What do you think?
Rate this book
Brian Jones : The Last Decadent
"This is the book that every Brian Jones fan has been waiting for, the most sensitive and honest portrait of Brian yet. Finally justice is done."- The Official Brian Jones Fanclub ? "An intelligent, lyrical exploration of Jone's complex psyche and persona."- The Washington Post ? "Jeremy Reed offers a new slant on things... A study of Jones as a decadent."- Uncut ? Brian Jones, rock 'n' roll godstar; founder member of the Rolling Stones, the murdered androgyne whose fragile psyche was ultimately broken by an industry which, nonetheless, provided him with the means to luxuriate in the bizarre and unorthodox. ? Jones's alcohol and drug excesses, his tormented and often psychotic states, his dandified propensity to cross-dress, his love of literature, privileged background and expensive speaking voice all placed him in the decadent tradition, the last of a rarefied aesthete's lineage. His tragic murder at the age of twenty seven further substantiated his place in the Byronic legend of the chosen one who dies young. ? In Brian The Last Decadent , author Jeremy Reed locates in Jones's obsessive fantasy world a terrain firmly aligned with the opium visions of Charles Baudelaire, the sartorial extravagence of Oscar Wilde, the sybaritic indulgences of Count Stenbock. Reed vividly recolours Brian Jones's brief, but incandescent and extraordinarily subversive life amidst the pop and fashion whirlwind of the Sixties, and in doing so presents perhaps the most illuminating and evocative portrait yet written of a fallen rock 'n' roll angel. ? Includes 16 pages of photographs.
160 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1999
8 people are currently reading
63 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
February 9, 2022
There’s a lot to say about this one...
This is the fourth book I’ve read on Brian Jones, and that feels apt. It’s not a biography, but rather “a study” that primarily discusses his fashion, his relationship with women, his sexuality, and his death. If this were your first book about Brian Jones, you’d be very confused by its nonlinear format and poetic waxing about how his life paralleled that of literary greats such as Oscar Wilde or Charlie Baudelaire. The comparisons grew tiresome at times, if I’m honest. I get it, Brian was a gender-bending icon and was probably queer in some way; I got it the first time, and I got it the tenth time.
That being said, I actually like that approach. It’s nice to see someone have fun with Brian Jones. This author is clearly a fan, and he’s clearly given a lot of thought to Brian’s life and cultural impact. I like the idea of non-biographical studies of musical figures such as this. This book definitely made me consider his relationships with women differently. The author points out, and other sources support, that he had very different relationships with women he slept with, versus ones he didn’t. And even better, the author doesn’t try to ignore Brian’s toxic traits. Reed calls him out for abandoning multiple girlfriends and children, and for beating his later girlfriends (namely Anita Pallenberg); though I’d like more clarity on the Suki Poitier incident. I’ve never heard about him beating her until this book, and there are no sources in the back, alas. Nonetheless, it all points to the fact that Brian could not maintain sexual, romantic relationships with women. Pat Andrews and Linda Lawrence, lovely though they were, required him to act in a husband-like role, which he was not able to commit to. Suki and Anna Wohlin (as described in her own memoir) let Brian walk all over them, their relationships hardly equal. Anita dominated him and eventually grew bored of his antics, abandoning him. Brian had female friends that he leaned on for support, but those relationships were not sexual. Nowhere is there mutual, romantic connection. This book helped me gain a lot of clarity on this side of Brian, and I found it very interesting.
I’m mixed on this book’s approach to Lewis and Louisa Jones. Brian and his parents had a complicated relationship: that much is certain. This book doesn’t go into biographical details, but from other sources, I know that he came from a very emotionally repressed household that rejected many of his personal and career choices. However, I’ve also read letters between Brian and his father that indicate a lot of love in their relationship. It might have been fraught, complicated love, but it was there. Reed paints Brian’s family as completely rejecting their son, setting the stage for Brian’s lifelong, fruitless search for belonging. Sure, maybe there’s something to that, but it felt very ungenerous. Then again, Laura Jackson’s “Golden Stone” acted as if Lewis and Louisa had smoothed over all issues with Brian by the time he died, which I also don’t think is true. I guess it just depends on what you want to believe. All parties have passed away, so whatever makes you feel better.
As for Brian’s sexuality, I believe he was at the very least bicurious, likely bisexual, and likely had encounters with men throughout his life. I this he was cisgender, but embraced his feminine side through his fashion choices and his sometimes submissive sexual role (particularly with Anita). It’s easy for the impact of his clothing to be lost on our modern eyes, considered men wearing make-up and dresses is becoming increasingly common. This book helped remind me that Brian’s bright fabrics, jewelry, hats, scarves, and the like were bold fashion statements in the 1960s, and they definitely earned him a “foppish” reputation. It was nice to hear someone seriously discuss his fashion influence as it pertains to gender. I hear Mick Jagger often cited as an early glam/femme influence in men’s fashion, but Brian definitely wore that crown first, just in a less drag-like way that children of the 21st century might not appreciate at first.
I was going to give this book four stars until that last chapter. To borrow a phrase from Yiddish, “oy vey”. This book, like many others, takes the stance that Brian was murdered. And to be honest, Reed had me for a second. Now more than ever, I think it’s likely that Frank Thorogood murdered Brian Jones for a combined motives of greed and resentment. The author claims that part of the motive was Thorogood’s homophobia and thus, disdain for Brian’s femininity, which is possible and compelling. I’m sure a more pressing issue was the money Thorogood was skimming off the top of Brian’s estate, but I definitely believe that someone of Thorogood’s caliber could be violently homophobic. Fine, I’ll accept it.
But it goes off the rails pretty quickly. Firstly, Nicholas Fitzgerald is not a reliable source in general, but especially for the night of Brian’s murder. I’ll give Reed some credit, this book was written before Anna Wohlin’s “The Wild and Wicked World of Brian Jones” was published, which is the only reliable firsthand account of Brian’s death that exists. Reed claims that there was party at Cotchford Farm that night, that Nicholas Fitzgerald (an acquaintance who claims to have had sexual experiences with Brian in the mid-1960s) arrived late to witness Thorogood and several other men hold Brian under the pool, and that Fitzgerald was warned to run away, “or you’ll be next”. Yeah, right. Fitzgerald is an attention-seeker who’s trying to get money and clout off of Brian’s name. Anna Wohlin claims there was no party that night, and I believe her. Sometime this week, I’m getting my own copy of Paul Trynka’s biography on Brian, and I’ll compare his findings to Fitzgerald’s account, but I think the consensus is that it’s bogus. It just sounds ridiculous and unbelievable. Even if Thorogood gave a deathbed confession to murdering Brian, it just didn’t happen like this.
Moreover, Reed hyperfixates on several points that just drive me crazy. The first is, why weren’t Brian’s dogs (Luther, Emily, Lolita, Baby Jane, and Boy, bless them all) going crazy when Brian’s body was discovered? If Brian were to drown alone in the pool, “Wouldn’t they [the dogs] have sensed Brian was in trouble and have come yelping out of doors?” I don’t know where to begin with this! First off, I’ve had pets all my life, and they do not have impeccable radar. Moreover, and more importantly, this proposition shoots the murder theory in the foot. If the dogs are expected to run outside while their master was drowning (which, by the way, is often a very silent death), then shouldn’t the dogs have run out to protect their master while he was being murdered by multiple men, which would’ve definitely caused commotion? It’s just ridiculous. Laura Jackson noted this in her book, too, but it sounded even stupider here. I just don’t understand this fixation. Are they implying that Thorogood locked the dogs away because he knew they’d alert everyone to the fact that he was murdering Brian? That’s giving him way too much credit.
Reed gives Thorogood too much credit in general. Again, Nicholas Fitzgerald is a very dubious source, and most of the murder claims come straight from his salacious, cash-grabbing book. Implying that Thorogood installed spotlights (SPOTLIGHTS!) over the pool so he could have better visibility while drowning Brian is so stupid. I’ve never heard this corroborated anywhere else. It just didn’t happen. What probably happened is that Anna and Janet Lawson, Thorogood’s girlfriend, went inside, Brian said something that made Thorogood panic/fly into a rage, and he drowned Brian. That, or Brian passed out (as Suki Potier claimed he often did, which is mentioned in this book) and drowned relatively quickly and quietly. But this was not a multi-person grand scheme. That’s just absurd.
There are more points that frustrate me, mostly concerning Anna and Janet. Again, this book came out before Anna’s did, and she was completely quiet about these events prior to its publication, so I’m trying to remember that as I consider Reed’s claims. Firstly, I’m tired of people noting that Janet should’ve been the one to give CPR because she’s a nurse, and the fact that she left Anna to do it is suspect. I think that’s assuming a lot about the women’s mental states at the time. Janet may have been a nurse, but she’s not a first responder. Anna was in an intimate relationship with Brian and would likely jump to help revive him before Janet, who barely knew him, would. I think it’s a stupid point to hang so much on.
Speaking of Janet, Reed makes a claim about her phone call to police that is so ignorant that I’m surprised it wasn’t caught in editing. Anna claims that she was on the phone when she heard Janet shout for her. Anna apparently dropped the phone, ran outside, and found Brian at the bottom of the pool. While she and Thorogood retrieved him, Janet ran inside to call the police. She claimed it took a few minutes because the house line was “still engaged”, meaning a receiver was off the hook. Reed calls this suspect, since, if Anna was outside, how could the line still be engaged? Maybe because, I don’t know, she dropped the phone and ran outside? Who’s to say she ever hung up at all? Maybe her receiver in the bedroom was left dangling on the cord. It’s not a certainty, but it’s definitely a possibility. I just don’t see any reason to blame Anna for this crime, and while Janet might know more than she’s saying, I don’t understand why she would have any motivation to see Brian dead, either. There was no conspiracy. Brian either died alone, or at the hands of one, lone man. Any other claim is borderline delusional.
I will say, to this book’s credit, it is both realistic about Brian’s addictions but also respectful of them, not treating him as a worthless junkie but as a tortured soul. I’ve been begging for a more measured view on his substance abuse for what feels like ages, and it’s nice to finally find one. In general, I love how much Reed loves Brian Jones. Again, as a fan, I like seeing another fan take his life story and do something different with it. But Reed should not have gone into the realm of trying to solve Brian’s murder, especially with no sources listed. If this were simply an elongated essay postulating on Brian’s gender expression and cultural impact, that would be fine. But the last chapter is borderline irresponsible. Laura Jackson makes some silly claims in her book, too, but her research is traceable. Anna Wohlin’s memoir was grating in parts, but she is probably the only person to offer an earned opinion on what happened that night. This book veered into pseudo-journalism at the end, with ill-cited, untrustworthy sources, and that really put a damper on the whole reading experience.
I’ll read this book again, and refer to it in the future, I’m sure. It’s pretty short, and it contains some beautiful glossy portrait photos that I may frame/display in my home. I like engaging in any book about Brian, because I always gain a new perspective. And aside from the ridiculous murder plot, I like Reed’s summation of Brian’s life at the very end of the book. But once again, I’m left frustrated with another “investigation” into his death. Yes, it’s suspect. No, nothing is certain. It will never be certain at this point. Let’s stop acting like there’s a smoking gun that’ll set it all straight. It’s too late for that.
This is the fourth book I’ve read on Brian Jones, and that feels apt. It’s not a biography, but rather “a study” that primarily discusses his fashion, his relationship with women, his sexuality, and his death. If this were your first book about Brian Jones, you’d be very confused by its nonlinear format and poetic waxing about how his life paralleled that of literary greats such as Oscar Wilde or Charlie Baudelaire. The comparisons grew tiresome at times, if I’m honest. I get it, Brian was a gender-bending icon and was probably queer in some way; I got it the first time, and I got it the tenth time.
That being said, I actually like that approach. It’s nice to see someone have fun with Brian Jones. This author is clearly a fan, and he’s clearly given a lot of thought to Brian’s life and cultural impact. I like the idea of non-biographical studies of musical figures such as this. This book definitely made me consider his relationships with women differently. The author points out, and other sources support, that he had very different relationships with women he slept with, versus ones he didn’t. And even better, the author doesn’t try to ignore Brian’s toxic traits. Reed calls him out for abandoning multiple girlfriends and children, and for beating his later girlfriends (namely Anita Pallenberg); though I’d like more clarity on the Suki Poitier incident. I’ve never heard about him beating her until this book, and there are no sources in the back, alas. Nonetheless, it all points to the fact that Brian could not maintain sexual, romantic relationships with women. Pat Andrews and Linda Lawrence, lovely though they were, required him to act in a husband-like role, which he was not able to commit to. Suki and Anna Wohlin (as described in her own memoir) let Brian walk all over them, their relationships hardly equal. Anita dominated him and eventually grew bored of his antics, abandoning him. Brian had female friends that he leaned on for support, but those relationships were not sexual. Nowhere is there mutual, romantic connection. This book helped me gain a lot of clarity on this side of Brian, and I found it very interesting.
I’m mixed on this book’s approach to Lewis and Louisa Jones. Brian and his parents had a complicated relationship: that much is certain. This book doesn’t go into biographical details, but from other sources, I know that he came from a very emotionally repressed household that rejected many of his personal and career choices. However, I’ve also read letters between Brian and his father that indicate a lot of love in their relationship. It might have been fraught, complicated love, but it was there. Reed paints Brian’s family as completely rejecting their son, setting the stage for Brian’s lifelong, fruitless search for belonging. Sure, maybe there’s something to that, but it felt very ungenerous. Then again, Laura Jackson’s “Golden Stone” acted as if Lewis and Louisa had smoothed over all issues with Brian by the time he died, which I also don’t think is true. I guess it just depends on what you want to believe. All parties have passed away, so whatever makes you feel better.
As for Brian’s sexuality, I believe he was at the very least bicurious, likely bisexual, and likely had encounters with men throughout his life. I this he was cisgender, but embraced his feminine side through his fashion choices and his sometimes submissive sexual role (particularly with Anita). It’s easy for the impact of his clothing to be lost on our modern eyes, considered men wearing make-up and dresses is becoming increasingly common. This book helped remind me that Brian’s bright fabrics, jewelry, hats, scarves, and the like were bold fashion statements in the 1960s, and they definitely earned him a “foppish” reputation. It was nice to hear someone seriously discuss his fashion influence as it pertains to gender. I hear Mick Jagger often cited as an early glam/femme influence in men’s fashion, but Brian definitely wore that crown first, just in a less drag-like way that children of the 21st century might not appreciate at first.
I was going to give this book four stars until that last chapter. To borrow a phrase from Yiddish, “oy vey”. This book, like many others, takes the stance that Brian was murdered. And to be honest, Reed had me for a second. Now more than ever, I think it’s likely that Frank Thorogood murdered Brian Jones for a combined motives of greed and resentment. The author claims that part of the motive was Thorogood’s homophobia and thus, disdain for Brian’s femininity, which is possible and compelling. I’m sure a more pressing issue was the money Thorogood was skimming off the top of Brian’s estate, but I definitely believe that someone of Thorogood’s caliber could be violently homophobic. Fine, I’ll accept it.
But it goes off the rails pretty quickly. Firstly, Nicholas Fitzgerald is not a reliable source in general, but especially for the night of Brian’s murder. I’ll give Reed some credit, this book was written before Anna Wohlin’s “The Wild and Wicked World of Brian Jones” was published, which is the only reliable firsthand account of Brian’s death that exists. Reed claims that there was party at Cotchford Farm that night, that Nicholas Fitzgerald (an acquaintance who claims to have had sexual experiences with Brian in the mid-1960s) arrived late to witness Thorogood and several other men hold Brian under the pool, and that Fitzgerald was warned to run away, “or you’ll be next”. Yeah, right. Fitzgerald is an attention-seeker who’s trying to get money and clout off of Brian’s name. Anna Wohlin claims there was no party that night, and I believe her. Sometime this week, I’m getting my own copy of Paul Trynka’s biography on Brian, and I’ll compare his findings to Fitzgerald’s account, but I think the consensus is that it’s bogus. It just sounds ridiculous and unbelievable. Even if Thorogood gave a deathbed confession to murdering Brian, it just didn’t happen like this.
Moreover, Reed hyperfixates on several points that just drive me crazy. The first is, why weren’t Brian’s dogs (Luther, Emily, Lolita, Baby Jane, and Boy, bless them all) going crazy when Brian’s body was discovered? If Brian were to drown alone in the pool, “Wouldn’t they [the dogs] have sensed Brian was in trouble and have come yelping out of doors?” I don’t know where to begin with this! First off, I’ve had pets all my life, and they do not have impeccable radar. Moreover, and more importantly, this proposition shoots the murder theory in the foot. If the dogs are expected to run outside while their master was drowning (which, by the way, is often a very silent death), then shouldn’t the dogs have run out to protect their master while he was being murdered by multiple men, which would’ve definitely caused commotion? It’s just ridiculous. Laura Jackson noted this in her book, too, but it sounded even stupider here. I just don’t understand this fixation. Are they implying that Thorogood locked the dogs away because he knew they’d alert everyone to the fact that he was murdering Brian? That’s giving him way too much credit.
Reed gives Thorogood too much credit in general. Again, Nicholas Fitzgerald is a very dubious source, and most of the murder claims come straight from his salacious, cash-grabbing book. Implying that Thorogood installed spotlights (SPOTLIGHTS!) over the pool so he could have better visibility while drowning Brian is so stupid. I’ve never heard this corroborated anywhere else. It just didn’t happen. What probably happened is that Anna and Janet Lawson, Thorogood’s girlfriend, went inside, Brian said something that made Thorogood panic/fly into a rage, and he drowned Brian. That, or Brian passed out (as Suki Potier claimed he often did, which is mentioned in this book) and drowned relatively quickly and quietly. But this was not a multi-person grand scheme. That’s just absurd.
There are more points that frustrate me, mostly concerning Anna and Janet. Again, this book came out before Anna’s did, and she was completely quiet about these events prior to its publication, so I’m trying to remember that as I consider Reed’s claims. Firstly, I’m tired of people noting that Janet should’ve been the one to give CPR because she’s a nurse, and the fact that she left Anna to do it is suspect. I think that’s assuming a lot about the women’s mental states at the time. Janet may have been a nurse, but she’s not a first responder. Anna was in an intimate relationship with Brian and would likely jump to help revive him before Janet, who barely knew him, would. I think it’s a stupid point to hang so much on.
Speaking of Janet, Reed makes a claim about her phone call to police that is so ignorant that I’m surprised it wasn’t caught in editing. Anna claims that she was on the phone when she heard Janet shout for her. Anna apparently dropped the phone, ran outside, and found Brian at the bottom of the pool. While she and Thorogood retrieved him, Janet ran inside to call the police. She claimed it took a few minutes because the house line was “still engaged”, meaning a receiver was off the hook. Reed calls this suspect, since, if Anna was outside, how could the line still be engaged? Maybe because, I don’t know, she dropped the phone and ran outside? Who’s to say she ever hung up at all? Maybe her receiver in the bedroom was left dangling on the cord. It’s not a certainty, but it’s definitely a possibility. I just don’t see any reason to blame Anna for this crime, and while Janet might know more than she’s saying, I don’t understand why she would have any motivation to see Brian dead, either. There was no conspiracy. Brian either died alone, or at the hands of one, lone man. Any other claim is borderline delusional.
I will say, to this book’s credit, it is both realistic about Brian’s addictions but also respectful of them, not treating him as a worthless junkie but as a tortured soul. I’ve been begging for a more measured view on his substance abuse for what feels like ages, and it’s nice to finally find one. In general, I love how much Reed loves Brian Jones. Again, as a fan, I like seeing another fan take his life story and do something different with it. But Reed should not have gone into the realm of trying to solve Brian’s murder, especially with no sources listed. If this were simply an elongated essay postulating on Brian’s gender expression and cultural impact, that would be fine. But the last chapter is borderline irresponsible. Laura Jackson makes some silly claims in her book, too, but her research is traceable. Anna Wohlin’s memoir was grating in parts, but she is probably the only person to offer an earned opinion on what happened that night. This book veered into pseudo-journalism at the end, with ill-cited, untrustworthy sources, and that really put a damper on the whole reading experience.
I’ll read this book again, and refer to it in the future, I’m sure. It’s pretty short, and it contains some beautiful glossy portrait photos that I may frame/display in my home. I like engaging in any book about Brian, because I always gain a new perspective. And aside from the ridiculous murder plot, I like Reed’s summation of Brian’s life at the very end of the book. But once again, I’m left frustrated with another “investigation” into his death. Yes, it’s suspect. No, nothing is certain. It will never be certain at this point. Let’s stop acting like there’s a smoking gun that’ll set it all straight. It’s too late for that.
December 4, 2020
A must read.
Brilliantly researched.
As a sixties fan of the talented musician Brian was, I found this book very moving.
I had the privilege of being present at concerts, at which Brian played.
I was unaware of the possibility of him forming a rival band.
Totally undeserved and tragic end to an extremely talented and sensitive human being.
A gripping read.
Brilliantly researched.
As a sixties fan of the talented musician Brian was, I found this book very moving.
I had the privilege of being present at concerts, at which Brian played.
I was unaware of the possibility of him forming a rival band.
Totally undeserved and tragic end to an extremely talented and sensitive human being.
A gripping read.
June 14, 2025
A bit of a mixed bag that tells the well-known facts of the short-lived 1960’s rock star intersecting with superficial passages of art/literary history that bear no actual connection to his life story. The “new” insights are basically just speculation, in particular involving a lengthy true crime finale about the somewhat unclear circumstances surrounding the artist’s death.
August 31, 2021
Highly recommended!
What a fantastic read! Absolutely diverting from the first page. Very eloquently written, it is a great tribute to Brian and has given me an excellent insight into his tortured existence.
What a fantastic read! Absolutely diverting from the first page. Very eloquently written, it is a great tribute to Brian and has given me an excellent insight into his tortured existence.
March 9, 2014
A bit of a hotch potch. Starts off appearing like a Thesis for a Psychology student and a celebration of homosexuality comparing Brian with noted Homosexuals such as Oscar Wilde.
Agreed there a few new insights but he is telling a story that has been told so many times and nearer the end of the book actually uses material from these books such as Who Killed Christopher Robin, Paint It Black and Golden Stone.
Agreed there a few new insights but he is telling a story that has been told so many times and nearer the end of the book actually uses material from these books such as Who Killed Christopher Robin, Paint It Black and Golden Stone.
November 27, 2025
A short but fascinating bio of Brian Jones, one of the original Rolling Stones. The Last Decadent got me listening to all their early albums with him, and the first couple after his death - a revealing voyage in itself. But Reed deals with more than just Jones' music and complicated life - he sets out evidence that Jones was a target whose death was far more sinister than a tragic drowning. A good read, especially for Stones fans.
July 25, 2019
Way too much about Oscar Wilde
It could have been a decent short book. Except the author kept throwing in a LOT of info about Oscar Wilde, Baudelaire, Brian's spirit, homosexuality, bisexuality, etc. Homo- doubt it, bi- maybe, his spirit is still here- quite unlikely, Oscar Wilde -who cares, cursed by black magic-um
? ? and on it went.
It could have been a decent short book. Except the author kept throwing in a LOT of info about Oscar Wilde, Baudelaire, Brian's spirit, homosexuality, bisexuality, etc. Homo- doubt it, bi- maybe, his spirit is still here- quite unlikely, Oscar Wilde -who cares, cursed by black magic-um
? ? and on it went.
May 20, 2013
This biography details the life of Brian Jones (original member of the Rolling Stones) and the mystery surrounding his death.
The first few chapters were good, but more details of the music would have been interesting. The chapters related to his death felt incomplete / unclear.
The first few chapters were good, but more details of the music would have been interesting. The chapters related to his death felt incomplete / unclear.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews