Petty: The Biography. An Interview with Author Warren Zanes - by James A. Baumann

You Don’t Know Tom Petty

by James A. Baumann

Click here to purchase Petty: The Biography

Anyone who grew up within earshot of an FM radio during the last three decades thinks they know Tom Petty. Depending on their age and inclination, they may think of him as the young punk who, armed with a Rickenbacker, celebrates the American girls and urges us not to live like a refugee. Or maybe he is the displaced Florida son who still speaks with a southern accent. He could be the video star who refuses to back down while running down a dream. Or maybe he even is the elder statesman who has the pull to play a Super Bowl halftime show as well as the rebel spirit to sing about the over-commercialization of his beloved rock and roll.

All of these could be parts of Tom Petty, but to pigeonhole him in one of these descriptions would be greatly missing the bigger picture. It’s a portrait that was mostly uncovered in the 2008 documentary film Runnin’ Down a Dream, but it wasn’t until Warren Zanes’ new book, Petty: The Biography, that the complete story (or, at least as complete as the world is likely to get) has been told.

Warren Zanes first crossed paths with Petty, like all of us, through his radio speakers. Later, as a member of the garage-rocking Del Fuegos, they came face-to-face as compatriots when the band served as Petty’s opening act. 

After the Del Fuegos split, Zanes would earn a PhD in visual and cultural studies. He since has successfully blended both sides of his life, writing for the 33 1/3 book series and a variety of publications. He’s been a vice president at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and is the executive director of the Rock and Roll Forever Foundation. 

He and Petty came back together as Zanes helped power the Runnin’ Down a Dream documentary directed by the legendary Peter Bogdanovich. It was the documentary research that continued and, eventually, led to this biography. 

While the documentary is expansive, Petty had the final cut. With this biography, though, he put all editorial decisions about what would or would not be included in Zanes’ hands. The result is a rather unflinching look at Petty’s life. 

In the promo materials Petty says, “At this point in my life, there’s no reason to do anything but tell the whole story.” And he does even as that story includes an abusive and opportunistic father, a wife saddled with mental health issues, the twisting ride of a professional music career, business deals gone sour, lost band members, and Petty’s own depression and heroin addiction. 

Fortunately, the book never falls into the “Behind the Music” template trap of success-flameout-redemption. Zanes delivers the downsides of Petty’s story with empathy. He also balances them with the top-of-the-world times as well. Of course there are all the hits and critical acclaim of his career that lead to fame and fortune. But the story also celebrates the less tangible opportunities such as being the (relatively) young pup in the Traveling Wilburys. The value of friendships and loyalty is shown through individuals like Stevie Nicks, George Harrison and  roadie Alan “Bugs” Weidel. Petty’s second wife overcomes his skeptical circle of friends and becomes a saving grace.

And, of course, there is Petty’s lifelong bond with the Heartbreakers, without whom there is no story. The narrative repeatedly winds around the relationships, the trust, the hard decisions, the creativity, the hurt feelings, and the striving for greatness that are part of any collaborative relationship. Zanes spoke with all of the Heartbreakers past and present (except bassist Howie Epstein who overdosed before the project began) and let them tell their side of the story. He also spoke with members of Mudcrutch, the precursor that would, eventually leave the Gainesville, Florida bar scene, head out west, and send Petty’s story into overdrive. 

There can’t be many people that know Petty better than this group. Throughout, their insights are honest, illuminating, and – in many cases – include some variation of the phrase, “Hey, it’s Tom’s band.” In the end, one gets the feeling that the reason behind so much of Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers’ success came from the fact that they were a true band, but they weren’t a democracy.

Zanes took time out from his parade of radio interviews and promotion for the book to answer a handful of questions for Pencilstorm about relationships, the story behind the songs, and knowing what to cut.

Baumann: You were in a band and a rock & roll peer of Tom Petty. You’ve also been a writer and an academic for several years now. Were there times when you were researching and writing this biography where you felt one side of your life pulling against the other? Conversely, were there specific times where you really felt the two sides most came together?

Zanes: Really, both sides of my life were in the mix at all times. That was the only way to do this project. Not that it was a conscious thing. I merely responded in relation to the subject, one of America's best songwriters and record makers, and the job, writing his biography. I wanted readers to get closer to this musical life, while also giving them something with an intelligence reflective of someone as smart as Petty. I had to be both an academic and a rock & roller.
 
Baumann: A lot of the focus in the book is on Petty’s relationships and many of those – Petty’s father, his first marriage, record label execs, etc. – are contentious. Even the productive ones – such as with Mike Campbell and all the different band members through the years – are touched with stories about unpopular decisions and sacrifices he had to make in service of those relationships. Was that a story line you had in mind when you began work on the book or was it something that evolved organically as you worked on it?

Zanes: When writing about a bandleader, one has to delve into the psychological. Being a bandleader is an impossible job. I wouldn't say his relationships are "contentious," unless we're willing to admit that any long-term creative relationship is going to have some of that. Petty is just one of several musicians in bands that have managed to stay together for decades that has complicated relationships in his past. The good news - and perhaps the difference - is that he had the willingness to talk about those relationships in an unguarded fashion. Did I know we needed to go there? Absolutely.
 
Baumann: You make a good point:  what relationship as close as family and a marriage, or a band that lasts more than three decades, isn't going to have some contention in it at one point or another? And you did give equal weight to those relationships that would buoy him up, such as those with Stevie Nicks or George Harrison and the rest of the WIlburys. The creative foil of Mike Campbell & Benmont Tench, and Scott Thurston's contributions later in the band's career. 

I particularly enjoyed the passages talking about Petty's and Harrison's relationship. Many, many years ago my grandmother was visiting in England. She was at the house of an acquaintance who was a minister. An old church had been damaged in a storm and, by pure coincidence, she was there that afternoon when George stopped by for afternoon tea and to talk about donating some money to help with repairs. She obviously was before Beatlemania's time, but she wasn't stupid. After George left, she grabbed half a cookie that he had eaten and slipped it into her purse. That half a cookie now sits in a box in my office.

From that time she would buy his records and, after she died, I found a bunch of newspaper and magazine clippings in her house about George's passing. I don't know how much she was ever a fan of his music, but just in an afternoon tea he made a great impact on her. So, your stories of his ukulele playing and bear hugs certainly rang true.

Zanes: That cookie story is as good as it gets, James. Wow.

Baumann: When the advance word got out that you were able to get Stan Lynch to submit to an interview for this book, fans reacted like you had found a missing Dead Sea Scroll. How were you able to make that happen and why do you think it was such an important part of the story?

Zanes: Tom Petty's story is a band story. So I needed the band to talk. Stan played a big role in the first half of the group's history, but it was the half in which they came together, faced early success, defined a power structure, experienced their first personnel change, tasted elation and disappointment. It was the time of becoming. And Stan was the lone extrovert. He was the band's greatest champion and its greatest internal threat. An amazing, complicated guy. I needed him. After several refusals, he accepted a visit. But I went to his door, and asked only for twenty minutes. Though I got eight hours.
 
Baumann: There are a handful of times in the book where you purposely jump out of the narrative and tell a first-person anecdote. What motivated or inspired you to utilize that device? (Which, for what it’s worth, I found to be effective.)

Zanes: That was something I had to ponder, had to work on at length. But I'm no different from many Petty fans: I've spent my life getting the next Tom Petty record. He's followed us through life, just as we've followed him, and we're lucky for it. I wanted to show some of that, just as I wanted to detail the crossing of our paths. We've known one another over thirty years, in a few different contexts. That needed to be understood, though it couldn't take too much space. I trimmed it, a lot.
 
Baumann: What was the one thing you learned while researching the book that surprised you the most?

Zanes: That Tom Petty is a worker, a tremendously hard worker. The decisions that get made on both the art and business sides are his decisions. The songs have an ease that we love, like Buddy Holly and Hank Williams have an ease, but to achieve that requires a fastidiousness and intuition and talent and work, work. I see him in the same light as the legends of country, like George Jones and Johnny Cash: he's going to keep doing this, probably as long as he can, because it's who he is.
 
Baumann: Two elements that many people are going to focus on from the book are Petty’s previously undisclosed heroin use and how his first wife suffered from mental illness. Obviously this information hasn’t widely circulated before now. To that end, it appears that you had unfettered access to most everyone around him from band members to friends and even his daughters. Why do you think he chose now to open up about those issues? 

Zanes: I think he was ready to do it, and I was in the right place. My relationship with him has always been a professional relationship, based around various projects, but he must have felt enough trust to do this. He was nothing short of unguarded when it came to talking. At times I was surprised at the degree to which he was opening up. 

But, really, he's a reader. He's read books that put a high gloss on things, just as he's read books that go after the truth. He knows that the latter books are the ones that mean something. When he read Peter Guralnick's Elvis books, he didn't love Elvis less. Tom wanted a good book, a smart book, a well-written book, but, above all, I think he wanted an honest book. He empowered me to write one. He never told me what could be in or out, never told me how I had to think.

Baumann: Many times you make the connection about how what was happening in Petty’s life at the time had an impact on the album he was working on. Now that you're done with the book, what albums – for better or for worse – do you listen to differently than you did before? 

Zanes: I listen to them all a bit differently. I haven't lost my old connection to them, but I have new information that is somewhere in me that affects how I process the content. It's a combination of the conscious and unconscious minds I think. But if you know that a songwriter was physically abused as a kid, or that he was lost in his own marriage, you're going to hear the reverberations of that, the longing and loss that you know is inside that person. 

At the same time, great songs and records have lives beyond the people who made them - so the biographical details never own a song. And Tom's are good enough that they have had rich and full lives in worlds far beyond his front yard.

Baumann: I know you were taking requests to put together a Tom Petty playlist on Spotify. What tracks would you choose for readers to listen to as they read the book? These shouldn’t necessarily be your favorite songs, but the ones that paint a picture of who Petty is.

Zanes: "Lost In Your Eyes" is an important Mudcrutch song that I refer to. "Dreamville" captures a Petty who is seeing the great rock and roll era tarnished and at risk, its world slipping from view. "Even the Losers" is his anthem. "Forgotten Man" is a guy out in Malibu trying to figure out what his connection is to the strange, shifting world in which we live. "Southern Accents" is Tom saying good-bye to his mother, I think. Frankly, I wouldn't know where to stop with this question. This is only as finite as his catalogue.

Baumann: When I would interview bands I always liked to ask them when they knew to stop messing with their records in the studio and declare them to be finished. So now I’ll ask you this: How did you know when to stop writing and editing this book?

Zanes: I didn't know. I had help, which is often the case with people making records. My editor, Gillian Blake, helped a lot. Petty's life and career are worthy of an 800-page biography, but I don't think that would have been the right experience for the fan and reader. Some of them, yes. But, most of them, not. 

I know Tom Petty songs that are so good that I'd love a twelve minute version, but he keeps it to three and half minutes. I know Hitchcock movies I'd love to see clock in at three hours, but he sticks to 90 minutes. I had to remember that and make this feel right as a reading experience. 

Baumann: You must have a bunch of leftover Tom Petty stories that you could put out as literary B-sides or outtakes. What’s your favorite story or quote that, for whatever reason, didn’t make it into the final version?

Zanes: Well, we're talking about a very quotable, very funny, very sharp guy. So there's always more. It was no mistake that artists like Bob Dylan, George Harrison, and Johnny Cash were drawn to Tom Petty. But, in particular, I remember him talking about his dogs. He has a real connection. And when he talked about one of the dogs dying, it was very moving. But he cut through the emotion with a line something like this: "I was so torn up about losing that dog, I went out and got another, exact same model." He was referring to a yellow labrador.

Click here to purchase Petty: The Biography

Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers - Santa Monica Dec 31 1978 legendary Santa Monica, CA New Year's show on December 31, 1978 1. Intro 2. I Need to Know 3. Surrender 4. Fooled Again (I Don't Like It) 5. Casa Dega 6. Refugee 7. You're Gonna Get It 8.

30th Anniversary Concert from Gainesville, FL

Tom Petty-Taxman,I Need You Tom Petty & Jeff Lynne-Handle With Care Eric Clapton & Billy Preston-Isn't It A Pity

Archives: I Cried When Lebron Left, Predicted His Return, and Wrote His Speech. by Colin Gawel

It's only 68 minutes until tip off of the Cavs v Warriors round 3. My son Owen is shooting hoops in the driveway wearing a Kyrie shirt under a Lebron jersey while listening to Ice Cube. I'm typing this. Please excuse typos and bad headline. My mind is elsewhere. But...

If you want a timely article story about the 2017 Finals I strongly suggest Pencilstorm's own NBA beat writer Ben Galli and his preview by clicking here. 

For a fun blast from the past please enjoy:

Ok, I'll admit it, I cried when Lebron left Cleveland, and what's worse, I did It in front of my six year old son.  by Colin Gawel

LeBron James is returning to Cleveland !! Hate to Say I Told you So. by Colin Gawel

I Went Ahead and Wrote LeBron's return speech for him. by Colin Gawel

That is all. Go Cavs! - Colin G.

One Opinion on New WWE Champion Jinder Mahal - by Big Vin Vader

                               One Opinion on New WWE Champion Jinder  Mahal

                                                   follow @bigvinvader

 Backlash was a very mixed bag of a show, with few notable matches or moments of worth.  That said, this is one PPV that will be talked about for quite some time to come, solely for the outcome of the main event match.  In a somewhat surprise (more on that to come) upset, former enhancement talent Jinder Mahal defeated Randy Orton to become the WWE Champion.  There’s really no way to explain that any further, so I’ll just get right down to it.

 The match itself actually wasn’t that bad, which was the only expectation going in.  Sure, it was far from good, but also nowhere near the worst PPV match this year.  On top of that, there was a surprisingly vocal contingent of the audience supporting Jinder, which was refreshing after the nonstop negativity leading up to this match.  I didn’t have a chance to watch much of the PPV the night it aired, but even for the little bit I did catch (Owens vs. Styles), I had a strange feeling that Jinder would be coming out on top.  The pin was very abrupt, but came at the end of a nice sequence where Orton knocked the hell out of the Singh Brothers and laid both out with a dual rope-hung DDT.  Jinder, of course snuck in for the finishing touch, and after the three count the result was final.  Call me contrarian, but there was something so refreshing, so enjoyable about that kind of a surprise, unpopular finish that worked for me.  After my initial shock died down, there was a lot to enjoy in the way the cameras sought out scores of distraught, disgusted fans.  That was a great reaction to a heel victory for the championship, and it’s not the sort of thing you get to see very often any longer.  In its own way, it was a great moment.

 If I can make a long-reaching comparison, the Hulk Hogan of the 1980s was every bit as limited a performer as Jinder, and his rise and continued status at the top of WWE clearly played into the rampant patriotism of the time.  Moving past that so-called Golden Era, it’s time that the company acknowledge their global audience and stop playing to the stereotypes they’ve dealt in for decades.  This is certainly a business-oriented move, but it clearly reflects the fact that white males are no longer (and have not been for quite some time) the core of their worldwide fan base.  That Jinder remains a heel while WWE attempts global expansion is another matter altogether.  Also of note is the fact that the Singh Brothers, formerly the Bollywood Boyz, are cast as his flunkies, denying their talents as impressive cruiserweight performers.  However, and this is very important to consider, there’s little to no indication that these performers’ ethnicities are the reason they catch such tremendous heel heat from crowds.  Rather, it’s the abrupt nature of Jinder’s push that seems to raise the ire of his most vocal detractors, and that totally makes sense.  There’s no indication beyond appealing to their Indian audience/market that Jinder is ready for this sort of a position at the top of the card (it isn’t my place to discuss whether he deserves it or not).  And with my reference to Hogan, I’m not trying to begin to compare them beyond wrestling ability.  Hogan could work a crowd like nobody else before or after, and how over he was unparalleled at the time.  What I’m saying is that this is a post-Triple H, Roman Reigns world.  That the company’s top choice will be at odds with the majority of their audience is almost a given anymore.  And let’s not forget that the majority of that vocal audience is composed of white American males.

 Face it, the Great Khali was the last attempt at an Indian crossover, and Jinder is nowhere near his level of awfulness in the ring.  Plus, at least he shows more personality than the giant former champion.  More importantly, this is a company who in its fifty-plus year existence has had only one African-American wrestler (that would be The Rock) hold its top title (the WWE Championship), and just a handful of minorities win that same prize.  That’s something you don’t hear mentioned too often, and it's very important not to forget that.  The fact that WWE is playing to a more global audience is a very good thing, particularly given the fact that most foreign and ethnic performers have been saddled with hugely offensive gimmicks, even in recent years.  Come on, Shinsuke Nakamura is the first major Asian performer on the main roster not to be saddled with an over-the-top gimmick emphasizing his race.  And I’m not saying that Jinder’s current Maharajah gimmick is without problems.  And I certainly can’t deny that the appeal to Indian crowds feels like little more than a cynical, exploitative cash-grab.  But I’m willing to sit back and watch how things are handled, and I want to see Jinder succeed in his role, because there could be a very interesting change of pace in store if this is pulled off successfully.  There are more important things, both within and especially outside of wrestling, than seeing somebody that the majority approve of.  Seeing the same bland, muscular white men in the top role ought to be a thing of the past, and opportunities need to be given to wider variety of stars from the company’s deep talent pool.  I’d be lying if I didn’t say I expected WWE to fail and fall back on their offensive, old ways.  But I don’t want that, and hopefully there are more people who agree that it’s time for a change, and if nothing else, Jinder’s ascent is certainly unprecedented.

Big Vin Vader covers professional wrestling for Pencilstorm. follow@bigvinvader

Kids Say Some Crazy Things! - by Andra Gillum

My favorite part about being a children’s author is reading and sharing my stories with kids.  I am often invited to schools as a “visiting author”.  My audience can range from preschoolers to middle schoolers.

Each group is unique.  I love to watch their reactions, hear their laughter, listen to their connections and field their questions which are always genuine, often very insightful, and occasionally very funny.

I started writing down some of my favorite remarks.  

First of all, kids always ask me how old I am.  I always try to deflect the question, but they typically won’t take no for an answer.  A few boys have said they expected me to be older, so I guess that’s a good thing.

One day I was telling a class that it took me well over a year to write my book.  A boy exclaimed:  “Your hand must have been really tired!”  I started to explain that I wasn’t actually writing for that entire time, but then I just let it go.

One little girl wrote me a thank you note after my visit and asked if I was a teenager.  That letter has been framed and hung it on my wall.

During a classroom presentation, a preschooler raised his hand.  “Is your book available on Amazon?” he inquired.

“Yes,” I laughed.  “How do you know about Amazon?”  

“My Dad says that Mom has an addiction.”  

While reading to a kindergarten class, I asked the kids who has a dog.  Most of them raised their hands.  One little boy blurted out “My dog died.”  

“I’m so sorry,”  I responed.  “Was your dog sick?”  

“No.” he replied.  “He was hit by a comet.”

“That happens sometimes,”  I told him.

Kids like to blurt out random things. “Do you like Luke Bryant?” one boy asked.

“Today is my birthday!” a little girl once proclaimed.

“That’s why I’m here”, I assured her.

I was asking one group about the difference between an author and an illustrator, when an impatient boy blurted out: “Did you draw the pictures?”

“No.” I responded.  “I wish I could have, but that isn’t my talent.”

He replied: “You could have just taken an art class.”  Why didn’t I think of that?

One day I was visiting a school to celebrate the birthday of Dr. Suess.  A boy asked me if I am friends with Dr. Suess.  “No,” I replied.  “Dr. Suess has been dead over 25 years.”  

He still thought we should be friends.

When I was explaining part of one book where the older sister is rather bossy, one 5 year old raised his hand.  He admitted:  “I’m pretty bossy.”  

I told him it’s good to be self-aware.

My Dad talks about a TV show he used to watch called “Kids Say the Darndest Things”.  

I love how they freely speak whatever comes to their mind.  They never consider whether it might sound strange, or be embarrassing.

It seems to be around age 11 or 12 when we become more self-conscious of what we say.

I suppose it’s good to filter our words to some extent, but I do love listening to little ones as their  thoughts flood out of their mouth like an open tap.

I wouldn’t want it any other way!  

 

Andra Gillum is a free-lance writer and the author of the children’s books “Doggy Drama” and “Puppy Drama” and “Old Doggy Drama” (coming soon).  Learn more at www.doggydrama.com.  Like us on Facebook at: www.facebook.com/doggydrama.   

If you work for a school, or know of one who would be interested in an author visit, please contact Andra at andrag@wowway.com.  Follow Andra on Twitter @GillumAndra