There was a snowstorm last night (went from bare brown ground to several inches of snow between nightfall and sunrise) so instead of going to see Garrett Mason play at the Marquee, I stayed home and watched Gimme Shelter in its entirety.

I am pressed for time, so a few disjointed points:

1) From a character point of view, it's amazing how little sense you get of the Stones as people. With the exception of Charlie Watts--Charlie, with his mournful hound dog face, is clearly shaken up and thinking while watching the film makers' footage of the Altamont disaster, and as they review the footage that shows how close the show came to not happening, he's wearing this rueful, sick little "if only" half-smile that makes me feel really sorry for him. Jagger maintains his ironic distance even when he's upset by the footage, Keith says maybe six words through the whole film, and neither Bill Wyman nor Mick Taylor are shown saying a word to anyone.

The Stones have always been one of those bands with a persona, so I've always assumed that what you see onstage bears little relationship to the actual people in the band. After watching them in this movie I am no closer to having a feel for them as humans than I was before. It's like, Charlie excepted, there isn't any there there. I can certainly see how this might be useful for self-protective reasons, but it's still unsettling.

2) I related my impression that Phil Lesh's "that doesn't seem right" comment sounded like he was saying "that doesn't sound like the Angels I know." I reviewed the relevant section in his book, and apparently I was also remembering him saying exactly that--the Dead had never had trouble with the Bay Area Angels, and he was surprised at their behaviour.

Not to say the Bay Area Angels weren't as dangerous as any others, but it does appear they had their moments of choosing not to behave in a dangerous fashion. And I'm going to watch the thing again before I return it, but I don't think I noticed any Oakland patches on the Angels onstage--San Jose is well represented.

3) The Angels' version, which Lesh repeats and I have no reason to think he doesn't believe, is that practically all the "Angel" presence at Altamont was by "prospects," not Angels proper, who were inadequately supervised (!!) and trying to prove their bad-assery. One article I read had an old Angel arguing that none of those guys ever became full members.

And not that I would argue, but--the guys I saw were almost without exception wearing vests with "Hells Angels MC" and winged skull patches. Did prospects get to wear those? Wearing colours you aren't yet entitled to sounds to me like a great way to end up having your body eaten by coyotes in the desert, you know?

Out of time. Later.