Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: 12Next
Current Page: 1 of 2
The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: ROPENI ()
Date: August 22, 2021 03:49

This is just a question, does anyone think that by going ahead with this tour without Charlie, plus COVID, and playing to half filled stadiums is the way to finish their illustrious career??......

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: Paddy ()
Date: August 22, 2021 03:59

To some it was tainted after Ian Stewart, after Brian Jones, after Mick Taylor, after Bill Wyman, after 1972, after 1978. It goes on and on.

Charlie’s legacy within the stones is cemented forever.
The tour is happening with his wishes, his replacement for the tour was on his recommendation.
Let’s see what happens by tours end or maybe next year.

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: Dan ()
Date: August 22, 2021 04:03

"Legacy" is a fan invention.

No one remembers Muhammad Ali's last fights.

20 years from now it will be their recorded output, kind of as it is now, not because they did shows with partial lineups or because of the Las Vegas 2016 setlist.

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: MisterDDDD ()
Date: August 22, 2021 04:04

A- Who said this was the "finish" ??

B- No.
They aren't filling any stadiums- yet- If/when they do, they will be likely leading the effort to get people out of this in a few ways.
The most important of which will be adding to the rolls of people getting vaxxed because they can't attend events like this otherwise.

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: daspyknows ()
Date: August 22, 2021 04:12

Quote
Dan
"Legacy" is a fan invention.

No one remembers Muhammad Ali's last fights.

20 years from now it will be their recorded output, kind of as it is now, not because they did shows with partial lineups or because of the Las Vegas 2016 setlist.

Some of us do. They were sad. Rope-a-dope.

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: Natlanta ()
Date: August 22, 2021 04:14

touch me baby tainted love.

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: More Hot Rocks ()
Date: August 22, 2021 05:26

Quote
ROPENI
This is just a question, does anyone think that by going ahead with this tour without Charlie, plus COVID, and playing to half filled stadiums is the way to finish their illustrious career??......

Do you actually know what tainted means? The reasons you give do not apply to a tainted legacy.

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: RollingFreak ()
Date: August 22, 2021 05:55

There is no way to taint the Stones legacy at this point. I won't hold it against them if they continue without Charlie, but for years everyone said you couldn't do that and I find it funny how many will just hop onto that. Goes to show you fans will accept anything.

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: Cooltoplady ()
Date: August 22, 2021 05:55

Ridiculous topic.

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: Rockman ()
Date: August 22, 2021 06:28

.... yeah tainted aint exactly the word ta use .....

But when ya think there aint a person alive
who hasnt tarnished their own lives in some way or other ...

regrets I've had a few .....



ROCKMAN

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: StonedAsiaExile ()
Date: August 22, 2021 13:25

Quote
Cooltoplady
Ridiculous topic.

Ropeni's call. It's a fair and legitimate question, maybe not the 'right' use of words ( I don't know his/her first language) but I believe everyone here has a right to post their questions, concerns, and beliefs.

You don't have to like or support them and if the 'topic' doesn't fit your narrative, move on to the next.

I read everyone whether I agree, like, or support, or not.

'nuff said.

Have a great Sunday all!

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: Bliss ()
Date: August 22, 2021 13:57

Diminished would be a better word.

Regarding a legacy, there's something to be said for ending a career, if not at your peak, at least not after you have been a long time in decline.

I don't like to see actors who were known for their youthful beauty and charm but are now older and no longer attractive up on the screen, unless they have managed to transform themselves into a different type of character. For example, I loved seeing Larry Hagman in the reboot of Dallas. He was very old, in fact he was dying, but he had great sincerity and power. I liked the old musicians in Buena Vista Social Club, singing about love.

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Date: August 22, 2021 14:23

Quote
ROPENI
This is just a question, does anyone think that by going ahead with this tour without Charlie, plus COVID, and playing to half filled stadiums is the way to finish their illustrious career??......

If the tour happens it won't be to half-filled stadiums.

And the 60th anniversary will (probably) be the last tour we'll remember them by - most likely with Charlie in the line up.

So... this might be a moot point, imo.

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: ROPENI ()
Date: August 22, 2021 14:36

Quote
More Hot Rocks
Quote
ROPENI
This is just a question, does anyone think that by going ahead with this tour without Charlie, plus COVID, and playing to half filled stadiums is the way to finish their illustrious career??......

Do you actually know what tainted means? The reasons you give do not apply to a tainted legacy.
Well excuseeeee meeeee if l used the wrong terminology, l did not mean to offend your sensitivities, now go back into your safe space,it was just a question, you did not like it cool,move on.......

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: ROPENI ()
Date: August 22, 2021 14:37

Quote
Cooltoplady
Ridiculous topic.
To you probably......

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: ROPENI ()
Date: August 22, 2021 14:40

Quote
StonedAsiaExile
Quote
Cooltoplady
Ridiculous topic.

Ropeni's call. It's a fair and legitimate question, maybe not the 'right' use of words ( I don't know his/her first language) but I believe everyone here has a right to post their questions, concerns, and beliefs.

You don't have to like or support them and if the 'topic' doesn't fit your narrative, move on to the next.

I read everyone whether I agree, like, or support, or not.

'nuff said.

Have a great Sunday all!
Thanks man,some people here are somewhat like the Taliban,you can't even ask a question without them getting all bend out of shape. Oh Well..You also have a great Sunday....

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: ROPENI ()
Date: August 22, 2021 14:41

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
ROPENI
This is just a question, does anyone think that by going ahead with this tour without Charlie, plus COVID, and playing to half filled stadiums is the way to finish their illustrious career??......

If the tour happens it won't be to half-filled stadiums.

And the 60th anniversary will (probably) be the last tour we'll remember them by - most likely with Charlie in the line up.

So... this might be a moot point, imo.

Hope you are right......

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: Green Lady ()
Date: August 22, 2021 14:41

The legacy can only be tainted by finding out something about their earlier career and the things we remember them for that makes them less valuable than we thought they were. Jimmy Savile, for instance, has a tainted legacy because we now know things about him that most of us didn't know at the time. Leaving Charlie out of the lineup temporarily for good and sufficient reasons is not remotely in the legacy-tainting class.

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: Cooltoplady ()
Date: August 22, 2021 18:49

Quote
Rockman
.... yeah tainted aint exactly the word ta use .....

But when ya think there aint a person alive
who hasnt tarnished their own lives in some way or other ...

regrets I've had a few .....

Agree. It was pointed out by another poster also. I don’t think he knows what it means also.

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: MisterDDDD ()
Date: August 22, 2021 19:25

Quote
Cooltoplady
Quote
Rockman
.... yeah tainted aint exactly the word ta use .....

But when ya think there aint a person alive
who hasnt tarnished their own lives in some way or other ...

regrets I've had a few .....

Agree. It was pointed out by another poster also. I don’t think he knows what it means also.

No matter what definition.. "taint" is not the appropriate term. Doesn't tarnish or diminish either imo.
More like bolsters it really... ballsy and genius as someone earlier pointed out winking smiley
[www.google.com]

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: Hairball ()
Date: August 22, 2021 19:29

Without Charlie, they're a much lesser version of the Stones, but their legacy will always been intact based on the first 20 years alone; '62-'82 no denying the greatness.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: stickyfingers101 ()
Date: August 23, 2021 02:07

it is what it is and the answer lies in the eyes/ears of the beholder.

for many, this will be there only chance to see the Stones. So, I imagine for them, the answer is a resounding "no"

for others who have been around since the Jones era, this is probably a bit of a let-down.

for me, I feel the Stones have always done as they pleased....so Eff-it. Rock on. Roll till the wheels come off. Live your life as you see fit. I love that they are continuing for that alone.

It's not my favorite "Stones" move, but whatever....

To answer your Q: IMO, their legacy is rock-solid for now...that is, until the Wokesters come after them.

I honestly do not think "history" is going to be as kind to the Stones as many might think....the whole "cultural appropriation" thing is probably gonna get even more traction in the future....it will likely be after the Stones are gone and probably most of us as well. But I do believe there will be an examination of their so-called "White Privilege"...and it might not go well for them.

IMO

FYI - I am NOT saying this is justified (or unjustified)...I just think it is gonna happen.

on another note - not everybody on here speaks English as a first language...cut them a little slack on their word-choice. Cut ALL of us a little slack on word-choice. Geebus. I think it was quite clear what Ropeni meant, so I don't understand splitting hairs over the definition of the word.

I think Hairball hit it on the head. Well stated, man.

(Ropes - I would've chosen "diminished" but hold nothing against "tainted"...I got what you meant)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-08-23 02:09 by stickyfingers101.

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: ROPENI ()
Date: August 23, 2021 02:44

Quote
Green Lady
The legacy can only be tainted by finding out something about their earlier career and the things we remember them for that makes them less valuable than we thought they were. Jimmy Savile, for instance, has a tainted legacy because we now know things about him that most of us didn't know at the time. Leaving Charlie out of the lineup temporarily for good and sufficient reasons is not remotely in the legacy-tainting class.
Thank you for the explanation Green Lady,l stand corrected,maybe as someone else wrote Diminished may a better description.....

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: ROPENI ()
Date: August 23, 2021 02:48

Quote
stickyfingers101
it is what it is and the answer lies in the eyes/ears of the beholder.

for many, this will be there only chance to see the Stones. So, I imagine for them, the answer is a resounding "no"

for others who have been around since the Jones era, this is probably a bit of a let-down.

for me, I feel the Stones have always done as they pleased....so Eff-it. Rock on. Roll till the wheels come off. Live your life as you see fit. I love that they are continuing for that alone.

It's not my favorite "Stones" move, but whatever....

To answer your Q: IMO, their legacy is rock-solid for now...that is, until the Wokesters come after them.

I honestly do not think "history" is going to be as kind to the Stones as many might think....the whole "cultural appropriation" thing is probably gonna get even more traction in the future....it will likely be after the Stones are gone and probably most of us as well. But I do believe there will be an examination of their so-called "White Privilege"...and it might not go well for them.

IMO

FYI - I am NOT saying this is justified (or unjustified)...I just think it is gonna happen.

on another note - not everybody on here speaks English as a first language...cut them a little slack on their word-choice. Cut ALL of us a little slack on word-choice. Geebus. I think it was quite clear what Ropeni meant, so I don't understand splitting hairs over the definition of the word.

I think Hairball hit it on the head. Well stated, man.

(Ropes - I would've chosen "diminished" but hold nothing against "tainted"...I got what you meant)
Thank You. and ur correct English is may second language,so diminished,my be a better description of what l was trying to ask...

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: GasLightStreet ()
Date: August 23, 2021 03:42

Quote
ROPENI
This is just a question, does anyone think that by going ahead with this tour without Charlie, plus COVID, and playing to half filled stadiums is the way to finish their illustrious career??......

Who said they were finished?

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: slew ()
Date: August 23, 2021 04:11

no

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: mickschix ()
Date: August 23, 2021 06:33

The Stones legacy won't be " diminished" ot tainted because of this...not one bit. All bands as they age lose some of their lustre, of course, but to say they'll be rated or viewed as having lost their power because of the Covid fiasco is absurd. I still think they should cancel the entire tour for safety reasons but I think there are financial/legal constraints in play that have put their backs up against the wall...still, the option is to suck up the losses and not endanger the band, the fans and the crew.

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: Green Lady ()
Date: August 24, 2021 20:39

Quote
ROPENI
Quote
stickyfingers101
it is what it is and the answer lies in the eyes/ears of the beholder.

for many, this will be there only chance to see the Stones. So, I imagine for them, the answer is a resounding "no"

for others who have been around since the Jones era, this is probably a bit of a let-down.

for me, I feel the Stones have always done as they pleased....so Eff-it. Rock on. Roll till the wheels come off. Live your life as you see fit. I love that they are continuing for that alone.

It's not my favorite "Stones" move, but whatever....

To answer your Q: IMO, their legacy is rock-solid for now...that is, until the Wokesters come after them.

I honestly do not think "history" is going to be as kind to the Stones as many might think....the whole "cultural appropriation" thing is probably gonna get even more traction in the future....it will likely be after the Stones are gone and probably most of us as well. But I do believe there will be an examination of their so-called "White Privilege"...and it might not go well for them.

IMO

FYI - I am NOT saying this is justified (or unjustified)...I just think it is gonna happen.

on another note - not everybody on here speaks English as a first language...cut them a little slack on their word-choice. Cut ALL of us a little slack on word-choice. Geebus. I think it was quite clear what Ropeni meant, so I don't understand splitting hairs over the definition of the word.

I think Hairball hit it on the head. Well stated, man.

(Ropes - I would've chosen "diminished" but hold nothing against "tainted"...I got what you meant)
Thank You. and ur correct English is may second language,so diminished,my be a better description of what l was trying to ask...

Sorry ROPENI, I wasn't trying to criticise your choice of words.

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: hbwriter ()
Date: August 24, 2021 22:32

Quote
ROPENI
Quote
More Hot Rocks
Quote
ROPENI
This is just a question, does anyone think that by going ahead with this tour without Charlie, plus COVID, and playing to half filled stadiums is the way to finish their illustrious career??......

Do you actually know what tainted means? The reasons you give do not apply to a tainted legacy.
Well excuseeeee meeeee if l used the wrong terminology, l did not mean to offend your sensitivities, now go back into your safe space,it was just a question, you did not like it cool,move on.......

nice response, right? well hey at least they didn't delete your post for offending the all-too-sensitive eyes and ears here like they did mine

Re: The Stones legacy tainted?
Posted by: NashvilleBlues ()
Date: August 24, 2021 22:42

Quote
hbwriter
Quote
ROPENI
Quote
More Hot Rocks
Quote
ROPENI
This is just a question, does anyone think that by going ahead with this tour without Charlie, plus COVID, and playing to half filled stadiums is the way to finish their illustrious career??......

Do you actually know what tainted means? The reasons you give do not apply to a tainted legacy.
Well excuseeeee meeeee if l used the wrong terminology, l did not mean to offend your sensitivities, now go back into your safe space,it was just a question, you did not like it cool,move on.......

nice response, right? well hey at least they didn't delete your post for offending the all-too-sensitive eyes and ears here like they did mine

Deleted? Is it not merged with another thread? BV does it all the time.

Goto Page: 12Next
Current Page: 1 of 2


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 1345
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home