First and foremost, Axl Rose has made it clear that he had zero desire to go solo and drop the Guns N’ Roses name after Slash & Duff left. I’m aware of this. It was his choice and he went for it. In his own words, “I don’t feel any reason whatsoever I should have to throw what I’ve not only worked for, but also fought and suffered for, away.” So right off the bat, it wasn’t ever going to happen. He stood his ground, and I respect it. Like David Fricke said in his review of Chinese Democracy, “To [Axl], the long march to Chinese Democracy was not about paranoia and control. It was about saying ‘I won’t’ when everyone else insisted, ‘You must.’” Love it or hate it, you cannot fault him for sticking to his guns (pun intended).
This period of Guns N’ Roses (without Slash) has always absolutely fascinated me, and it continues to fascinate even now that it is long over. Slash, Duff, and Axl have been back together for years, their wounds have healed, and they’re touring often. As a longtime fan, I’m happy to see it. But as I watch Axl on stage, playing to now packed stadiums vs. the half-filled arenas he was in just ten years ago, I can’t help but wonder if he’s thinking “Now all these people want to see me? When two people rejoin? That’s what you wanted?”. He never stopped doing Guns N’ Roses, but people had a hard time accepting it without Slash. And that is a shame, because he was making music that was truly unique and at a new level for him.
What I’m going to talk about is all theoretical and there is no way to know any of it. This is a very mysterious and confusing period in the band’s history. There is a lot I won’t cover, but it is me attempting to make sense of everything that happened. I also don’t expect anyone to care about this who isn’t a Guns N’ Roses fan. And even among that group, only a subsection of them would even want to think about this era (1999–2015). And only a niche part of that group wouldn’t blame Axl instantly for all that went down. So it’s a small collection of people that would remotely give a shit about this, but I’m one of them and I care (perhaps a bit too much).
So just some background, yes, I’m a Guns N’ Roses fan, and a pretty big one at that. More specifically, I’m an Axl Rose fan (an “Axl Nutter” as we’ve been called online by detractors). His voice and sound are still unmatched by most people in music. He’s also a fascinating and somewhat tragic character. Tragic because of his troubled childhood, the wrestling he’s done with his trauma, the struggles with mental health, and also because of the period I’m going to focus on here. That era, I think, was Axl at his creative peak. And, if not burdened by the expectations and legacy of the name “Guns N’ Roses”, could have been his most freeing. I also know I’m going to get tons of shit for saying that an era that saw one album, lots of lineup changes, and two riots was his creative peak, but judging by that one album and the hours of songs that have leaked, I stand by this claim.
So if there were to be a thesis, I guess it’s that. If Axl had just gone solo, his life would have been easier and a lot more music would have come out. This might seem obvious, but given how much he’s blamed for the delay of Chinese Democracy, I’m not sure it’s widely accepted.
There were three big forces at play during this time: the label not liking the creative direction, the public rejecting this as Guns N’ Roses, and Axl himself. All have unique relationships to the name and the fact that he stuck with it impacted each. Let’s examine them and what happened.
The Label Not Liking The Creative Direction
Chinese Democracy was released in 2008 and it had been in the works for at least a decade. It was said that Axl was holding onto the album, tinkering endlessly with it, and trying to make it sound current so it could fit in with whatever was happening musically at the time. The thing about that, though, is he had it recorded eight years prior in 2000 and said they were ready to mix. And what did the label (more specifically A&R guy Bob Ezrin) tell him when hearing it?
“[Axl] was nervous about hearing what I had to say… When he sat down, he started saying to me that he has finished the record. I said, ‘Axl, we are not ready to mix this record. This record isn’t ready to be mixed. There are two great songs on it and I know that you’re capable of more, that’s the reason why I’m here. You’re such a great talent and I would do you a disservice if I didn’t tell you the truth, which is that most of the songs aren’t great. But I‘m very happy to help you get there and I believe that it’s possible, if you would like to continue to work on the record, to make it better.’
He said, ‘I don’t agree with that. We are ready to mix.’
‘You have my number, if you change your mind let me know, but I have a dinner party at home now and I had to go.’ I left and I haven’t heard from him since.” (Bob Ezrin, HitChannel, 04/12/12)
And what happened after that conversation?
“We started over, we continued adding songs, continued recording and recording. Every time that we thought that we had the correct songs, then somebody [in the record company] thought that we could make it better.” (Axl, Rock & Pop FM, 01/22/01)
For eight more years they kept working. I’m not a producer, mixer, or engineer, but you can hear that Chinese Democracy has layers-upon-layers-upon-layers of sound on it. And when you compare them to the rough mixes that leaked from this time, that allegedly had two good songs on it, the tracks are fundamentally the same. So what seems to have been happening was them bringing in tons of producers and mixers and adding layers to something that Axl said had been done since 2000. It’s sad, really.
What makes it more sad is that those rough mixes, once leaked, received near universal praise from people who (yes, illegally) listened to them. Just taking a completely unscientific survey of comments from Reddit and forums (sites that can be very hostile towards Axl) and the enthusiasm for these is obvious.
- Listening to this actually makes me sad. This is the best version of Madagascar I ever heard. The Blues was MUCH better than what got released in 2008. Atlas and Perhaps finally sound FINISHED and they’re amazing… I’m sad because if this was released in 2000, the way Axl always wanted, we would probably get a proper tour in 2001–02 and at the very least one or two more albums last decade, with Bucket in them! Axl was right all along, Bob Ezrin ruined Guns N’ Roses’ future by saying he had almost no good songs. The band never went on the road as much, members had to leave or focus on another projects, Axl’s confidence was shattered, etc… If this was released in 2000, everything could have gone differently.
- Madagascar is amazing, the original versions are almost all much better that the released album. That Axl who walked on stage for HOB 2001 was full of confidence with an amazing album ready to go and that fuckin’ Bob Ezrin just fucked up the whole thing…
- As a fan since I was 9 years old watching “sweet child” on MTV in ’88 and seeing this band rise to the the top only to wait and be heartbroken year after year when this album was actually great and ready to go in 2000. What could have followed? What huge success awaited Axl and crew? Another what-could-have-been for the rock n roll history books.
- AXL WAS FUCKING RIGHT ALL ALONG.
Now the last comment is from me, but you get the point. These comments, and plenty more like it, are in stark contrast to what the actual album received from these groups of people.
So what happened? Why did Bob Ezrin think Axl had “two great songs” when it certainly seems like he had many more? It might just have to do with Bob’s taste, but it also might be because of the name “Guns N’ Roses.” He heard songs like “Madagascar” and “Silkworms” and was comparing them to the band that made “Paradise City.” And was perhaps sympathizing with Jimmy Iovine who once put it bluntly: “It’s not Guns N’ Roses without Slash.” Like I said before, there’s no way to know what would have happened if this was labeled as Axl’s crazy solo project, but it’s hard to imagine that the name wasn’t a barrier.
“It was a bummer. Most of the songs that are on the record now were done 10 fucking years ago. But all the talking heads in the mix were saying, ‘Make ’em sound better! Make ’em sound better!’ So we kept redoing this and that.” (Tommy Stinson, bassist for Guns N’ Roses, AV Club, 05/19/11)
2. The Public Rejecting This as Guns N’ Roses
In addition to the label, Axl had the enormous (if not impossible) uphill battle of persuading the public that they should now accept this as a new phase and direction of Guns N’ Roses. This, at best, gave casual fans a head scratch or, at worst, a visceral “no fucking way.” It became a joke on FM radio and was lambasted by critics. I was following the 2002 tour closely and remember reading a review that read, almost verbatim, “I found Robin Finck’s solo on ‘November Rain’ particularly offensive.” No one can refute Finck’s playing ability, his work with Nine Inch Nails is excellent, so this critic pretty much had his mind made up before even seeing the show. This happened in review-after-review and on message boards across the internet. People just could not handle that Slash wasn’t there.
Axl’s argument against this was that people accept different lineups of Pink Floyd, Van Halen, and more, why is Guns N’ Roses any different? And the response to that is that they’re more like Aerosmith, The Rolling Stones, & The Who. Bands with singer and guitarist combinations so iconic that replacing one of them makes the whole thing just not work. It seems the general public felt this way about Guns N’ Roses — at least in terms of their attitude. I vividly remember hearing a bootleg of a show in Osaka from 2002 where the crowd was loudly booing Buckethead and yelling “Go home!”.
And at the next show, in a completely separate country, Axl famously yelled at a crowd member, “He’s in my ass, that’s where Slash is, fuckhead! Go home!”.
Axl has commented on the shit that was continually lobbed at him a few times:
“Personally, I’m so proud of [the current band] I wouldn’t know how to express it. I can’t see me handling something like this with so much class and maturity, especially being shit on publicly to such a degree. ‘Hey join my band, bring an umbrella!’”
I also can’t find the quote at this exact moment, but I remember Axl being asked (I believe by Eddie Trunk) why he stays largely silent from the press and he replied, “it’s never anything positive, so why bother?”.
Again, a massive chunk of this just would have been removed if it were a solo project. He’s aware of that, I’m sure several people were reminding him constantly, but still, it’s worth considering. Would these critics have gone in with their teeth already gnarling? Would the fans’ arms had been crossed if they didn’t have to wrestle with someone else playing “Nightrain”? Would Axl have had an easier time having this new direction accepted by audience members and critics? I think the answer to these is pretty obvious.
3. Axl, Himself
Of course, a big reason for the lack of releases during this time is Axl’s own unique (bizarre, actually) working habits. There are many stories about him wandering into the studio ready to work at 1am after everyone else had been there since the afternoon. But while this is draining (and incredibly frustrating) for the other musicians and engineers, it wouldn’t stop the project entirely.
What also held it up was the enormous weight he felt in having to redefine what Guns N’ Roses was. He’s referred to this struggle several times over.
“How do you rebuild something that got so big and replace virtually every person on the crew, every single thing. And how do you make a whole bunch of guys that were something else into something that already was? I don’t know if it’s exactly been done like this.”
I’d argue you can, and it’s an admirable thing to attempt. But Jesus Christ, for your own sanity, don’t try to. Especially if it will cause anxiety during a performance. Case in point: the 2002 VMA performance where the new band makes its major North American debut and Axl is noticeably out of breath. Why? Surely he knows how to sing and he wasn’t winded on the shows prior to it. So what happened:
“Catastrophe… ya know it was the whole new band thing, and it took everyone a little while to get going.”
This is a coy, non-committal way of saying “I was so anxious about what I was doing, so worried, that I became overwhelmed [and probably stretched the scream too far on ‘Jungle’].”
Would this have happened if he didn’t have to worry about all that? It could have, but its chances of occurring are a lot less. And again, I’m aware it wasn’t an option and he felt like he didn’t have a choice in the matter, but clearly it caused him stress and anguish:
“I’m literally the last man standing. Not bragging, not proud. It’s been a fucking nightmare…”
And then, once money really got involved, he felt that he became stuck…
“After the monies invested by old Geffen (that were decisions made that have worked out for me but I’m on record as having opposed) dropping the name became suicide.”
“As far as a new name… this is who I am, not whatever else someone else thinks of. I don’t see myself as solely Guns, but I do see myself as the only one from the past making the effort to take it forward, whether anyone approves or not... The name helped the music more than you could ever know and I’m not talking in regards to studios or budgets, I mean it as in being pushed by something, and having to get the music to a place where I can find my peace regardless of what anyone says.”
I honestly respect all of this. And he knows that on some level the whole project would have been easier if he dropped the name and he chose to do something different. I even accept this as Guns N’ Roses. I’m just simply reinforcing here, as a fan and as someone who roots for him, that I wish he would have dropped it for his own well-being. Because as an outside observer, it looked extremely hard.
So what was he working on? It’s been fairly well documented that, around this time, Axl became infatuated with industrial metal, particularly Nine Inch Nails. So much so that he even hired their longtime guitarist, Robin Finck, to play in the band. Listening to Chinese Democracy and all of the leaks (from the 3+ albums he was planning) you really get the sense he wanted to go in that direction.
Better
Shackler’s Revenge
Oklahoma
Silkworms
Dub Suplex
Devious Bastard
Dummy
Perhaps
Eye On You
Oh My God
The General
Monsters
These are all heavy, intricate, and crazy (in a good way) songs. Not all of them are complete, some don’t even have vocals, but my God, what might have been. Would we have them if he called the band something else, even if he profoundly did not want to do that? I suspect we would. Who knows, we may even still have a band that plays these between Guns N’ Roses tours.
The counter arguments to this will be that it was Axl’s perfectionism, crazy internal clock, and inability to let the project go that caused the lack of material to be released. Perhaps that’s true, but only to a degree. To put the blame solely on Axl, after everything discussed above, is overly simplified, especially given that he believed that an album that came out in 2008 was done in 2000 (which is why the original name for Chinese Democracy was 2,000 Intentions).
Of course, a lot of this particular music might still not have been released because Axl has said that if he were to make a solo album it would have sounded almost nothing like these songs.
“I didn’t make a solo record. A solo record would be completely different than this and probably much more instrumental. I made a Guns record with the right people who were the only people who really wanted to help me try, were qualified and capable while enduring the public abuse for years. The songs were chosen by everyone involved… The instrumental I wrote for End of Days is more a solo effort, at least presently.”
So maybe a lot of these songs would still be in the vault. But would those instrumentals have seen the light of day? Axl is a perfectionist and tinkers endlessly, but without critics wrestling with the name Guns N’ Roses, without executives saying “make it better”, without the public asking “Where’s Slash?”, wouldn’t his life have been significantly easier? Wouldn’t band members have been more inclined to stick around? Wouldn’t the audience still have been interested in Axl’s long-awaited solo effort? And would their minds be maybe at least a bit more open? I think the answer to these is yes.
To Axl, this was and still is Guns N’ Roses. And he may be right — I certainly think it was too. But to get others on board he had to release music under this banner, and while he’s a crazy person with bizarre work habits, he really tried. And when you’re facing lawsuits, band members leaving, producers wanting to keep going, and people telling you “this isn’t Guns N’ Roses,” how much can be really put out?
Why did I write this? I think at the end of the day, I’m just a fan who not only likes the kinds of sounds he was going for, but also one that wishes one of his favorite artists had an easier time. I’m not saying he’s perfect and not very frustrating (late starts, no shows, what the fuck?), but knowing the hell he went through, and knowing what he was trying to do, it’s just a shame that more of this material never came to light.
And don’t get me wrong, I’m ultimately glad he’s reconciled with Slash & Duff, but is it exciting creatively? I’m not going to critique the shows, the setlist, or his voice — I think generally speaking the shows are very good and the band is a powerhouse. But honestly, try getting them into the studio and producing something like “Shackler’s Revenge” — it won’t happen. You’d get a version of that song, and it’d probably be pretty cool, but it wouldn’t be the same unhinged, industrial, aggressive beast that it is.
It’s reasons like this I’m not sure I want a new album from the band in its current lineup. They may have healed their wounds, are enjoying playing together, and all that, but I have to think those stark creative differences and desires are still there. Yes, they play each other’s songs in concert — but do you think Slash wants to work hours in the studio and construct “Better”? And does Axl want to record a tough, street rock song like “Slither”? And if so, would either want to do a whole album of them? I doubt it. So if that’s the case, what would a new album even end up being? Something that doesn’t totally satisfy either one of them and, thus, the audience? Perhaps it’s best to just play the songs they already have in concert and make millions doing it.
I do still hope Axl considers releasing some of these songs some day, in some form, be it a boxset or some other package. They’re too interesting, too heavy, and too good to just let them gather dust. We know that he’s been revisiting them with the current band and have actually released two at the time of this writing, “Silkworms” (now “Absurd”) and “Hard School” (now “Hard Skool”). I actually like both of these releases, but given the somewhat tepid response to them, they may be wondering why bother with more, especially a whole album that probably couldn’t live up to expectations anyway. I know I would be thinking the same thing if I were them.
That said, Axl, if you read this, know that there are people out there who want this music and to hear your thoughts on making it. It may not be a ton, it may not even be the majority of the GN’R audience, but I assure you they’re there. And just remember, “You were right all along!”.