Tell Me :
Talk
That's the truth of the matter in a nut shell. All the rest of the Doxa bullshit is just adding garnish to a lousy out of date meal.
Luckily for Mick the 90's saw a resurgence of Rock bands like Aerosmith, Guns And Roses and The Black Crows. Mick being no idiot new if he was going to keep to the Lifestyle he was accustomed to he had better get back with Keith and make some serious money. And that's what Mick did and continues to do. Art, creativity, direction or reinvention doesn't and didn't come into it. Money and bums on hideously expensive seats is all Mick has been interested in since the failure of his solo career, if it can be called a career at all.
But weren't some of his lyrics about Keith. Shoot Your Mouth Off etc.
Look in the mirror, and you see one.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-04-02 21:05 by TheflyingDutchman.
Lol
The only thing I conclude is that - much to my delight- Jagger turned his back to the Stones in the eighties and backed himself up with more competent players, the more skilled and better sounding guitarists, easily like Keith if necessary, and at last some decent lead playing again, which had vanished since Taylor left the band. The quality of Jagger's songs is up for debate, there are great ones, and some are not the best. His Stones covers were outstanding; at least Jagger gave it a try, he and his musicians gave the best they had.This cannot be said of Keith (and Wood)from the early 8-tees and onwards, who only had and has to fart and pose on his guitar, pulling out the same boring licks out of his sleeve, till date, and the audience went nuts,. I stilI like his voice though. I'm not an old school rock admirer per se. I like discipline, not sloppiness, even in Rock.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-04-03 01:27 by TheflyingDutchman.
No, Talk is Cheap and Main Offender have some great songs.
If you like discipline in Rock, The Eagles are your band.zzzzzzz
Some great songs on Jaggers solo work too.
I thought he just did ... unless, of course, he's typing for someone else.
Huh? ..."they are not as good as any Stones-album since 1986, including B2B."
Since you already said "since 1986" you still had to be redundant? Because fact says BTB is "since 1986".
Regardless of that myth, SHE'S THE BOSS, hell, even PRIMITIVE COOL is better than any Stones album from 1986.
Best since 1986 - any Stones album from 1989 onward when held up to the worst album in the history of The Rolling Stones.
Funniest thing I think I've ever seen you post.
Take the best of She´s The Boss & Primitive Cool and you still can´t touch DW.
You're right - Jagger's best songs from both albums blow DW into where it belongs - the toilet.
That's a good argument. Throw Harlem Shuffle and Had It With You in there and it's even better.
Quote, as documentation, suitably confronted with
Negativity towards solo ventures mentionned in plural.
Remarkably with no exceptions made for WANDERING SPIRIT, even when Mick has made at least three solo albums and one Stones album outside the Stones, the latter being the only album, as a paradox, when I for one, both before and now, miss the band from time to time.
I read your thoughts on Mick Jagger’s solo albums yesterday, Doxa, as I prepared myself for the first soccer match of the season. I can’t now give a response to all of your thoughts, I am sorry. I think I have some disagreement to your perspectives. I content myself, however, to come with a most limited answer to present one thought only.
I think SHE’S THE BOSS is somewhat better than its rumour. It features maybe only one song, that is great. In my opinion, “Hard Woman” lives up to that estimation. I read, Doxa, that you name it as a ballad, even a pure ballad. I have never thought about this song as ballad. Not only am I reluctant to that term so much in use. More important, other aspects have always absorbed me. That is, for me this song has got those extra-musical qualities, which contribute to lift some Stones songs, “Hard Woman” touching on one fatal love better to be separated from. And myself I seem to feel it very much. (I would have loved the Stones to record it.)
Am I the only one to adore “Hard Woman”?
OK i go with that, you got a deal
Seriously though there are some great songs scattered through Micks solo albums.
I just don't like the way he sings them and i don't like the production of them.
Its a catch 22 for Mick , he would hate to admit it very often but Keith really does bring out the best in him.
I just realized this is fascinating reading GasLightStreet.
As much as you hate Dirty Work, you go so far as to say that you think 4 tracks on it are better than all Micks solo Albums.
I didn't think it was possible to find someone hate Micks solo work to the extent that i do. Of course nothing Mick does is all bad, its just that before he went solo i had such high regard for him, i thought he was a god like genius, i really did.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-04-03 19:50 by stone4ever.
It's a weird concept, really. Jagger has done some great solo songs and he's done some good solo songs - but aside from Stones fans, nobody even knows about them (the same for Keith's solo songs/albums). Some of them may have been better as Stones songs. But he's done a lot more bad solo songs than good solo songs. I've always thought if he had a sympathetic guitarist instead of a wanking Jeff Beck on some songs they'd be better, more listenable.
I say the 4 songs from DIRTY WORK in jest - although there are days when I think it's true. Are they really better than any of Jagger's solo songs? Or are those 4 DW songs just good enough?
To sum that up, I listen to songs from WS more than anything from DW, and for that matter just a few from PRIMITIVE COOL more than any from DW. So in that aspect, yes, some of Jagger's solo songs are better than the best 4 on DW. As much as I like Harlem Shuffle I'd really rather listen to Hang On To Me Tonight. As much as I like Had It With You I'd really rather listen to Put Me In The Trash. Too Rude - well, Kow Tow is more preferable. Sleep Tonight? Gimme Wired All Night.
Would Take It So Hard be better with Jagger singing? I dunno. I think that is a Keith Stones song if there ever wasn't one. Keith has a few that are great solo songs, a few that are good solo songs - and then there are some that certainly could've been better with Mick singing them - or even having a hand in writing them. But to my ears it's less so to Keith than it is to Mick's solo work.
Sometimes doing something different isn't automatically better (or good). And that pretty much sums up Mick's solo career.
State Of Shock isn´t crap, imo. It´s excellent, pure genius.
Ruthless People is one of the very best songs he ever recorded as a solo-artist, it´s greater than great, simply marvelous. Dancing In The Street is very enjoyable.
Overall crap, that doesn't mean there aren't some good ones.
Per the ones you specifically mentioned ...
State of Shock = below average
Ruthless People = average
Dancing in the Street = about the worst thing I've ever heard in my life
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: April 2, 2017 19:27
Quote
Stoneage
To put it short. By the time Jagger started his solo career he was already an old fart. He, basically, had nothing to offer. The kids weren't paying attention to him.
They had better artists to choose from. And the old fans only wanted him to get back to The Stones ...
That's the truth of the matter in a nut shell. All the rest of the Doxa bullshit is just adding garnish to a lousy out of date meal.
Luckily for Mick the 90's saw a resurgence of Rock bands like Aerosmith, Guns And Roses and The Black Crows. Mick being no idiot new if he was going to keep to the Lifestyle he was accustomed to he had better get back with Keith and make some serious money. And that's what Mick did and continues to do. Art, creativity, direction or reinvention doesn't and didn't come into it. Money and bums on hideously expensive seats is all Mick has been interested in since the failure of his solo career, if it can be called a career at all.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: April 2, 2017 20:28
To be fair though the lyrics on Sir Michael's solo efforts are a bit more honest and introspective than some of the Stones ones. Even though he, of course,
stated that the lyrics had nothing to do with his own life in interviews. As usual, to avoid further questions in that direction.
stated that the lyrics had nothing to do with his own life in interviews. As usual, to avoid further questions in that direction.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: April 2, 2017 21:00
Quote
Stoneage
To be fair though the lyrics on Sir Michael's solo efforts are a bit more honest and introspective than some of the Stones ones. Even though he, of course,
stated that the lyrics had nothing to do with his own life in interviews. As usual, to avoid further questions in that direction.
But weren't some of his lyrics about Keith. Shoot Your Mouth Off etc.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
TheflyingDutchman
()
Date: April 2, 2017 21:04
Quote
stone4ever
As for Keithettes i have no idea what you are on about and i see no evidence on iorr to suggest that one exists. Keithettes only exist in your mind my friend.
Look in the mirror, and you see one.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-04-02 21:05 by TheflyingDutchman.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: April 2, 2017 21:07
Quote
TheflyingDutchmanQuote
stone4ever
As for Keithettes i have no idea what you are on about and i see no evidence on iorr to suggest that one exists. Keithettes only exist in your mind my friend.
Look in the mirror, and you see one.
Lol
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
Stoneage
()
Date: April 2, 2017 22:08
(to Stone4ever): That is true. But some other songs, at least seemed to, reflect on his personal life also.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-04-02 22:35 by Stoneage.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-04-02 22:35 by Stoneage.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: April 2, 2017 22:16
Kudos to you Doxa for laying it out on the Mick solo albums - the good, the bad, and the ugly - warts and all.
It shows you're not really the cheerleading 'Mick Chick' that you sometimes come across as.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
It shows you're not really the cheerleading 'Mick Chick' that you sometimes come across as.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
TheflyingDutchman
()
Date: April 3, 2017 01:18
Quote
DoxaQuote
TheflyingDutchman
For an individual member it's impossible to escape from the gravity of the planet "Rolling Stones" indeed. That's their fate and fortune at the same time.
That's true. In the case of Jagger, it is not solely how the audiences response to his doings, but also whatever he does is actually rather bounded by his own limitations, that is, the Stones vocabulary. Mick might be interest in whatever new trends happen, that seems to be his 'wandering spirit', but that doesn't translate that he could musically adapt to them convincingly, at least if he travels too far from his 'home vocabulary'. I think he somehow lost that sensitivity during the 80's. "Miss You" and SOME GIRLS were his last triumph in that sense. For Jagger disco music was just the latest trend - and a very succesfull form of black music - he had been following since his teenager years, and it wasn't just an odd move to transform an always rhythmn-based Stones groove to four-in-the-floor. As far as white rock goes, the punk revolution was about the best thing that could have happen to the Stones at the time. It gave them a justification to go to the basics, to play simple and raw Chuck Berry-based guitar stuff with a conviction and a feeling, no worrying about technical matters. etc. But as the disco evolved, and the new 'dance music' was entering to the scene, with the likes of Jacko and Prince, and finally the entrance of rap, that started to go beyond Jagger's reach. And the same we can say of the white rock music: evolving from the raw guitar-based punk into 'new wave', and the synths and all taking the lead as the 80's went on,´the birth of 'alternative rock', or what was left of old guitar rock was to be reduced under the new forms of technically-skilled 'hard rock', guitar heroes entering the scene again (that is known since then under the title of 'metal'), all that started to be rather difficult for Jagger to adapt to convincingly. At some time he probably thought that it surely was impossible for the Stones, but he most likely over-estimated his own skills in doing that.
Another thing to remember is that Jagger had already problems by the time of people like David Bowie entering the scene, but for some years he still managed to do rather well for not being an "old fart".
- Doxa
The only thing I conclude is that - much to my delight- Jagger turned his back to the Stones in the eighties and backed himself up with more competent players, the more skilled and better sounding guitarists, easily like Keith if necessary, and at last some decent lead playing again, which had vanished since Taylor left the band. The quality of Jagger's songs is up for debate, there are great ones, and some are not the best. His Stones covers were outstanding; at least Jagger gave it a try, he and his musicians gave the best they had.This cannot be said of Keith (and Wood)from the early 8-tees and onwards, who only had and has to fart and pose on his guitar, pulling out the same boring licks out of his sleeve, till date, and the audience went nuts,. I stilI like his voice though. I'm not an old school rock admirer per se. I like discipline, not sloppiness, even in Rock.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-04-03 01:27 by TheflyingDutchman.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
MKjan
()
Date: April 3, 2017 03:16
Quote
TheflyingDutchmanQuote
DoxaQuote
TheflyingDutchman
For an individual member it's impossible to escape from the gravity of the planet "Rolling Stones" indeed. That's their fate and fortune at the same time.
That's true. In the case of Jagger, it is not solely how the audiences response to his doings, but also whatever he does is actually rather bounded by his own limitations, that is, the Stones vocabulary. Mick might be interest in whatever new trends happen, that seems to be his 'wandering spirit', but that doesn't translate that he could musically adapt to them convincingly, at least if he travels too far from his 'home vocabulary'. I think he somehow lost that sensitivity during the 80's. "Miss You" and SOME GIRLS were his last triumph in that sense. For Jagger disco music was just the latest trend - and a very succesfull form of black music - he had been following since his teenager years, and it wasn't just an odd move to transform an always rhythmn-based Stones groove to four-in-the-floor. As far as white rock goes, the punk revolution was about the best thing that could have happen to the Stones at the time. It gave them a justification to go to the basics, to play simple and raw Chuck Berry-based guitar stuff with a conviction and a feeling, no worrying about technical matters. etc. But as the disco evolved, and the new 'dance music' was entering to the scene, with the likes of Jacko and Prince, and finally the entrance of rap, that started to go beyond Jagger's reach. And the same we can say of the white rock music: evolving from the raw guitar-based punk into 'new wave', and the synths and all taking the lead as the 80's went on,´the birth of 'alternative rock', or what was left of old guitar rock was to be reduced under the new forms of technically-skilled 'hard rock', guitar heroes entering the scene again (that is known since then under the title of 'metal'), all that started to be rather difficult for Jagger to adapt to convincingly. At some time he probably thought that it surely was impossible for the Stones, but he most likely over-estimated his own skills in doing that.
Another thing to remember is that Jagger had already problems by the time of people like David Bowie entering the scene, but for some years he still managed to do rather well for not being an "old fart".
- Doxa
The only thing I conclude is that - much to my delight- Jagger turned his back to the Stones in the eighties and backed himself up with more competent players, the more skilled and better sounding guitarists, easily like Keith if necessary, and at last some decent lead playing again, which had vanished since Taylor left the band. The quality of Jagger's songs is up for debate, there are great ones, and some are not the best. His Stones covers were outstanding; at least Jagger gave it a try, he and his musicians gave the best they had.This cannot be said of Keith (and Wood)from the early 8-tees and onwards, who only had and has to fart and pose on his guitar, pulling out the same boring licks out of his sleeve, till date, and the audience went nuts,. I stilI like his voice though. I'm not an old school rock admirer per se. I like discipline, not sloppiness, even in Rock.
No, Talk is Cheap and Main Offender have some great songs.
If you like discipline in Rock, The Eagles are your band.zzzzzzz
Some great songs on Jaggers solo work too.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
LeonidP
()
Date: April 3, 2017 03:18
Quote
Monsoon Ragoon
I think - to be honest - that Primitive Cool is a very good album and much better than Crosseyed Heart. The latter is totally boring. But I don't know if it makes sense to compare Jagger with Richards albums.
Quote
stone4ever
Why can't you just say that YOU prefer Primitive Cool to Crosseyed Heart...
I thought he just did ... unless, of course, he's typing for someone else.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: April 3, 2017 05:00
Quote
HMS
But the solo-albums aren´t a compromise between J/R and still they are not as good as any Stones-album since 1986, including B2B. Wandering Spirit is the best solo-album by a Rolling Stone but overall it is not better than the Stones-albums that were to follow. WS has it´s hi´s and low´s just like any Stones album since DW.
Huh? ..."they are not as good as any Stones-album since 1986, including B2B."
Since you already said "since 1986" you still had to be redundant? Because fact says BTB is "since 1986".
Regardless of that myth, SHE'S THE BOSS, hell, even PRIMITIVE COOL is better than any Stones album from 1986.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: April 3, 2017 05:02
Quote
HMSQuote
stone4ever
Above post is food for thought, Mick and Keith using their best contributions to solo work was bad news for Stones albums. They must have used all their best stuff for solo album's. I still think Crosseyed Heart would have been as good as Tatoo You had Mick worked his magic on it. That's not to say I don't love Keith’s vocals on it.
Mick would have had to work real real hard to turn CH into something as good as Tattoo You. I think the result would have been much worse than ABB. Why is everybody bashing ABB? It´s a damn fine album, best since ´86.
Best since 1986 - any Stones album from 1989 onward when held up to the worst album in the history of The Rolling Stones.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: April 3, 2017 05:03
Quote
Doxa
SHE'S THE BOSS is by no means a bad record, but not very memorable either. ”Just Another Night” is a good song and it was a minor hit single. Compared to the Stones music at the time (think especially of UNDERCOVER), the album was much more melodic generally.
Funniest thing I think I've ever seen you post.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 3, 2017 10:35
No Alfie or Superheavy-reviews?
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
HMS
()
Date: April 3, 2017 12:54
She´s The Boss:
When it was released I liked about half of it´s songs, I liked the funky, groovy way of the album. But in hindsight the production is dated. Now only Just Another Night and Lonely At The Top move me, one or two other songs are ok.
Primitive Cool:
Only Shoot Off Your Mouth and Peace For The Wicked do it for me. The rest is lame and tame radio-pop, mostly awful. Listening to that album is more or less a waste of time.
Wandering Spirit:
Wired All Night, Use Me, Evening Gown, Mother Of A Man, Sweet Thing, Wandering Spirit are all great, some others are ok, but the album has it´s share of fillers too: Handsome Molly, Angel In My Heart, Lonely For So Long, Out Of Focus. Still Mick´s best.
Goddess At The Doorway
Good Gave Me Everything is very good, Hideaway, GITD & Lucky Day are decent songs, everything else is garbage, especially the very formulaic ballads.
Alfie:
Old Habits is a rather decent song but overall Mick´s contributions are lame and tame, nothing to remember.
Superheavy:
What´s that?????
There are some non-album nuggets here and there, Ruthless People which is great and could have been a monster on any Stones-album, I´m Ringing is a enjoyable, melodic rocker and Blue is a very good song wasted on a B-side.
When it was released I liked about half of it´s songs, I liked the funky, groovy way of the album. But in hindsight the production is dated. Now only Just Another Night and Lonely At The Top move me, one or two other songs are ok.
Primitive Cool:
Only Shoot Off Your Mouth and Peace For The Wicked do it for me. The rest is lame and tame radio-pop, mostly awful. Listening to that album is more or less a waste of time.
Wandering Spirit:
Wired All Night, Use Me, Evening Gown, Mother Of A Man, Sweet Thing, Wandering Spirit are all great, some others are ok, but the album has it´s share of fillers too: Handsome Molly, Angel In My Heart, Lonely For So Long, Out Of Focus. Still Mick´s best.
Goddess At The Doorway
Good Gave Me Everything is very good, Hideaway, GITD & Lucky Day are decent songs, everything else is garbage, especially the very formulaic ballads.
Alfie:
Old Habits is a rather decent song but overall Mick´s contributions are lame and tame, nothing to remember.
Superheavy:
What´s that?????
There are some non-album nuggets here and there, Ruthless People which is great and could have been a monster on any Stones-album, I´m Ringing is a enjoyable, melodic rocker and Blue is a very good song wasted on a B-side.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
HMS
()
Date: April 3, 2017 13:01
Quote
GasLightStreet
SHE'S THE BOSS, hell, even PRIMITIVE COOL is better than any Stones album from 1986.
Take the best of She´s The Boss & Primitive Cool and you still can´t touch DW.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: April 3, 2017 18:24
Quote
HMSQuote
GasLightStreet
SHE'S THE BOSS, hell, even PRIMITIVE COOL is better than any Stones album from 1986.
Take the best of She´s The Boss & Primitive Cool and you still can´t touch DW.
You're right - Jagger's best songs from both albums blow DW into where it belongs - the toilet.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: April 3, 2017 18:28
Sleep Tonight and Too Rude from DW are better than all Jagger solo album's put together.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: April 3, 2017 18:37
Quote
stone4ever
Sleep Tonight and Too Rude from DW are better than all Jagger solo album's put together.
That's a good argument. Throw Harlem Shuffle and Had It With You in there and it's even better.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
Witness
()
Date: April 3, 2017 18:44
Quote
stone4everQuote
TheflyingDutchmanQuote
stone4ever
As for Keithettes i have no idea what you are on about and i see no evidence on iorr to suggest that one exists. Keithettes only exist in your mind my friend.
Look in the mirror, and you see one.
Lol
Quote, as documentation, suitably confronted with
Quote
stone4everQuote
LeonidP
Nah, I agree completely with Keith's "dogshit in the doorway" assessment.never truer words spoken.
I stay out of Mick solo threads because i can't help but feel negative about Micks solo ventures, so my lips are sealed but Keith definitely summed it up beautifully with the "dogshit in the doorway" comment.
Negativity towards solo ventures mentionned in plural.
Quote
stone4ever
I think all of Mick's solo albums just went to prove that Keith was and is the sound of the Stones.
Remarkably with no exceptions made for WANDERING SPIRIT, even when Mick has made at least three solo albums and one Stones album outside the Stones, the latter being the only album, as a paradox, when I for one, both before and now, miss the band from time to time.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
Witness
()
Date: April 3, 2017 18:44
Quote
Doxa
Hello, it is a rainy Sunday, and inspired by this thread, let my think aloud some thoughts (=bullshit) about Mick Jagger's solo career and albums. I will discuss the albums one by one. The rest will follow later.
PART ONE: SHE'S THE BOSS
SHE'S THE BOSS was a big deal at the time when it was released, the first solo album by a 'big' Stone. And since it was Jagger, it wasn't considered just a 'solo album' a'la Wood's or Wyman's he might do as a side project to his main job and never actually compared to it, but this was something Stones-level important. Anyone knew it at the time, though Jagger himself – naturally - tried to avoid the comparison to the Stones.
Altogether, I think the album turned out to be a brief disappointment. More qualitywise than salewise (it is still easily the best selling Stones solo album ever, but of course damn far not only from an (aimed) MIchael Jackson level but also from a typical Stones level). A solo Jagger was stuck somewhere the middle of the Stones and 'what is trendy now'. A kind of forced, non-natural compromise, and SHE'S THE BOSS failed between them: compared to the Stones, it was too 'poppish', and for the trends of the day, it was too 'Stonesy' (if nothing else, but Jagger's own trademark blues-based rock voice and image, no matter how hard he tried to polish it, was something he couldn't transform too much).
The cruel fact was that by the mid-80's there started to be a huge gap between what is now called the 'classic rock' (what the Stones represented) and what the kids were digging at the moment. My guess is that Jagger tried to charm both potential audiences: the 'old' Stones fans and the 'new' kids, and thereby to continue the huge success he had accustomed with the Stones. He might have calculated – very justified at the time and now - that the only way to have hit singles and albums goes through 'being trendy' – that is, to get the biggest potential audience, the kids, to buy the stuff. And he was assured that he can not do that with the Stones any longer (he was right about that). And probably he thought that his old fans – the Stones fans – will just follow him (or maybe he thought that those people might have grown up a bit too much, are not any longer into pop music. So one cannot count on them).
But he failed to charm either of the potential audiences. It sold rather well, yes, but I claim – no statistics to show though – that the people who were actually buying the record were mostly 'non-trendy' Stones fans (who were curious to get it because it was Jagger). There was no new ”Miss You” in it to charm non-Stones fan audiences.
It could be that it was almost a mission impossible to mix those two trends, and what Jagger tried was doomed to fail (he wasn't the only 60's rock legend discovering that – just listen, for example, Dylan's EMPIRE BURLESQUE from the same year. But then again, people like Paul Simon and David Bowie were exceptions). What worked still in 1978 (mixing the Stones with currents like disco and punk), didn't work any longer in 1985 (to come to terms with Prince, Michael Jackson or Duran Duran). Or we can say it: trying to cope with the trends convincingly was not any longer in Jagger's grasp. What worked for 70's stars Bowie or Freddie Mercury didn't work for 60's icon Jagger. He was too much that Jagger, a Rolling Stone. (Remember, I was still a kid also at the time, and very reflective what the people of my age were into).
SHE'S THE BOSS is by no means a bad record, but not very memorable either. ”Just Another Night” is a good song and it was a minor hit single. Compared to the Stones music at the time (think especially of UNDERCOVER), the album was much more melodic generally. We haven't heard pure ballads like ”Hard Woman” for ages. In some songs the mix of dance music, latest sounds and the old rhythm and blues works rather well. I think the weakest cut actually is the only pure Stones rocker, ”Lonely At The Top”- probably aimed to please the 'old' fanbase – since it so clearly shows the lack of the real magic. Rocking and trying way too hard without a natural swing and flow. My guess is that when Keith Richards was criticising SHES THE BOSS for being ”too Stonesy” (against the usual perception of his fans), he had this song in particular in mind. If Jagger feels the Stones as a framework being too limited, why he wants to do similar music on his own? Since it was an ever-important opening track, it probably put too much mood for the whole record.
- Doxa
I read your thoughts on Mick Jagger’s solo albums yesterday, Doxa, as I prepared myself for the first soccer match of the season. I can’t now give a response to all of your thoughts, I am sorry. I think I have some disagreement to your perspectives. I content myself, however, to come with a most limited answer to present one thought only.
I think SHE’S THE BOSS is somewhat better than its rumour. It features maybe only one song, that is great. In my opinion, “Hard Woman” lives up to that estimation. I read, Doxa, that you name it as a ballad, even a pure ballad. I have never thought about this song as ballad. Not only am I reluctant to that term so much in use. More important, other aspects have always absorbed me. That is, for me this song has got those extra-musical qualities, which contribute to lift some Stones songs, “Hard Woman” touching on one fatal love better to be separated from. And myself I seem to feel it very much. (I would have loved the Stones to record it.)
Am I the only one to adore “Hard Woman”?
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 3, 2017 19:24
Love Hard Woman (the album version). It is indeed a ballad.
My faves on STB are Hard Woman and Secrets.
My faves on STB are Hard Woman and Secrets.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: April 3, 2017 19:28
I have to admit i love both versions of Hard Woman. Its impossible for Mick to completely deny or hide his genius. Hard Woman is genius. Its the melodies, they just pour out of him, and they come so naturally, that's Micks yin to Keith's yang.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: April 3, 2017 19:32
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
stone4ever
Sleep Tonight and Too Rude from DW are better than all Jagger solo album's put together.
That's a good argument. Throw Harlem Shuffle and Had It With You in there and it's even better.
OK i go with that, you got a deal
Seriously though there are some great songs scattered through Micks solo albums.
I just don't like the way he sings them and i don't like the production of them.
Its a catch 22 for Mick , he would hate to admit it very often but Keith really does bring out the best in him.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: April 3, 2017 19:38
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
stone4ever
Sleep Tonight and Too Rude from DW are better than all Jagger solo album's put together.
That's a good argument. Throw Harlem Shuffle and Had It With You in there and it's even better.
I just realized this is fascinating reading GasLightStreet.
As much as you hate Dirty Work, you go so far as to say that you think 4 tracks on it are better than all Micks solo Albums.
I didn't think it was possible to find someone hate Micks solo work to the extent that i do. Of course nothing Mick does is all bad, its just that before he went solo i had such high regard for him, i thought he was a god like genius, i really did.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-04-03 19:50 by stone4ever.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: April 3, 2017 19:53
Quote
stone4everQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
stone4ever
Sleep Tonight and Too Rude from DW are better than all Jagger solo album's put together.
That's a good argument. Throw Harlem Shuffle and Had It With You in there and it's even better.
I just realized this if fascinating reading GasLightStreet.
As much as you hate Dirty Work, you go so far as to say that you think 4 tracks on it are better than all Micks solo Albums.
I didn't think it was possible to find someone hate Micks solo work to the extent that i do. Of course nothing Mick does is all bad, its just that before he went solo i had such high regard for him, i thought he was a god like genius, i really did.
It's a weird concept, really. Jagger has done some great solo songs and he's done some good solo songs - but aside from Stones fans, nobody even knows about them (the same for Keith's solo songs/albums). Some of them may have been better as Stones songs. But he's done a lot more bad solo songs than good solo songs. I've always thought if he had a sympathetic guitarist instead of a wanking Jeff Beck on some songs they'd be better, more listenable.
I say the 4 songs from DIRTY WORK in jest - although there are days when I think it's true. Are they really better than any of Jagger's solo songs? Or are those 4 DW songs just good enough?
To sum that up, I listen to songs from WS more than anything from DW, and for that matter just a few from PRIMITIVE COOL more than any from DW. So in that aspect, yes, some of Jagger's solo songs are better than the best 4 on DW. As much as I like Harlem Shuffle I'd really rather listen to Hang On To Me Tonight. As much as I like Had It With You I'd really rather listen to Put Me In The Trash. Too Rude - well, Kow Tow is more preferable. Sleep Tonight? Gimme Wired All Night.
Would Take It So Hard be better with Jagger singing? I dunno. I think that is a Keith Stones song if there ever wasn't one. Keith has a few that are great solo songs, a few that are good solo songs - and then there are some that certainly could've been better with Mick singing them - or even having a hand in writing them. But to my ears it's less so to Keith than it is to Mick's solo work.
Sometimes doing something different isn't automatically better (or good). And that pretty much sums up Mick's solo career.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: April 3, 2017 20:46
I sum up the Glimmer twins solo work like this.
Mick first.
He didn't appear to do himself any favors by going solo musically or financially. Perhaps Mick chose the wrong decade to go solo, i don't know that any decade would have been good for Mick because the sacrifice would have been the 70's and man the Stones were incredible during that time. Had he gone solo in the 90's he might have had a better result commercially, but his solo efforts didn't really have enough Rock muscle in them to cater for what possibly could have been a more harder heavier attempt at getting a bit more metal into his Rock without Keith. That opportunity seemed to go over Micks head with his very weak effeminate vocal stance during his solo work. I was as surprised as the next man that no one wanted or cared for Mick as a solo artist except for a few die hard fans, mostly they tend to live on this thread lol. To this day i don't understand why he did it, its not like he went in a different direction musically, it feels like he just went solo for the sake of it with no game plan.
Keith next.
Obviously i am biased but i think Keith came out of his solo work better for doing it. As he said at the time he never wanted to go solo , he viewed himself as a failure in that he couldn't keep the Stones together. Perhaps Keith asked for it, i imagine Keith's huge ego fueled by Vodka and vast amounts of Cocaine made him unmanageable in Micks eyes. Mick may have felt forced to go solo as he found Keith too much to handle. That's my guess, Mick is the alpha male and he likes his own way, no room for two leaders in the Stones, i imagine Mick felt threatened by Keith as he gradually rose out of his heroin induced calm to this man wanting to have more say in the Stones musically.
Keith had to find a discipline in himself by working solo, I remember Mick making this observation, he said that Keith would take as long as he liked to work on a song and generally left the production and finishing to Mick.
I think Keith also found his voice by going solo, up to Talk Is Cheap we only ever got a song or two from Keith and in that respect i'm pleased Mick went solo or we would never have realized what Keith had to offer vocally. Admittedly, like Dylan, Keith's voice is not for everyone but i appreciate its passion and soul.
Yeah i like Keith's three albums, i wouldn't trade them for anything, i'm pleased they happened , and i suppose i have Mick to thank for them.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2017-04-03 21:26 by stone4ever.
Mick first.
He didn't appear to do himself any favors by going solo musically or financially. Perhaps Mick chose the wrong decade to go solo, i don't know that any decade would have been good for Mick because the sacrifice would have been the 70's and man the Stones were incredible during that time. Had he gone solo in the 90's he might have had a better result commercially, but his solo efforts didn't really have enough Rock muscle in them to cater for what possibly could have been a more harder heavier attempt at getting a bit more metal into his Rock without Keith. That opportunity seemed to go over Micks head with his very weak effeminate vocal stance during his solo work. I was as surprised as the next man that no one wanted or cared for Mick as a solo artist except for a few die hard fans, mostly they tend to live on this thread lol. To this day i don't understand why he did it, its not like he went in a different direction musically, it feels like he just went solo for the sake of it with no game plan.
Keith next.
Obviously i am biased but i think Keith came out of his solo work better for doing it. As he said at the time he never wanted to go solo , he viewed himself as a failure in that he couldn't keep the Stones together. Perhaps Keith asked for it, i imagine Keith's huge ego fueled by Vodka and vast amounts of Cocaine made him unmanageable in Micks eyes. Mick may have felt forced to go solo as he found Keith too much to handle. That's my guess, Mick is the alpha male and he likes his own way, no room for two leaders in the Stones, i imagine Mick felt threatened by Keith as he gradually rose out of his heroin induced calm to this man wanting to have more say in the Stones musically.
Keith had to find a discipline in himself by working solo, I remember Mick making this observation, he said that Keith would take as long as he liked to work on a song and generally left the production and finishing to Mick.
I think Keith also found his voice by going solo, up to Talk Is Cheap we only ever got a song or two from Keith and in that respect i'm pleased Mick went solo or we would never have realized what Keith had to offer vocally. Admittedly, like Dylan, Keith's voice is not for everyone but i appreciate its passion and soul.
Yeah i like Keith's three albums, i wouldn't trade them for anything, i'm pleased they happened , and i suppose i have Mick to thank for them.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2017-04-03 21:26 by stone4ever.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
LeonidP
()
Date: April 3, 2017 21:24
Quick Mick solo summary:
She's The Boss = crap
Primitive Cool = average
Wandering Spirit = eggcellent
Goddess in the doorway = dogshit
Alfie = average
SuperHeavy = eggcellent
Oh, and his singles/one-offs, etc.,
such as Dancing In the Street, State of Shock, Will.I.Am, etc. = crap
She's The Boss = crap
Primitive Cool = average
Wandering Spirit = eggcellent
Goddess in the doorway = dogshit
Alfie = average
SuperHeavy = eggcellent
Oh, and his singles/one-offs, etc.,
such as Dancing In the Street, State of Shock, Will.I.Am, etc. = crap
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
HMS
()
Date: April 3, 2017 21:43
Quote
LeonidP
his singles/one-offs, etc.,
such as Dancing In the Street, State of Shock, Will.I.Am, etc. = crap
State Of Shock isn´t crap, imo. It´s excellent, pure genius.
Ruthless People is one of the very best songs he ever recorded as a solo-artist, it´s greater than great, simply marvelous. Dancing In The Street is very enjoyable.
Re: Mick Jagger solo works
Posted by:
LeonidP
()
Date: April 3, 2017 21:47
Quote
HMSQuote
LeonidP
his singles/one-offs, etc.,
such as Dancing In the Street, State of Shock, Will.I.Am, etc. = crap
State Of Shock isn´t crap, imo. It´s excellent, pure genius.
Ruthless People is one of the very best songs he ever recorded as a solo-artist, it´s greater than great, simply marvelous. Dancing In The Street is very enjoyable.
Overall crap, that doesn't mean there aren't some good ones.
Per the ones you specifically mentioned ...
State of Shock = below average
Ruthless People = average
Dancing in the Street = about the worst thing I've ever heard in my life
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
alexander paul , Bjorn , Boett , IsakSun , Martin90 , Mirko , MJAGGER123 , monkeymantoo , More Hot Rocks , PaintMonkeyManBlack , perkmo , SKILLS , steffialicia , tommyturbo76 , voodoodrew
Guests:
2009
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10