Quote
spsimmons
Sounds like it is written by someone trying to prove how "WOKE" they are. Ahhhh, this current generation, I tell ya.

It was written 10 years ago, before "being woke" was a thing.

"They are awful...

...but I like them ! "

[ You guys don't remember Dick Emery ? ]

Quote
Spud
"They are awful...

...but I like them ! "

[ You guys don't remember Dick Emery ? ]

Oh, I do indeed.

A silly click bait article.

This thread has 1900 views.

That website and article just got about half those views. For free.

Good job!

Even if it's supposed to be funny, it's full of American redundancy and idiocy.

"There’s something unnatural about 70-somethings consuming unending cascades of pure, uncut cocaine."

Keith says some things... but this bearded shitsicle implies more than one, which is, from what any Stones fan knows, hasn't happened in quite a long time.


"Maybe they’re back on the wagon, maybe they aren’t" is redundancy at its finest. In fact, it negates the whole mindset. It says absolutely NOTHING.

Uh, "the Stones’ horribly dated aesthetic" - which era? Which tour? Which album? What an ignorant ape.

"Despite the rough-and-tumble act, Mick Jagger was at London School of Economics before the band got serious"... uh, well, I guess that just makes it certifiable that poor people or not rich people... can't get into colleges?

"More than proving that the band’s members were macho, self-obsessed stereotypes (a virtue in some people’s minds, I suppose), it offered a clear case for the idea that they weren’t so much subversives as gigantic @#$%&." Poor little ape obviously knows nothing about being in a band... with a camera around.

"Whether or not they actually hired the Hell’s Angels (or just traded beer for half-assed semi-security), the Stones certainly could have done more to stop the destruction." I hear that wearing capes solves everything.

"In fact, they didn’t really invent anything. Bands like the Byrds, the Hollies, and Them debuted around the same time with dissonant hits that were every bit as inspired." YAWN.

"Entire dissertations have expounded on the overtly sexist, violent, and borderline psychopathic lyrics of songs like “Paint it Black,” “Mother’s Little Helper,” “Brown Sugar,” and “Sticky Fingers.” Are those songs overtly sexist, violent and borderline psychopathic? Anyone know the words to Sticky Fingers?

"Rather than offer an inclusive revolution, the Stones set back the cause"... What cause was that?

"OK, sure, the Stones were seminal, but the Beatles had an album out for two years before they even entered the arena." Poor little couch riding millennial doesn't understand that there weren't any apps or YouTube back then.

"Keith Richards is famous for saying “If I’m singing ‘Satisfaction’ when I’m 40, I’m going to kill myself.” Maybe he actually meant 80?" Nice quote.

“Entire dissertations have been written...” Can the author quote even a single one? “Dissonant hits” by the Byrds, the Hollies and Them. Is he referring to short, catchy pop tunes that may contain some incidental notes outside of the prevailing key? ... If this article were a hard copy, the paper would curl up its edges in embarrassment and let the office fan blow it towards a less conspicuous area, perhaps the “circular file”, or even the restroom ( assuming the paper were thin enough to be of use).

Who gives a damn on that article? There've been far more articles on the Stones' crappiness, particularly in the 1960s and 70s.

Just ignore, take a deep sip out of either bottle, put on a Stones record, relax and smile :-)

milkcow

Quote
Carnaby
LOL

[flavorwire.com]

I am all for critically looking at the Stones, but this article doesn't do that. In fact, it doesn't speak about the Stones (a group of people that have made music) at all. It speaks about the looks of other people's daughters (and ironically enough about other people's sexism without seeing his own) and who is and who isn't working class as if in any way that is important for anything.
So, it's a very conservative, narrow-minded article about nothing really.

It's actually remarkable how little is written in general anywhere (beit it positive or negative) about the music of the Stones. Which is really all that matters and the only reason they are still around.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-04-12 10:39 by matxil.

Whether the passing of time will focus more attention on their music and its legacy remains to be seen...

...but the focus has always been on other things I suspect largely because the band has down the years developed and maintained such a larger than life character.

Quote
Meise
Who gives a damn on that article?

For a second, if you just look at it right, it reads as if HMS is writing about how good anything except DIRTY WORK is hailed while DIRTY WORK is the poor victim.

Rubbish article.

If it wasn't for The Stones, there'd be no post British wave bands such as The Count Five, The Seeds, 13th Floor Elevators, Sir Douglas Quintet, or anything else on the Nuggets compilation.

Secondly, personal insults about family members and their perceived looks doesn't merit anything in my book, and is a cheap shot.

Thirdly: how can someone take the moral high ground on drug use, when some of their biggest acts destroyed themselves, i.e Michael Jackson, Prince, Elvis Presley etc ?. Or even Kurt Cobain.

A stupid set of premises, with no evident logic to back up, so not worth considering.