Tell Me :
Talk
Doxa, history books don't just tell stories of the past. They rearrange the past and past events according to the 'needs' of the time they are written. The past is an open book. The Stones in 1968 - whatever that means to different people - would be a whole different thing if the Stones retired in 1969, 1976 or whenever. New meanings are attached to 'the Stones' of 1968 as they go onstage in 2012. It is actually an issue of different levels of experience. First-hand experience is just a level of experience. The meaning of past events only partially is based on first-hand experiences. I know you understand what I mean, because I'm always reading your posts!
Right you are
Well said - I think we just found a fan, thank you. runaway is trying to convince me I don't know what a fan is. Well its right here
didn't realize there were so many rules we had to follow....
Actually, like this, keep it simple - right on runaway
Thanks for your comment - which I think is quite similar as His Majesty's, and I reply to both of you with this post.
Perhaps I sounded like too much emphasizing the first-hand experience of the prime or golden years. I just wanted to point out the difference between being there at the time and 'reconstructing'´it afterwards. There is some immediate experience that is unique, which - of course - is also individual, and varies from person to person, and from country to country. For example, what The Stones were in UK was different that what the band was like being one token of British Invasion, then hitting hard with "Satisfaction" in USA. And how the band was seen, for example, in Finland was rather different to either to UK and US experiences. And this varies rather a lot all over the world.
But any experience - anywhere, anytime - of any music or pheneomen is as good as any other. There is no 'privileged' or more 'real' or 'authentic' experience. Listening to "Jumping Jack Flash" fresh in 1968 or 2012 doesn't matter: it is teh effect it causes that matters. To repeat myself: I just wanted to emphasize the difference between being part of the scene when the band was the hottest of the hottest, and each new single and album would blow people minds by being being current, relevant and part of the zeitgeist. And in that zeitgeist rock music had a rather strong social impact. That is something we post-80's fans can only fantasize. Our experiences are different - but of course, as 'good' as any other. It is also for this reason, I really enjoy reading people's 'memories' here in IORR - how they got to know the band and its music, and how they felt then.
To make one example (especially His Majesty in mind). Generally the Brian Jones years, especially the early years 1963-65, are neglected here in our dicussions. Especially Brian's guitar contributions are ignored or belittled, since, techically speaking, much of them are rather "era-defined", and not as easy approachable as, say, Taylor's or Wood's - or later Keith's - since the criteria and standard of musicianship was not so high yet, and the art of 'rock' guitar wasn't so developed as it very quickly did as the years go by. But that doesn't change the fact how hugely impressive and influential those - or like band's music - were at the time of their release. We all have now heard thousands of slide guitar and harmonica performances, but one can only imagine what it was like seeing and hearing this blonde guy doing such a thing then, on a record made in style no one ever had heard before. (And I need to add, if the reason to go crazy is just the guy and his looks, that's as valuable, authentic experience as any other).
The same goes for many of early Stones hits. I have personally heard many stories of people hearing for first time "The Last Time" or "Satisfaction" in the radio, and that totally blowing their mind. Yeah, maybe that migh happen still to a young hiphop kid even today (who skipped his music history courses at school), but still I claim that is different than having an audience who even theoretically have not any chance to have prior-experience or knowledge of that kind of stuff beforehand. Hearing a new song in the radio, knowing that this is the hottest, the most relevant thing today, and being totally hooked (like your friends)... being in those shoes, a part of that scene (I think the social dimension is an important part of the experience), is something we younger fans might never really grasp. Even though we can still hear the greatness, you needed to be there in 1965 to really got the revolutionary significance of those singles (and those guitar riffs). And then, desperately waiting for the next single to blow your mind (which it most likely did).
I totally agree with Kirk of history being an "open book". The known 'facts' are rather minimal (and boring) compared to the lots of interpretations, meanings, and whatever that makes The Stones story and music so fascinating (and 'seeing the past', that is, writing history, is still an on-going and ever-going process, as Kirk remarked)). There are many books and reports to look after, and to have different views and perspectives. I have tried to read that 'open book' with open mind (the best I can) I guess some 30 years now - and at the same trying to keep one eye on what's going on at the moment. I hope people understand that the words "book" and "reading" are used metaphorically here.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-22 11:01 by Doxa.
I think you do a little generalization error here, Dandy. Some people critizise some things, others some others, but I don't think there is one person who critizises everything. No, I think all of them love something very deeply in this band, that's why they are here, and that is what makes all of them fans.
By the way, I never have liked the very word "fan" - and the idea of arguing if someone likes something more than someone else does is really a dumb idea. "Hey, I am bigger fan of Marianne F's tits than you are!" "No, no, you really don't know what they mean to me!".
- Doxa
Well, maybe I shouldn't say "lots of people", because my point was focusing on the people who indeed are negative to (almost) everything the band does or not does.
For instance, there are people here who wants Mick to focus more on SuperHeavy than the Stones. There are people here who detest today's Stones. There are people here who can't stand Mick and Keith working together again, and so on...
Are these people fans? Of course they are. Still, it shows how hard it is for a huge band like the Stones to please their fans.
Some people like the Brussels box-set, others are enjoying the Toronto-release.
This is a "fan club", but there are other words for fan - like supporter, patriot or follower - pick yours, Doxa
Hard core!
Awesome post!!!
At the gate as you enter any of the 4 shows. These badges are banded inside!
Sorry, Tele, no can do.
Actually you qualify both definitions of 'real fan' made by emotionalbarbeque and superrevy: you were there when the actual story was written (when the Stones made contemporarily relevant music), and you are a casual fan who go to see an expensive Vegas show out of curiosity...
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-23 10:41 by Doxa.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
Kirk
()
Date: October 21, 2012 22:01
Quote
Doxa
Hmmm.. you Emotionalbarbeque come and say stoppong the fight over fanhood, and then you claim that most of us are not 'real fans'. Very diplomatic.
But that said, I think you have a point. Quite many of us didn't have chances for 'authentic' first-hand fan experiences, when the Stones actually made history and dictated the zeitgeist. It is like reading history books now.
- Doxa
Doxa, history books don't just tell stories of the past. They rearrange the past and past events according to the 'needs' of the time they are written. The past is an open book. The Stones in 1968 - whatever that means to different people - would be a whole different thing if the Stones retired in 1969, 1976 or whenever. New meanings are attached to 'the Stones' of 1968 as they go onstage in 2012. It is actually an issue of different levels of experience. First-hand experience is just a level of experience. The meaning of past events only partially is based on first-hand experiences. I know you understand what I mean, because I'm always reading your posts!
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
Erik_Snow
()
Date: October 21, 2012 22:01
Quote
runaway
A Fan is An Enthiousiastic Admirer!
Doesn't say nothing about the Age
Doens't say nothing about how many concerts you visited
Doesn't say nothing about how many records you got
Right you are
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
runaway
()
Date: October 21, 2012 22:06
I know what they are but you don'tQuote
2000 LYFHQuote
runawayQuote
2000 LYFH
Honestman - Nice photos as always, but certainly no fans in any of those pictures. Keep trying, the true fan is out there somewhere, but where?
2000 LYFH,
No fans but how would you like to call them?
And how does a fan look like then towards you?
I know what they are not, but I don't know what they are! What was the question?
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
memphiscats
()
Date: October 21, 2012 22:10
Great photos & fascinating discussion.
The upside of being a Rolling Stones fan.
Discussing the smallest detail with like-minded strangers who've started to feel like friends. And as chaotic as life gets, you can always put on your favorite Stones album and for a little while, all is right with the world. You foot taps out the beat and before you know it, you're smiling because the excitement and joy of their music rock together make things OK again.
As His Majesty pointed out, it's about connection. (sounds like a Stones song)
Lately it's a bit rough being a fan. We have to share them with so many. It's hurtful when you've spent time and energy loving something and to feel like that "something" might have rejected you. Point in case = Concert tix $$$$. But that doesn't matter because even the Stones themselves can't take away their music, the gifts they gave us cannot be rescinded.
That said, I'm proud to be a Stones fan.
The upside of being a Rolling Stones fan.
Discussing the smallest detail with like-minded strangers who've started to feel like friends. And as chaotic as life gets, you can always put on your favorite Stones album and for a little while, all is right with the world. You foot taps out the beat and before you know it, you're smiling because the excitement and joy of their music rock together make things OK again.
As His Majesty pointed out, it's about connection. (sounds like a Stones song
)Lately it's a bit rough being a fan. We have to share them with so many. It's hurtful when you've spent time and energy loving something and to feel like that "something" might have rejected you. Point in case = Concert tix $$$$. But that doesn't matter because even the Stones themselves can't take away their music, the gifts they gave us cannot be rescinded.
That said, I'm proud to be a Stones fan.
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
2000 LYFH
()
Date: October 21, 2012 22:20
Quote
memphiscats
Great photos & fascinating discussion.
The upside of being a Rolling Stones fan.
Discussing the smallest detail with like-minded strangers who've started to feel like friends. And as chaotic as life gets, you can always put on your favorite Stones album and for a little while, all is right with the world. You foot taps out the beat and before you know it, you're smiling because the excitement and joy of their music rock together make things OK again.
As His Majesty pointed out, it's about connection. (sounds like a Stones song
Lately it's a bit rough being a fan. We have to share them with so many. It's hurtful when you've spent time and energy loving something and to feel like that "something" might have rejected you. Point in case = Concert tix $$$$. But that doesn't matter because even the Stones themselves can't take away their music, the gifts they gave us cannot be rescinded.
That said, I'm proud to be a Stones fan.
Well said - I think we just found a fan, thank you. runaway is trying to convince me I don't know what a fan is. Well its right here
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
runaway
()
Date: October 21, 2012 22:27
I drink one right now CHEERS& PEACEQuote
2000 LYFHQuote
memphiscats
Great photos & fascinating discussion.
The upside of being a Rolling Stones fan.
Discussing the smallest detail with like-minded strangers who've started to feel like friends. And as chaotic as life gets, you can always put on your favorite Stones album and for a little while, all is right with the world. You foot taps out the beat and before you know it, you're smiling because the excitement and joy of their music rock together make things OK again.
As His Majesty pointed out, it's about connection. (sounds like a Stones song
Lately it's a bit rough being a fan. We have to share them with so many. It's hurtful when you've spent time and energy loving something and to feel like that "something" might have rejected you. Point in case = Concert tix $$$$. But that doesn't matter because even the Stones themselves can't take away their music, the gifts they gave us cannot be rescinded.
That said, I'm proud to be a Stones fan.
Well said - I think we just found a fan, thank you. runaway is trying to convince me I don't know what a fan is. Well its right here
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
lunar!!!
()
Date: October 21, 2012 22:37
Quote
emotionalbarbecue
After reading the bitterness and whining and all...
Let's put it into perspective my friends...
Being purist....a real fan is a fan who knew the Stones since the sixties....
Those who get on the wagon from the 80's onwards....would not not really fans then. It does not matter if they got on the wagon becouse of biological reasons (you were born in late sixties or seventies...). I mean,..if by the time Undercover was released you were in kindergarten.....you lost everything related to stones....every piece of the real thing.
Subsequently the being a fan issue stems from reading books,watching videos, hearing recordings, bootlegs and more importantly imagination and fantasy (and experiences like writing in IORR!)....but not from real life...
So the concept FAN must be revised....and all people here giving lessons, lectures and telling of others....chill out...please.
Most of people who write (myself perhaps....who knows...AND OF COURSE most of the respected "experts" who think they are entitled to give lessons) here have not idea of NOTHING, NO F IDEA. nothing, nihil, nada, no (swear word here) IDEA....No one's to blame....but the longevity of this band and biology.The best ever existed.
didn't realize there were so many rules we had to follow....
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: October 21, 2012 23:06
Either you´re a fan, or you´re not.
Seemingly, lots of people have lost the little last tad of fandom, imo.
Seemingly, lots of people have lost the little last tad of fandom, imo.
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
LuvGlimmerTwins
()
Date: October 21, 2012 23:18
I'm a Rolling Stones FANatic 
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
2000 LYFH
()
Date: October 21, 2012 23:24
Quote
Erik_SnowQuote
runaway
A Fan is An Enthiousiastic Admirer!
Doesn't say nothing about the Age
Doens't say nothing about how many concerts you visited
Doesn't say nothing about how many records you got
Right you are
Actually, like this, keep it simple - right on runaway
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: October 21, 2012 23:26
She looks like fun.
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
vudicus
()
Date: October 21, 2012 23:28
Fan = Fanatical.
x
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2015-11-21 16:25 by vudicus.
x
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2015-11-21 16:25 by vudicus.
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
spain73
()
Date: October 21, 2012 23:29
Born in 1973, not real fan, gonna remove my tattoo.... it's gonna hurt, ough!
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: October 21, 2012 23:55
Real fans never mention wigs.
And neither do I.
And neither do I.
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
shortfatfanny
()
Date: October 22, 2012 00:57
A fight ? Did I miss something ? Damned...
Aaaargggghhhh....those emotional hooligans....
Aaaargggghhhh....those emotional hooligans....
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: October 22, 2012 01:52
Quote
KirkQuote
Doxa
Hmmm.. you Emotionalbarbeque come and say stoppong the fight over fanhood, and then you claim that most of us are not 'real fans'. Very diplomatic.
But that said, I think you have a point. Quite many of us didn't have chances for 'authentic' first-hand fan experiences, when the Stones actually made history and dictated the zeitgeist. It is like reading history books now.
- Doxa
Doxa, history books don't just tell stories of the past. They rearrange the past and past events according to the 'needs' of the time they are written. The past is an open book. The Stones in 1968 - whatever that means to different people - would be a whole different thing if the Stones retired in 1969, 1976 or whenever. New meanings are attached to 'the Stones' of 1968 as they go onstage in 2012. It is actually an issue of different levels of experience. First-hand experience is just a level of experience. The meaning of past events only partially is based on first-hand experiences. I know you understand what I mean, because I'm always reading your posts!
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: October 22, 2012 10:43
Quote
KirkQuote
Doxa
Hmmm.. you Emotionalbarbeque come and say stoppong the fight over fanhood, and then you claim that most of us are not 'real fans'. Very diplomatic.
But that said, I think you have a point. Quite many of us didn't have chances for 'authentic' first-hand fan experiences, when the Stones actually made history and dictated the zeitgeist. It is like reading history books now.
- Doxa
Doxa, history books don't just tell stories of the past. They rearrange the past and past events according to the 'needs' of the time they are written. The past is an open book. The Stones in 1968 - whatever that means to different people - would be a whole different thing if the Stones retired in 1969, 1976 or whenever. New meanings are attached to 'the Stones' of 1968 as they go onstage in 2012. It is actually an issue of different levels of experience. First-hand experience is just a level of experience. The meaning of past events only partially is based on first-hand experiences. I know you understand what I mean, because I'm always reading your posts!
Thanks for your comment - which I think is quite similar as His Majesty's, and I reply to both of you with this post.
Perhaps I sounded like too much emphasizing the first-hand experience of the prime or golden years. I just wanted to point out the difference between being there at the time and 'reconstructing'´it afterwards. There is some immediate experience that is unique, which - of course - is also individual, and varies from person to person, and from country to country. For example, what The Stones were in UK was different that what the band was like being one token of British Invasion, then hitting hard with "Satisfaction" in USA. And how the band was seen, for example, in Finland was rather different to either to UK and US experiences. And this varies rather a lot all over the world.
But any experience - anywhere, anytime - of any music or pheneomen is as good as any other. There is no 'privileged' or more 'real' or 'authentic' experience. Listening to "Jumping Jack Flash" fresh in 1968 or 2012 doesn't matter: it is teh effect it causes that matters. To repeat myself: I just wanted to emphasize the difference between being part of the scene when the band was the hottest of the hottest, and each new single and album would blow people minds by being being current, relevant and part of the zeitgeist. And in that zeitgeist rock music had a rather strong social impact. That is something we post-80's fans can only fantasize. Our experiences are different - but of course, as 'good' as any other. It is also for this reason, I really enjoy reading people's 'memories' here in IORR - how they got to know the band and its music, and how they felt then.
To make one example (especially His Majesty in mind). Generally the Brian Jones years, especially the early years 1963-65, are neglected here in our dicussions. Especially Brian's guitar contributions are ignored or belittled, since, techically speaking, much of them are rather "era-defined", and not as easy approachable as, say, Taylor's or Wood's - or later Keith's - since the criteria and standard of musicianship was not so high yet, and the art of 'rock' guitar wasn't so developed as it very quickly did as the years go by. But that doesn't change the fact how hugely impressive and influential those - or like band's music - were at the time of their release. We all have now heard thousands of slide guitar and harmonica performances, but one can only imagine what it was like seeing and hearing this blonde guy doing such a thing then, on a record made in style no one ever had heard before. (And I need to add, if the reason to go crazy is just the guy and his looks, that's as valuable, authentic experience as any other).
The same goes for many of early Stones hits. I have personally heard many stories of people hearing for first time "The Last Time" or "Satisfaction" in the radio, and that totally blowing their mind. Yeah, maybe that migh happen still to a young hiphop kid even today (who skipped his music history courses at school), but still I claim that is different than having an audience who even theoretically have not any chance to have prior-experience or knowledge of that kind of stuff beforehand. Hearing a new song in the radio, knowing that this is the hottest, the most relevant thing today, and being totally hooked (like your friends)... being in those shoes, a part of that scene (I think the social dimension is an important part of the experience), is something we younger fans might never really grasp. Even though we can still hear the greatness, you needed to be there in 1965 to really got the revolutionary significance of those singles (and those guitar riffs). And then, desperately waiting for the next single to blow your mind (which it most likely did).
I totally agree with Kirk of history being an "open book". The known 'facts' are rather minimal (and boring) compared to the lots of interpretations, meanings, and whatever that makes The Stones story and music so fascinating (and 'seeing the past', that is, writing history, is still an on-going and ever-going process, as Kirk remarked)). There are many books and reports to look after, and to have different views and perspectives. I have tried to read that 'open book' with open mind (the best I can) I guess some 30 years now - and at the same trying to keep one eye on what's going on at the moment. I hope people understand that the words "book" and "reading" are used metaphorically here.
- Doxa
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-22 11:01 by Doxa.
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: October 22, 2012 10:57
It's rather simple. Fans support the band, either by listening to the band's music or attending their shows.
Lots of people here are not supporting the Stones at all, on the contrary, they're criticizing everything they do. Even D&G is shite. Doing concerts are shite, they should have packed it up long time ago...
If they play in stadiums, that's wrong. If they play in arenas, it's too expensive (which is indeed true, though).
Sometimes I wonder what the Stones can do, that these "fans" will accept...
Hey, some jerk here even thought I was disqualified to bring my opinion about music in general, because I said the Stones was my favourite band, and that D & G was the best rock track released this year
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-22 11:06 by DandelionPowderman.
Lots of people here are not supporting the Stones at all, on the contrary, they're criticizing everything they do. Even D&G is shite. Doing concerts are shite, they should have packed it up long time ago...
If they play in stadiums, that's wrong. If they play in arenas, it's too expensive (which is indeed true, though).
Sometimes I wonder what the Stones can do, that these "fans" will accept...
Hey, some jerk here even thought I was disqualified to bring my opinion about music in general, because I said the Stones was my favourite band, and that D & G was the best rock track released this year
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-22 11:06 by DandelionPowderman.
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: October 22, 2012 11:26
Quote
DandelionPowderman
It's rather simple. Fans support the band, either by listening to the band's music or attending their shows.
Lots of people here are not supporting the Stones at all, on the contrary, they're criticizing everything they do. Even D&G is shite. Doing concerts are shite, they should have packed it up long time ago...
If they play in stadiums, that's wrong. If they play in arenas, it's too expensive (which is indeed true, though).
Sometimes I wonder what the Stones can do, that these "fans" will accept...
Hey, some jerk here even thought I was disqualified to bring my opinion about music in general, because I said the Stones was my favourite band, and that D & G was the best rock track released this year
I think you do a little generalization error here, Dandy. Some people critizise some things, others some others, but I don't think there is one person who critizises everything. No, I think all of them love something very deeply in this band, that's why they are here, and that is what makes all of them fans.
By the way, I never have liked the very word "fan" - and the idea of arguing if someone likes something more than someone else does is really a dumb idea. "Hey, I am bigger fan of Marianne F's tits than you are!" "No, no, you really don't know what they mean to me!".
- Doxa
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: October 22, 2012 11:37
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
It's rather simple. Fans support the band, either by listening to the band's music or attending their shows.
Lots of people here are not supporting the Stones at all, on the contrary, they're criticizing everything they do. Even D&G is shite. Doing concerts are shite, they should have packed it up long time ago...
If they play in stadiums, that's wrong. If they play in arenas, it's too expensive (which is indeed true, though).
Sometimes I wonder what the Stones can do, that these "fans" will accept...
Hey, some jerk here even thought I was disqualified to bring my opinion about music in general, because I said the Stones was my favourite band, and that D & G was the best rock track released this year
I think you do a little generalization error here, Dandy. Some people critizise some things, others some others, but I don't think there is one person who critizises everything. No, I think all of them love something very deeply in this band, that's why they are here, and that is what makes all of them fans.
By the way, I never have liked the very word "fan" - and the idea of arguing if someone likes something more than someone else does is really a dumb idea. "Hey, I am bigger fan of Marianne F's tits than you are!" "No, no, you really don't know what they mean to me!".
- Doxa
Well, maybe I shouldn't say "lots of people", because my point was focusing on the people who indeed are negative to (almost) everything the band does or not does.
For instance, there are people here who wants Mick to focus more on SuperHeavy than the Stones. There are people here who detest today's Stones. There are people here who can't stand Mick and Keith working together again, and so on...
Are these people fans? Of course they are. Still, it shows how hard it is for a huge band like the Stones to please their fans.
Some people like the Brussels box-set, others are enjoying the Toronto-release.
This is a "fan club", but there are other words for fan - like supporter, patriot or follower - pick yours, Doxa
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
MartinB
()
Date: October 22, 2012 12:10
I must have seen several hundreds of bands, famous and not famous. But even in the most decadent the Vegas era (I did not experience the 60s or 70s), no other band's music has ever managed to elicit the same emotions in me as the stones. Perhaps only one or two songs in a show, but despite being old, greedy and sometimes almost a parody of themeselves, their music is unimitable. It is not logical or rational. Is this being a fan?
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: October 22, 2012 12:18
Quote
MartinB
I must have seen several hundreds of bands, famous and not famous. But even in the most decadent the Vegas era (I did not experience the 60s or 70s), no other band's music has ever managed to elicit the same emotions in me as the stones. Perhaps only one or two songs in a show, but despite being old, greedy and sometimes almost a parody of themeselves, their music is unimitable. It is not logical or rational. Is this being a fan?
Hard core!
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
Witness
()
Date: October 22, 2012 12:50
Quote
Doxa on October 22, 2012, 10:43
Awesome post!!!
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: October 22, 2012 17:21
Where can I return my "real fan" badge to?
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
2000 LYFH
()
Date: October 22, 2012 17:24
Quote
71Tele
Where can I return my "real fan" badge to?
At the gate as you enter any of the 4 shows. These badges are banded inside!
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: October 23, 2012 10:39
Quote
71Tele
Where can I return my "real fan" badge to?
Sorry, Tele, no can do.
Actually you qualify both definitions of 'real fan' made by emotionalbarbeque and superrevy: you were there when the actual story was written (when the Stones made contemporarily relevant music), and you are a casual fan who go to see an expensive Vegas show out of curiosity...
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-23 10:41 by Doxa.
Re: What's being a fan....(STOP THE FIGHT)
Posted by:
Grison
()
Date: October 23, 2012 11:51
a Fan?
Am I none, because I go and spoil my money for the London shows?
Am I one, because I can go to the London shows and others can't?
The big discussions about a real fan in this forum started out, because of Money and not because of Music.
So at the end Rock and Roll became along with other modern music the most materialistic cultural output since it started, and not only today.
Despite the fact that we envy those people who have experienced and survived the 60ies or even 70ies (which I stand for) Money was an issue from the first very moment. Not because of the musicians, but because of the Record industry which saw the biggest potential in young people.
I would not considder myself a fan, but a follower since the very early 70ies and I remember even back in 1976 there have been reports in some newspapers about the horrendous ticketprices of the Stones. Again in 1982 etc etc. It never stopped.
It couldn't stop because we have been able to follow and accepted to pay the price being a follower and/or fan.
Today the 4 concerts do not judge you whether you are a fan, a follower, a supporter, whether you can or you can't or not willing to buy the tickets. But again there are hundreds of staffpeople to be paid, there are so many inside people who try to earn some money out of this cash cow, that so many people are left out who just are not able or not willing to pay the price.
However, even if you envy the tie people of Saville Row and/or Fleet Street who manage to buy such high price tickets, it won't help. Perhaps there are also some true fans who just made another career than others did. Don't judge if you don't really know.
... on with the mighty show....
Am I none, because I go and spoil my money for the London shows?
Am I one, because I can go to the London shows and others can't?
The big discussions about a real fan in this forum started out, because of Money and not because of Music.
So at the end Rock and Roll became along with other modern music the most materialistic cultural output since it started, and not only today.
Despite the fact that we envy those people who have experienced and survived the 60ies or even 70ies (which I stand for) Money was an issue from the first very moment. Not because of the musicians, but because of the Record industry which saw the biggest potential in young people.
I would not considder myself a fan, but a follower since the very early 70ies and I remember even back in 1976 there have been reports in some newspapers about the horrendous ticketprices of the Stones. Again in 1982 etc etc. It never stopped.
It couldn't stop because we have been able to follow and accepted to pay the price being a follower and/or fan.
Today the 4 concerts do not judge you whether you are a fan, a follower, a supporter, whether you can or you can't or not willing to buy the tickets. But again there are hundreds of staffpeople to be paid, there are so many inside people who try to earn some money out of this cash cow, that so many people are left out who just are not able or not willing to pay the price.
However, even if you envy the tie people of Saville Row and/or Fleet Street who manage to buy such high price tickets, it won't help. Perhaps there are also some true fans who just made another career than others did. Don't judge if you don't really know.
... on with the mighty show....
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
BeastyBurdeny , gotdablouse , jumpingjackflash5 , keefmick , Kevinstones78 , latvianinexile , mariano , mr_c_ox , rastakeith , wickerman
Guests:
1733
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10