how come when we see rock icons that have died they mention
janis , hendrix, morrison, moon , elvis, bonham, but never brian jones
why is he ignored when it comes to rock n roll death, no respect, and he was the first to go

If there's a heaven, I do hope Brian won't read the posts on this board crying for Mick Taylor to come back!!!!!!


Truth is stranger than fiction

stoned greetings
G. The Cock

Brian could play any instrument, but his slide and harmonica playing is some of the best ever. I wish he was up there on list, but, I think his amazing talent is overlooked, due to the fact that he died so early, and played so many instruments.

JR

I guess he's often overlooked 'cause he was no frontman as Jimi, Janis (frontwoman) or Jim M.
Btw, his talent was ridiculous and .... without him there would be no Rolling Stones!


Truth is stranger than fiction

stoned greetings
G. The Cock

He wasnt a leadsinger and still has to compete with Mick and Keith. Mick and Keith who rewrites the story in every interview.

Keith Moon and Bonham were not front men and they are often mentioned. I think its a shame that more people don't even know who Brian is.

melillo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> how come when we see rock icons that have died
> they mention
> janis , hendrix, morrison, moon , elvis, bonham,
> but never brian jones
> why is he ignored when it comes to rock n roll
> death, no respect, and he was the first to go



I personally dont think he's ignored - certainly he's better known that Janis Joplin. Not being a front man doesnt help (as said above) plus the factor that its quite a long time ago

he was far from the first star to die prematurely in the rock 'n' roll era - there were loads of them before Brian, many of whom had a huge musical legacy that was even bigger than Brian's - Hank Williams, Buddy Holly and Otis Redding most notably

You're completely right J-J-Flash! There's no excuse Brian is not mentioned in R'n'R-History as he should, even on this board - as I said a zillion times before - he doesn't get the credits he deserves! (see above - crying for MT, the so-called "Big Three" albums - all post Brian - where are the first two, where is Aftermath on this list????? - are they bad you Taylorists???) Sorry, but I'm always getting kinda worried and even angry on this topic...


Truth is stranger than fiction

stoned greetings
G. The Cock

I was told one time that many of the rock icons that left the stage too early (Brian, Jimi, Janis, Cobain, Jim Morrison, etc.) were all 27 years old. Is this true?

Believe it or not, it's possible to like all the eras (BJ, MT, RW).

You got the point Miss U. !!!


Truth is stranger than fiction

stoned greetings
G. The Cock

he never wrote a song????

>> Believe it or not, it's possible to like all the eras (BJ, MT, RW). <<

yeah baby!
(and who is this "they" that you think is "ignoring" Brian??)


"What do you want - what?!"
- Keith

That is right, I love all three eras. Certainly there are strong and weak albums from each era. IORR is one of my least favorite albums and that was when Taylor was in the band. Aftermath deserves more credit, great album. And Brian Jones in general should be more well known and recognized. I was at a bar in Boston during the Fenway shows and there were a group of people next to us who were also going to the concert that didn't even know who Brian was and they were all from London.

It used to niggle me that he was so often overlooked in the pantheon of rock icons especially as he was a pioneer in so many ways but at least the upcoming movie about him (whatever it's merits) should bring him firmly into the public consciousness.

Elmo Lewis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was told one time that many of the rock icons
> that left the stage too early (Brian, Jimi, Janis,
> Cobain, Jim Morrison, etc.) were all 27 years old.
> Is this true?


Yes, but Jimi and Jim were both weeks from turning 28. Still, thrilling age to die.

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
>
> I personally dont think he's ignored - certainly
> he's better known that Janis Joplin.

Not in the US, Gazza. Joplin is a household name here. Jones probably has less than half her overall name recognition.

It would have been very intersesting - on a pure musical level - had Jones stayed with the Stones and survived (big "ifs" I realize). No telling what the direction of the band would have been. Fascinating to contemplate, though.

Sorry, Gazza, but Brian Jones is not well known, at least here in the States. Janis Joplin is FAR MORE popular than Brian. Also, Brian was the first rocker of HIS GENERATION to die. Buddy Holly, Richie Valens, etc belonged to a different generation. Let's face it, Brian is a very obscure figure, even among Stones circles (look at all the attention MT gets here in comparison to Brian!). I believe the biggest reason why Brian does not recieve that much attention is the attitude of the Stones. Mick and Keith don't talk much about him, and when they do, it's often in derogatory terms. Therefore, his legacy has been dismissed by the public because the band chooses not to remember him in a good way (if at all). It's as simple as that. Otherwise, I do agree with most here that BJ should be remembered and especially honored by Stones fans, but we all know that's not the case . . .

I agree , joplin is way more known than jones, its not even an issue
and i also meant jones was the first to go from his generation, thats why i didnt include valens and holly, though i didnt mean to ignore them

Gazza Wrote:
I personally dont think he's ignored - certainly
> he's better known that Janis Joplin.



What planet are you living on?



the shoot 'em dead, brainbell jangler!

neptune Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sorry, Gazza, but Brian Jones is not well known,
> at least here in the States.Janis Joplin is FAR
> MORE popular than Brian.

fair enough, but then I live in the UK and Janis Joplin aint well known here


Also, Brian was the first
> rocker of HIS GENERATION to die.
Buddy Holly,
> Richie Valens, etc belonged to a different
> generation.

well..Ritchie Valens was only a year or two older than Brian, dont forget, even though he died ten years before him

Otis Redding didnt belong to a different generation, though, and died 19 months before Brian did.


Let's face it, Brian is a very
> obscure figure, even among Stones circles (look at
> all the attention MT gets here in comparison to
> Brian!).

well thats true, but I think its fair to say that we live in an age where musical history is sadly pretty irrelevant to many people. Taylor gets more attention primarily because hes still alive, so theres a desire for some fans to seem him work with the band again. Also, the Stones music in the Brian Jones era has dated more than the post 1968 period did. There are a HIGH proportion of Stones fans who have no idea who Mick Taylor is and dont care either. Sad but true.

I believe the biggest reason why Brian
> does not recieve that much attention is the
> attitude of the Stones. Mick and Keith don't talk
> much about him, and when they do, it's often in
> derogatory terms. Therefore, his legacy has been
> dismissed by the public because the band chooses
> not to remember him in a good way (if at all).

that certainly doesnt help matters, Id agree. But at least they dont pretend he didnt exist. The era where the Stones made their biggest CULTURAL impact was the '60's (even though their best era MUSICALLY was probably just after that period). When you see programmes made on TV about pop culture and its impact on society (and we had one on tv here just 2 nights ago) when theres anything about the Stones on it, it almost without exception will focus on them during the 60's. Its as if they had no cultural impact after 1969.


> It's as simple as that. Otherwise, I do agree
> with most here that BJ should be remembered and
> especially honored by Stones fans

no argument there.

rattler2004 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gazza Wrote:
> I personally dont think he's ignored - certainly
> > he's better known that Janis Joplin.
>
>
>
> What planet are you living on?


the concept that there are parts of the universe where an artist may be less well known than they are in other parts (including your own) is obviously lost on you...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-10-26 05:04 by Gazza.

melillo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> how come when we see rock icons that have died
> they mention
> janis , hendrix, morrison, moon , elvis, bonham,
> but never brian jones
> why is he ignored when it comes to rock n roll
> death, no respect, and he was the first to go


I totally agree with you melillo! Jeez, you hear more about guys like Kurt Cobain or even Sid Vicious!! Give the late Brian Jones his due I say! He was one of the best musicians EVER, at least in my opinion.

Hound Dog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That is right, I love all three eras. Certainly
> there are strong and weak albums from each era.
> IORR is one of my least favorite albums and that
> was when Taylor was in the band. Aftermath
> deserves more credit, great album. And Brian Jones
> in general should be more well known and
> recognized. I was at a bar in Boston during the
> Fenway shows and there were a group of people next
> to us who were also going to the concert that
> didn't even know who Brian was and they were all
> from London.

Sacrilege

what a bunch of fúcking morons. They should be ashamed to call themselves Stones fans

They should have had their tickets confiscated, been put on the next plane home and then dumped over the Atlantic...

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hound Dog Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > That is right, I love all three eras.
> Certainly
> > there are strong and weak albums from each
> era.
> > IORR is one of my least favorite albums and
> that
> > was when Taylor was in the band. Aftermath
> > deserves more credit, great album. And Brian
> Jones
> > in general should be more well known and
> > recognized. I was at a bar in Boston during
> the
> > Fenway shows and there were a group of people
> next
> > to us who were also going to the concert
> that
> > didn't even know who Brian was and they were
> all
> > from London.
>
> Sacrilege
>
> what a bunch of fúcking morons. They should be
> ashamed to call themselves Stones fans
>
> They should have had their tickets confiscated,
> been put on the next plane home and then dumped
> over the Atlantic...
>


Agreed Gazza, agreed!

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> rattler2004 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Gazza Wrote:
> > I personally dont think he's ignored -
> certainly
> > > he's better known that Janis Joplin.
> >
> >
> >
> > What planet are you living on?
>
>
> the concept that there are parts of the universe
> where an artist may be less well known than they
> are in other parts (including your own) is
> obviously lost on you...
>
>
>
> Edited 1 times. Last edit at 10/25/05 20:04 by
> Gazza.

I mean no disrespect...and I apologize for the harsh tone of my post.

I too have lived in the U.K. for 7 years, (currently I reside in the States) and Janis Joplin was very popular when I was in England...

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>he concept that there are parts of the universe
> where an artist may be less well known than they
> are in other parts (including your own) is
> obviously lost on you...


Very little is lost on me...thank you very much...but this one always puzzled me a bit...in 1989/90 when the Stones were ripping up the stage in the U.S. and in Europe...Cliff Richard was voted the most popular English act of both years in a BBC poll....c'mon




the shoot 'em dead, brainbell jangler!

rattler2004 Wrote:
> > Gazza.
>
> I mean no disrespect...and I apologize for the
> harsh tone of my post.

likewise..i was just yankin' your chain


but this one always puzzled me a bit...in
> 1989/90 when the Stones were ripping up the stage
> in the U.S. and in Europe...Cliff Richard was
> voted the most popular English act of both years
> in a BBC poll....c'mon
>


its a different market entirely - but a large one
Cliff isnt regarded as anything but a joke by anyone who's listened to rock music after about 1962
However there is a large MOR/pop audience and he's adored by the uncultured masses, mostly menopausal women who like their pop stars to be bland, wholesome and inoffensive.
I dont really know what sort of equivalent act there would be in the States to Cliff. he's been around since 1958, fer Chrissakes
"Rock" music is more a divisive market however, so naturally when it comes to "polls" you're going to find acts like the Stones (and anyone else who was popular at that time) liked by only a percentage of that huge market.

J-J-Flash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Keith Moon and Bonham were not front men and they
> are often mentioned. I think its a shame that more
> people don't even know who Brian is.


Keith Moon was but I think a problem is that Brian more or less took his own life and he was fired and he still gets shite for things that others got away with. And maybe he was shy and wanted to be loved. You dont get remebered for that. Of course Keith does what he can to keep him in the grave.