A little rough on the boys now but Brussels is his Album of the Year...

BrusselsAffair

He writes: "Leaving aside a disappointing go at Gimme Shelter (which has never worked live, even then), ..."

Which planet does he live on? He has probably never heard the versions from Wembley Sept. 9, 1973 (my all time rock favourite), or Philadelphia 1972, or Amsterdam 1995.

The latest one:

I'm really looking forward to listening to it, still digesting the Some Girls deluxe cd's. Nice he put's it in context, Goat's Head Soup was just released. If Some Girls is over rated as he says , I counter that GHS was way under-rated. I would LOVE to hear the out-takes of those sessions down in Jamacia. peace.

I get annoyed when someone says a Stones record is overrated. They are all underrated, as far as I am concerned!

The review ain't not that far from reality for the first part, but most of us don't want to admit it.
For the rest, when he write :
"...Only one mystery hangs over the whole thing: why did they take the best part of 40 years to release it?..."
think he should read MORE CAREFULLY the story of the STONES and the lines about the mess it was and it still is with their catalogue copyrights !!!

HMN



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-15 03:47 by Honestman.

Best

Gimme Shelter

Ever

I'm not English, but I read Guardian articles now and then. I think that those people of Guardian very often confuse critical thinking and writing with plain moaning.Plus this 'past glories gone astray' attitude. Is it New Left's legacy? Maybe.

"Platonic ideal of a rock band" - that's great description of Brussels show.

It is for exactly these kind of reviews that it was extremily important that the bootleg got finally released. I have whined for years that it is almost a crime against rock and roll history that the Stones at their true peak are not documented officially good enough, and we have too much of lesser material.

The word is spreading now... Perhaps is is good that the show(s) are released in this low profile way, without too much advertising or anything (a cheap downloading); it keeps something of the secret...

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-15 13:18 by Doxa.

I think the review is almost spot-on, apart from his impression of GS.
GS studio is virtually impossible to re-create live..maybe he was expecting the studio version...

Sounds like a revue from someone who was told to revue it,and found out reluctantly that he actually liked it,can't agree with his comments about Some Girls reissue or indeed his dismissal of the original version.
Some interesting observations in the comments section below the revue.
Takes all kinds I suppose.

Guy's a tool. He used "unhinged" twice in consecutive sentences.

Quote
Zack
Guy's a tool. He used "unhinged" twice in consecutive sentences.

Haha, agreed!
I didn't like his piece all that much, but I gotta agree that Brussels Affair is without a doubt the best Stones release of all the vaults-related stuff they put out lately, as well as being the best Stones release since at least Tattoo You.

Easily one of the best releases of 2011 as well.

I don't read the "music press" much, but I'd say Brussels Affair deserves more attention in the media.

Is " Brussels Affair" available on CD/ DVD, Sounds like it reading Guardian review

The "Platonic ideal" of a rock band ?

No. The theory of forms is in Plato's Republic and refers to the ideal of an object, as in its perfect form, i.e. unchanging and immutable. The Stones do not, in any way, shape, or form are not adherents to a Platonic ideal. The second incarnation, which performed the Brussels gigs, was much changed from the first incarnation, i.e. Brian Jones had left, or was fired, and consequently died.

Subsequent to the Brussels gig, the Stones changed again with the arrival of Ron Wood in 1975, and then another change with the departure of Bill Wyman in 1993. Therefore, my argument is that the Stones, if you apply Plato's Theory of Forms, are thus not the Platonic ideal of a rock band.

I would also argue to that shifting genres from blues to soul to country to disco to funk et al also highlights a band that ill-serve any Platonic ideal, or any theory of forms. I would add that the Stones are more akin to Heraclitus of Ephesus' theory that you cannot stand in the same part of the river twice, as they shift and move through genres and influences at a rate of knots.

If you also wish to apply literary theory to the Stones, you could argue that the Stones, like Milton moving from Virgil, adhere to the Anxiety of Influence by Harold Bloom, where the new poets precede the old poets and metaphorically castrate the father, precursor poets, by creating something new. A case in point being Muddy Waters' I Can't Be Satisfied transferred to Satisfaction.

Quote
tomcasagranda
The "Platonic ideal" of a rock band ?

No. The theory of forms is in Plato's Republic and refers to the ideal of an object, as in its perfect form, i.e. unchanging and immutable. The Stones do not, in any way, shape, or form are not adherents to a Platonic ideal. The second incarnation, which performed the Brussels gigs, was much changed from the first incarnation, i.e. Brian Jones had left, or was fired, and consequently died.

Subsequent to the Brussels gig, the Stones changed again with the arrival of Ron Wood in 1975, and then another change with the departure of Bill Wyman in 1993. Therefore, my argument is that the Stones, if you apply Plato's Theory of Forms, are thus not the Platonic ideal of a rock band.

I would also argue to that shifting genres from blues to soul to country to disco to funk et al also highlights a band that ill-serve any Platonic ideal, or any theory of forms. I would add that the Stones are more akin to Heraclitus of Ephesus' theory that you cannot stand in the same part of the river twice, as they shift and move through genres and influences at a rate of knots.

If you also wish to apply literary theory to the Stones, you could argue that the Stones, like Milton moving from Virgil, adhere to the Anxiety of Influence by Harold Bloom, where the new poets precede the old poets and metaphorically castrate the father, precursor poets, by creating something new. A case in point being Muddy Waters' I Can't Be Satisfied transferred to Satisfaction.

Sounds good Tom, except the evolution of a Rock and Roll Band is a natural part of the Platonic form, the Stones actually defining the complete form as they go. No one before them (Muddy Waters) or since (50 years strong) has been able to even give us a better understanding of what that form is. We have only the Stones as the seed. May it be sown in many fertile young minds. peace.

Naturalust,

Thank you. I am a classics graduate, and was showing off a little bit. All that Latin and Greek makes one a tad pedantic when journalists start using terminology that comes from a handy little reference book, or thesaurus.

There were rock n roll groups prior to The Stones, but the Stones are the best of them, and long may they continue to be.

Actually I stand with the original suggestion of the band in Brussels being as close to the Platonic ideal of rock and roll as it is possible to be. Especially "Midnight Rambler" might THE finest performance of any rock song ever; it can't be any better. If we believe in Platonic Forms - well, I don't, but it has a nice metaphorical value - there is by definition only one ideal of a rock band. So, according to Plato, the manifestations (that are subjected to time and change) we have - say, the Stones in 1965, 1969, 1973, 1978, or The Beatles, Zep, U2, etc. - might be more or less accurate representations of that unchanging and immutable ideal which is, as tomcasagranda pointed out, 'unchanging and immutable'. In their peaks, The Stones have tried to reach the goal (the ideal) from different directions. Yeah, LIVE IN TEXAS 1978 offers a great approximation too, but however, I would argue like the writer, that it is the band in Brussels that actually captures the ideal. That's hitting to the 'essence' of rock'n'roll - to take terminology of the other Greek fellow, Aristotle, into picture as well. but like i said I think we should keep this kind of philosophical talk of "ideas" and "essences" in metaphorical level, not literally think that there is an Platonic idea(l) rock and roll band... The latter is a rather silly thing to do I think...

- Doxa, that is, non-Episteme...



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-15 23:14 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa
the Stones at their true peak

It's not their true peak.

Quote
tomcasagranda
All that Latin and Greek makes one a tad pedantic when journalists start using terminology that comes from a handy little reference book, or thesaurus.

It didn't occur to me that the writer was actually using fancy terms to make an impact, and I think the "Platonic Ideal" was rather rich way to tell the point. At least I find it very accurate and informative. Actually that kind of things - for which I don't have had a right word to describe - has came to mind when I have listened THE BRIUSSELS AFFAIR. There is something 'transcendental' - another fancy word - in that performance and in that particular incarnation of the band in its peak. I think it also the closest the Stones ever been to a general idea of typical rock band - with a wonderful lead guitarist, the guitars distinguishly seperated to the solo and rhythm guitar, the band is extremily tight and not sloppy etc. - the band has ever been. All the other incarnations are more personal and idiosyncratic. But in BRUSSELS the Stones play according to general rules of a typical rock band (including rather good technical ability). And even with those rules the Stones can show that they are masters. BRUSELLS show is very easy to dig by almost any rock fan (but for example, LIVE IN TEXAS might need need more 'trained' ears to dig that extraordinary groove). But that that doesn't need to mean that that version or era of the band needs to be a favourite of a Rolling Stones fan. I can easily understand why to some ears the band might sound even a bit boring in 1973. They never been nearer the rock mainstream as they then were.

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-15 23:40 by Doxa.

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
Doxa
the Stones at their true peak

It's not their true peak.

Hey, I wrote the last lines in the post just above especially you in my mind...

- Doxa

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
Doxa
the Stones at their true peak

It's not their true peak.

I expect the stones will have a HUGE intergalactic comeback sometime around 2312, who are we to judge the immortal so? peace.

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
Doxa
the Stones at their true peak

It's not their true peak.

I expect the stones will have a HUGE intergalactic comeback sometime around 2312, who are we to judge the immortal so? peace.

Even without any comebacks it's still not their true peak.

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
Doxa
the Stones at their true peak

It's not their true peak.

I expect the stones will have a HUGE intergalactic comeback sometime around 2312, who are we to judge the immortal so? peace.

Even without any comebacks it's still not their true peak.

Yes it is...

Certainly, the Stones area an ever-changing, ever-evolving, mutable group. Unfortunately, the general consensus is that they were/are not as good as they were.
Ever-changing suggests that the group who did Angie, Dancing With Mr D, were not the same group, in sound, that did Continental Drift or Thru & Thru. I believe that they are, in some instances, as good as they were, albeit in a mutable, changing way.

I would argue that the Stones are now the precursor poets, which Harold Bloom refers to in the Anxiety of Influence, and that they are the Chronos figures waiting for the Zeus figures to castrate them. Bands like Primal Scream, The Black Keys, The Stone Roses, The White Stripes, and even The Black Crows come along, but they never manage to totally castrate the illustrious father-head that is the Stones.

All poetry, according to Harold Bloom, has a precursor: i.e. Milton, Dante, Virgil, and that the current epic poet wishes to metaphorically castrate the previous poet.

Should the Stones stop rolling, or can they attain another peak of excellence ? Based on the evidence of Stripped, some of Bridges to Babylon, and Bigger Bang, they should continue, as there is always some bit of excellence on a new album. Mutability, change, suggests that they can make a new track that would knock our socks off. Miss You was such an example back in 1978, ditto Undercover in 1983, and Continental Drift in 1989.

they probably need more critics to post reviews like this one a lot more often.

Quote
Amsterdamned


Yes it is...

The highest point of activity, quality, or achievement : anyone who saw Jones at his peak looked upon genius.

Quote
tomcasagranda

I would argue that the Stones are now the precursor poets, which Harold Bloom refers to in the Anxiety of Influence, and that they are the Chronos figures waiting for the Zeus figures to castrate them. Bands like Primal Scream, The Black Keys, The Stone Roses, The White Stripes, and even The Black Crows come along, but they never manage to totally castrate the illustrious father-head that is the Stones.

Love the imagry Tom, and quite a Chronos, It's a good thing poets are not often musicans in bands. In fact the music is the door which allows a glimpse of what Zues might be thinking at any one moment. Hopefully just coming up with some lyrics that kinda sound good. . lol peace

Thanks Naturalust.

I must've listened too hard at University, though I must admit the Anxiety of Influence was a life-changing book that absolutely changed the way I look at books, films, music, works of art.

I'll pick it up and read it. Sounds good, always ready to stir it up a bit and see where it all falls out. Creativity in all its forms being a special interest of mine indeed. The 1973 work you are referring to? peace.