A letter from Mary.

[DeadAndNotForSale]

People blatantly missing the point of the letter.

Second.
Denial. Denial everywhere.

Nothing new around these parts.

How is it that all you intelligent, eloquent people are missing the point of why Mary's letter is offensive to some of us on this board?? It's not denial, it's not that we don't agree what Mart is saying about not glorifying his death, it's not that we don't believe Scott was a shitty father. IT'S BECAUSE WE THINK MARY SHOULD NOT HAVE DIVULGED SUCH PERSONAL DETAILS ABOUT HIS SHITTINESS SO SOON AFTER HIS DEATH. She could have given the same message (however high and mighty I believe it to be) WITHOUT being so mocking and demeaning to her ex husband.

I guess it's just a matter of perception. While I agree it was a bit soon after Scott passed for her to speaking about Scott like this, it's hard to argue with her timing. With today's news cycle being what it is, who knows if people would have noticed or cared had she released this a month from now. She needed to talk about this while Scott's death was still big news. It's unfortunate it works this way, but that's the way it is.

I also don't agree that it was "mocking" or "demeaning". Her criticisms of Scott were delivered with sorrow and anguish, not ridicule. I'm sure there is MUCH worse shit she could have referenced to drive her point home, and I am sure it was tempting to do so, so simply mentioning things like having to sober him up before a talent show or listening to him cry over the phone didn't bother me.

She's in a tough spot, with a difficult message to get across at a difficult time, I think she did OK.

What I highlighted is the paradigm in this thread.  I and a lot of others didn't think she needed to do that at all.  We believe that she had no right to put some of those personal details out for the whole world to see.  I've mentioned this earlier in the thread, it's like an enraged spouse spouting off about her relationship problems on Facebook.  Except she put it on the biggest music website in the world.


Lovemachine97 hit the nail on the head earlier when he said that she did not go about getting her point across in the most effective way because she didn't highlight the good in him, which there certainly was.  There was so much negativity in her letter, that it comes off as someone who holds a grudge. 


Again you may see it differently and I respect your views, but it's fairly simply to see both sides of the fence in this "debate". 

I do see both sides, I even said it's a matter of perception. I just understand the utility in releasing the statement when she did, even though it was a bit harsh. I also do not agree with the "enraged spouse on facebook" comparison because this actually has purpose.

Anyway, I feel like I just keep arguing in circles and I don't want to make this board any more toxic in the wake of Scott's passing than it already is. Speaking of which...

Why don't you answer my direct questions?   You're blind hatred for Scott has clouded your objectivity or any ability to be empathetic to him.

Because your questions are not worth a response. Saying I have blind hatred for Scott proves you do not understand me at all. My 1,000+ posts here, A STONE TEMPLE PILOTS FAN FORUM, while probably a bit depressing should tell you how impassioned I feel about him and the rest of the band. I'm sad just like everyone else, but as I mentioned earlier, I understand Mary's motive and believe the jarring timeliness of her message is worth the number of lives it could potentially change.

I just disagree with the point of writing it.  You thought you had a "gotcha" moment with me earlier in this thread when I said that the only reason this was receiving buzz is because it went against the grain by insinuating that was reason enough to write it.  That doesn't necessarily mean it had a discernible reason to be released in the first place. 

Rock fans, and STP fans in particular, already knew that musicians have a tendency to gravitate towards drugs.  Nothing about this piece was revelatory.   It just had a bit of shock value because she aired some more dirty laundry that never made it to the media (for good reason). 

[DeadAndNotForSale]

And this bickering is why people leave or avoid this forum like the plague, and why Rik has had to intervene in the past.  We are 8 pages into this thread and nothing new or noteworthy has been said aside from people bitching at each other.  I propose Rik closes this thread and everyone shut the hell up, turn on a record and chill out.

For the most part we are having a solid discussion.  There are a couple of bad apples in here, but for the most part it is civil.  Chill.

[megafonemaniac]

Wasn't the video for Fall to Pieces, glorifying the rock n roll lifestyle?
Drugs n alcohol etc.....


Oh yeah, Mary was in that video!!!

[Rik]

I'm not going to lock anything just yet. Keep it civil, and this will stay open. Emotions will run high, but that is to be expected with open letters flying around on a often bitterly divided fan forum.

[STPGurl]

Question to those so horrifically appalled at Mary's letter: Are you a parent? Do you have children of your own or do you act as a parent to your significant others child/ren?

Not trying to shit-stir or claim superiority due to the fact that I have reproduced. Just genuinely curious if this is where the divide lies.

[CritterTypeThing]

You're right about the timing being important from the publicity/exposure front.  I don't think it is the correct time to be preaching this at all (she sounds too pompous), but if she must get her message across, I guess this is the right time to do it.

The 'demeaning' parts I found to be comments like 'someone propping him up on stage', 'having to calm him down in his paranoid crying' (how must Jamie feel reading that, that her husband was calling Mary to help him - she wants to look like the saviour, the only one who could help him. It's disrespecful to Jamie and to Scott), or the fact that he wouldn't come to plays because 'now he's an atheist' - as if saying this is his flavor of the month, he's petty and shallow to become an atheist because of his new wife.  There are ways she could have gor her message across without being so mean.

This is not a tell-all, stripped-down exposé that she is writing about her ex (if she wants to do that and spill all the beans, she has a right to. But at least people then know what to expect in that and have a right not to buy it). But it's not an exposé piece, or an exert from her new book. It's a fucking statement on the passing of the father of her children and should have been more respectful.

 If you play Devils advocate and read the letter from a bitter, opportunistic, jealous ex wife view point, you'll see it is littered with mockery and passive aggression.

In the end, there's no right or wrong.  It's just levels of sensitivity.  What's right by me, won't necessarily be right by you, and maybe not right by Mary.  It would have been nice if she had acknowledged a bit of the positives, but I can't sit here and judge her as a person just because she didn't go about it the way I would have. 

But I can judge her action, and your post pretty much sums up my stance about this letter and thread so far.  Nicely put.



The more this goes on, the more I respect the hell out of the statement released by STP.  While at first I thought it was a little too thin, I atleast applaud the balance of positive and negative they struck. 

[etcreative]

I'm a parent. And its my job to make sure that I use discretion on who I choose to make babies with b/c my child will be stuck with them for the rest of their life.  I recognized that when I was young.  Fortunately my children were rewarded for my good judgement.  Its my job to behave in a responsible manner and consider above else my child's feelings.  Its my job to shield them from the dangers of the adult world until they are developed and mature enough to fend for themselves.  Its my job to ensure that they have a safe environment to do their (child's) job - which is be a kid.  This ugly spill over is not all of Scott fault.  Its partly hers as well.....


Mary's letter was out of line and irresponsible.  Putting your kids and heartbreak and sorrow on national display is perverse and immature. 

[etcreative]

In my clinical opinion (I'm an LCSW) the very painful turmoil the family ,her and her children are suffering needs to be done behind closed doors with a licensed trained professional.  What she did was dysfunctional, and irresponsible and selfish....

[STPGurl]

ETC - I suppose many of us here will have to agree to disagree when it comes to Mary's letter.

Her children are no longer babies. I was younger than Lucy when STP forever changed my life. And you have to remember, none of this is news to them. They've been living it for 15 years.

Once upon a time, I was a child who had a parent walk out on them. You'd be surprised how much a small person can understand ON THEIR OWN in that situation. Kids aren't dumb or naïve.

Personally, I feel Mary was restrained and brave. Her words helped me come to grips with a sort of closure - they helped to humanize someone I've idolized for 20+ years. I didn't like what she said -- but I DO believe that is her truth.

When it all boils down - who are we to criticize? We aren't in her shoes. Scotts shoes. The kids shoes. This is hard on everyone.

[CagedTiger]

People blatantly missing the point of the letter.

Second.
Denial. Denial everywhere.

Nothing new around these parts.

How is it that all you intelligent, eloquent people are missing the point of why Mary's letter is offensive to some of us on this board?? It's not denial, it's not that we don't agree what Mart is saying about not glorifying his death, it's not that we don't believe Scott was a shitty father. IT'S BECAUSE WE THINK MARY SHOULD NOT HAVE DIVULGED SUCH PERSONAL DETAILS ABOUT HIS SHITTINESS SO SOON AFTER HIS DEATH. She could have given the same message (however high and mighty I believe it to be) WITHOUT being so mocking and demeaning to her ex husband.

I guess it's just a matter of perception. While I agree it was a bit soon after Scott passed for her to speaking about Scott like this, it's hard to argue with her timing. With today's news cycle being what it is, who knows if people would have noticed or cared had she released this a month from now. She needed to talk about this while Scott's death was still big news. It's unfortunate it works this way, but that's the way it is.

I also don't agree that it was "mocking" or "demeaning". Her criticisms of Scott were delivered with sorrow and anguish, not ridicule. I'm sure there is MUCH worse shit she could have referenced to drive her point home, and I am sure it was tempting to do so, so simply mentioning things like having to sober him up before a talent show or listening to him cry over the phone didn't bother me.

She's in a tough spot, with a difficult message to get across at a difficult time, I think she did OK.

What I highlighted is the paradigm in this thread.  I and a lot of others didn't think she needed to do that at all.  We believe that she had no right to put some of those personal details out for the whole world to see.  I've mentioned this earlier in the thread, it's like an enraged spouse spouting off about her relationship problems on Facebook.  Except she put it on the biggest music website in the world.


Lovemachine97 hit the nail on the head earlier when he said that she did not go about getting her point across in the most effective way because she didn't highlight the good in him, which there certainly was.  There was so much negativity in her letter, that it comes off as someone who holds a grudge. 


Again you may see it differently and I respect your views, but it's fairly simple to see both sides of the fence in this "debate". 

The part highlighted in red says it all, "she needed to talk about this while Scott's death was big news"... So she can get her name back out there, possibly secure another book deal/more trash talk articles and maybe even co produce a film about Scott's life at some point similar to what Courtney did with the recent Cobain film.
The letter screams cash grab to me, I'm not saying that was the only point to it but I'm willing to bet we'll be hearing/seeing her a lot more over the next couple of years. I'll be very shocked if she leaves it at that letter and just gets on with her life.

[Slither]

The part highlighted in red says it all, "she needed to talk about this while Scott's death was big news"... So she can get her name back out there, possibly secure another book deal/more trash talk articles and maybe even co produce a film about Scott's life at some point similar to what Courtney did with the recent Cobain film.

There is literally 0 evidence to suggest any of this.

[CagedTiger]

The part highlighted in red says it all, "she needed to talk about this while Scott's death was big news"... So she can get her name back out there, possibly secure another book deal/more trash talk articles and maybe even co produce a film about Scott's life at some point similar to what Courtney did with the recent Cobain film.

There is literally 0 evidence to suggest any of this.

True but there's evidence to suggest she's used Scott's name/fame to draw attention to herself and make her money in the past isn't there. Like her book 'Mary WEILAND - 'Fall to Pieces', her pretty much forcing Scott to join VR when he wasn't really interested and then starring in the video for 'Fall to Pieces' herself, a video that some might say 'glorified' the rock lifestyle of booze and drugs, the same lifestyle she now says shouldn't be glorified. She's bi polar, then she's not. She is a walking contradiction...

[STPGurl]

The part highlighted in red says it all, "she needed to talk about this while Scott's death was big news"... So she can get her name back out there, possibly secure another book deal/more trash talk articles and maybe even co produce a film about Scott's life at some point similar to what Courtney did with the recent Cobain film.

There is literally 0 evidence to suggest any of this.

True but there's evidence to suggest she's used Scott's name/fame to draw attention to herself and make her money in the past isn't there. Like her book 'Mary WEILAND - 'Fall to Pieces', her pretty much forcing Scott to join VR when he wasn't really interested and then starring in the video for 'Fall to Pieces' herself, a video that some might say 'glorified' the rock lifestyle of booze and drugs, the same lifestyle she now says shouldn't be glorified. She's bi polar, then she's not. She is a walking contradiction...

I don't like this. Too many assumptions are being made here.

...as far as her name on the book (or anywhere else) - her name IS still Mary Weiland. More than likely she kept it so she would share a last name with her children (at least in my experiences that is why a woman kept her married name after divorce).

[lovemachine97]

Again, the letter makes sense, especially given the point she is trying to make--and it is more persuasive--if she shows us who Scott was before showing us who Scott became.

Otherwise, I read that and I think, 'Why did you marry and have kids with that loser douchebag in the first place? How dumb are you?' Since we know from other perspectives that sober Scott was a good guy, then the letter comes off as a list of examples saying, 'Look how fucked up this guy was and what a shitty father he was," as opposed to a cautionary tale about abuse and fatherhood. It's NOT the same cautionary tale if Scott was fucked up and shitty the whole time, including when Mary decided to marry and have kids with him. Then it is a cautionary tale about being careful about who you marry. And that's not the point she was making.

While I am inclined to believe most of what she said (the Christmas/atheism thing makes no sense), I actually resist based upon the fact that it is just a list of shitty things he did without a frame of reference telling me if he was ever not shitty. So I am also inclined to believe that this was an opportunity to tarnish him, and she did it under the guise of a cautionary tale.

Because of that, I look at things she said much more critically. Like, how and when was CPS involved? Only recently? Years ago? Just once? Scott hasn't seen the kids in years? Why exactly? Did you move away? Is he constantly touring to pay you your alimony and child support? Has he tried to see them? Did you do your best to block his requests, which may have had to squeeze into his work schedule?

Again, I am inclined to believe he slid into being a bad parent, but I am also inclined to look at it critically with the way she chose to tell the story.

[Rik]

There is only one thing I want to add to this discussion, but unfortunately I honestly can't come up with the evidence or even the correct timeframe. When I read her letter, it reminded me of something Mary (or her sister Julie) either posted here on BE or on the old VR forum. I don't remember when or where. Could even have been that she sent it to me by e-mail, but I can't find any evidence in my e-mail archives either. I just know it was a couple of years ago, most likely after VR disbanded.

The gist of it was that she posted a plea to stop supporting what Scott was doing at the time, because he was putting himself in a bad environment (or was being exploited by others, or a combination of both) and it would ruin him. She knew then what she wrote and published now. His decline was her worst nightmare come true. She saw it coming, posted a plea at the time and witnessed it come true over the last couple of years with the tragic last chapter a week ago.