Quote
BroomWagon
[hipquotient.com]
Discusses.

Painting by the late artist Guy Peellaert, from Rock Dreams, the book he co-published with rock journalist Nik Cohn. It presents a series of fantasy pictures of popular rock bands and artists – often portrayed at their imaginary worst. This depiction of the Rolling Stones was probably inspired by Brian Jones’s Nazi portrait. It is NOT meant to imply that the Stones were Third Reich followers or pedophiles.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-08-10 20:07 by 2000 LYFH.

i always have a laugh when i see attempts at molding the real Rolling Stones into the modern politically correct age.

No, uncle Keith and uncle Mick were not nice people when they were young,they got into some really dark shit and it wasn't all an act.

the iron crosses and swastikas on the guitar are really just an ancient sanskrit symbol and Keith was trying to project peace and light...uh.. yeah, let's go with that.

Guy Peellart,the painter of the evil looking portrait in 2000 LYFHs post also did the cover of it's only rock and roll.they weren't worried about upsetting their corporate sponsors in those days.

Quote
lem motlow
They weren't worried about upsetting their corporate sponsors in those days.

Well said! Since 1989 Jagger's spending his time re-writing in pink the past of the band "yeah we'd visit sick children in hospitals!" "Robert Frank made a work of fiction with CS Blues. he directed the action and the roadies became actors".

A new storytelling for a new clean era and a new market (the family market) to conquer... Mick the ever-subtle understood the drug image of the 60's and 70's died in the 80's where it was all about being clean being smart being a yuppie.

Only Keef didn't get Mick's memo : "yeah I snorted Dad's ashes. Sh!t happens ya know (snif)"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-08-10 21:24 by dcba.

Quote
dcba

Only Keef didn't get Mick's memo : "yeah I snorted Dad's ashes. Sh!t happens ya know (snif)"

sorry,but the people hanging on to this keith as the keeper of the old rebel flame thing are as out of touch with reality as the ones rewriting the bands history.

Keith presents himself as a family man who poses in vanity fair with his grandchildren and uses his image to sell expensive luggage and clothing..
the "snorting dads ashes" thing made him look at best like someone making a sad attempt at being outrageous and at worst a wacko who is suffering from some sort of mental disorder.
he hasn't pulled any weird stunts like that since,his corporate sponsors probably asked him not to.

Quote
lem motlow

Quote
dcba

Only Keef didn't get Mick's memo : "yeah I snorted Dad's ashes. Sh!t happens ya know (snif)"

sorry,but the people hanging on to this keith as the keeper of the old rebel flame thing are as out of touch with reality as the ones rewriting the bands history.

Keith presents himself as a family man who poses in vanity fair with his grandchildren and uses his image to sell expensive luggage and clothing..
the "snorting dads ashes" thing made him look at best like someone making a sad attempt at being outrageous and at worst a wacko who is suffering from some sort of mental disorder.
he hasn't pulled any weird stunts like that since,his corporate sponsors probably asked him not to.

I don't think Keith is unduly concerned about the thoughts of corporate sponsors. If anything, I'm sure they're happy to indulge HIM. (As they should be. )

that's cute-i love it when fans still buy into the rebel that lives by his own rules thing.
the Stones,all of them, do what works for the bottom line.

the story of Keith putting Justin Beiber in his place put it into perspective for me-

the media and fans were all over the story,"keith called him a wannabe,keith said this,keith said that"

truth is they sat down for drinks and talked at a resort most fans could never afford to visit.they had alot in common, not the least of which was their friend Thomas Ayad who was sadly killed in the Paris attack and their mutual clothing sponsor Yves saint laurent.

there are pictures of them both wearing the same shiny disco jacket with the palm trees on it during live performances,that's todays reality.it's not 1972 anymore.

i still love the Stones but these guys are all about money and celebrity,in that order-music is just a means to an end at this point.to think differently is just childish.

Quote
2000 LYFH

Quote
BroomWagon
[hipquotient.com]
Discusses.

Painting by the late artist Guy Peellaert, from Rock Dreams, the book he co-published with rock journalist Nik Cohn. It presents a series of fantasy pictures of popular rock bands and artists – often portrayed at their imaginary worst. This depiction of the Rolling Stones was probably inspired by Brian Jones’s Nazi portrait. It is NOT meant to imply that the Stones were Third Reich followers or pedophiles.

Where is bill?

I wish this thread would drop off. Hurts to look at it. Disgusting anf hateful symbol.

Quote
lem motlow
that's cute-i love it when fans still buy into the rebel that lives by his own rules thing.
the Stones,all of them, do what works for the bottom line.

the story of Keith putting Justin Beiber in his place put it into perspective for me-

the media and fans were all over the story,"keith called him a wannabe,keith said this,keith said that"

truth is they sat down for drinks and talked at a resort most fans could never afford to visit.they had alot in common, not the least of which was their friend Thomas Ayad who was sadly killed in the Paris attack and their mutual clothing sponsor Yves saint laurent.

there are pictures of them both wearing the same shiny disco jacket with the palm trees on it during live performances,that's todays reality.it's not 1972 anymore.

i still love the Stones but these guys are all about money and celebrity,in that order-music is just a means to an end at this point.to think differently is just childish.

I think you're missing the point, which is that Keith doesn't have to worry about losing any money because of corporate sponsors taking offense. He's got sponsors lined up around the block, they all do. (Which I don't think is a childish view.)

Quote
alimente
I think it's not that simple. Trying to provoke is surely one aspect, but for some it's also a kind of weird fascination for Nazi stuff, possibly just like some are truly fascinated by Satan and evil forces, while for others it's just posing for provocational purposes which does not go deeper than that.

Of course.

Quote
lem motlow
i always have a laugh when i see attempts at molding the real Rolling Stones into the modern politically correct age.

No, uncle Keith and uncle Mick were not nice people when they were young,they got into some really dark shit and it wasn't all an act.

the iron crosses and swastikas on the guitar are really just an ancient sanskrit symbol and Keith was trying to project peace and light...uh.. yeah, let's go with that.

Guy Peellart,the painter of the evil looking portrait in 2000 LYFHs post also did the cover of it's only rock and roll.they weren't worried about upsetting their corporate sponsors in those days.

Spot on

Quote
wonderboy
Sporting such symbols is also a way to mock the Nazis. The Nazis took them seriously, you are treating them as a joke or a silly fashion statement.
It's also pretty common for people who believe they are oppressed to ironically take on the garb of their oppressors.
And a lot of it is just play, campy stuff like dressing up in women's clothes.

I don't see it as mocking, it's just fashion. The uniforms looked good despite the disgusting individuals who once wore them and designed them. And partly because since these are cloths and crosses worn by the worst kind of evil bastards in history he or she who wears them has a natural devilish aura.

As far as I understand art, it's not just about what the artist is expressing, but also
about what the audience is making of it.
So, instead of trying to figure out the motives Keith had to have swasticas on his guitar,
try to figure out what it does to yourself.

Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away

Corporate sponsors!
On his recent documentary, didn't Keith make some derogatry remarks about the marketing world (in reference to his brief career in the world of advertising) ?

"(Culture)is divided into those who use an urn as a chamber pot and those who use a chamber pot as an urn"...Karl Kraus

Quote
Aquamarine
I think you're missing the point, which is that Keith doesn't have to worry about losing any money because of corporate sponsors taking offense. He's got sponsors lined up around the block, they all do. (Which I don't think is a childish view.)

no actually it's you who are missing the point.you are buying into some bullshit image that keith does and says what he wants and can get away with it because of who he is-that's nonsense.

if he played that guitar with the iron crosses and swastikas on it for one show in 2016 it would go viral on the internet,the anti-defamation league would denounce him,he would be called an anti-semite,fans on facebook and twitter would be blasting him,the media would turn on him like a rabid dog and he would be asked to apologize.

if he didn't his yves saint laurent contract would be gone,there would be no more louis vuitton ads or anything else coming his way-he would be a pariah in the entertainment world. the Stones wouldn't be able to get a bubblegum company to sponsor their next tour let alone the huge beer and credit card companies they get now.
we live in a hyper sensitive environment in todays age with respect to religious and ethnic issues.anyone who thinks they are above it will get the world landing on their head in short order.if you think people who are in the public eye as much as Mick and Keith aren't insanely aware of this you're living in a fantasyland.

The Stones-ALL OF THEM- are sanitized,non offensive cartoon charactors who say and do exactly what is needed to keep the public from being offended and the corporate dollars rolling in.if some fans still believe that any of the old "screw em all" attitude is present that just means the PR machine is still working really well.

Quote
lem motlow

Quote
Aquamarine
I think you're missing the point, which is that Keith doesn't have to worry about losing any money because of corporate sponsors taking offense. He's got sponsors lined up around the block, they all do. (Which I don't think is a childish view.)

no actually it's you who are missing the point.you are buying into some bullshit image that keith does and says what he wants and can get away with it because of who he is-that's nonsense.

if he played that guitar with the iron crosses and swastikas on it for one show in 2016 it would go viral on the internet,the anti-defamation league would denounce him,he would be called an anti-semite,fans on facebook and twitter would be blasting him,the media would turn on him like a rabid dog and he would be asked to apologize.

if he didn't his yves saint laurent contract would be gone,there would be no more louis vuitton ads or anything else coming his way-he would be a pariah in the entertainment world. the Stones wouldn't be able to get a bubblegum company to sponsor their next tour let alone the huge beer and credit card companies they get now.
we live in a hyper sensitive environment in todays age with respect to religious and ethnic issues.anyone who thinks they are above it will get the world landing on their head in short order.if you think people who are in the public eye as much as Mick and Keith aren't insanely aware of this you're living in a fantasyland.

The Stones-ALL OF THEM- are sanitized,non offensive cartoon charactors who say and do exactly what is needed to keep the public from being offended and the corporate dollars rolling in.if some fans still believe that any of the old "screw em all" attitude is present that just means the PR machine is still working really well.

Is this stuff worse for the sponsors than him snorting a dead man's ashes?

well let's see-


sitting home wacked out of your skull snorting ashes-creepy,bizzare -but not really offensive.

wearing the symbol of a group of psychos who murdered 3 million jewish people...

hmmm,yeah there might be a slight difference,YA THINK ????

Quote
lem motlow

Quote
Aquamarine
I think you're missing the point, which is that Keith doesn't have to worry about losing any money because of corporate sponsors taking offense. He's got sponsors lined up around the block, they all do. (Which I don't think is a childish view.)

no actually it's you who are missing the point.you are buying into some bullshit image that keith does and says what he wants and can get away with it because of who he is-that's nonsense.

if he played that guitar with the iron crosses and swastikas on it for one show in 2016 it would go viral on the internet,the anti-defamation league would denounce him,he would be called an anti-semite,fans on facebook and twitter would be blasting him,the media would turn on him like a rabid dog and he would be asked to apologize.

if he didn't his yves saint laurent contract would be gone,there would be no more louis vuitton ads or anything else coming his way-he would be a pariah in the entertainment world. the Stones wouldn't be able to get a bubblegum company to sponsor their next tour let alone the huge beer and credit card companies they get now.
we live in a hyper sensitive environment in todays age with respect to religious and ethnic issues.anyone who thinks they are above it will get the world landing on their head in short order.if you think people who are in the public eye as much as Mick and Keith aren't insanely aware of this you're living in a fantasyland.

The Stones-ALL OF THEM- are sanitized,non offensive cartoon charactors who say and do exactly what is needed to keep the public from being offended and the corporate dollars rolling in.if some fans still believe that any of the old "screw em all" attitude is present that just means the PR machine is still working really well.

Sigh. I am not living in a fantasyland, I am an intelligent adult just like you, and my cynical view is that there is pretty much nothing anything any of them could do that wouldn't leave many corporate entities still willing to sponsor them. They'd just spin whatever it was and normal service would be resumed.

Mel Gibson and John Galliano probably thought that too...

Keith just wanted to be left alone to do whatever he felt like doing.
In that sense, he got just what he wanted. What is there left to 'rebel' against?
Keith was living in a country home and had a place in the south of France before he was 30, and has been hanging out with aristocats and the nouveau riche his whole life. Mick, Keith and Charlie are pretty refined, cultured men when you get right down to it. Nobody really believes they're outsiders or renegades anymore.

Quote
lem motlow
wearing the symbol of a group of psychos who murdered 3 million jewish people...

I hate to be petty, but I think it was six. Millions...

Quote
lem motlow
well let's see-


sitting home wacked out of your skull snorting ashes-creepy,bizzare -but not really offensive.

wearing the symbol of a group of psychos who murdered 3 million jewish people...

hmmm,yeah there might be a slight difference,YA THINK ????

My point was that both weren't exactly sponsor-friendly activities...

In Sanskrit the Swastika was a peaceful symbol; the worst thing was that some lunatics hijacked the imagery.

Quote
tomcasagranda
In Sanskrit the Swastika was a peaceful symbol; the worst thing was that some lunatics hijacked the imagery.

No, the worst thing was that 8 of my great uncles perished in Auschwitz. In the modern era, that symbol means one thing only.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016-08-12 00:39 by steffialicia.

Quote
steffialicia

Quote
tomcasagranda
In Sanskrit the Swastika was a peaceful symbol; the worst thing was that some lunatics hijacked the imagery.

No, the worst thing was that 8 of my great uncles perished in Auschwitz. In the modern era, that symbol means one thing only.

Absolutely right. I'm german and I would not waste a single thought about wearing such a symbol, never did and never will - no matter what it meant in ancient times until the Nazis took it for them. If I ever felt like provoking or looking "tres chic", there were other means to achieve this. I mean, the ones who one really provokes by wearing this symbol are first and foremost the relatives of millions of victims. It's just tasteless and disgusting.

Thank you for your sensitivity. My great grandmother was German too!

Hi Matthijs, geen enkele Nederlandse onderwijsinstelling liet of laat nazi uniformen toe.

one of the most politically incorrect bands ever - my beloved Rolling Stones - and this 'irritated you??' - what did you expect some flowers and hearts on an old guitar Keith had around - of course he was trying to be offensive and piss people off - also - you misspelled the word 'swastika"...

did the ad for Black and Blue 'irritate' you - did the line about black girls in "Some Girls "irritate you " - did Brian's Nazi outfit "irritate you"? did Keith driving around in a Nazi Staff Car in the 60's "irritate you"

go listen to the Bugaloos and stop whining about insignificant nonsense...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-08-15 16:45 by cowboytoast.

Quote
Stoneage
To carve swastikas in wood - wasn't that what young boys, tired of school, did to pass time during long school days?

IF any politician from any country had done that 30 years ago they would be Crucified to this day but if any musician, actor or so called artist had done it the apologists come out in full force. Talk about double standards



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-08-15 16:47 by virgil.