Re: MICK JAGGER &KEITH RICHARDS
Date: October 9, 2005 07:12
harlem shuffle Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>,i can,t read anything here
> then,in all debates here if jaggers name turned
> up,then comes all his enemies,you and other
> socalled stonesfans in just to bash jagger,for
> almost everything he has done in his 42 years in
> rockmusic
Find one instance on this board or any other where I bashed Jagger (or any Stone, for that matter), just one. Actually, let me save you the trouble: you can't, because I haven't and I never would. You on the other hand have nothing good to say about Keith's albums, not one good word. Get some help, and stop calling yourself a Stones fan, because according to your own definition you're not.
You're interpreting my preference of Keith's albums over Mick's as bashing? Seek counselling at your convenience, because that's not bashing, that's preference. It's akin to saying because I like EOMS more than BB that I'm bashing BB. Hardly, I love BB, I just like EOMS more than I like BB.
By the way, it's interesting that in your own defense of Jagger you never speak of the album but only of individual songs, and similarly when you say that Keith's solo work is really bad (something I NEVER say about Jagger, by the way), you only speak about individual songs. Try to remember that I spoke about the album as a whole, not as individual songs, and I spoke about the tightness of the Winos as a group that helped create the album's success, and its wholeness.
You have no argument against that because there's nothing like a band or group approach to Mick's solo albums, and that's his choice, he's truly a solo artist on his solo projects. On the other hand, I admire Keith's ability to form a group that plays well together and realizes that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. He's done it with the Stones and he's done it with the Winos.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-10-09 08:27 by camper88.