Re: Why do the Stones have so few hardcore fans?
Date: August 1, 2006 22:13
Not sure where your anger is coming from Roadster. Besides telling you just not to read the thread if you don't like it, I feel confident that through discussion we'd fairly easily be able to arrive at a definition, or possibly a couple of competing definitions coming from different perspectives.
I consider myself a hardcore fan b/c I have all of their albums (barring possibly obscure compilations with tiny differences in the mixes) in some form (the 60s stuff in many forms) and, in what is by now a far larger number of items, a large collection of bootlegs, most or all of the key stuff. So basically I know all the songs. Also because I think they are _the_ preeminent rock band, the leaders of the form, etc.
I can imagine someone asserting their hardcore-ness (and perhaps questioning mine) on the basis of how many shows they've attended (I've only attended 2, b/c I am on the young side and b/c I am even more hardcore about not supporting corporate rock machines). This could get into a pissing contest area, but it's still an obvious claim on serious fandom.
Only a few misguided souls, I hope, would assert their hardcore-ness based on how much $ they spend on the band.
So I think we could probably settle on knowing a certain high pct of the albums or songs, and/or being familiar with their live work either through a number of shows or knowing the key bootlegs. I would also like to demand the ability to articulate why it is you like the band without resorting to cliches like "mick--the greatest frontman," "KEEF--the human riff!!"
btw, these ideas are just academic; I have no intention of judging applications...