The Stones aren't the only Europeans who have "editorial comments" regarding U.S. foreign policy. For those who have not read or heard about the article written for the German newspaper Der Welt by Matthias Doepfner, CEO of the giant German publishing company Axel Springer, here's a link:
There is no topic the Stones could write about that would dent their ticket sales in any significant way. Have you tried buying tickets to one of their shows in the past decade? It's nearly impossible.
I have followed the Stones since I'm 6. I'm gonna be 46. I gave up on them as has-beens around my college years thinking "Tattoo You" was their last fine effort. I just heard the advance on their new single, "Rough Justice". I was wrong.
Uh-oh!!! Bono is going to be sooooo jealous!!!!!! Cat fight!!!! meow-meow....
First, I think that a serious artist in any medium has an obligation to produce works that evoke an emotional response. Political subjects are certainly fair game! A rambling diatribe [either liberal or conservative] given during a concert or a press interview doesn't qualify as art, merely opinion...there is a difference!
Second, I find it amusing that some British artists will criticize the politics of the USA, and then set up residency here to avoid their high tax payments in the UK.
Third, Mick has not been able to sing live for some 20 years now!
Imagine that! After 20 years I just might have to buy a Rolling Stones Album!
Exile on Main Street was the last serious listen I gave to the Stones. Sorry, I just can't take them serious.
I haven't heard anything good since "Some Girls" and even that album though eblematic of its time (Miss You= Disco Stones) it was still vastly inferior to Exile and previous work. Now Mick and the Boys look like those Kroft puppets. Totally irrelevant caricatures of themselves. The fact that they still sell out shows proves P.T. Barnum knew what he was talking about.
They sell out their shows because they put on one hell of a show! I've been a Stones fan all my life, and have seen them dozens of times. The last show I saw was their tour in 1999 at the Arco Arena in Sacramento. They are very professional musicians, and to me their current shows are superior to the ones I saw during the past 30 years. Just like every supergroup and superstar, they did have their "peak" back when... just like Dylan, McCartney, Pink Floyd, The Who, Arrowsmith, REM, Pearl Jam, etc. etc. etc.
I'm glad they're still around to remind us of how great they were. I thought the song Mixed Emotions was among some of their best. And from the early reviews, their new cd should bring back many old fans, and maybe a few new ones, too.
Gee, are people still using that ancient BT Barnum saying. Well, as far as I'm concerned" You Can't Always Get What You Want, But You Get What You Need.
Go spend a thousand bucks and see the show. It's better than cocaine.
You mean those wrinkled up corpses are still writing songs? How could a band that's been dead since the late 70's do that??? Next thing you know we'll have more multi-milionaries telling us working folks how the rich steal from us!!! Where's Bruce Springsteen when you need him.
It never ceases to amaze me how washed up has-beens feel the need to put out a new LP just to prove they have nothing left to say!
They've gathered a little too much moss!
Speaking as an artist, and knowing many aritists in the music industry, the art community, the photography community, the poetry community, the ceramic community, and the sculpture community, etc... I hope nobody ever tells me to stop doing what I love doing, simply because they don't appreciate it.
As Dylan (another of those wrinkled up corpses) once wrote: "..don't criticize, what you can't understand."
Besides, age discrimination is just another form of intolerance.
Mick's so old, that if he "Can't Get No Satisfaction"...he should try Viagra!
Should we call this the "Dead Men Walking" tour?
Many of the great blues musicians perform(ed) into their senior years. They just got better or do ya'll consider them washed up has-beens. I'd have given my eye teeth to have seen Muddy Waters, Lightnin' Hopkins, Sonny Boy Williamson, Howlin Wolf and many others at any point in their careers. The Stones have'nt been successful all by them selves. Werent they inspired by some of the blues musicians I just named?
Being discriminating IS NOT intolerance. The Stones rate right up there with Harry Belefonte for not knowing how to reason. More to the point they lie, usually by omission, but just the same, they lie. It gets them attention too when artistically they may not deserve any. THAT is pathetic. If anyone needs a classic example of peer pressure at work you only need look at artists as a group and then pay attention to the sub groups which take opposite stands on issues. It ain't arguable. It's a fact, Jack. One big circle jerk if I ever saw one.
>> They just got better or do ya'll consider them washed up has-beens.<<
That's a good point. However, IMO the Stones peaked in the Beggar's Banquet/Let it Bleed/Sticy Fingers/Exile on Main Street era. Everything after that is vanilla rock and roll (or disco for a short period). There's no doubting they are a great rock and roll band but getting better? Sorry. Lastly ole Mick lost his voice long ago; he no longer sings but shouts and talks with the music but you gotta love the energy.
Lugnut, thanks for giving us "the facts". Without your direction I can't imagine the quagmire we would get ourselves into. Of course, your opinions, I'm sorry, your facts, would be the same if the Stones had written a song lauding the neo-cons.
Hey, it's only rock 'n roll and it's a gas, gas, gas!
You're more correct than you realize. I'm equally angry with the knee jerk, too greedy, far right and criticize them in these threads too. Anyone that doesn't believe in the power of peer pressure (positive and negative) and potential damaging tribalism that is growing in this country have their heads burrowed deeply in the sand. You are always welcome to contact me offline for further discussion either through email or phone so that we don't get this thread deleted. At least I got your attention, huh?
Lugnut- I'm curious. Who is your favorite: Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly or Dr. Laura Schlessinger? And do you listen to them using a tube, or solid state tuner?
Lugnut, you state:
The Stones rate right up there with Harry Belefonte for not knowing how to reason.
I'm not sure what you're refering to concerning Harry Belefonte. Could you explain? Thanks.
Any of you guys can contact me offline if you wish.
Rosstman, I rarely listen to any talking heads. Limbaugh is by far the worst example of the bunch. Can't stand the guy.
My tuner plays music (NPR) because of the high broadcast quality. Can't stand their news however.
Belefonte lashed out at the Bush administraton last week saying that Hitlers Nazi's had jews within their administration, the comparison being to Condoleza Rice and Colin Powell. Of course, the jewish community came unglued because it was totally untrue and he had to retract the statement. I find it okay if he doesn't agree with these two highly placed blacks but comparing them to any higher ups within the Nazi's was a stupid and ill inoformed thing to do, and beyond rude. This was just vicious. No, I'm no Bush supporter even though I voted for him. I have no problem attacking anyone using truth. That's fair. Lying is not fair and one cannot disprove a negative.
I subscribe to two papers, watch network news and cable news each once a day. Those things that interest me I then seek out further information. But honestly folks, most issues reside close enough to home that not being informed is a sign of not caring. Long ago I thought about providing folks with a subscription of daily "Cliff Notes" about issues that face us. Shoulda done it.
Please, don't ask me more questions in this thread. I'm outta here but available.
Lugnut, you know Oscar Wilde said: Nothing succeeds like excess...
BTW do tubes mellow Rush Limbaugh?
Patrick, all teasing aside. At least we both enjoy Leon Russell and Neil Young. Regardless of how old they are.
Lest anyone forget the Radiohead album that came out after the 2000 US election called "Hail to the Thief....."
I just bought "Hail to the Thief" earlier this week. Haven't yet digested the lyrics, but I definitely like the tunes.
Regarding the age issue, all artist with long term careers have a pretty well defined peak period, but what's interesting is that the recorded peak period may or may not coincide with their live performance peak. That may be what has happened with the Rolling Stones. I'm one of those who thinks "Exiles" and "Sticky Fingers" were the apogee, but everyone who I've spoken to says they still put on a tremendous live show. It's ironic when you consider that Jagger was quoted in his 20s saying he couldn't imagine still doing it (playing rock 'n roll) when he was in his 40s.
Let's not forget that "Sweet NeoCon" is not the Stones first venture into political thought. "Satisfaction" was considered a protest song upon it's release. "Street Fighting Man" was banned from many radio playlist since it seemed to endorse urban rioting. "Salt of the Earth" is a prayer for the hard working people, the stay at home voter, the common foot soldier... And last but not least, "Undercover Of the Night" portrays how even rich white British musicians care about those missing in Central America. Just because you're an ex-drug addict, have lots of illegitimate children and don't want to pay high taxes doesn't mean you can't have an opinion.
Onwhy61 - a more accessible and truly excellent radiohead album you should try is "The Bends." Trust me, its that good