Tell Me :
Talk
Did the writer bother to ask them if they had any plans to do a new album after the tour? If not then he should be either fired or demoted.
'Pathetic' is a strong word. He's not Lindsay Lohan or a reality star, after all. These comments in RS magazine are just PR blips of the very long Stone's historical timeline. It isn't the first time they've had disparaging remarks about each other and won't be thr last.
+1
Semi OT but Mikal Gilmore wrote an excellent book about R&Roll titled "Night Beat: A Shadow History of Rock and Roll".
When the Stones are done and you have plenty of free time ( = after Hyde Park) give it a try!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-05-08 23:01 by dcba.
that was a brilliant skit
Wingless Dogshit in the Doorway anyone?
He tried it before.
It won't work.
Well I'm not, not, a Keith guy. Keith just continues to do and say things that make him look ridiculous. We've seen this spastic old man Keith, getting worse, since the mid 90s.
It's getting harder to remember he was the epitome of cool for a good 20 years.
Sure. Like Duck Dunn said in the Blues Brothers movie....
Duck was a magnificent actor, terribly underrated.
How was he to know the big money would be coming in after all those years?
Besides, the age of 58 was pretty damn old in 1994 to be a high-profile rock star, especially after you had just endured the humiliation of a public mid-life crisis (i.e., Mandy).
He could have come back at any time after Voodoo Lounge, if he really wanted a big pay day. Every time The Stones would go out on tour, they would offer him the job before calling on Darryl.
Perhaps it was just more trouble than it was worth.
Nice analysis...
Keith did not admit that he refuses to get sober, he has said he hasn't stopped drinking completely. Having a few drinks a day is much different from being smashed out of your brain all the time.
When has Keith ever not finished a tour? Barring any major medical disaster, Keith will tour until he drops and if he can't the tour will stop, Mick Taylor or no. The others would not continue without him, just as they wouldn't if something happened to Charlie. As for Ronnie, why in the world would he leave to play with Rod?
MT sits because for whatever reason, that's what they want right now. It may change as the tour progresses, I hope it does, but to suggest that he is an insurance policy for Keith or Ronnie is pretty far fetched, imo.
is it much different having a few drinks an hour? i don't want to get into advanced mathematics...but a simple yes/no response would be appreciated.
Yes
i was afraid of that....from now on, i'm going with fewer but larger drinks.
Thank you, Slew! I was thinking the exact same thing. People are just making assumptions but can't have a single clue what the Stones think, feel or want.
Cheers,
Wuudy
Or he has an incredible overwhelming sense of the obvious, and for that reason didn't bother.
Managers play task masters and for that reason are often disliked/resented by those on the team that just want to have fun and not do work.
Jagger is the boss...someone has to be. From the beginning, Charlie wouldn't do it, Keith couldn't do it, Brian shouldn't do it...Bill, well, he just wants to take photographs of girls legs.
Or he was told the subject is off limits. Both Mick and Keith have dropped hints recently, but maybe something has changed in recent weeks. Maybe they had another spat and the whole idea went down the drain? Who knows, only time will tell.
Sure we can. In human society there are only a limited number of different personality types--16 or so--and life is a chess board where a limited number of choices are made across a finite field of possibilities.
Plus there is body language....
It remains a marriage of convenience--for us kids, of course.
And for millions and millions of dollars.
Yes, they kept it together just for us. We should be thankful that the marriage lasted as long as it did - that they held on until we were mature enough to understand.
Money has kept a lot of marriages together.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Rolling Stone Cover Story: The Rolling Stones 2013
Posted by:
JumpinJackOLantern
()
Date: May 8, 2013 22:32
Quote
bye bye johnny
Did the writer bother to ask them if they had any plans to do a new album after the tour? If not then he should be either fired or demoted.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: May 8, 2013 22:42
<<In 1987, when I asked Jagger about Richards, he said, "I feel . . . I respect him, and I feel a lot of affection for him, and I feel protective. He's the kind of person who, well, he has a certain vulnerability. He's had a lot of hard times. He's had a lot of good times [laughs]. We've had a lot of fun and a lot of heartache together." Today, when I ask him about his present relationship with Richards, Jagger replies, "It's a really good working relationship. Keith seems to be quite focused, and he seems to be enjoying playing.">>
That comparison says it all really about the current post-Life state of the Jagger-Richards (non)relationship, as impersonal as any one might have with their 9-to-5 counterparts, your thoughts of which get switched off during the commute home, to be with people you really want to know, rather than those you are merely thrown together with in the common interest of making a living.
Perhaps it's just as well that they don't record a new album, as it would only be a disjointed, fragmented mish-mash of Jagger and Richards solo efforts.
If they do make a new album, they could call it Wandering Offender, and maybe title the remaining follow-up Talk Is Primitive.
That comparison says it all really about the current post-Life state of the Jagger-Richards (non)relationship, as impersonal as any one might have with their 9-to-5 counterparts, your thoughts of which get switched off during the commute home, to be with people you really want to know, rather than those you are merely thrown together with in the common interest of making a living.
Perhaps it's just as well that they don't record a new album, as it would only be a disjointed, fragmented mish-mash of Jagger and Richards solo efforts.
If they do make a new album, they could call it Wandering Offender, and maybe title the remaining follow-up Talk Is Primitive.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
nightskyman
()
Date: May 8, 2013 22:48
Quote
AlmostHearYouSigh
Over the years I have grown tired of Keith but my sense is fans look more favorable on him than Mick. Why is that? Keith is rock and roll, yeah I get that but his everyman act is oh so tired.
As much as he annoys me I feel a bit sorry for him becasue he is kind of pathetic at this stage. I don't think anyone would ever feel that about Mick. Why is there a feeling to protect Keith? I even think Mick does this.
I suppose if the myth is bigger than the truth print the myth. Anyone ever read the book about the making of Exile A season in Hell? In Keith's mind the whole album was made in his basement. In reality less than half was and it was Mick who completed the album in LA! Yet its a Keith album and the myth of Keith started to grow.....
'Pathetic' is a strong word. He's not Lindsay Lohan or a reality star, after all. These comments in RS magazine are just PR blips of the very long Stone's historical timeline. It isn't the first time they've had disparaging remarks about each other and won't be thr last.
Re: Rolling Stone Cover Story: The Rolling Stones 2013
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: May 8, 2013 22:58
Quote
bam
Kind of looks like they all posed for separate photos and then photoshopped them together.
+1
Semi OT but Mikal Gilmore wrote an excellent book about R&Roll titled "Night Beat: A Shadow History of Rock and Roll".
When the Stones are done and you have plenty of free time ( = after Hyde Park) give it a try!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-05-08 23:01 by dcba.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: May 8, 2013 23:01
Quote
GRNRBITWQuote
MartinB
Keith is Keith. Is anybody surprised?
nope. the only time i was suprised was the time on SNL when mick was keith. but that didn't last long.
that was a brilliant skit
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: May 8, 2013 23:03
Quote
stonehearted
<<In 1987, when I asked Jagger about Richards, he said, "I feel . . . I respect him, and I feel a lot of affection for him, and I feel protective. He's the kind of person who, well, he has a certain vulnerability. He's had a lot of hard times. He's had a lot of good times [laughs]. We've had a lot of fun and a lot of heartache together." Today, when I ask him about his present relationship with Richards, Jagger replies, "It's a really good working relationship. Keith seems to be quite focused, and he seems to be enjoying playing.">>
That comparison says it all really about the current post-Life state of the Jagger-Richards (non)relationship, as impersonal as any one might have with their 9-to-5 counterparts, your thoughts of which get switched off during the commute home, to be with people you really want to know, rather than those you are merely thrown together with in the common interest of making a living.
Perhaps it's just as well that they don't record a new album, as it would only be a disjointed, fragmented mish-mash of Jagger and Richards solo efforts.
If they do make a new album, they could call it Wandering Offender, and maybe title the remaining follow-up Talk Is Primitive.
Wingless Dogshit in the Doorway anyone?
Re: Rolling Stone Cover Story: The Rolling Stones 2013
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: May 8, 2013 23:04
"Jagger could still do something this startling without either Richards or the Rolling Stones"
... and he's going to. He's dying to work with younger guys = ppl in their 30's.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-05-08 23:05 by dcba.
... and he's going to. He's dying to work with younger guys = ppl in their 30's.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-05-08 23:05 by dcba.
Re: Rolling Stone Cover Story: The Rolling Stones 2013
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: May 8, 2013 23:06
Quote
dcba
"Jagger could still do something this startling without either Richards or the Rolling Stones"
... and he's going to. He's dying to work with younger guys = ppl in their 30's.
He tried it before.
It won't work.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: May 8, 2013 23:08
Quote
rambler44I am a "Keith" guy but you make a great point here and I certainly can't defend him. And he clearly is putting on some silly macho bravado because he is pissed and embarrassed the apology became public.Quote
treaclefingers
I find it astonishing that given that all has transpired in the past couple of years, Keith doesn't have even the remotest sense of self preservation. Forget about feeling bad about or sorry for how he has hurt his friend. Just self preservation from the point of keeping his band together.
I guess though that is consistent with past behaviour. Just goes to show that the instant the band winds it down we're likely getting a second volume of LIFE with all the really 'bad bits'. AFTER LIFE perhaps?
Mick requested an apology? "He did," says Richards, "and I said that I regret if I caused you any, you know, inconvenience or pain, or something. It was . . ." Richards laughs. "I'd say anything to get the band together, you know? I'd lie to my mother."
and
Looking back now, is there anything he wishes he hadn't said in print?
"No, no, no, no." Richards laughs again. "I say what I say and that's it. I wouldn't retract a thing, man."
I didn't think my opinion of him could be lower, but it certainly is. He's pissed that it's public that he's apologized so he basically retracts it.
What a moron.
What has struck me about all of this is how apparent it is becoming that Mick was genuinely hurt by Keith's book. Which is something I would not expect from him. In a sense it makes him more likeable and less cold. However, I think there is a lot of hurt that Keith feels too. To me Keith is like the little brother who just wants the love and affection of his big brother and is constantly rebuffed. So he rebels with the Brenda comments and the things in Life. And Mick does go out of his way everytime Keith says they love and fight like brothers to make it clear after 50 years he only works with Keith and has known him a long time. That's really harsh.
The person's perspective on the whole thing that I would like to hear is Charlie's. Both Mick and Keith have tremendous affection for Charlie and he is very close to both of them. I would love to get his take. But as a "Keith" guy I would like to point out that when Mick called Charlie in the middle of the night some years back and told his "drummer boy" to get down here. Charlie got up, got dressed in one of his impeccable suits, came down to where Mick and Keith were, and punched Mick Jagger in the face.
Well I'm not, not, a Keith guy. Keith just continues to do and say things that make him look ridiculous. We've seen this spastic old man Keith, getting worse, since the mid 90s.
It's getting harder to remember he was the epitome of cool for a good 20 years.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: May 8, 2013 23:16
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
stonehearted
<<In 1987, when I asked Jagger about Richards, he said, "I feel . . . I respect him, and I feel a lot of affection for him, and I feel protective. He's the kind of person who, well, he has a certain vulnerability. He's had a lot of hard times. He's had a lot of good times [laughs]. We've had a lot of fun and a lot of heartache together." Today, when I ask him about his present relationship with Richards, Jagger replies, "It's a really good working relationship. Keith seems to be quite focused, and he seems to be enjoying playing.">>
That comparison says it all really about the current post-Life state of the Jagger-Richards (non)relationship, as impersonal as any one might have with their 9-to-5 counterparts, your thoughts of which get switched off during the commute home, to be with people you really want to know, rather than those you are merely thrown together with in the common interest of making a living.
Perhaps it's just as well that they don't record a new album, as it would only be a disjointed, fragmented mish-mash of Jagger and Richards solo efforts.
If they do make a new album, they could call it Wandering Offender, and maybe title the remaining follow-up Talk Is Primitive.
Wingless Dogshit in the Doorway anyone?
Sure. Like Duck Dunn said in the Blues Brothers movie....
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: May 8, 2013 23:32
Quote
stoneheartedQuote
treaclefingersQuote
stonehearted
<<In 1987, when I asked Jagger about Richards, he said, "I feel . . . I respect him, and I feel a lot of affection for him, and I feel protective. He's the kind of person who, well, he has a certain vulnerability. He's had a lot of hard times. He's had a lot of good times [laughs]. We've had a lot of fun and a lot of heartache together." Today, when I ask him about his present relationship with Richards, Jagger replies, "It's a really good working relationship. Keith seems to be quite focused, and he seems to be enjoying playing.">>
That comparison says it all really about the current post-Life state of the Jagger-Richards (non)relationship, as impersonal as any one might have with their 9-to-5 counterparts, your thoughts of which get switched off during the commute home, to be with people you really want to know, rather than those you are merely thrown together with in the common interest of making a living.
Perhaps it's just as well that they don't record a new album, as it would only be a disjointed, fragmented mish-mash of Jagger and Richards solo efforts.
If they do make a new album, they could call it Wandering Offender, and maybe title the remaining follow-up Talk Is Primitive.
Wingless Dogshit in the Doorway anyone?
Sure. Like Duck Dunn said in the Blues Brothers movie....
Duck was a magnificent actor, terribly underrated.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: May 8, 2013 23:46
Quote
leatherjacketQuote
sonomastoneQuote
24FPS
Is it really a surprise that Bill couldn't get into it again? When people who really love you have a chance to be reunited with you they bring you in and you just pick up from your last point. He returns to the periphery 20 years later and sees nothing has changed, only gotten colder. No new music of any real merit. A stage show playing 90% of stuff he played on. And the relationship between Jagger and Richards is frostier than ever. And yet the music on stage is transcendent. Go figure.
I respect Bill for not doing it. It takes balls to say no to that kind of money and adulation, but he kept his self respect.
Respect? He got invited and afterwards he was complaining. He could have made up his mind by saying: "two songs, no way". But he didn't and was whining afterwards. Its how Charlie put it, Bill left the band in the wrong moment right before a lot of money came in and he couldn't benefit from his time being in the Stones. Bill knows that and thats one of the reasons he sounds so bitter these days, talking shit about how happy he is. If somebody is really happy with his life he doesn't have to say it to every journalist who is around. To be with the Stones is not very time consuming. He lost a fortune.
How was he to know the big money would be coming in after all those years?
Besides, the age of 58 was pretty damn old in 1994 to be a high-profile rock star, especially after you had just endured the humiliation of a public mid-life crisis (i.e., Mandy).
He could have come back at any time after Voodoo Lounge, if he really wanted a big pay day. Every time The Stones would go out on tour, they would offer him the job before calling on Darryl.
Perhaps it was just more trouble than it was worth.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: May 8, 2013 23:47
Quote
DoomandGloom
Simple psychology at work here. Mick wants Keith to take this tour seriously. He only acknowledges him as a working partner, cutting him few breaks after all Richards could fall apart in any given moment, he has admitted he refuses to get sober. Mick appears to have all the cards, I have little doubt this tour would finish with or without Keith considering Mick Taylor is waiting in the wings. Ronnie however trumps them all, if he were to leave and play with Rod the band would be in turmoil while Keith would party carefree expecting the old Taylor to carry him. The result Ronnie demands he doesn't get shown up by MT and Taylor sits.
Nice analysis...
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
latebloomer
()
Date: May 9, 2013 00:01
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
DoomandGloom
Simple psychology at work here. Mick wants Keith to take this tour seriously. He only acknowledges him as a working partner, cutting him few breaks after all Richards could fall apart in any given moment, he has admitted he refuses to get sober. Mick appears to have all the cards, I have little doubt this tour would finish with or without Keith considering Mick Taylor is waiting in the wings. Ronnie however trumps them all, if he were to leave and play with Rod the band would be in turmoil while Keith would party carefree expecting the old Taylor to carry him. The result Ronnie demands he doesn't get shown up by MT and Taylor sits.
Nice analysis...
Keith did not admit that he refuses to get sober, he has said he hasn't stopped drinking completely. Having a few drinks a day is much different from being smashed out of your brain all the time.
When has Keith ever not finished a tour? Barring any major medical disaster, Keith will tour until he drops and if he can't the tour will stop, Mick Taylor or no. The others would not continue without him, just as they wouldn't if something happened to Charlie. As for Ronnie, why in the world would he leave to play with Rod?
MT sits because for whatever reason, that's what they want right now. It may change as the tour progresses, I hope it does, but to suggest that he is an insurance policy for Keith or Ronnie is pretty far fetched, imo.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
stonesrule
()
Date: May 9, 2013 00:05
Essentially Keith has a sweet nature but he has been spoiled and catered to for a very long time.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
GRNRBITW
()
Date: May 9, 2013 00:12
Quote
latebloomer
Keith did not admit that he refuses to get sober, he has said he hasn't stopped drinking completely. Having a few drinks a day is much different from being smashed out of your brain all the time.
is it much different having a few drinks an hour? i don't want to get into advanced mathematics...but a simple yes/no response would be appreciated.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
latebloomer
()
Date: May 9, 2013 00:15
Quote
GRNRBITWQuote
latebloomer
Keith did not admit that he refuses to get sober, he has said he hasn't stopped drinking completely. Having a few drinks a day is much different from being smashed out of your brain all the time.
is it much different having a few drinks an hour? i don't want to get into advanced mathematics...but a simple yes/no response would be appreciated.
Yes
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
GRNRBITW
()
Date: May 9, 2013 00:18
Quote
latebloomerQuote
GRNRBITWQuote
latebloomer
Keith did not admit that he refuses to get sober, he has said he hasn't stopped drinking completely. Having a few drinks a day is much different from being smashed out of your brain all the time.
is it much different having a few drinks an hour? i don't want to get into advanced mathematics...but a simple yes/no response would be appreciated.
Yes
i was afraid of that....from now on, i'm going with fewer but larger drinks.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: May 9, 2013 02:21
I've never quite understood why Mick is seen as so unlikeable by so many people. He seems to have carried the burden of being the adult in the band for many years. From dealing with Brian and Klein and then Keith, and trying to navigate the ship to firm financial ground. People give Mick a lot of crap and I don't understand it. Is it because the authority figure is hard to love? Mick did drugs, Mick carried on, but he could never afford to take it as far as Brian or Keith. Except for maybe a little coke excess in the 70s, which he got under control, Mick has always performed well. Keith had kind of a rough stretch of guitar playing in the mid-70s, probably due to heroin.
This f#$*ers are 70, for christ's sake. I'm still hearing a lot of immaturity in their statements. And they're only going to get grumpier! Ahhhh!!!
This f#$*ers are 70, for christ's sake. I'm still hearing a lot of immaturity in their statements. And they're only going to get grumpier! Ahhhh!!!
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
Wuudy
()
Date: May 9, 2013 03:27
Quote
slew
I'm glad you people are all in Mick and Keith's heads and know what they are thinking and feeling!!!
Thank you, Slew! I was thinking the exact same thing. People are just making assumptions but can't have a single clue what the Stones think, feel or want.
Cheers,
Wuudy
Re: Rolling Stone Cover Story: The Rolling Stones 2013
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: May 9, 2013 03:36
Quote
JumpinJackOLanternQuote
bye bye johnny
Did the writer bother to ask them if they had any plans to do a new album after the tour? If not then he should be either fired or demoted.
Or he has an incredible overwhelming sense of the obvious, and for that reason didn't bother.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: May 9, 2013 03:39
Quote
24FPS
I've never quite understood why Mick is seen as so unlikeable by so many people. He seems to have carried the burden of being the adult in the band for many years. From dealing with Brian and Klein and then Keith, and trying to navigate the ship to firm financial ground. People give Mick a lot of crap and I don't understand it. Is it because the authority figure is hard to love? Mick did drugs, Mick carried on, but he could never afford to take it as far as Brian or Keith. Except for maybe a little coke excess in the 70s, which he got under control, Mick has always performed well. Keith had kind of a rough stretch of guitar playing in the mid-70s, probably due to heroin.
This f#$*ers are 70, for christ's sake. I'm still hearing a lot of immaturity in their statements. And they're only going to get grumpier! Ahhhh!!!
Managers play task masters and for that reason are often disliked/resented by those on the team that just want to have fun and not do work.
Jagger is the boss...someone has to be. From the beginning, Charlie wouldn't do it, Keith couldn't do it, Brian shouldn't do it...Bill, well, he just wants to take photographs of girls legs.
Re: Rolling Stone Cover Story: The Rolling Stones 2013
Posted by:
JumpinJackOLantern
()
Date: May 9, 2013 03:53
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
JumpinJackOLanternQuote
bye bye johnny
Did the writer bother to ask them if they had any plans to do a new album after the tour? If not then he should be either fired or demoted.
Or he has an incredible overwhelming sense of the obvious, and for that reason didn't bother.
Or he was told the subject is off limits. Both Mick and Keith have dropped hints recently, but maybe something has changed in recent weeks. Maybe they had another spat and the whole idea went down the drain? Who knows, only time will tell.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
Rip This
()
Date: May 9, 2013 05:16
...crappy cover....what a terrible cover shoot by Terry Richardson of all people...the Glimmers enjoy/use the drama that hangs over them...the relationships have changed..people change..that's life...obviously they can still play and write...too bad they can't put their differences aside and get on with it...the article sounds like a Reality TV show.....nice post by Turd On The Run...
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: May 9, 2013 06:02
Quote
WuudyQuote
slew
I'm glad you people are all in Mick and Keith's heads and know what they are thinking and feeling!!!
Thank you, Slew! I was thinking the exact same thing. People are just making assumptions but can't have a single clue what the Stones think, feel or want.
Sure we can. In human society there are only a limited number of different personality types--16 or so--and life is a chess board where a limited number of choices are made across a finite field of possibilities.
Plus there is body language....
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
JumpinJackOLantern
()
Date: May 9, 2013 06:20
This marriage between Mick and Keith has been on the rocks for decades and looks like it's finally headed for divorce. The kids (us fans) are the ones that will be most hurt by it. But, life will go on, and there is always the sons of the Beatles to look forward to - sometime in the next five years.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: May 9, 2013 06:21
Quote
JumpinJackOLantern
This marriage between Mick and Keith has been on the rocks for decades and looks like it's finally headed for divorce. The kids (us fans) are the ones that will be most hurt by it. But, life will go on, and there is always the sons of the Beatles to look forward to - sometime in the next five years.
It remains a marriage of convenience--for us kids, of course.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: May 9, 2013 06:27
Quote
stoneheartedQuote
JumpinJackOLantern
This marriage between Mick and Keith has been on the rocks for decades and looks like it's finally headed for divorce. The kids (us fans) are the ones that will be most hurt by it. But, life will go on, and there is always the sons of the Beatles to look forward to - sometime in the next five years.
It remains a marriage of convenience--for us kids, of course.
And for millions and millions of dollars.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
JumpinJackOLantern
()
Date: May 9, 2013 06:27
Quote
stoneheartedQuote
JumpinJackOLantern
This marriage between Mick and Keith has been on the rocks for decades and looks like it's finally headed for divorce. The kids (us fans) are the ones that will be most hurt by it. But, life will go on, and there is always the sons of the Beatles to look forward to - sometime in the next five years.
It remains a marriage of convenience--for us kids, of course.
Yes, they kept it together just for us. We should be thankful that the marriage lasted as long as it did - that they held on until we were mature enough to understand.
Re: "Love and War Inside the Rolling Stones" - Rolling Stone, May 23 2013
Posted by:
JumpinJackOLantern
()
Date: May 9, 2013 06:33
Quote
24FPSQuote
stoneheartedQuote
JumpinJackOLantern
This marriage between Mick and Keith has been on the rocks for decades and looks like it's finally headed for divorce. The kids (us fans) are the ones that will be most hurt by it. But, life will go on, and there is always the sons of the Beatles to look forward to - sometime in the next five years.
It remains a marriage of convenience--for us kids, of course.
And for millions and millions of dollars.
Money has kept a lot of marriages together.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
a bigger nut , armin944 , crawdaddy , DavidinAustin , detroitken , dnewton99 , eibert , Happy Jack , hockenheim95 , jimpietryga1 , keefmick , kkhoranstoned , liddas , mab1888 , micha063 , MisterDDDD , MisterO , mrfancyman , P@py , Ram , SS , steenhorst , Stonesfan2146 , stonesmuziekfan , StonyRoad , superglen , TumblinDice76 , WarMachine , willprefecture , witterings , zwilling
Guests:
1970
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10