In the last 10 years or so, it seems to me that Mick Jagger's star has re-risen.
I don't mean like the Grammy performance, we all know he's got the energy, the drive to perform, etc....
I mean in terms of public perception.
The audience at the Grammys seemed genuinely fascinated, enthralled by Jagger's presence, similar to the responses he's gotten at various events he's attended. When he's at a film premier or fashion thing with L'wren, the celebrities in the pics with him seem like 'Im standing next to @#$%& Mick Jagger!'...
At the Stones in Exile premier in Cannes, the press, the other celebs had the same reaction - the sense that they were in the presence of a genuine icon.
Well, it wasn't like this in the 80s and 90s. He had become a parody in the media's eyes, and music fans were, in general, uninterested. The age jokes, the whoring jokes....Mick couldn't do anything right and was decidedly uncool. He, with Jerry Hall, just seemed to hover around some British aristo crowd, hosting cross-dressing parties for the euro-trash set. He would come out every once and a while, made one great solo album, WS, but for the most part, he seemed to be lingering in the shade of faded glory.
Those of us who have been following the Stones for the last 50, 40, 30, 25 years or so remember the bad press with the low solo album sales, tours etc...Goddess only selling 900-something copies upon release and the media mocking him for it.
I can't really pin-point when it started to change, but for the last several years, his public persona has experienced an up-swing, in that he is regarded as Mick Jagger. I don't know if it has do with the fact that he no longer resides in a permanent tabloid ghetto...cavoring with 19-year olds and acting like someone in a perpetual mid-life crisis...though I think that has something to do with it. He's carrying himself with much more class, much more sophistication....and that is being reflected in the public's reaction to him....
What is different in Mick today, from the Mick of the 80s and 90s? Or is this just a new generation, a different culture? I just know that it wasn't cool to be a Mick Jagger fan from 1984-2000 - it was painful.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2011-02-15 22:12 by stupidguy2.

Seems he's reclaimed some of his "primitve cool" - especially since the Grammys.

Who's to say what/who is cool?

I recently had some girl tell me that if I was cool, I'd let her park her motorcycle in the courtyard of my flat.
I guess I just couldn't find any cool in me that day.

Mick has, for the most part, always been cool.

Coolest Stone ever?

1972 Keith?

Brian - cool hair and never gets old?

Bill - tapping all that trim?

Jagger - after Grammys?

Charlie - the King of Cool?

Quote
Edith Grove
Who's to say what/who is cool?

I recently had some girl tell me that if I was cool, I'd let her park her motorcycle in the courtyard of my flat.
I guess I just couldn't find any cool in me that day.

Mick has, for the most part, always been cool.

But you're a Stones fan. Im mean in terms of the way the public, the music fans percieved him.

I think that the indroduction of the stones as heroes from the past helped. I mean ten years ago when you would see a guy wearing a tongue and lips t-shirts you knew he was a fan or had been to a concert. Now they sell clothes with the logo and images of mick and keith in trendy clothingstores. That together with the exile documentary (the first official documentary that only focusses on past activities) and the ladies en gentlemen movie -that was shown on various filmfestivals giving it a culstatus- made mick and keith into icons for a broader audience. They stand for freedom en pure rock n roll. Same happened to Bob Marley and Hendrix. You see their images on clothes and other merchandise...not because of what they are but what they stand for...only difference,..Mick and Keith or still alive.

Mick was never not cool. OK, maybe during the 'Lets Work' video.

Quote
stupidguy2

Quote
Edith Grove
Who's to say what/who is cool?

I recently had some girl tell me that if I was cool, I'd let her park her motorcycle in the courtyard of my flat.
I guess I just couldn't find any cool in me that day.

Mick has, for the most part, always been cool.

But you're a Stones fan. Im mean in terms of the way the public, the music fans percieved him.

Yesterday, my boss told me "Mick's still got it!" and he ain't no Stones fan.

Quote
Edith Grove

Quote
stupidguy2

Quote
Edith Grove
Who's to say what/who is cool?

I recently had some girl tell me that if I was cool, I'd let her park her motorcycle in the courtyard of my flat.
I guess I just couldn't find any cool in me that day.

Mick has, for the most part, always been cool.

But you're a Stones fan. Im mean in terms of the way the public, the music fans percieved him.

Yesterday, my boss told me "Mick's still got it!" and he ain't no Stones fan.

That's my point,
What did your boss think of Mick in the 80s and 90s. Am i the only one who remembers the lean years of Stonesdom?

There are always swings and roundabouts with media coverage - and Mick is famously a difficult interviewee, so will always attract snide comments from those who prefer the easy route of Keith's recycled parables or Ronnie's garrulous indiscretions. I'm not sure that Jagger has ever really suffered from poor publicity though. My perception is that he has dictated the agenda for most of his career - certainly since the 70's and controlled his image long before people made careers out of 'spin'. Truth is, for Joe Public who are not Stones or even music fans, Mick Jagger transcends the Rolling Stones. Most would be hard pushed, for all Keith's bravado, to pick any of the others out of a line-up. Everyone knows who Jagger is. And always have. Who, apart from Elvis and Jackson can say as much?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-02-15 22:51 by Lady Jayne.

Quote
stupidguy2
What did your boss think of Mick in the 80s and 90s.

I think he only knows Mick & the Stones from what he hears on the radio and occasionally on TV.
He probably wouldn't know the different eras of Stones music.

mick is too corporate/business-like to be cool.

Quote
Lady Jayne
There are always swings and roundabouts with media coverage - and Mick is famously a difficult interviewee, so will always attract snide comments from those who prefer the easy route of Keith's recycled parables or Ronnie's garrulous indiscretions. I'm not sure that Jagger has ever really suffered from poor publicity though. My perception is that he has dictated the agenda for most of his career - certainly since the 70's and controlled his image long before people made careers out of 'spin'. Truth is, for Joe Public who are not Stones or even music fans, Mick Jagger transcends the Rolling Stones. Most would be hard pushed, for all Keith's bravado, to pick any of the others out of a line-up. Everyone knows who Jagger is. And always have. Who, apart from Elvis and Jackson can say as much?

I agree with what you're saying, but I remember a certain media bias against Mick in the mid80s through most of the 90s. The Stones and Jagger are larger than life, and will always overshadow any media cycle or shift, that's true. But when was the last time you remember Mick getting so much love from non-Stones fans, and not just 'Ehh...' No age jokes, no lip jokes etc....

This is one sample review that summed a consensus of that time.

[observer.guardian.co.uk]

Quote
Lady Jayne
There are always swings and roundabouts with media coverage - and Mick is famously a difficult interviewee, so will always attract snide comments from those who prefer the easy route of Keith's recycled parables or Ronnie's garrulous indiscretions. I'm not sure that Jagger has ever really suffered from poor publicity though. My perception is that he has dictated the agenda for most of his career - certainly since the 70's and controlled his image long before people made careers out of 'spin'. Truth is, for Joe Public who are not Stones or even music fans, Mick Jagger transcends the Rolling Stones. Most would be hard pushed, for all Keith's bravado, to pick any of the others out of a line-up. Everyone knows who Jagger is. And always have. Who, apart from Elvis and Jackson can say as much?

uh...john paul george & ringo

Erh... Has he ever lost it?

I think most of the world agree that he is a geniue frontman and performer. He has always been cool to the world (except for those who thinks he has too much money...bla bla bla... -and those who thinks he 'sold out' when he accepted knighthood...bla bla bla...).

Mick has been cool for all of his 67+ years except for 3 minutes and 12 seconds.











Lets Work.

Quote
ineedadrink
mick is too corporate/business-like to be cool.

It's probably because of this that we still have the Stones.

Still think he's not cool?

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Lady Jayne
There are always swings and roundabouts with media coverage - and Mick is famously a difficult interviewee, so will always attract snide comments from those who prefer the easy route of Keith's recycled parables or Ronnie's garrulous indiscretions. I'm not sure that Jagger has ever really suffered from poor publicity though. My perception is that he has dictated the agenda for most of his career - certainly since the 70's and controlled his image long before people made careers out of 'spin'. Truth is, for Joe Public who are not Stones or even music fans, Mick Jagger transcends the Rolling Stones. Most would be hard pushed, for all Keith's bravado, to pick any of the others out of a line-up. Everyone knows who Jagger is. And always have. Who, apart from Elvis and Jackson can say as much?

uh...john paul george & ringo

I disagree. None of the Beatles transcend the music. The music is iconic and collectively so were they (although, again many would struggle to pick out Harrison or Ringo in a line-up) but individually as anything else, no. There is lots of good will and affection for Macca but the buzz he created presenting a BAFTA on Sunday in London was nothing to the electricity in the room when Jagger did the same in 2009.

Quote
Lady Jayne
There is lots of good will and affection for Macca but the buzz he created presenting a BAFTA on Sunday in London was nothing to the electricity in the room when Jagger did the same in 2009.

True, Mick galvanized these A-list actors....
I guess I should not have used the word "cool" in the thread title. Of course he always going to be "cool" to us because we understand the iconography.
Its not about Mick being cool so much as its about him being respected outside Stonesdom. ANd Mick, circa-"Lets Work" was not being taken seriously. Pre-83, I never thought Mick would not be cool...and then SHe's the Boss happened, and then Running out of Luck happened, and then .....etc...
Mick was not respected in the 80s and no amount of revisionism can change that....the 89 tour in some ways corrected some of that, but Jagger had already slipped...and he was not so infallible anymore, he didn't loom so large anymore to people in general.
There was an article in a magazine in the early 90s about media trends....and one editor remarked, 'Mick and Jerry, they're so passe...'
And it was ture, at least in the public's perception. I remember when I got into the Stones, you saw Jagger and Hall in magazines all the time, are they breaking up, are they getting married, is he cheating again...'
By 90, nobody cared anymore, except the UK tabloids, but nobody cared about them.
I think there is a difference in how he is percieved today, a huge difference.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2011-02-15 23:49 by stupidguy2.

"Quote
Lady Jayne
There are always swings and roundabouts with media coverage - and Mick is famously a difficult interviewee, so will always attract snide comments from those who prefer the easy route of Keith's recycled parables or Ronnie's garrulous indiscretions. I'm not sure that Jagger has ever really suffered from poor publicity though. My perception is that he has dictated the agenda for most of his career - certainly since the 70's and controlled his image long before people made careers out of 'spin'. Truth is, for Joe Public who are not Stones or even music fans, Mick Jagger transcends the Rolling Stones. Most would be hard pushed, for all Keith's bravado, to pick any of the others out of a line-up. Everyone knows who Jagger is. And always have. Who, apart from Elvis and Jackson can say as much?"

True. As some critic said, in the Rolling Stones saga, Keith is the character actor, while Mick is the leading man, and has been since the beginning.

In Latinamerica Mick is the coolest. Always has, still is.

Mick Jagger has ALWAYS been COOL! Yes, he may be riding a crest of popularity and it may even be as a result of fans being honestly insulted and offended that Keith's bio treated " his brother" so dishonorably; many of us did take it very personally and raced to MIck's defense. I don't think MIck really needed defending because in his own way, he knows the truth and he understands Keith and his motivations. He may not LIKE it and he certainly must have lost respect for him but I think that by now it's not such a big deal. ( I bet I'm more bothered by it than Mick is!)

I've noticed the excitement and wonderment from the public to a Mick Jagger sighting . Plus he's mentioned in a few hit songs lately ( Keisha comes to mind and Black-Eyed Peas ) Maybe it's that he's a symbol for survival . Sure he's old but we're all getting older and I can't help but feel such respect for this man , I Love Mick Jagger and the day he passes away will be a sad one . The Stones have been a band that has been around as long as I have since I was born in 62 . And Keith has had his moment because I don't think the public will ever forgive him for slagging off Mick Can Keith even get his todger UP anyways ! unforgivable but I love Keith Too .

Quote
kittypoo
I've noticed the excitement and wonderment from the public to a Mick Jagger sighting . Plus he's mentioned in a few hit songs lately ( Keisha comes to mind and Black-Eyed Peas ).

I think its a combination of different things. Media cycles do change, as do trends, a new generation of celebrities discovering Mick and how cool he is....
But I do think it has alot to do with Mick's lower profile. He seems to be living a more sedate life, and L'wren attracts a different publicity than Jerry did.

Keith's book certainly went into detail about his relationship with Jagger, and to be honest Jagger comes out of it as a hero as far as holding the band together is concerned. The petty sniping in 'Life' shows Keith in a poor light. by pulling his mask away it shows the advancing years have brought inevitable maturity without worldy wisdom. This light on Keith's character has dramatically lowered his 'coolness'rating. While the adversity to which Jagger was subjected to over the years by his 'band-mate?' and his unwillingness to respond in kind has definitely allowed his 'coolness' rating to rise.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-02-16 04:33 by rumple21.

He has has always been cool in my book!

Quote
stupidguy2
In the last 10 years or so, it seems to me that Mick Jagger's star has re-risen.

I couldn't believe how skinny he was. I think that alone is a turn on. Always did it for me. You almost have to shake your head and realize that his dad taught physical fitness on TV, and lived into his nineties. Mick's got hops. No way around it. It's almost like he couldn't screw up his routine by now, he's doing things the way he's done it for years. It always reminds me of the interviewer that asked Mick in '69 (I think) whether he would be singing Satisfaction when he's 70, and Mick said something like 'I would like to'. I mean, this is what he targeted - to get out there and do it for a long time, longer than anyone else. His voice sounded fresh, was nice to hear. Very nice indeed. I'm a fan of 'the older he gets, the more fun it is to watch'. Because he IS older, but it doesn't seem to matter. Which is really the ultimate feat, imo.

Happy Valentine's Day stupidguy2

Quote
Brue
I couldn't believe how skinny he was. I think that alone is a turn on. Always did it for me. You almost have to shake your head and realize that his dad taught physical fitness on TV, and lived into his nineties. Mick's got hops. No way around it. It's almost like he couldn't screw up his routine by now, he's doing things the way he's done it for years. It always reminds me of the interviewer that asked Mick in '69 (I think) whether he would be singing Satisfaction when he's 70, and Mick said something like 'I would like to'. I mean, this is what he targeted - to get out there and do it for a long time, longer than anyone else. His voice sounded fresh, was nice to hear. Very nice indeed. I'm a fan of 'the older he gets, the more fun it is to watch'. Because he IS older, but it doesn't seem to matter. Which is really the ultimate feat, imo.

Like a rabbit.

I don't think he can sustain that much energy in a 2 + hour show night after night on a big stadium stage. That might really condense a setlist to under 18 songs. He may have troubles with his voice, at his age, on a big tour.

I would be thrilled if he worked in his 1969 - 1972 stage show. In 1969 he really worked in a confined space and performed some of his best work at the mic stand. Of course its nice to see him occasionaly wander the wings.

Mick is happy and he is having a good time. He doesn't overexpose himself by doing to many public appearances. He keeps it exciting in that way, picking up the jobs where he has fun and he doesn't have to be involved in a long and tedious process. Mick loves quickies!
Rock and Roll,
Mops