Has the famous tongue & lips trademark become more famous than the Rolling Stones themselves, and if not, then how long will it be before it does?

More to the point, just how big an influence has this logo been on the band's post-seventies career?

I'd say yes.
Can't tell you how many kids I see these days wearing the logo on t-shirts.

I gotta think most of these kids don't know where that logo comes from.

Quote
Mainman
Has the famous tongue & lips trademark become more famous than the Rolling Stones themselves, and if not, then how long will it be before it does?

More to the point, just how big an influence has this logo been on the band's post-seventies career?

The answer to your first question is yes. Your second question I don't even understand.

In which case I'll put you down as:
a) yes
b) haven't a clue

Quote
Mainman

More to the point, just how big an influence has this logo been on the band's post-seventies career?

I haven't a clue as to how a band's career can possibly be "influenced" by their own logo. What exactly are you trying to say? That they've spent the last 40 years trying to make music that sounds the way their logo looks????



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-01-27 01:47 by tatters.

What do you mean post 1970s? They finally did something different with it for Steel Wheels and then went way beyond that with a whole new design for Voodoo and then the Babylon one was cool. What, the only one that's been normal since 1989 was on Stripped, Live Licks and Shine A Light, as far as the back cover goes and in general.

I know She's So Cold was the first different tongue and the last one until Steel Wheels with exception of the original hardly being used for releases and the double gleam tongue being the common tongue now.

Quote
Mainman
Has the famous tongue & lips trademark become more famous than the Rolling Stones themselves, and if not, then how long will it be before it does?

More to the point, just how big an influence has this logo been on the band's post-seventies career?

Huge, as they're more of a brand name than a band these days - and the degree of priority given to the marketing of merchandise is very high. Its a 365-day a year thing - which the music isnt.

As said above, the logo gets worn by kids who could barely name you more than one band member or a couple of songs. They certainly arent the sort of people the band are trying to attract to their concerts as theyve outpriced them.

Retro-chic being what it is, its not inconceivable that the logo will even outlive the band's music.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-01-27 01:47 by Gazza.

It's certainly out performed the band's music!

What about John Pasche? He should have made a royalty deal with Mick, shouldn't he?

Quote
Gazza


As said above, the logo gets worn by kids who could barely name you more than one band member or a couple of songs. They certainly arent the sort of people the band are trying to attract to their concerts as theyve outpriced them.

Retro-chic being what it is, its not inconceivable that the logo will even outlive the band's music.

True, its meaningless. Remember when wearing a t-shirt with your favorite group or singer to school was like a badge of honor? It really bugs me when I see kids with the Johnny Cash shirts......who's next?
It's the homogenization of music history and culture.
Then again, I used to love wearing authentic Triumph Motorcycle shirts just because Dylan wore one on an album cover and James Dean rode one. And I've never been on a motorcyle.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2011-01-27 03:35 by stupidguy2.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
Mainman
Has the famous tongue & lips trademark become more famous than the Rolling Stones themselves, and if not, then how long will it be before it does?

More to the point, just how big an influence has this logo been on the band's post-seventies career?

Huge, as they're more of a brand name than a band these days - and the degree of priority given to the marketing of merchandise is very high. Its a 365-day a year thing - which the music isnt.

As said above, the logo gets worn by kids who could barely name you more than one band member or a couple of songs. They certainly arent the sort of people the band are trying to attract to their concerts as theyve outpriced them.

Retro-chic being what it is, its not inconceivable that the logo will even outlive the band's music.

Okay, I think I now understand the OP's second question, which should have been worded "To what extent have the Stones financially benefited from having such a cool logo?" The answer is that having such a cool logo certainly hasn't done them any harm.

the branding is very important...there are "boutique" type sections in major departments stores like Bloomingdales in New York that sell series of Rolling Stones t shirts...and it has a very high profiile spot on the selling floor right by the escalator.The brand will live on no doubt about that...

John Pasche got SCRUDE by Mick out of the tongue and lips logo, yet alone they hardly use the one he originally designed.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-01-28 17:02 by skipstone.

Sorry about my little knowledge in the word of English: But what does scude mean? I've heard about SCUD-missiles, but that's probably not what John got from Mick?

Quote
Stoneage
Sorry about my little knowledge in the word of English: But what does scude mean?

"Proper" English would be: John Pasche got SCREWED by Mick....

Ok, I get it! Thanks EG! Imagine how rich John would have been with a royalty contract!

Quote
tatters

Quote
Gazza

Quote
Mainman
Has the famous tongue & lips trademark become more famous than the Rolling Stones themselves, and if not, then how long will it be before it does?

More to the point, just how big an influence has this logo been on the band's post-seventies career?

Huge, as they're more of a brand name than a band these days - and the degree of priority given to the marketing of merchandise is very high. Its a 365-day a year thing - which the music isnt.

As said above, the logo gets worn by kids who could barely name you more than one band member or a couple of songs. They certainly arent the sort of people the band are trying to attract to their concerts as theyve outpriced them.

Retro-chic being what it is, its not inconceivable that the logo will even outlive the band's music.

Okay, I think I now understand the OP's second question, which should have been worded "To what extent have the Stones financially benefited from having such a cool logo?" The answer is that having such a cool logo certainly hasn't done them any harm.

No, that's NOT what I meant!

The point of the question was to ascertain whether the unforseen success of their branding had influenced them to the point where business would take an increasingly higher priority over their musical output/performances; a point which Gazza very succinctly and eloquently alluded to in his earlier response.

They have indeed become a brand - a very successful one - though incredibly, with the addition of a logo that can exist independently outside of their increasingly marginalised music, irrespective of what it is supposed to be representing.

Alas, it would seem that Pete Townshend's decription of the Stones as "a tee-shirt-selling machine" back in early 1982 was merely the tip of a mammoth-sized ice-berg.

Quote
Mainman

Quote
tatters

Quote
Gazza

Quote
Mainman
Has the famous tongue & lips trademark become more famous than the Rolling Stones themselves, and if not, then how long will it be before it does?

More to the point, just how big an influence has this logo been on the band's post-seventies career?

Huge, as they're more of a brand name than a band these days - and the degree of priority given to the marketing of merchandise is very high. Its a 365-day a year thing - which the music isnt.

As said above, the logo gets worn by kids who could barely name you more than one band member or a couple of songs. They certainly arent the sort of people the band are trying to attract to their concerts as theyve outpriced them.

Retro-chic being what it is, its not inconceivable that the logo will even outlive the band's music.

Okay, I think I now understand the OP's second question, which should have been worded "To what extent have the Stones financially benefited from having such a cool logo?" The answer is that having such a cool logo certainly hasn't done them any harm.

No, that's NOT what I meant!

The point of the question was to ascertain whether the unforseen success of their branding had influenced them to the point where business would take an increasingly higher priority over their musical output/performances; a point which Gazza very succinctly and eloquently alluded to in his earlier response.

They have indeed become a brand - a very successful one - though incredibly, with the addition of a logo that can exist independently outside of their increasingly marginalised music, irrespective of what it is supposed to be representing.

Alas, it would seem that Pete Townshend's decription of the Stones as "a tee-shirt-selling machine" back in early 1982 was merely the tip of a mammoth-sized ice-berg.

Okay, I see. But do you think their merchandising really reaches all that many NON-Stones fans? I haven't seen anyone lately, other than myself, wearing a Stones t-shirt. And even I know it's a totally passe thing to be wearing. It was cool in the 70s. Now it just pegs you as being stuck in the 70s.

Quote
Gazza
As said above, the logo gets worn by kids who could barely name you more than one band member or a couple of songs. They certainly arent the sort of people the band are trying to attract to their concerts as theyve outpriced them.

What kids are these? I don't seem to see too many of them. Sometimes I'll see a young celebrity wearing the logo, and it makes them look hopelessly uncool, mainly because they're unaware they're wearing something that stopped being cool 30 years ago. Once in a while someone does come up with a cool variation on it, though. I saw a purple one on a tie-dyed t-shirt during the B2B tour that I liked a lot.

The tongue-logo and vintage Stones clothing seems to "in" for teenage girls and younger women. A couple of years ago hardrock, vintage t-shirts (Kiss, Motorhead, AC/DC) were fashionable among young girls.I don't think it has much to do with the music, moreso with fashion. Personally, I remember buying those hideous black t-shirts at concerts in the 90-ties. The merchandise has stepped up a bit since then.

Quote
tatters

Quote
Gazza
As said above, the logo gets worn by kids who could barely name you more than one band member or a couple of songs. They certainly arent the sort of people the band are trying to attract to their concerts as theyve outpriced them.

What kids are these? I don't seem to see too many of them. Sometimes I'll see a young celebrity wearing the logo, and it makes them look hopelessly uncool, mainly because they're unaware they're wearing something that stopped being cool 30 years ago. Once in a while someone does come up with a cool variation on it, though. I saw a purple one on a tie-dyed t-shirt during the B2B tour that I liked a lot.

These kids wearing the tongue label are eveywhere. Most of the time there is no reference to the Stones. There doesn't have to be.

Its a badge...of sorts.

Quote
Edith Grove

Quote
Stoneage
Sorry about my little knowledge in the word of English: But what does scude mean?

"Proper" English would be: John Pasche got SCREWED by Mick....

Oh you guys made me laugh out loud on that one!

Yeah, I just fixed it. Just saw it. Edith, I was going by the BP spelling and forgot the letter R.

Although I kinda like Scude.

Quote
Mainman

Quote
tatters

Quote
Gazza
As said above, the logo gets worn by kids who could barely name you more than one band member or a couple of songs. They certainly arent the sort of people the band are trying to attract to their concerts as theyve outpriced them.

What kids are these? I don't seem to see too many of them. Sometimes I'll see a young celebrity wearing the logo, and it makes them look hopelessly uncool, mainly because they're unaware they're wearing something that stopped being cool 30 years ago. Once in a while someone does come up with a cool variation on it, though. I saw a purple one on a tie-dyed t-shirt during the B2B tour that I liked a lot.

These kids wearing the tongue label are eveywhere. Most of the time there is no reference to the Stones. There doesn't have to be.

Its a badge...of sorts.

Like my son, born in 1983, who wears a replica Led Zeppelin 1977 Tour t-shirt. But I see way more Zep shirts on "kids" than Stones shirts. I think maybe some Black kids like the logo and see it as a "Black Thing". The 70s soul band Rufus (featuring Chaka Khan) had an album cover with artwork that was very similar to the Stones logo. Also, the logo has strong oral sex associations. When I was 18 I had a jacket with a Stones logo I had embroidered on the back of the right shoulder. A number of (older) women saw this as some kind of signal that I liked to "go down".



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-01-30 00:10 by tatters.