around on a bit at the end.
I think if you're writing about Guns 'n Roses and you're not coming it at from the position that they were justifiably the biggest rock band in the world that put out three and a half landmark albums in a short period of time you're missing the mark. I recently read Fargo Rock City by Chuck Klosterman and felt he came at this material from the same intellectual style as Weisbard but was much more enjoyable to read as it was definitely also coming from a place of fandom.
The result is a book that is kind of punching down at the band throughout 98% of it. The author communicates how he rushed out and bought the Use Your Illusion albums right when they came out and listened to them a lot, but I didn't get the feeling he was as big of a fan as most people that would pick up the book. Even in the sections where he's praising a few GNR songs, he talks about the bad Izzy Stradlin songs like it's obvious nobody could like them (sorry, 14 Years, Dust 'n Bones, and Double Talking Jive all kick ass). Then there's his general distaste for Don't Cry and Estranged, which he only comes around on a bit at the end.
I think if you're writing about Guns 'n Roses and you're not coming it at from the position that they were justifiably the biggest rock band in the world that put out three and a half landmark albums in a short period of time you're missing the mark. I recently read Fargo Rock City by Chuck Klosterman and felt he came at this material from the same intellectual style as Weisbard but was much more enjoyable to read as it was definitely also coming from a place of fandom.
July 3, 2015
An odd book, looser and more meandering than the 33 1/3 series usually allows, and with a fair amount of commentary on the process of writing the book and rediscovering the band. It's a book about a moment - the zenith of blockbuster rock at the end of the 80s and beginning of the 90s - whose horizons gradually shrink to being a book about a band, then a book about an album. Because it's not a terribly good album (OK, albums), this narrowing of scope doesn't help Weisbard much, and the last chapter listen to Use Your Illusion(s) in all their bloat and ambition is rather anticlimactic. The rock book as wry, Nick Broomfield style documentary, if you like, in which the chase is the thing and the final encounter with the object of study can only disappoint.
Still, if it dances around its supposed topic a little too much, Weisbard's other subjects are interesting ones: the vanished world of the rock business in its commercial prime, the axial tilt - as much hype as reality - from hard rock to alternative rock, Axl Rose himself in all his tawdry complexity. This was a period I lived and listened through, but it was also one I saw through a transatlantic filter. Weisbard writes, sadly at times, about its scale and flaws. Never such appetite again.
Still, if it dances around its supposed topic a little too much, Weisbard's other subjects are interesting ones: the vanished world of the rock business in its commercial prime, the axial tilt - as much hype as reality - from hard rock to alternative rock, Axl Rose himself in all his tawdry complexity. This was a period I lived and listened through, but it was also one I saw through a transatlantic filter. Weisbard writes, sadly at times, about its scale and flaws. Never such appetite again.
April 3, 2015
Still some of the most balanced & insightful of all the Axl - related writing I've ever read.
May 16, 2020
Almost scared away by reviews here. I don't regret listening to this audiobook but still I don't feel I would have missed a lot if I had decided to pass.
The author's view is interesting in that he comes from an angle of someone "in the record business" as a published critic during the era. For me, whom was just becoming a teenager as Appetite was becoming huge, it is hard to relate to how that was -- but I think that experience/angle is the value of this work of reminiscence/recollection. It provides a different perspective which is helpful to me, if still a bit alien. I think it does focus a bit much on the "total sales" numbers that loomed so large back then, and which still carried significant weight in 2006 when this was written. I will also point out the 14 years between when this was written and my reading, is almost the same length of time between this work and the albums it is recalling.
I could write more but I think I will summarize by saying there is a lot of fluff and the writer gets in his own way often. It is barely focused on the albums and is more a long digression on his trying to digest what that era of GnR signified in 2006. I started off listening expecting a rating of 1, was validated during the intro, but it slowly climbed up to the 2.5/3 rating I settled on. The ending where he does actually listen to the album is anti-climatic, but okayish.
Whether it deserves to be part of the 33 1/3 series depends on what you picture the series to be, but I will say it is not a very strong work. The few other titles I have listened to are also a bit askew but seem to hold up to review, this one is weak but perhaps serviceable in that context.
The author's view is interesting in that he comes from an angle of someone "in the record business" as a published critic during the era. For me, whom was just becoming a teenager as Appetite was becoming huge, it is hard to relate to how that was -- but I think that experience/angle is the value of this work of reminiscence/recollection. It provides a different perspective which is helpful to me, if still a bit alien. I think it does focus a bit much on the "total sales" numbers that loomed so large back then, and which still carried significant weight in 2006 when this was written. I will also point out the 14 years between when this was written and my reading, is almost the same length of time between this work and the albums it is recalling.
I could write more but I think I will summarize by saying there is a lot of fluff and the writer gets in his own way often. It is barely focused on the albums and is more a long digression on his trying to digest what that era of GnR signified in 2006. I started off listening expecting a rating of 1, was validated during the intro, but it slowly climbed up to the 2.5/3 rating I settled on. The ending where he does actually listen to the album is anti-climatic, but okayish.
Whether it deserves to be part of the 33 1/3 series depends on what you picture the series to be, but I will say it is not a very strong work. The few other titles I have listened to are also a bit askew but seem to hold up to review, this one is weak but perhaps serviceable in that context.
June 24, 2025
The irreverent conceit – to write about the pomp and pop circus of an album-as-event you vaguely recall without stomaching the will to listen to the thing – feels irreverent, fresh and exciting … until it feels lame, lazy and tiresome. Weisbard has a cutting turn of phrase and some intriguing societal insight, but too often gets strung up in his own wordplay, layering abstractions to the point of using many words to say very little. It’s all written in a chronological, first-person flow, with only a vague thread pulling it together: all he’s really trying to tell us, most of the time, is that he doesn’t like Guns N’ Roses very much, and apparently feels the need to atone for the younger him that does. The concept fails in one key way: no one would buy this book who wasn’t in some sense a GnR fan, or at least agnostic. Weisbard is a proud non-believer. He’s at odds with his audience as much as he’s (legitimately) at odds with Rose’s racism and homophobia. I agree with a lot of what he has to say, but still hoped to find out more about this flawed opus – its composition, recording, themes and legacy. There’s little meat in this otherwise prickly word salad.
October 3, 2019
After reading Exile on Main Street 33 1/3 I was really excited to read UYI 1 & 2 33 1/3 because I remember buying this double album the day it came out. I Loved the two albums and they remind me of when I was in my early 20's. I was disappointed with the way the author presented these albums. He gives a little bit of the History and the importance of the albums at the time but for the most part he criticizes the band (especially Izzy Stradlin and Axl Rose) and a lot of the songs. He claims to have loved the double album when it came out but now finds the songs stupid and not very good. The last section of the book (like with EoMS) he breaks down each song. Again I didn't enjoy this section because of instead of explaining each song, he criticizes most of them and complains about Izzy and Axl's musical writing abilities. I don't recommend reading this book. Go to Wikapedia for a better explanation of UYI 1 & 2.
February 25, 2019
Seems like a meta homage to the albums by having the few insightful moments completely submarined by the more frequently embarrassing and slapdash ones. The author describes Napster- leaked Chinese Democracy songs as "sculptures still mainly in the stone" and I feel like that's the best way to describe the book. There is probably a great story about the recording of the albums and the tour, but it's not here. I see what the author is doing, but it's boring and self-indulgent. There was a way to dovetail a look at the music industry, rock criticism, and the band, and this guy just couldn't get out of his own way.
Also, namedropping Robert Christgau as someone he's known "for many years" communicates a lot about how this book reads.
Also, namedropping Robert Christgau as someone he's known "for many years" communicates a lot about how this book reads.
February 6, 2023
What a terrible book. You’d think they’d hire someone that was a fan to write this or at least do their research!
Author didn’t even listen to UYI1&2 until page 104 of a 125 page book. Instead he chose to work from his memory of the songs! The remaining pages of the book are dedicated to slagging every song with a few sentences.
Most of the book comes off like the a student that prepared to write an essay about Nirvana, but the test was Guns N’ Roses, so he begins with, “GNR is nothing like Nirvana…”
Disappointed. Don’t waste your time.
Author didn’t even listen to UYI1&2 until page 104 of a 125 page book. Instead he chose to work from his memory of the songs! The remaining pages of the book are dedicated to slagging every song with a few sentences.
Most of the book comes off like the a student that prepared to write an essay about Nirvana, but the test was Guns N’ Roses, so he begins with, “GNR is nothing like Nirvana…”
Disappointed. Don’t waste your time.
April 25, 2022
Terrible. Why choose a writer that hates the genre, the artist and the album? And also thinks very highly of themselves? The first chapter is full of insults of nearly every other genre and big artist of the time. This book is definitely not in the spirit of the 33 1/3 series at all. Skip this, even if you are the biggest GnR fan out there. There is nothing in this book for you or anyone for that matter.
December 18, 2022
I had got a copy of this book as I was under the impression that it would be an interesting backstory and analysis of the Use Your Illusion albums - WRONG. What this actually is, is an autobiography and American cultural study, only using the albums and Guns N’ Roses as a contextual reference. The book is peppered with anecdotes about what terrible people the band are (especially Axl - he’s, like, a total asshole, you know). Only the 5th and final chapter (26 pages) is actually about the albums that the book is named after.
There are two quotes in particular that appear early in the book that are most alarming regarding the author and his intentions for the book.
Throughout the book, it is clear that the author has no real passion for, nor knowledge of his subject, which begs the question: why is he writing a book about it?
Just to make this clear - the author actually attempted to write a book about albums that he hadn’t actually listened to since their release (around 15 years by the time the book was written), which would go a long way towards explaining why most of the book is not even about the albums in question.
Reading this book, it’s clear that the author has a strong dislike for the band and the majority of their songs. It’s the cool thing to do to hate GN’R, and this was written in 2007, when this sentiment was perhaps at its strongest, in comparison to today’s post-reunion nostalgia. Despite this, strangely, he actually makes a real, genuine effort to defend the hideous ‘One In A Million’.
As mentioned above, the only time the book seems to mention the band itself is when justifying the author’s vitriol towards them. One of the more outlandish of these anecdotes was the story of Nestor Tallarido and his 16 year old daughter Cynthia. A victim of her father’s abuse, she shot herself after he refused permission for her to attend GN’Rs Argentina gig that weekend, and after finding her, he did the same. Of course, Axl and Slash were entirely to blame - also, they apparently urinated on her from their hotel window the day before. (Out of interest, I couldn't find anything to back up this supposedly true story - the book itself contains no sources or references.)
On a related note, check out this quote:
This, of course, is nonsense. I would be very interested to see if anyone is actually able to find lyrics to back up this claim.
There are also random claims throughout the book that are straight-up laughable for a music critic to make. At one point, the author claims that “it isn’t clear how much longer CDs will be sold in stores”. Even though this was written in 2007, when these fears of the future of the record industry were strong, only executive types with a lot of money invested in the industry were paranoid enough to actually believe this - of course, over 10 years later, CDs still haven’t gone anywhere.
He also states that “Hip-hop would never be the center of the pop universe, the way rock had.” Hip hop has been one of the commercially dominant genres (along with EDM) for almost the entire time since this was written, although this quote isn’t surprising coming from a rock critic, as such writers are notoriously biased.
The whole book is full of self-indulgent nonsense that reeks of snobbery and pretentiousness, the author looking down his nose at the subject throughout. It's clear that he's disappointed he didn’t get the chance to write a book about his teenage years and instead wrote this drivel, which is full of in-jokes aimed at fellow rock critics (and gushing about how much he wants to be like other critics), pointlessly obscure references supposedly intended to impress, and the use of big words to make himself sound more photosynthesis.
Also, I can pretty much guarantee that the author is the only person to have found sadomasochism metaphors in ‘Sweet Child O’ Mine’. (At one point, he mentions Freudian theory, which is humorously relevant considering the copious references he makes to S&M and masturbation.)
tl;dr - The author admits he hasn’t even listened to the albums that this book is supposed to be about, and lacks any basic knowledge of the band. He instead resorts to self-indulgent nonsense to fill most of the chapters. If you really want to read his opinion on the albums, skip to the final chapter. The rest is only of mild interest, at best.
There are two quotes in particular that appear early in the book that are most alarming regarding the author and his intentions for the book.
I still don’t know much of anything about Guns N’ Roses, and wouldn’t want to spoil my fog by reading books and articles about them just yet. [p.25]
Throughout the book, it is clear that the author has no real passion for, nor knowledge of his subject, which begs the question: why is he writing a book about it?
This is probably a good time to announce that, while I will rehash fading memories of a period when I had UYI on my stereo borderline obsessively, I don’t intend to listen to it again until the very last chapter of this book. [p.11]
Just to make this clear - the author actually attempted to write a book about albums that he hadn’t actually listened to since their release (around 15 years by the time the book was written), which would go a long way towards explaining why most of the book is not even about the albums in question.
Reading this book, it’s clear that the author has a strong dislike for the band and the majority of their songs. It’s the cool thing to do to hate GN’R, and this was written in 2007, when this sentiment was perhaps at its strongest, in comparison to today’s post-reunion nostalgia. Despite this, strangely, he actually makes a real, genuine effort to defend the hideous ‘One In A Million’.
As mentioned above, the only time the book seems to mention the band itself is when justifying the author’s vitriol towards them. One of the more outlandish of these anecdotes was the story of Nestor Tallarido and his 16 year old daughter Cynthia. A victim of her father’s abuse, she shot herself after he refused permission for her to attend GN’Rs Argentina gig that weekend, and after finding her, he did the same. Of course, Axl and Slash were entirely to blame - also, they apparently urinated on her from their hotel window the day before. (Out of interest, I couldn't find anything to back up this supposedly true story - the book itself contains no sources or references.)
On a related note, check out this quote:
[David Geffen on the Geto Boys:] “I’m not saying the artist hasn’t got a right to make these records. I have a right to say I won’t make money selling these messages. I’m not going to make money off records that talk about mutilating women and cutting off their tits and fucking their dead bodies.” Guns N’ Roses, however, pretty much made music about the same stuff, only they were too big to drop. [p.21]
This, of course, is nonsense. I would be very interested to see if anyone is actually able to find lyrics to back up this claim.
There are also random claims throughout the book that are straight-up laughable for a music critic to make. At one point, the author claims that “it isn’t clear how much longer CDs will be sold in stores”. Even though this was written in 2007, when these fears of the future of the record industry were strong, only executive types with a lot of money invested in the industry were paranoid enough to actually believe this - of course, over 10 years later, CDs still haven’t gone anywhere.
He also states that “Hip-hop would never be the center of the pop universe, the way rock had.” Hip hop has been one of the commercially dominant genres (along with EDM) for almost the entire time since this was written, although this quote isn’t surprising coming from a rock critic, as such writers are notoriously biased.
The whole book is full of self-indulgent nonsense that reeks of snobbery and pretentiousness, the author looking down his nose at the subject throughout. It's clear that he's disappointed he didn’t get the chance to write a book about his teenage years and instead wrote this drivel, which is full of in-jokes aimed at fellow rock critics (and gushing about how much he wants to be like other critics), pointlessly obscure references supposedly intended to impress, and the use of big words to make himself sound more photosynthesis.
Also, I can pretty much guarantee that the author is the only person to have found sadomasochism metaphors in ‘Sweet Child O’ Mine’. (At one point, he mentions Freudian theory, which is humorously relevant considering the copious references he makes to S&M and masturbation.)
tl;dr - The author admits he hasn’t even listened to the albums that this book is supposed to be about, and lacks any basic knowledge of the band. He instead resorts to self-indulgent nonsense to fill most of the chapters. If you really want to read his opinion on the albums, skip to the final chapter. The rest is only of mild interest, at best.
July 9, 2019
If I ever do any work as a publisher, I plan on asking prospective authors to give me some sort of idea of what they intend to write before I give them a contract. I will use a baseball analogy: they will "pitch" the core concept of a book to me, and I will decide based on that "pitch" whether to swing for the fences or just watch the ball float by me. This innovative publishing strategy will avoid unfortunate scenarios like Eric Weisbard's Use Your Illusion I and II wherein an author delivers a completed manuscript without at any point having anything to say.
November 22, 2024
For a book about the Illusion albums he sure talks about “One in a Million” a lot. Also, they should have probably picked someone that actually likes Guns N Roses.
This is one of the worst books of the series I’ve encountered so far.
This is one of the worst books of the series I’ve encountered so far.
August 9, 2019
Much like the other books I’ve read in this series, this is in dire need of an edit (and proofread) but I enjoyed it overall.
September 29, 2020
Somewhere in here is a really good essay about the album as this is padded like a high schooler the night before his essay is due.
October 18, 2020
An usual format choice: the book is mainly a retrospective of GnR and their rise to infamy told from the perspective of a former listener who missed the hullabaloo at the time.
July 13, 2023
Why do you write about them when you hate them？？？
May 5, 2020
I found this really heavy going, but fans will dig it.
February 27, 2011
I don't know anyone who would call Guns N' Roses' Use Your Illusion I and II a great or important album. Weisbard doesn't either, but he does make a convincing case for it as a turning point in popular music. The writing took me back to 1991 when I was thirteen years old and truly thrilled by the coming soon posters for this album in the local music store. Well before the release of the album, the single "You Could Mine" was released on the Terminator 2 soundtrack, and I can remember pumping quarters into a CD jukebox to hear it over and over again while eating pizza and playing video games.
Weisbard chronicles the quick dissolution of Guns N' Roses after the release of this bloated, beached whale of an album. Use Your Illusion marked the death of blockbuster hard rock albums. The genre was killed by grunge, which itself was killed by indie rock (i.e. Pavement). Then came the internet.
Again, for me, the release of that double album, which I am not even tempted to relisten to (even though I have recently put a couple of the singles from it (not November Rain) and G N' R's earlier discs in my Grooveshark library), was the last time the release of an album rated amongst the things that were important to me (though I do remember anticipating Nirvana's In Utero as well). I mean, I've bought every single Sonic Youth album released since then, but I've never really anticipated their release dates.
Weisbard also does a good job of getting you to feel for crazytown dumb dumb Axl Rose. That unsustainable screeching howl. That androgynous gypsy street waif look. Really got me as a 6th, 7th, 8th grader.
Weisbard chronicles the quick dissolution of Guns N' Roses after the release of this bloated, beached whale of an album. Use Your Illusion marked the death of blockbuster hard rock albums. The genre was killed by grunge, which itself was killed by indie rock (i.e. Pavement). Then came the internet.
Again, for me, the release of that double album, which I am not even tempted to relisten to (even though I have recently put a couple of the singles from it (not November Rain) and G N' R's earlier discs in my Grooveshark library), was the last time the release of an album rated amongst the things that were important to me (though I do remember anticipating Nirvana's In Utero as well). I mean, I've bought every single Sonic Youth album released since then, but I've never really anticipated their release dates.
Weisbard also does a good job of getting you to feel for crazytown dumb dumb Axl Rose. That unsustainable screeching howl. That androgynous gypsy street waif look. Really got me as a 6th, 7th, 8th grader.
February 15, 2015
I hadn’t really thought about Guns n’ Roses as a band in a while and was intrigued by this book as Use Your Illusion 1 was the last album I had listened to by the band, I don’t think I even got around to volume II. I vaguely remembered as an uneven and long album with cinematic pretensions culminated in songs (and videos) like November Rain. It was also the end of GNR as we knew them in all their glory.
I really enjoyed this book as I think the author was coming from a very similar place in his contemplation and relationship to the band. I was not by any means a super fan, but was pulled in by the full-out energy of Appetite for Destruction and the over-the-top charisma of their performance.
The book covers much of GNR’s history to get us to the juggernaut that is UYI I & II and what happened as the band disintegrated afterward. Its hard to talk about them without going into the compelling failure of artistic perfectionism embodied by Axl Rose. It made me revisit some of the videos – some I hadn’t even seen – and think about the vision of the group during the tumultuous mid-nineties when rock n’ roll was being replaced by other types of music and the music industry machine was on the precipice of upheaval. Looking back, its hard to believe how quickly GNR gained such heights and then faded away.
I really enjoyed this book as I think the author was coming from a very similar place in his contemplation and relationship to the band. I was not by any means a super fan, but was pulled in by the full-out energy of Appetite for Destruction and the over-the-top charisma of their performance.
The book covers much of GNR’s history to get us to the juggernaut that is UYI I & II and what happened as the band disintegrated afterward. Its hard to talk about them without going into the compelling failure of artistic perfectionism embodied by Axl Rose. It made me revisit some of the videos – some I hadn’t even seen – and think about the vision of the group during the tumultuous mid-nineties when rock n’ roll was being replaced by other types of music and the music industry machine was on the precipice of upheaval. Looking back, its hard to believe how quickly GNR gained such heights and then faded away.
March 11, 2012
My third read in the 33 1/3 series, Weisbard's take on UYI I & II is terrific. Pure memory acts as the driving force for the majority of the book, and serves to attest to the long-last impact and "nature of the crime," to take from the track "Don't Damn Me," that Axl and friends partook as they created what would be the culmination of the megalomania that was the pre-late 90s, pre-digital era. A bloated orchestration that strayed from the charm (read: terrorizing lunacy) that had made the band stand out from it's late '80s hair metal contemporaries, certainly, but Use Your Illusion merits a place in the pantheon for its spirit of omnipotence, and Weisbard recognizes this.
"Use Your Illuion was...the epitome of the rock bloat that alternative was about to come and try to slay, the album that fifteen year later Axl Rose is still struggling to follow up, the end of Guns N' Roses, heavy metal on the Sunset Strip, and the entire 1980s model of blockbuster pop/rock promotion. Look back on the artists of that holiday season now: Kurt Cobain killed himself; Michael Jackson was shamed out of the spotlight; Garth Brooks retired from realeasing new albums; Metallica went into therapy; Pearl Jam recast themselves as a jam bad; [MC] Hammer is a semi-recurrent VH1 episode..."
"Use Your Illuion was...the epitome of the rock bloat that alternative was about to come and try to slay, the album that fifteen year later Axl Rose is still struggling to follow up, the end of Guns N' Roses, heavy metal on the Sunset Strip, and the entire 1980s model of blockbuster pop/rock promotion. Look back on the artists of that holiday season now: Kurt Cobain killed himself; Michael Jackson was shamed out of the spotlight; Garth Brooks retired from realeasing new albums; Metallica went into therapy; Pearl Jam recast themselves as a jam bad; [MC] Hammer is a semi-recurrent VH1 episode..."
January 2, 2009
Overlooked by many in 2007 perhaps due to it not being about "Appetite For Destruction" it perfectly set the stage for the fandom-analysis of Carl Wilson's book on Celine Dion, with very sharp writing skills about a lesser work of probably the last great "unifying" rock bands (Axl, in other words). In the wake of "Chinese Democracy" this 33 1/3 will totally get you up to speed on G N'R's history, significance, conflicts, and sublime qualities. One of the very best in the 33 1/3 series I wish I had read much earlier. Advocating/analyzing a controversial, "less great" album by a beloved band is a great idea and couldn't have been handled better.
March 16, 2011
Some of books in this series I don't mind. You learn a thing or two you didn't know. There isn't anything new for me here though. Maybe to a "musical academic" or something it's worth the read. For instance, In Utero is a great one since you're actually getting some interesting reminisces about the actual recording process of In Utero from people who were actually present. Otherwise, you're reading the opinions of a fan, a music journalist or worse (an academic fan), desperate to talk shit about something that they hold dear from their childhoods. In that way I feel like this series of books either utterly succeeds (In Utero) or fails (this book or OK Computer 33.3) per book.
AK
AK
March 12, 2008
"The periods of my life in which I have felt the most loose at ends about who I am and where I am going are the periods in which I have related most strongly to Use Your Illusion. I experience it not as Sunset metal but as an earlier Hollywood genre: noir." (pg. 44)
That pretty much says all that needs to be said in regards to why I enjoy these albums.
This book also explains why there are so many dolphins in the "Estranged" video: they were symbolic of Stephanie Seymour. They were symbolic of a supermodel. They were symbols. They were symbolic.
That pretty much says all that needs to be said in regards to why I enjoy these albums.
This book also explains why there are so many dolphins in the "Estranged" video: they were symbolic of Stephanie Seymour. They were symbolic of a supermodel. They were symbols. They were symbolic.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 34 reviews