For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
Stoneage
The usual gossip stuff from GQ. There is some truth in there. But nothing that hasn't already been dissected. On the other hand - very few of GQ readers are Stones fans to begin with.
So it's news for them. Some of the "lessons" taught are false though. Like number 5: The Rolling Stones don't get better with age. At least not after 40...
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
Stoneage
The usual gossip stuff from GQ. There is some truth in there. But nothing that hasn't already been dissected. On the other hand - very few of GQ readers are Stones fans to begin with.
So it's news for them. Some of the "lessons" taught are false though. Like number 5: The Rolling Stones don't get better with age. At least not after 40...
disagree with you...as people they are better...kinder, nicer
Quote
StoneageQuote
treaclefingersQuote
Stoneage
The usual gossip stuff from GQ. There is some truth in there. But nothing that hasn't already been dissected. On the other hand - very few of GQ readers are Stones fans to begin with.
So it's news for them. Some of the "lessons" taught are false though. Like number 5: The Rolling Stones don't get better with age. At least not after 40...
disagree with you...as people they are better...kinder, nicer
I'm sure they are, Treacles. Most people mellow with age. GQ was talking about the artistic output though: "Almost every artist runs out of puff in their middle years. But the true greats – Philip Roth, Pablo Picasso, the Stones – find an extra gear just as their contemporaries are slowing down or falling off their perch. Almost unbelievably, The Rolling Stones in their seventies are the most exciting live act on the planet."
There I disagree with them. Somewhat at least...
Quote
Stoneage
"Almost every artist runs out of puff in their middle years. But the true greats – Philip Roth, Pablo Picasso, the Stones – find an extra gear just as their contemporaries are slowing down or falling off their perch.
Quote
MisterDDDDQuote
StoneageQuote
treaclefingersQuote
Stoneage
The usual gossip stuff from GQ. There is some truth in there. But nothing that hasn't already been dissected. On the other hand - very few of GQ readers are Stones fans to begin with.
So it's news for them. Some of the "lessons" taught are false though. Like number 5: The Rolling Stones don't get better with age. At least not after 40...
disagree with you...as people they are better...kinder, nicer
I'm sure they are, Treacles. Most people mellow with age. GQ was talking about the artistic output though: "Almost every artist runs out of puff in their middle years. But the true greats – Philip Roth, Pablo Picasso, the Stones – find an extra gear just as their contemporaries are slowing down or falling off their perch. Almost unbelievably, The Rolling Stones in their seventies are the most exciting live act on the planet."
There I disagree with them. Somewhat at least...
GQ wasn't talking about their "artistic output" in general as you suggest though.
They (as you can see in your quote) are specifically referring to their live act.
* The Rolling Stones in their seventies are the most exciting live act on the planet
Accurate.
Quote
24FPSQuote
MisterDDDDQuote
StoneageQuote
treaclefingersQuote
Stoneage
The usual gossip stuff from GQ. There is some truth in there. But nothing that hasn't already been dissected. On the other hand - very few of GQ readers are Stones fans to begin with.
So it's news for them. Some of the "lessons" taught are false though. Like number 5: The Rolling Stones don't get better with age. At least not after 40...
disagree with you...as people they are better...kinder, nicer
I'm sure they are, Treacles. Most people mellow with age. GQ was talking about the artistic output though: "Almost every artist runs out of puff in their middle years. But the true greats – Philip Roth, Pablo Picasso, the Stones – find an extra gear just as their contemporaries are slowing down or falling off their perch. Almost unbelievably, The Rolling Stones in their seventies are the most exciting live act on the planet."
There I disagree with them. Somewhat at least...
GQ wasn't talking about their "artistic output" in general as you suggest though.
They (as you can see in your quote) are specifically referring to their live act.
* The Rolling Stones in their seventies are the most exciting live act on the planet
Accurate.
That's from lack of competition. Few kids are going into the rock and roll business today. The only way the Stones are better is if they dug deeper into the blues. That's the only significant artistic accomplishment they've made in the Post-Wyman era. (Not including bonus cuts from earlier eras).
Quote
MisterDDDDQuote
24FPSQuote
MisterDDDDQuote
StoneageQuote
treaclefingersQuote
Stoneage
The usual gossip stuff from GQ. There is some truth in there. But nothing that hasn't already been dissected. On the other hand - very few of GQ readers are Stones fans to begin with.
So it's news for them. Some of the "lessons" taught are false though. Like number 5: The Rolling Stones don't get better with age. At least not after 40...
disagree with you...as people they are better...kinder, nicer
I'm sure they are, Treacles. Most people mellow with age. GQ was talking about the artistic output though: "Almost every artist runs out of puff in their middle years. But the true greats – Philip Roth, Pablo Picasso, the Stones – find an extra gear just as their contemporaries are slowing down or falling off their perch. Almost unbelievably, The Rolling Stones in their seventies are the most exciting live act on the planet."
There I disagree with them. Somewhat at least...
GQ wasn't talking about their "artistic output" in general as you suggest though.
They (as you can see in your quote) are specifically referring to their live act.
* The Rolling Stones in their seventies are the most exciting live act on the planet
Accurate.
That's from lack of competition. Few kids are going into the rock and roll business today. The only way the Stones are better is if they dug deeper into the blues. That's the only significant artistic accomplishment they've made in the Post-Wyman era. (Not including bonus cuts from earlier eras).
Discounting their literal record(s) breaking live performances and tours to bolster your digs at other aspects of their career doesn't make them any less real or relevant.
Quote
georgie48
Being one of "the gang of 70+" since this year I can't but enjoy reading this article
It is not 100% pure, but what is in life? Through my life I had to often hear "aren't you getting too old for this (going to Stones concerts, wearing Stones shirts/jackets, etc., etc) and my "standard" answer was/is always "Hey, Mick and Keith are around 5 years ahead of my, and as long as that is the case, I am YOUNG, sharing their lives through their music and concerts". And without trying to sound snobbish, I feel it has a positive impact on my surroundings.
So, I welcome everyone to go and see them next year . I will cross the Pacific as well as the Atlantic for that and I think it's "peanuts".
Great photo's by the way.
Happy New Year to all