Rolling Stones best Live Band...Really? No hungry younger bands out there somewhere...

2 1 2 0

.... Crossfire part two.... nice....



ROCKMAN

Nice job Ronnie....Thanks for posting..

Interesting - it tells quite a lot of good ol' NME to give such awards to a nostalgia act. They have softened, right? Actually I think that speaks something of the times we live in. Not even NME can continue with their old "we hate old acts" attitude they've been famous for decades now. Since the market in music business, especially in rock music, is not what it used to be, also they need to accept the fact that the potential buying audience, which is still somehow interested in their stuff, is getting older. Or to put it in othee terms: even they cannot ignore the nostalgia market if they are going to remain competent (or alive) in their business.

- Doxa

I'm curious as to why they would use such a dumb looking award. Who is the middle finger directed towards? and did a 16 year old punk kid in high school design it?

Quote
Doxa
Interesting - it tells quite a lot of good ol' NME to give such awards to a nostalgia act. They have softened, right? Actually I think that speaks something of the times we live in. Not even NME can continue with their old "we hate old acts" attitude they've been famous for decades now. Since the market in music business, especially in rock music, is not what it used to be, also they need to accept the fact that the potential buying audience, which is still somehow interested in their stuff, is getting older. Or to put it in othee terms: even they cannot ignore the nostalgia market if they are going to remain competent (or alive) in their business.

- Doxa

hey, Doxa, glad to see you're back!
btw, it's not NME' stuff award but people's choice - that's mean all these stupid rules about "nostalgia" and "relevant" start to blur

Hey Noel hates Bowie's new video!

Doxa has it right: it is interesting to not the music paper's recent turnaround regarding their appreciation of 'older acts' Since the first issue, some 50+ years ago, they've always focused almost exclusively on what they perceive to be 'current' From Elvis and The Beatles, to The Sex Pistols and The Strokes. It's a rag for students, though. As a man approaching 30, I would feel silly buying it now.

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
I'm curious as to why they would use such a dumb looking award. Who is the middle finger directed towards? and did a 16 year old punk kid in high school design it?

I wondered about that too, but I guess Britain/Europe can get away with that. They would never present an award that looked like that on national TV here in the US, the public and then FCC would be up in arms if they tried.

Quote
latebloomer

I wondered about that too, but I guess Britain/Europe can get away with that. They would never present an award that looked like that on national TV here in the US, the public and then FCC would be up in arms if they tried.

I agree. It's, cheap, tacky, and embarrassing, IMO.

Quote
proudmary

Quote
Doxa
Interesting - it tells quite a lot of good ol' NME to give such awards to a nostalgia act. They have softened, right? Actually I think that speaks something of the times we live in. Not even NME can continue with their old "we hate old acts" attitude they've been famous for decades now. Since the market in music business, especially in rock music, is not what it used to be, also they need to accept the fact that the potential buying audience, which is still somehow interested in their stuff, is getting older. Or to put it in othee terms: even they cannot ignore the nostalgia market if they are going to remain competent (or alive) in their business.

- Doxa

hey, Doxa, glad to see you're back!
btw, it's not NME' stuff award but people's choice - that's mean all these stupid rules about "nostalgia" and "relevant" start to blur

Hi, sweetie! Just checking here what's going on, and couldn't resist saying something...

I don't konw if it's people's choice or some damn jury. Just nostalgia or musical conservatism in different form. Anyways, the Stones have had more positive hype in their home country than for ages, so I suppose the "cold English blood has run hot" for them now - they've been recognized as a cultural "institution" (Ronnie's corny quote from last summer), mostly I guess due to hype over their London shows. Also the sales of GRRR! speaks volumes that they are "hot" in their home ground - it has sold, relatively speking, better there than nowhere else, if I am not totally wrong with my random observations).

Personally I think their shows were a bore, or, say, "nothing new under the sun" to make any difference (and I suppose anyone with any kind of objective eye should agree with). I guess the shows were (a) entertaining if one is keen on nostalgia, or (2) interesting if one is such a die hard Rolling Stones fan that can recognize if they play one inch inch better than they did in 2007 or 2003. But to make that "best live act of the year" is a joke, But life, and pools like that, is a joke... Good ol' NME wouldn't even nominated them...

You know, Proud Mary, I suppose I sometime feel pretty much connected to Mick Jagger in his overt hatred towards "nostalgia". There is just so much cheapness, free riding, in it...

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-06 19:05 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa
...I suppose I sometime feel pretty much connected to Mick Jagger in his overt hatred towards "nostalgia". There is just so much cheapness, free riding, in it...

- Doxa

He may say he hates it, but he isn't adverse to following the money, and there's plenty to be had in that old nostalgia biz...eh?

Quote
Big Al
Doxa has it right: it is interesting to not the music paper's recent turnaround regarding their appreciation of 'older acts' Since the first issue, some 50+ years ago, they've always focused almost exclusively on what they perceive to be 'current' From Elvis and The Beatles, to The Sex Pistols and The Strokes. It's a rag for students, though. As a man approaching 30, I would feel silly buying it now.

Exactly, you get my point. I haven't read (exclusively) the paper for ages either. So I think the Stones - and looking Ronnie's heavy involvement in those pages - getting such a recognition in a such a context speaks volumes more of the paper than of The Stones. The conclusion that a "classic rock" act like the Stones is now "relevant", a "hot" again among younger crowds or something, is just a fallacy. It tells more like that NME is in its way to the territory of MOJO or UNCUT. I guess the money speaks there.

- Doxa

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Doxa
...I suppose I sometime feel pretty much connected to Mick Jagger in his overt hatred towards "nostalgia". There is just so much cheapness, free riding, in it...

- Doxa

He may say he hates it, but he isn't adverse to following the money, and there's plenty to be had in that old nostalgia biz...eh?

Yeah, we - who have had urge and enough money from 1989 on to follow them - do really well know that... But I think Jagger is sincere in his feelings, but, knowing his hunger for money and success there is just too much to gain in nostagia business, so he can't really follow his true feelings...

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-06 19:30 by Doxa.

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Doxa
...I suppose I sometime feel pretty much connected to Mick Jagger in his overt hatred towards "nostalgia". There is just so much cheapness, free riding, in it...

- Doxa

He may say he hates it, but he isn't adverse to following the money, and there's plenty to be had in that old nostalgia biz...eh?

I've never understood this argument. You can say that people who listen to Schubert or watch Chekhov - do it for the nostalgic reasons. in recent Stones concerts was nostalgia as much as in the jubilee performance of Swan Lake or Threepenny Opera.

Welcome back Doxa, although I must say you've robbed me the opportunity for creating a brand new thread called 'Doxa?', in keeping with our new tradition of creating threads with only one word and a question mark.

Things just keep evolving here on IORR.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Doxa
...I suppose I sometime feel pretty much connected to Mick Jagger in his overt hatred towards "nostalgia". There is just so much cheapness, free riding, in it...

- Doxa

He may say he hates it, but he isn't adverse to following the money, and there's plenty to be had in that old nostalgia biz...eh?

Yeah, we - who have had urge and enough money from from 1989 on to follow them - do really well know that... But I think Jagger is sincere in his feelings, but, knowing his for hunger money and success there is just too much to gain in nostagia business, so he can't really follow his true feelings...

- Doxa

You are generous in your assessment of Mick's feelings about nostalgia, I think he's more the hard-headed business man here, but I wouldn't discount the possibility that he has mellowed in that regard. I think many people, as they grow old, begin to look back wistfully toward the things they did in their youth. I don't think Mick Jagger is immune to that feeling.

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Doxa

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Doxa
...I suppose I sometime feel pretty much connected to Mick Jagger in his overt hatred towards "nostalgia". There is just so much cheapness, free riding, in it...

- Doxa

He may say he hates it, but he isn't adverse to following the money, and there's plenty to be had in that old nostalgia biz...eh?

Yeah, we - who have had urge and enough money from from 1989 on to follow them - do really well know that... But I think Jagger is sincere in his feelings, but, knowing his for hunger money and success there is just too much to gain in nostagia business, so he can't really follow his true feelings...

- Doxa

You are generous in your assessment of Mick's feelings about nostalgia, I think he's more the hard-headed business man here, but I wouldn't discount the possibility that he has mellowed in that regard. I think many people, as they grow old, begin to look back wistfully toward the things they did in their youth. I don't think Mick Jagger is immune to that feeling.

or he really likes these songs - how do you think this could be?

Quote
proudmary

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Doxa

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Doxa
...I suppose I sometime feel pretty much connected to Mick Jagger in his overt hatred towards "nostalgia". There is just so much cheapness, free riding, in it...

- Doxa

He may say he hates it, but he isn't adverse to following the money, and there's plenty to be had in that old nostalgia biz...eh?

Yeah, we - who have had urge and enough money from from 1989 on to follow them - do really well know that... But I think Jagger is sincere in his feelings, but, knowing his for hunger money and success there is just too much to gain in nostagia business, so he can't really follow his true feelings...

- Doxa

You are generous in your assessment of Mick's feelings about nostalgia, I think he's more the hard-headed business man here, but I wouldn't discount the possibility that he has mellowed in that regard. I think many people, as they grow old, begin to look back wistfully toward the things they did in their youth. I don't think Mick Jagger is immune to that feeling.

or he really likes these songs - how do you think this could be?

I have no doubt proudmary, but I think that goes along a bit with nostalgia, wanting to relive those moments one is most proud of and likes the most. Sort of like an old person who loves to re-tell the best stories of their youth. In Mick's case, I would say he has every reason to like those songs, and that goes for Keith, Charlie, and Ronnie too. I would love for them to do a great album of new material, but I do understand that the nostalgia act may be what they have left in them and what they want to do.

Quote
proudmary

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Doxa
...I suppose I sometime feel pretty much connected to Mick Jagger in his overt hatred towards "nostalgia". There is just so much cheapness, free riding, in it...

- Doxa

He may say he hates it, but he isn't adverse to following the money, and there's plenty to be had in that old nostalgia biz...eh?

I've never understood this argument. You can say that people who listen to Schubert or watch Chekhov - do it for the nostalgic reasons. in recent Stones concerts was nostalgia as much as in the jubilee performance of Swan Lake or Threepenny Opera.

You don't see much Schubert or Chekhov try act like to they used to be these days, now do you?

With the Stones - who are pop stars - I think more suitable analogy is to some athletics who try to still perform in the top level even though their heyday is more far than now anyone remembers. When watching the Stones in that "One More Shot" televison show I felt like watching some years back Björn Borg in some senior tournament. Yeah, Borg played tennis as it supposed to play as the Stones played their songs, but both were as faraway cries from what they used to be. But in pop...well, "classic rock" business, the senior tournamants are the places where the big money is, unlike in top sports.

The term to explain this anomaly is "nostalgia": the Stones try to present an act like it used to be, an impression what they once upon time ago were like - not what they are now (unlike, say,Dylan, Clapton, McCartney,etc ). What I dislike in nostalgia is that there is no artistic drive in it - to watch around, to grow up, to evolve. Just looking back. It's artistically speaking a cheap shot.

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Doxa
...I suppose I sometime feel pretty much connected to Mick Jagger in his overt hatred towards "nostalgia". There is just so much cheapness, free riding, in it...

- Doxa

He may say he hates it, but he isn't adverse to following the money, and there's plenty to be had in that old nostalgia biz...eh?

Yeah, we - who have had urge and enough money from 1989 on to follow them - do really well know that... But I think Jagger is sincere in his feelings, but, knowing his hunger for money and success there is just too much to gain in nostagia business, so he can't really follow his true feelings...

- Doxa

I don't think it is a question of "his hunger for money", but rather his wish to continue to be part of a major rock band that can play stadiums. If they did not satisfy the nostalgia of their aging audiences, he probably soon would have been heading back to small scale audiences. Even those might have fallen apart under such a scenario.

So, in my perspective, for decades, the problem about the Stones seemingly bent on nostalgia, warhorses dominating setlists and the "Las Vegas" tag has not applied to the band, but with the Stones audiences. The audiences that for for so long have not wished to be listening to songs from newmade albums during concerts

It makes me cringe seeing Ronnie with all those crap indie bands. I supose he's just having a good time, lapping up the compliments and humouring them, probably hasn't a clue who they are. Thank God the other 3 kept away.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-06 20:25 by brownsugar86.

At least with the Stones you still get glimpses of their former greatness and a young person seeing them for the first time could understand why once upon a time they were the greatest band in the world, whereas if you took that same young personto see Dylan now or played them one of his last three albums, there is nothing there to even hint at the fact that this guy is one of the most important figures in the history of popular music.

Quote
Witness

Quote
Doxa

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Doxa
...I suppose I sometime feel pretty much connected to Mick Jagger in his overt hatred towards "nostalgia". There is just so much cheapness, free riding, in it...

- Doxa

He may say he hates it, but he isn't adverse to following the money, and there's plenty to be had in that old nostalgia biz...eh?

Yeah, we - who have had urge and enough money from 1989 on to follow them - do really well know that... But I think Jagger is sincere in his feelings, but, knowing his hunger for money and success there is just too much to gain in nostagia business, so he can't really follow his true feelings...

- Doxa

I don't think it is a question of "his hunger for money", but rather his wish to continue to be part of a major rock band that can play stadiums. If they did not satisfy the nostalgia of their aging audiences, he probably soon would have been heading back to small scale audiences. Even those might have fallen apart under such a scenario.

So, in my perspective, for decades, the problem about the Stones seemingly bent on nostalgia, warhorses dominating setlists and the "Las Vegas" tag has not applied to the band, but with the Stones audiences. The audiences that for for so long have not wished to be listening to songs from newmade albums during concerts

I agree. What I meant with "hunger for money and success", was the point you made: Jagger wants to be a big star, to fill up the stadiums, and I think all his "artistic drives" are second to that. That's why The Stones "exist" today (I wish he had been more brave back in the 80's and really tried harder for that solo career option, which still had a sort of muse in it.) I think you are also spot on that is the taste of his audiences that he takes as his guidance. Back in the day - when he and the Stones made great, earth-breaking music, noted even in NME - that's was the only option to survive, to be "big". You need to evolve, to re-invent oneself to stay big in the business. But as when his audiences got older, and more conservative (and wealthy), that wasn't any longer the case. Actually it turned out to be the opposite. More "classical" sounding it was, the better it was. Jagger learned that hard way during the 80's. He has played his cards very safe and sure ever since. The Stones, in many ways, reflect the times very well. If they once were the "rebellious band", and then "the greatest rock and roll band in the world" (when the term had a meaning), they now are a perfect "classical rock band" with all its conservative, nostalgic connotations involved.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-06 21:39 by Doxa.

Quote
treaclefingers
Welcome back Doxa, although I must say you've robbed me the opportunity for creating a brand new thread called 'Doxa?', in keeping with our new tradition of creating threads with only one word and a question mark.

Things just keep evolving here on IORR.

Thanks. But let's say I'm just making a brief cameo. I remember the moderator once writing that if you don't have anything positive (I take that to be "non-critical") to say, don't write at all. This principle seems to internalized in this site perfectly nowadays. The point is that I don't feel at all connected to the music or anything the Rolling Stones nowadays represents, so I don't see any point in spoiling the party here. I guess my posts in this thread is a good indication of my "stance".

Actually I made sometime ago a long review of CROSSFIRE HURRICANE and ONE MORE SHOT show but then I decided not to post them here, since I came to the conclusion that that kind of "critical" talk does not suit to the atmosphere of this site any longer. No "whining" and "trolling"...

- Doxa

It makes me chuckle when I see people taking this message board a tad too seriously. This isn't the United Nations General Assembly!

This isn't the United Nations General Assembly! .... yeah but that's friggin' joke anyway...but I get what ya sayin'



ROCKMAN

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo
It makes me chuckle when I see people taking this message board a tad too seriously. This isn't the United Nations General Assembly!

Do you actually have a point or do you try to be funny/clever?

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa

Quote
treaclefingers
Welcome back Doxa, although I must say you've robbed me the opportunity for creating a brand new thread called 'Doxa?', in keeping with our new tradition of creating threads with only one word and a question mark.

Things just keep evolving here on IORR.

if you don't have anything positive (I take that to be "non-critical") to say, don't write at all. This principle seems to internalized in this site perfectly nowadays. The point is that I don't feel at all connected to the music or anything the Rolling Stones nowadays represents, so I don't see any point in spoiling the party here. I guess my posts in this thread is a good indication of my "stance".


- Doxa

If we all felt like that, there would probably be about 8 people who regularly posted here....well, only one really, the MightyStonesStillRollingLondonKidsStreetRuleStonesCrowJumpinJackoLanternRollingMightyStones50Watchman (with apologies to all the other pseudonyms I've forgotten)

You have to keep posting here because it's your destiny to keep irritating him!

You simply must...we can't all do it alone. Our number are few, and his ability to create new pseudonyms is only limited by the amount of time his mom allows for him to be on the computer. That is obviously A LOT!

Meanwhile, I'm going to go back to rereading another Sons of Beatles thread.