Re: just repeating pete about keith

[Sroundtable@aol.com]

In a message dated 04/15/2002 5:54:50 PM Central Daylight Time, 
TheWho-Digest-Owner@igtc.com writes:


> > , let me be the one to state that Keith was *not* all washed up
> > by 31. 
> 
> Let me be the second.
> 
> 
> Jon in Mi.
> 

I heard it on one of those radio excerpts someone on this list sent me to, 
done in the 80s, i think, but not quite sure.  He stated that at the time of 
keith's death, the Who were basically broken up b/c he couldn't play drums 
anymore either live or in the studio.  At 31 he certainly could have 
recovered.  I actually have no opinion about Keith being washed up at 31 
because i wasn't around to see him or hear him play.  I did remark on how 
drastically his appearance changed by age 31, to the point that he looked 
well older than the others on the WAY cover, and in the picture from the Max R
&B box set.  That's what fast living will do sometimes.  Was keith more of a 
boozer or did he take a lot of heavier drugs?

mc