Quote
JJFlash2010
I would think that everyone on this site would really appreciate the chance to buy another Stones album the day it's released. Maybe the old guys are through with it all. Time will tell.

Theoretically a nice idea I'm no sure about if I'm really dying to hear just another album from semi-retired rock musicians and full-time celebrities reaching the age of 70 and to pretend they are still in their twenties/thirties music- and actionwise. Or is the idea of feeling excited for having a chance to buy "new Rolling Sones album" that fascinates us so much (we all have fond memories of that) - never mind the content of the album? Seems like some fans are just so stuck into certain pattern that it is taken for granted and that it should live forever, and no much reality-checking of the nature of the game.

I guess I'm a bad fan and a naysayer but I don't think there is great album nor great songs in their veins any longer, and I don't think the world needs any other mediocre 'by numbers' Stones album that hasn't any song in it that is worth remembering. I am sure Mick can technically make it - he can write songs autopilot in a minute (a'la GODDESS, ALFIE, A BIGGER BANG, EXILE DELUXE... thanks but no thanks) - but I think Keith is musically senile these days - and been that for several years.

But we wait for a miracle happen...

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2010-10-24 11:36 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
JJFlash2010
I would think that everyone on this site would really appreciate the chance to buy another Stones album the day it's released. Maybe the old guys are through with it all. Time will tell.

Theoretically a nice idea I'm no sure about if I'm really dying to hear just another album from semi-retired rock musicians and full-time celebrities reaching the age of 70 and to pretend they are still in their twenties/thirties music- and actionwise. Or is the idea of feeling excited for having a chance to buy "new Rolling Sones album" that fascinates us so much (we all have fond memories of that) - never mind the content of the album? Seems like some fans are just so stuck into certain pattern that it is taken for granted and that it should live forever, and no much reality-checking of the nature of the game.

I guess I'm a bad fan and a naysayer but I don't think there is great album nor great songs in their veins any longer, and I don't think the world needs any other mediocre 'by numbers' Stones album that hasn't any song in it that is worth remembering. I am sure Mick can technically make it - he can write songs autopilot in a minute (a'la GODDESS, ALFIE, A BIGGER BANG...thanks but no thanks) - but I think Keith is musically senile these days - and been that for several years.

But we wait for a miracle happen...

- Doxa

Doxa, that's pretty much exactly how I feel, and I think is a good summation of one of the two camps on this board.

With a couple of possible exceptions (and I'm thinking of noone in particular, I think you just have to account for it due to the odds), I think everyone here is at least a reasonably die-hard Stones fan, and we break primarily into two factions. One are the dreamers, the true die-hards who never stop seeing the Stones as their heroes that can do no wrong. The others are like you and I, who believe the band's best days are behind them. Not as a harsh criticism as much as a practical matter.

We believe that no band can keep up that level of quality forever, especially when we look at the output, studio and live shows both, of last 25 years. The other half sees it differently, and thinks they have evolved, and not gone progressively downhill as the years have gone by.

As much as I think our side is right, are we really so? Or is it actually just a matter of perception, taste, and loyalty? Is either side definitively right or wrong?

Maybe they could get Geritol to sponsor the next tour. Maybe they're all done. I don't have any answers for you.

Quote
bustedtrousers
As much as I think our side is right, are we really so? Or is it actually just a matter of perception, taste, and loyalty? Is either side definitively right or wrong?

Really, raelly good point - there is no factual truths in this matter. And it is not solely the issue of two camps - the dilemma can exist in personal level too. When the 'critical fan' in me is put a bit side, there is also in me the old fanatic fan that digs or at least follows the band and its doings happens what happens... and gets certain satisfaction even though my brains say should not... But anyway, no matter how scitzofrenic it might sound, these two sides can live side by side, even happily together.

- Doxa

The truth of the matter is we don't know. There's been talk of an album and tour in 2011. Now we wait.

Quote
JJFlash2010
The truth of the matter is we don't know. There's been talk of an album and tour in 2011. Now we wait.

I would say that the possibility that the scenario of an album and a tour will happen is more likely that it will not happen. Be it good or not. But like said, personally I'm not thrilled if it will happen nor disappointed if it will not. But if it will, it is a goddamn good excuse to travel the world and meet fellow-Stones fans!

- Doxa

No less love for Keith from me, nor from the main crowd of Stones fans. In this I do not include the "fans" who hang on and go to shows and post here because they have a crush on Jagger. They're not the true Stones-fans. They're just ageing groupies.

The Keith-bashing from those "ladies" (of both sexes) doesn't upset me at all. It's expected that they're not willing to see facts. It's expected that they're bashing the book months before they've read it. And now one of them proudly announces she "will say bad things about Keith in public and NOT read the book". Yeah - go ahead - it will backfire at you.
Wasn't it Jagger who wrote "Stupid Girl", by the way? And why am I thinking about that song now?

>> Wasn't it Jagger who wrote "Stupid Girl", by the way? And why am I thinking about that song now? <<

LoFL! :E

love is love and not fade away

Quote
Addicted
No less love for Keith from me, nor from the main crowd of Stones fans. In this I do not include the "fans" who hang on and go to shows and post here because they have a crush on Jagger. They're not the true Stones-fans. They're just ageing groupies.

The Keith-bashing from those "ladies" (of both sexes) doesn't upset me at all. It's expected that they're not willing to see facts. It's expected that they're bashing the book months before they've read it. And now one of them proudly announces she "will say bad things about Keith in public and NOT read the book". Yeah - go ahead - it will backfire at you.
Wasn't it Jagger who wrote "Stupid Girl", by the way? And why am I thinking about that song now?

With respect, but I see an inconsistency here: it is cool to "love" Keith Richards but not to have a "crush on" Jagger. Maybe we all should pay more attention to what Jagger sings in "Stupid Girl".

Over-all, the use of "not true Stones fans"-card is not probably the best argumentative move in a Rolling Stones fan board.

Ladies, please, behave.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-10-24 13:26 by Doxa.

Perhaps it's a matter of choice. Creativity of song writing must lie within. Earlier achievements such as "Jumpin Jack Flash" were spontaneous and goal oriented. Absence of "fire in the belly" is their undoing. At least Ron Wood is challenging despite personal hurdles.

Quote
lettingitbleed
People are up in arms due to some book excerpts. He made some less than nice comments about Mike and Brian (wow what a shock) and some folks have taken it hard. It's only rock n' roll lads....

On Matt Lauer Friday morning, he also made some very nice comments about Mick.
I say read the book in it's entirety,

Mick's rock, I'm roll.

Keith always gives away whatever he is expected to provide. Matt Lauer is big Mick's fan, so when Keith speaks to him he speaks in favor of Mick. When an interviewer expects to hear dirty stuff - Kieth is ready to oblige.
You can't tell what he really thinks. Maybe he himself is confused.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-10-24 19:24 by proudmary.

Quote
proudmary
Keith always gives away whatever he is expected to provide. Matt Lauer is big Mick's fa, so when Keith speaks to him he speaks in favor of Mick. When an interviewer expects to hear dirty stuff - Kieth is ready to oblige.
You can't tell what he really thinks. Maybe he himself is confused.

Agreed. Just like the entire media world! LOL Especially MSNBC!!!

I think that playing the sexist card is simply a smokescreen to hide the real facts; the real reason some may take great offense at Keith's remarks boils down to decency. You see, REAL Stones fans want to see our boys getting along and at least not airing dirty laundry about each other in a public way. Funny how so many long for the days when Mick and Keith shared a microphone....remember how special THAT was!!?? Well, it's not so special to print such personal things just to shock and sell a few book. And the remarks about " having a crush on Jagger" are a lame attempt to side-step the issue we have with the comments. Someone on another thread said that if Mick had been the one tossing Keith under the bus the outcry would be heard ' round the world.....well said! Tit for tat.
So, does that mean that Jagger fans have LESS credibilty than Keith fans? If that's the implication, it's not only not valid, it's offensive.

Quote
mickschix
Wouldn't it be a GAS if the book BOMBED because of his nastiness? I know a few real Stones fans that are really pissed and have told me that not only won't they buy the book but they plan on letting it be known in several ways how resentful they are that the tone of the book couldn't have been more warm and fuzzy towards his mates.

Slim chance the book bombs. It's HIS autobiography and he can write with any tone he wants. People have some F'n nerve. Hey, you don't want to read the book? Than don't read the F'in book. It's that easy.

No love loss here. Been a fan since 1976 / 1977.
Wish he was MY Dad.
If you knew mine you would understand why!

The only negative thing I will add, is that in all the retrospectives about the Stones when they interview Keith, Brian Jones it not mentioned at all. IMO, this is not right As Bill Wyman said, "No Jones, No Stones.".

Truthfully I've really not had that much respect for Keith since I was a teenager and through it was cool to be a junkie rock star. That's not cool at all. What I think is pretty cool is the fact that Mick put up with a drug addicted junkie for all those years and really never said a bad word about it. I might be wrong but I always thought Mick took the high road and didn't discuss Keith's drug problems. If someone can prove me wrong, pull up some youtubes or interviews I'd like to see them.

After dealing with the waste that Brian became, its surprising that he stayed by Keith's side. Sure he did his crappy solo albums but the Stones put out some duds after Undercover and the almighty monster of rock Keef was just as responsible as Mick.

I've grown to have a lot more respect for Mick and A lot less for Keith. As far as I'm concerned he's been a complete caricature of a rock star, with his lame poses and sayings, "oh it's great to be anywhere, Please"...and his less than stellar solo albums show that he isn't so great without the band. There good, not that great, I never listen to them. I think Ronnie's solo albums in the 70's were better.

With all that said, I really did like over half of ABB, and I listen to it all the time. The extra songs on Exile were great, so I think they still have it in them to put down some good music. A ridiculous over the top boring by the numbers stadium tour, no way

[www.dailymail.co.uk]


Interesting article from a rock journalist.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-10-25 09:01 by Bliss.

Quote
Addicted
No less love for Keith from me, nor from the main crowd of Stones fans. In this I do not include the "fans" who hang on and go to shows and post here because they have a crush on Jagger. They're not the true Stones-fans. They're just ageing groupies.

If you are referring to me, it's not a crush on Mick that has me here....it's the MUSIC.
Figures the Keith groupie is quick to start calling people names

Quote
Addicted

Wasn't it Jagger who wrote "Stupid Girl", by the way? And why am I thinking about that song now?

That's just ... stupid, Addicted.

Since Doxa and Mickschix sufficiently responded to your post, I will say that its that juvenile attitude that has helped create the "rivarly" in the first place. "Crush on Mick"? Nothing compares to the fan-boy adoration that takes over Keef's desciples. It seems to me that Keef can do no wrong, whatever he says, does - however stupid, is met with a 'Keef is so cool...'

I think that in the final analysis, the lingering impression of Keith will be one of a withered, jealous, bitter, old man who was always jealous of his " friend" and this childish bit of retaliation will not be forgotten...not my Mick and not by Stones fans who care quite a lot about Mick. The journalist really nailed it and it was certainly based on facts. People will feel sorry for Keith and they will applaud Mick for not resorting to the same vicious tactics. Mick will come out smelling like a rose and looking like the gentleman that he is.

not me,, keith is keith,, calls a spade a spade,, doesnt hold back,, never has,, so why would he now

I love the Stones, and I think both Mick and Keith will survive this. Perhaps people are projecting their own values and how they would react in this situation, but that does not speak to the dynamic that has existed between these 2 for the last 30 years. It is easy to see how they have both hurt each other, and for me its easy to see how the Rolling Stones are way bigger than each of them, something they are very aware of.

Quote
northernale1
not me,, keith is keith,, calls a spade a spade,, doesnt hold back,, never has,, so why would he now

Keith is the man..
lol...

Quote
mickschix
I think that in the final analysis, the lingering impression of Keith will be one of a withered, jealous, bitter, old man who was always jealous of his " friend" and this childish bit of retaliation will not be forgotten...not my Mick and not by Stones fans who care quite a lot about Mick. The journalist really nailed it and it was certainly based on facts. People will feel sorry for Keith and they will applaud Mick for not resorting to the same vicious tactics. Mick will come out smelling like a rose and looking like the gentleman that he is.

That is true. Maybe the scope of Keith's 'memoirs", not just soundbites, will prove to be more eloquent. But he has proven to be filled with adolescent pettiness. I wonder if this resentment toward Jagger really does go back to Anita. After all, as Sanchez theorized, she did seem to have a thing for Jagger. And I'm not basing that on just the Sanchez book, but on Anita's actions. If she didn't have an underlying, lingering 'thing' for him, why would Keith care so much. I think Anita continued to harbor some desire for him. Hence, Keith resented him. Makes sense.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-10-26 02:32 by stupidguy2.

I think the Anita thing is what turned him against Mick and Brian.

Keith has always said what he wants, and probably always well, and gets a lot of respect for that.
He often crosses the line, but generally is forgiven.

When you start to string all the stupid, ignorant and insensitive things he has said, sadly, it starts to become a part of his legacy, and competes with the 'other legacy', that of musical genius that he was.

It's too bad...just glad that Mick and Charlie have their act together.

In an article in Marie Claire magazine in 2002 (French edition), the interviewer asked Anita, "Then Keith is the man of your life?" Anita answered something to the effect of "yes and no". She said "for the passion, it was Brian. He was a genius, crazy, extravagant. Keith is still the mate, the beloved lover. The confidante." She's usually a bit contradictory when interviewed so I found this very telling.

KR turned into his own caricature. I can't take him serious anymore. And the older het gets, the more embarrassing it becomes.