Tell Me :
Talk
How did this go from a horrible Mick Jagger song to a Metallica song?
Same opinion here - both counts. Let's work was easily worst thing ever and somehow he thought it should be the single LOL
Hardly a fair comparison. The Beatles were pretty much still at their peak when they disbanded and the four members started pursuing their solo careers. by the time Mick and Keith began their solo projects the Stones had burned themselves out creatively. A solo Stones record from the early 70s (not Bill's obviously) might have included Brown Sugar (written mostly by Mick) or Gimme Shelter (ditto keith). At that time. either could have produced something comparable to the best Beatles solo work IMO.
The Stones real achievement is not their solo work, it's the fact they stayed together so long to do their best work as a group.
By the time Mick and Keith did solo work, the stuff that the Stones were doing as a band was just as lame. Comparing the solo efforts though of The Beatles and The Stones though makes it pretty clear (and I know I'll get whapped for this). It's this simple, the members of the 3 songwriting Beatles were way, way more talented than any songwriter of The Rolling Stones. And as a group, the Stones were no. 2 in popularity. But were they second best in terms of making records? Nope. Not even in the top 5. Sorry.
Ps, Party Doll - a forgettable track, only memorable being the only acoustic standout on Jagger's worst album ever. 5 out of 10.
[thepowergoats.com]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 03:26 by jamesfdouglas.
Ah, finally.
I agree w/ both of you, on both points!
I remember an interview where Mick was asked if Sweethearts Together was about Keith and him, Mick laughed a little and then said no.
+ 1. With Keith's TALK IS CHEAP the last Stones-related albums I find actually fascinating, like their last contributive sayings in music. The much praised WANDERING SPIRIT is surely a good and cohesive album but I don't find it as intersting as PRIMITIVE COOL. To me Jagger there is just going through different familiar musical styles (for The Stones fans) he proves to still to be a master, inwheras in PRIMITIVE COOL he still tried to widen up his musical horizon, and to say something novel. He also created there the singing style he is pretty much stuck ever since. That is t also to say that he abondened there the forced barking/shouting style typical to mid-80's; the contrast in delivery between DIRTY WORK (or UNDERCOVER, SHE'S THE BOSS, "Dancing In The Street; "State of Shock") and PRIMITIVE COOL is remarkable. (Keith's MAIN OFFENDER has some 2-3 great tracks but to the most part I find it boring and repitive, unnecessary follower of TALK IS CHEAP.)
"Party Doll" is great but cheesy song
. When the album was released it was the easiest track to like (for many it sounded like being the only track in the album to like). That is to say, with its country-flavor, it sounded most Stonesy. I remember reading one review of the album saying that one can almost hear Keith Richards's presence there. But Jagger's worst artistic move ever, and career wise fatal choice, was to release "Let's Work" as a leading single with that terrible video. That ruined the album and his solo career. Even the toughest fans of his were out of reasonable arguments to justify it... Perhaps Jagger tried to make a pervert 'postmodern' dance track that would oddily charm the pop audiences, but that was a terrible misjudgment. Yeah, it was relaesed during the darkest hours of the 80's but even then, in that context, that was too much. It showed that Mick terribly had lost his touch to the nerve of the times. Man, did he lost his face with that track, and made it too easy for Keith to start his anti-Mick campaign the press loved...
- Doxa
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 11:14 by Doxa.
First of all, I want to say that Party Doll is a great tune.
Secondly, I want to thank you, Gazza, for that razor-sharp analysis. I can't help but agree.
And, again we see how great a singer-songwriter the Mick is.
I like Say You Will even better than Party Doll, but it is cheesy, too for sure.
The production ruins the greatness in both of the tunes, imo.
Whoa, leave Almost Hear You Sigh out of this discussion, please!
Comparing the "flutes" and the synths with Keith's hauntingly beautiful classical guitar is a sin
This is not Hideaway with Wyclef Jean-pan flutes, this is the real nitty-gritty (and very, very beautiful).
Some great live versions as well. No acoustic guitar here, but some killer Mayfield-esque licks:
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 12:08 by DandelionPowderman.
The cheese is cheese, no matter in which instrument it is presented. Of course, acoustic guitar is a 'holy' instrumnet for guitar lovers but probably for that reason the judgment can be blind. The way the clasical guitar is here presented is typical late-80's production idea. Extremily cheesy or even cheap trick (to make a 'romantic' impression). Yeah, it is a novel thing in Rolling Stones music but there was nothing original in that in contemporary sense; just blindly following the trend. Just equal to Jagger's synths and fake flutes, etc. When I now listen the track I almost feel co-shame to Keith to be forced to follow such a cheesy trend of the day. And this was the guy who used to reintroduce acoustic guitar as the key insrument in rock-n'roll, and made miracles with it. Bloody long way historically and conceptually from BEGGARS BANQUET to "Almost Hear You Sigh".
If there is one Stones track with no 'balls' in it, that's "Almost Hear You Sigh". But it is a nice song, anyway, and I like it. But cheese is cheese.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 12:44 by Doxa.
Hell yes - how did he even record such a thing, & then think it was worthy of release? I know they have other duds (like Streets of Love, imo) but some always seem to find a way to like them, but this one track, Let's Work, I don't think i have ever seen anyone say they like it, or try to defend it.
BTW, the Primitive Cool album has 2 tracks that I think are great, that others seem to overlook -- Peace For The Wicked & Radio Control ... I love them both!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 17:30 by LeonidP.
of course he would. You'd expect him to say yes?
So Mick's a liar?
Have they ever 'revealed' these kind of matters? That they make songs of each other? I can only think of "You Don't Move Me" Keith admitting that to be the case (and to a part "Beast of Burden", "All About You" and "Mixed Emotions"). But I pretty much admire their artistic choice to not start explaining or explicate the 'meanings' of their songs. Let the listeners to do that. When they - especially Mick who is responsible of most of the lyrics - do that it is mostly done tongue-in-cheek and is more or less obscure or something very general that says nothing. I think Jagger, as a good writer, knows that it is better to leave some of the mystery there.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 17:57 by Doxa.
I think Keith is more likely to write about Mick than the other way around.....Jagger seems preoccupied with his romantic preoccupations...
but its all open to interpretation so who knows?
I agree with your take on "Party Doll" representing Jagger's transition from growl to 'strangled cat' whine.
I had no idea this was Stewart's doing. I like him even less now.
You are correct, PC, even more than STB, killed Jagger's previous cred at the time. While we could hope that Boss was a fluke, PC just cemented the fact that Jagger had really jumped the shark, lost touch and veered into total posturing.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-19 00:41 by stupidguy2.
Keith - yes.
Mick - no.
Exactly. I made the same observation when I quite randomly checked the "TrackTalk" in timeisonourside.com - in fact, it started to look like Keith had especially during the 80's an obsession to write about Mick or the feelings considering Mick... Anyway, I came across one recent (2011) intersting comment by Jagger considering "Beast of Burden":
No, (it's not about Keith's heroin situation). I think that's just made up (laughs). I think that's rubbish. But you know, it's so long ago. People, they like to make up stories and whatever, what you believe happened at the time. I could tell you, I could make up all sorts of stuff about how Far Away Eyes was written - it wouldn't be correct, I'm sure, but it might sound good (laughs).
I wonder if that "people" who "make up stories and whatever what you believe happened at the time" but what "wouldn't be correct", but "might sound good" is a brief critisism to Keith direction...
- Doxa
Jagger is just a master of dodging a question isn't he? When he says its 'made up' or 'Keith wrote it' ....he's lying his ass off. Whoever a song is about, Jagger will say anything to dodge the truth. That we can be sure of..
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-19 01:40 by stupidguy2.
Sure it is
The funny thing is that Beck is doing the very same classical guitar trick as Keith later would do on Almost Hear You Sigh.
Listen to both and tell me who's the cheesier one
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
toomuchforme
()
Date: January 18, 2012 01:05
Used to be my number one. Excellent song.
"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"
"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: January 18, 2012 01:23
Quote
Rolling HansieQuote
Elmo Lewis
I think it's pretty cool
... and nothing else matters
How did this go from a horrible Mick Jagger song to a Metallica song?
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
Lynd8
()
Date: January 18, 2012 02:20
Quote
Elmo Lewis
I think it's pretty cool, but almost campy.
BTW, other than "Let's Work", Primitive Cool ain't that bad.
Same opinion here - both counts. Let's work was easily worst thing ever and somehow he thought it should be the single LOL
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
matsumoto33
()
Date: January 18, 2012 02:47
Quote
24FPS
Unlike the Beatles, the Stones are almost universally crap solo artists. Well, Charlie isn't recording rock and roll. I don't known what that proves. Mick's songs just sort of float out there without getting pinned down. Keith solo work sounds like lower grade Stones. Think of all the hit records the solo Beatles made, including Ringo! Not to mention all the memorable tracks that are unique to each Beatle. You can cite Beatle solo tracks that are as memorable and important as what they did in the group. But you can't say that for the Stones. What's Mick's biggest hit? 'Just Another Night'? And Keith's is 'Take It So Hard'? Pretty slim pickings. No wonder they love and hate their own group.
Hardly a fair comparison. The Beatles were pretty much still at their peak when they disbanded and the four members started pursuing their solo careers. by the time Mick and Keith began their solo projects the Stones had burned themselves out creatively. A solo Stones record from the early 70s (not Bill's obviously) might have included Brown Sugar (written mostly by Mick) or Gimme Shelter (ditto keith). At that time. either could have produced something comparable to the best Beatles solo work IMO.
The Stones real achievement is not their solo work, it's the fact they stayed together so long to do their best work as a group.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
jamesfdouglas
()
Date: January 18, 2012 03:25
Quote
matsumoto33Quote
24FPS
Unlike the Beatles, the Stones are almost universally crap solo artists. Well, Charlie isn't recording rock and roll. I don't known what that proves. Mick's songs just sort of float out there without getting pinned down. Keith solo work sounds like lower grade Stones. Think of all the hit records the solo Beatles made, including Ringo! Not to mention all the memorable tracks that are unique to each Beatle. You can cite Beatle solo tracks that are as memorable and important as what they did in the group. But you can't say that for the Stones. What's Mick's biggest hit? 'Just Another Night'? And Keith's is 'Take It So Hard'? Pretty slim pickings. No wonder they love and hate their own group.
Hardly a fair comparison. The Beatles were pretty much still at their peak when they disbanded and the four members started pursuing their solo careers. by the time Mick and Keith began their solo projects the Stones had burned themselves out creatively. A solo Stones record from the early 70s (not Bill's obviously) might have included Brown Sugar (written mostly by Mick) or Gimme Shelter (ditto keith). At that time. either could have produced something comparable to the best Beatles solo work IMO.
The Stones real achievement is not their solo work, it's the fact they stayed together so long to do their best work as a group.
By the time Mick and Keith did solo work, the stuff that the Stones were doing as a band was just as lame. Comparing the solo efforts though of The Beatles and The Stones though makes it pretty clear (and I know I'll get whapped for this). It's this simple, the members of the 3 songwriting Beatles were way, way more talented than any songwriter of The Rolling Stones. And as a group, the Stones were no. 2 in popularity. But were they second best in terms of making records? Nope. Not even in the top 5. Sorry.
Ps, Party Doll - a forgettable track, only memorable being the only acoustic standout on Jagger's worst album ever. 5 out of 10.
[thepowergoats.com]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 03:26 by jamesfdouglas.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
Palace Revolution 2000
()
Date: January 18, 2012 04:06
Quote
punkfloyd
Grated cheese.
Ah, finally.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
LeonidP
()
Date: January 18, 2012 06:42
Quote
Lynd8Quote
Elmo Lewis
I think it's pretty cool, but almost campy.
BTW, other than "Let's Work", Primitive Cool ain't that bad.
Same opinion here - both counts. Let's work was easily worst thing ever and somehow he thought it should be the single LOL
I agree w/ both of you, on both points!
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
matsumoto33
()
Date: January 18, 2012 07:30
Quote
jamesfdouglasQuote
matsumoto33Quote
24FPS
The Stones real achievement is not their solo work, it's the fact they stayed together so long to do their best work as a group.
By the time Mick and Keith did solo work, the stuff that the Stones were doing as a band was just as lame.
But by that time, the solo efforts of the surviving Beatles were pretty poor too. The point is that all artists run out of steam eventually; the members of the Beatles were no exception, they just ran out of steam after they left the band rather than when they were still in it.
I don't necessarily disagree with your comments about the relative talents of Jagger / Richards vs Lennon / McCartney btw, but comparing their solo careers is comparing apples and oranges...
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
elunsi
()
Date: January 18, 2012 08:13
Quote
Gazza
Mick very rarely writes openly about his domestic life. It's usually hidden in opaque references. Mick and Keith writing songs about their relationship and dressing up as a song about a woman isnt that uncommon (All About You, Worried about You, Sweethearts Together etc)
I remember an interview where Mick was asked if Sweethearts Together was about Keith and him, Mick laughed a little and then said no.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: January 18, 2012 11:03
Quote
Lynd8Quote
Elmo Lewis
I think it's pretty cool, but almost campy.
BTW, other than "Let's Work", Primitive Cool ain't that bad.
Same opinion here - both counts. Let's work was easily worst thing ever and somehow he thought it should be the single LOL
+ 1. With Keith's TALK IS CHEAP the last Stones-related albums I find actually fascinating, like their last contributive sayings in music. The much praised WANDERING SPIRIT is surely a good and cohesive album but I don't find it as intersting as PRIMITIVE COOL. To me Jagger there is just going through different familiar musical styles (for The Stones fans) he proves to still to be a master, inwheras in PRIMITIVE COOL he still tried to widen up his musical horizon, and to say something novel. He also created there the singing style he is pretty much stuck ever since. That is t also to say that he abondened there the forced barking/shouting style typical to mid-80's; the contrast in delivery between DIRTY WORK (or UNDERCOVER, SHE'S THE BOSS, "Dancing In The Street; "State of Shock") and PRIMITIVE COOL is remarkable. (Keith's MAIN OFFENDER has some 2-3 great tracks but to the most part I find it boring and repitive, unnecessary follower of TALK IS CHEAP.)
"Party Doll" is great but cheesy song
. When the album was released it was the easiest track to like (for many it sounded like being the only track in the album to like). That is to say, with its country-flavor, it sounded most Stonesy. I remember reading one review of the album saying that one can almost hear Keith Richards's presence there. But Jagger's worst artistic move ever, and career wise fatal choice, was to release "Let's Work" as a leading single with that terrible video. That ruined the album and his solo career. Even the toughest fans of his were out of reasonable arguments to justify it... Perhaps Jagger tried to make a pervert 'postmodern' dance track that would oddily charm the pop audiences, but that was a terrible misjudgment. Yeah, it was relaesed during the darkest hours of the 80's but even then, in that context, that was too much. It showed that Mick terribly had lost his touch to the nerve of the times. Man, did he lost his face with that track, and made it too easy for Keith to start his anti-Mick campaign the press loved...- Doxa
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 11:14 by Doxa.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
Come On
()
Date: January 18, 2012 11:12
That -87-clip was excellent.. so Party Doll is probably Great...
2 1 2 0
2 1 2 0
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
dead.flowers
()
Date: January 18, 2012 11:15
Quote
GazzaQuote
proudmary
Good country tune with a great harmonica at the end.
Even Richards who never likes to give credit to Mick said in a recent interview that Jagger is one of the best country songwriters.
Btw, Keith. Gazza said this song is about him- but why? I think it's about Jerry Hall
-You used to be my party doll
-But now you want to live in clover
-You used to be my number one
-But now those salad days are over
At face value, it looks like a love song to a woman, but read the lyrics in the context of Mick and Keith's disintegrating relationship at the time it was written (he was still very much with Jerry Hall at the time).
Mick very rarely writes openly about his domestic life. It's usually hidden in opaque references. Mick and Keith writing songs about their relationship and dressing up as a song about a woman isnt that uncommon (All About You, Worried about You, Sweethearts Together etc)
'Party Doll' is a bittersweet farewell to his friendship with Keith, from what I can see.
Especially with the references to 'the honky tonking's over' , the 'whisky haze' and 'facing the music'...
You used to be my party doll
But now you say the party's over
You used to love to honky tonk
But now the honky tonking's over
Times change but fascination stays
Love wins but the passion just fades
I'll drink to the dancing days
I'll drink to your crazy ways
Through the whiskey haze
Face the music, face the truth
Chase that fleet sweet bird of youth
Grow up sweetly, grow up strong
Hear the heartbeat, in my song
'Kow Tow' and 'Shoot off your mouth' were the ones which the press focussed on at the time as being a potshot at Keith but they were simply more obvious. This one is a bit more affectionate (you could even make an argument for 'Throwaway' as being partly inspired by Keith too)
First of all, I want to say that Party Doll is a great tune.
Secondly, I want to thank you, Gazza, for that razor-sharp analysis. I can't help but agree.
And, again we see how great a singer-songwriter the Mick is.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: January 18, 2012 11:26
While we are in it, is this great or cheesy...
:
More serious note: this is a key track to wittness the arrival of 'new' trained Jagger voice - that is so familiar nowadays - with that nasal-based colour in it, over-prononcation, reaching technically alright but a bit artificailly or unnaturally the melody lines. Some call it "struggled cat". Jagger very much attributed it to Dave Stewart who forced Mick to work his voice harder in this particular track in PRIMITIVE COOL..
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 11:31 by Doxa.
:More serious note: this is a key track to wittness the arrival of 'new' trained Jagger voice - that is so familiar nowadays - with that nasal-based colour in it, over-prononcation, reaching technically alright but a bit artificailly or unnaturally the melody lines. Some call it "struggled cat". Jagger very much attributed it to Dave Stewart who forced Mick to work his voice harder in this particular track in PRIMITIVE COOL..
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 11:31 by Doxa.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: January 18, 2012 11:34
Quote
Doxa
While we are in it, is this great or cheesy...
More serious note: this is a key track to wittness the arrival of 'new' trained Jagger voice - that is so familiar nowadays - with that nasal-based colour in it, over-prononcation, reaching technically alright but a bit artificailly or unnaturally the melody lines. Some call it "struggled cat". Jagger very much attributed it to Dave Stewart who forced Mick to work his voice harder in this particular track in PRIMITIVE COOL..
- Doxa
I like Say You Will even better than Party Doll, but it is cheesy, too for sure.
The production ruins the greatness in both of the tunes, imo.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: January 18, 2012 11:41
That 'cheese' element, or flirting with it openly, was one of the accepted tools in the 80's main stream musical scene. Especially it was very much pointed out and emphasizied in the videos representing the songs... And it was not the trendy-spotter Jagger doing it. Just look at the video of Dylan's "Emotionally Yours", or the following one by our heroes:
I think "Almost Hear You Sigh" includes probaly teh most cheesiest musical bit in the recorded Rolling Stones history: that 'romantic' acoustic guitar topping the altogether 'AOR' music track.
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 11:47 by Doxa.
I think "Almost Hear You Sigh" includes probaly teh most cheesiest musical bit in the recorded Rolling Stones history: that 'romantic' acoustic guitar topping the altogether 'AOR' music track.
- Doxa
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 11:47 by Doxa.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: January 18, 2012 12:07
Quote
Doxa
That 'cheese' element, or flirting with it openly, was one of the accepted tools in the 80's main stream musical scene. Especially it was very much pointed out and emphasizied in the videos representing the songs... And it was not the trendy-spotter Jagger doing it. Just look at the video of Dylan's "Emotionally Yours", or the following one by our heroes:
I think "Almost Hear You Sigh" includes probaly teh most cheesiest musical bit in the recorded Rolling Stones history: that 'romantic' acoustic guitar topping the altogether 'AOR' music track.
- Doxa
Whoa, leave Almost Hear You Sigh out of this discussion, please!
Comparing the "flutes" and the synths with Keith's hauntingly beautiful classical guitar is a sin
This is not Hideaway with Wyclef Jean-pan flutes, this is the real nitty-gritty (and very, very beautiful).
Some great live versions as well. No acoustic guitar here, but some killer Mayfield-esque licks:
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 12:08 by DandelionPowderman.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: January 18, 2012 12:39
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Whoa, leave Almost Hear You Sigh out of this discussion, please!
Comparing the "flutes" and the synths with Keith's hauntingly beautiful classical guitar is a sin
The cheese is cheese, no matter in which instrument it is presented. Of course, acoustic guitar is a 'holy' instrumnet for guitar lovers but probably for that reason the judgment can be blind. The way the clasical guitar is here presented is typical late-80's production idea. Extremily cheesy or even cheap trick (to make a 'romantic' impression). Yeah, it is a novel thing in Rolling Stones music but there was nothing original in that in contemporary sense; just blindly following the trend. Just equal to Jagger's synths and fake flutes, etc. When I now listen the track I almost feel co-shame to Keith to be forced to follow such a cheesy trend of the day. And this was the guy who used to reintroduce acoustic guitar as the key insrument in rock-n'roll, and made miracles with it. Bloody long way historically and conceptually from BEGGARS BANQUET to "Almost Hear You Sigh".
If there is one Stones track with no 'balls' in it, that's "Almost Hear You Sigh". But it is a nice song, anyway, and I like it. But cheese is cheese.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 12:44 by Doxa.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
LeonidP
()
Date: January 18, 2012 17:28
Quote
Doxa
But Jagger's worst artistic move ever, and career wise fatal choice, was to release "Let's Work" as a leading single with that terrible video. That ruined the album and his solo career. Even the toughest fans of his were out of reasonable arguments to justify it...
- Doxa
Hell yes - how did he even record such a thing, & then think it was worthy of release? I know they have other duds (like Streets of Love, imo) but some always seem to find a way to like them, but this one track, Let's Work, I don't think i have ever seen anyone say they like it, or try to defend it.
BTW, the Primitive Cool album has 2 tracks that I think are great, that others seem to overlook -- Peace For The Wicked & Radio Control ... I love them both!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 17:30 by LeonidP.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: January 18, 2012 17:42
Quote
elunsiQuote
Gazza
Mick very rarely writes openly about his domestic life. It's usually hidden in opaque references. Mick and Keith writing songs about their relationship and dressing up as a song about a woman isnt that uncommon (All About You, Worried about You, Sweethearts Together etc)
I remember an interview where Mick was asked if Sweethearts Together was about Keith and him, Mick laughed a little and then said no.
of course he would. You'd expect him to say yes?
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
steel driving hammer
()
Date: January 18, 2012 17:53
Quote
GazzaQuote
elunsiQuote
Gazza
Mick very rarely writes openly about his domestic life. It's usually hidden in opaque references. Mick and Keith writing songs about their relationship and dressing up as a song about a woman isnt that uncommon (All About You, Worried about You, Sweethearts Together etc)
I remember an interview where Mick was asked if Sweethearts Together was about Keith and him, Mick laughed a little and then said no.
of course he would. You'd expect him to say yes?
So Mick's a liar?
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: January 18, 2012 17:53
Quote
GazzaQuote
elunsiQuote
Gazza
Mick very rarely writes openly about his domestic life. It's usually hidden in opaque references. Mick and Keith writing songs about their relationship and dressing up as a song about a woman isnt that uncommon (All About You, Worried about You, Sweethearts Together etc)
I remember an interview where Mick was asked if Sweethearts Together was about Keith and him, Mick laughed a little and then said no.
of course he would. You'd expect him to say yes?
Have they ever 'revealed' these kind of matters? That they make songs of each other? I can only think of "You Don't Move Me" Keith admitting that to be the case (and to a part "Beast of Burden", "All About You" and "Mixed Emotions"). But I pretty much admire their artistic choice to not start explaining or explicate the 'meanings' of their songs. Let the listeners to do that. When they - especially Mick who is responsible of most of the lyrics - do that it is mostly done tongue-in-cheek and is more or less obscure or something very general that says nothing. I think Jagger, as a good writer, knows that it is better to leave some of the mystery there.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-18 17:57 by Doxa.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: January 18, 2012 20:26
Another angle in the Beatles vs. Stones discussion is the picking of side musicians. You rarely heard a Beatles solo record and thought about the side musicians. They used some great ones and some obscure ones and it always seemed to work. Or at least it didn't matter.
The Stones side musicians matter. We have seen that the absence of Bill Wyman, the bass player for gods sake, has made a considerable difference in the sound of the group for the worse. There's just something about the chemistry of the Stones sound that matters. The sum is indeed greater than the individual parts. And that's not to say that the Beatles are better than the Stones. It seems that you have to take individual Stones and put them in with stellar musicians for it to work. Mick and some 'ersatz' Stones didn't cut it.
The Stones side musicians matter. We have seen that the absence of Bill Wyman, the bass player for gods sake, has made a considerable difference in the sound of the group for the worse. There's just something about the chemistry of the Stones sound that matters. The sum is indeed greater than the individual parts. And that's not to say that the Beatles are better than the Stones. It seems that you have to take individual Stones and put them in with stellar musicians for it to work. Mick and some 'ersatz' Stones didn't cut it.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
scottkeef
()
Date: January 18, 2012 21:08
Neither , its really "cheat or greesy"!!
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
stupidguy2
()
Date: January 19, 2012 00:40
Quote
DoxaQuote
GazzaQuote
elunsiQuote
Gazza
Mick very rarely writes openly about his domestic life. It's usually hidden in opaque references. Mick and Keith writing songs about their relationship and dressing up as a song about a woman isnt that uncommon (All About You, Worried about You, Sweethearts Together etc)
I remember an interview where Mick was asked if Sweethearts Together was about Keith and him, Mick laughed a little and then said no.
of course he would. You'd expect him to say yes?
Have they ever 'revealed' these kind of matters? That they make songs of each other? I can only think of "You Don't Move Me" Keith admitting that to be the case (and to a part "Beast of Burden", "All About You" and "Mixed Emotions"). But I pretty much admire their artistic choice to not start explaining or explicate the 'meanings' of their songs. Let the listeners to do that. When they - especially Mick who is responsible of most of the lyrics - do that it is mostly done tongue-in-cheek and is more or less obscure or something very general that says nothing. I think Jagger, as a good writer, knows that it is better to leave some of the mystery there.
- Doxa
I think Keith is more likely to write about Mick than the other way around.....Jagger seems preoccupied with his romantic preoccupations...
but its all open to interpretation so who knows?
I agree with your take on "Party Doll" representing Jagger's transition from growl to 'strangled cat' whine.
I had no idea this was Stewart's doing. I like him even less now.
You are correct, PC, even more than STB, killed Jagger's previous cred at the time. While we could hope that Boss was a fluke, PC just cemented the fact that Jagger had really jumped the shark, lost touch and veered into total posturing.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-19 00:41 by stupidguy2.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
Gazza
()
Date: January 19, 2012 01:13
Quote
DoxaQuote
GazzaQuote
elunsiQuote
Gazza
Mick very rarely writes openly about his domestic life. It's usually hidden in opaque references. Mick and Keith writing songs about their relationship and dressing up as a song about a woman isnt that uncommon (All About You, Worried about You, Sweethearts Together etc)
I remember an interview where Mick was asked if Sweethearts Together was about Keith and him, Mick laughed a little and then said no.
of course he would. You'd expect him to say yes?
Have they ever 'revealed' these kind of matters? That they make songs of each other? I can only think of "You Don't Move Me" Keith admitting that to be the case (and to a part "Beast of Burden", "All About You" and "Mixed Emotions"). But I pretty much admire their artistic choice to not start explaining or explicate the 'meanings' of their songs. Let the listeners to do that. When they - especially Mick who is responsible of most of the lyrics - do that it is mostly done tongue-in-cheek and is more or less obscure or something very general that says nothing. I think Jagger, as a good writer, knows that it is better to leave some of the mystery there.
- Doxa
Keith - yes.
Mick - no.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: January 19, 2012 01:30
Quote
GazzaQuote
DoxaQuote
GazzaQuote
elunsiQuote
Gazza
Mick very rarely writes openly about his domestic life. It's usually hidden in opaque references. Mick and Keith writing songs about their relationship and dressing up as a song about a woman isnt that uncommon (All About You, Worried about You, Sweethearts Together etc)
I remember an interview where Mick was asked if Sweethearts Together was about Keith and him, Mick laughed a little and then said no.
of course he would. You'd expect him to say yes?
Have they ever 'revealed' these kind of matters? That they make songs of each other? I can only think of "You Don't Move Me" Keith admitting that to be the case (and to a part "Beast of Burden", "All About You" and "Mixed Emotions"). But I pretty much admire their artistic choice to not start explaining or explicate the 'meanings' of their songs. Let the listeners to do that. When they - especially Mick who is responsible of most of the lyrics - do that it is mostly done tongue-in-cheek and is more or less obscure or something very general that says nothing. I think Jagger, as a good writer, knows that it is better to leave some of the mystery there.
- Doxa
Keith - yes.
Mick - no.
Exactly. I made the same observation when I quite randomly checked the "TrackTalk" in timeisonourside.com - in fact, it started to look like Keith had especially during the 80's an obsession to write about Mick or the feelings considering Mick... Anyway, I came across one recent (2011) intersting comment by Jagger considering "Beast of Burden":
No, (it's not about Keith's heroin situation). I think that's just made up (laughs). I think that's rubbish. But you know, it's so long ago. People, they like to make up stories and whatever, what you believe happened at the time. I could tell you, I could make up all sorts of stuff about how Far Away Eyes was written - it wouldn't be correct, I'm sure, but it might sound good (laughs).
I wonder if that "people" who "make up stories and whatever what you believe happened at the time" but what "wouldn't be correct", but "might sound good" is a brief critisism to Keith direction...
- Doxa
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
stupidguy2
()
Date: January 19, 2012 01:39
Quote
DoxaQuote
GazzaQuote
DoxaQuote
GazzaQuote
elunsiQuote
Gazza
Mick very rarely writes openly about his domestic life. It's usually hidden in opaque references. Mick and Keith writing songs about their relationship and dressing up as a song about a woman isnt that uncommon (All About You, Worried about You, Sweethearts Together etc)
I remember an interview where Mick was asked if Sweethearts Together was about Keith and him, Mick laughed a little and then said no.
of course he would. You'd expect him to say yes?
Have they ever 'revealed' these kind of matters? That they make songs of each other? I can only think of "You Don't Move Me" Keith admitting that to be the case (and to a part "Beast of Burden", "All About You" and "Mixed Emotions"). But I pretty much admire their artistic choice to not start explaining or explicate the 'meanings' of their songs. Let the listeners to do that. When they - especially Mick who is responsible of most of the lyrics - do that it is mostly done tongue-in-cheek and is more or less obscure or something very general that says nothing. I think Jagger, as a good writer, knows that it is better to leave some of the mystery there.
- Doxa
Keith - yes.
Mick - no.
Exactly. I made the same observation when I quite randomly checked the "TrackTalk" in timeisonourside.com - in fact, it started to look like Keith had especially during the 80's an obsession to write about Mick or the feelings considering Mick... Anyway, I came across one recent (2011) intersting comment by Jagger considering "Beast of Burden":
No, (it's not about Keith's heroin situation). I think that's just made up (laughs). I think that's rubbish. But you know, it's so long ago. People, they like to make up stories and whatever, what you believe happened at the time. I could tell you, I could make up all sorts of stuff about how Far Away Eyes was written - it wouldn't be correct, I'm sure, but it might sound good (laughs).
I wonder if that "people" who "make up stories and whatever what you believe happened at the time" but what "wouldn't be correct", but "might sound good" is a brief critisism to Keith direction...
- Doxa
Jagger is just a master of dodging a question isn't he? When he says its 'made up' or 'Keith wrote it' ....he's lying his ass off. Whoever a song is about, Jagger will say anything to dodge the truth. That we can be sure of..
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-01-19 01:40 by stupidguy2.
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
elunsi
()
Date: January 19, 2012 09:54
Quote
Doxa
No, (it's not about Keith's heroin situation). I think that's just made up (laughs). I think that's rubbish. But you know, it's so long ago. People, they like to make up stories and whatever, what you believe happened at the time. I could tell you, I could make up all sorts of stuff about how Far Away Eyes was written - it wouldn't be correct, I'm sure, but it might sound good (laughs).
I wonder if that "people" who "make up stories and whatever what you believe happened at the time" but what "wouldn't be correct", but "might sound good" is a brief critisism to Keith direction...
- Doxa
Sure it is
Re: Is "Party Doll" great or cheesy?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: January 19, 2012 10:31
Quote
Doxa
While we are in it, is this great or cheesy...
More serious note: this is a key track to wittness the arrival of 'new' trained Jagger voice - that is so familiar nowadays - with that nasal-based colour in it, over-prononcation, reaching technically alright but a bit artificailly or unnaturally the melody lines. Some call it "struggled cat". Jagger very much attributed it to Dave Stewart who forced Mick to work his voice harder in this particular track in PRIMITIVE COOL..
- Doxa
The funny thing is that Beck is doing the very same classical guitar trick as Keith later would do on Almost Hear You Sigh.
Listen to both and tell me who's the cheesier one
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Casino Boogie , drwatts , fedecarp , filstan , ghs73 , Irix , josepi , mab1888 , Paddy , Racca1962 , rattler2004 , Steinschlag , UGK56 , willy80 , zowie
Guests:
1422
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10