Richard Crawley Tells the Incredible Story Behind His Iconic Photo of Mick Jagger
[petapixel.com]

Thx Hj!

I just read the article about this photograph and have a couple of thoughts I'm compelled to address...

Firstly: Yes, it's a cool photo, very cool photo.

But, pictures with Mick Jagger sticking his tongue out are a dime a dozen..he's been posing like this for 40 years.
So what's so "iconic" about this picture? I've been a rabid fan for almost 50 years and don't believe I've ever seen this photo. Has it graced magazine covers like LIFE, TIME or Newsweek. Or Rolling Stone, even? Has it been on an album cover? Why is the word "iconic" (the most over-used and meaningless word in entertainment news writing) attached to this photo? To make people think this is the image, above all others, which comes to mind when people think 'Mick Jagger', as if this image was like the Eiffel Tower as an icon of Paris? Give me a break....

Secondly: What's so 'incredible' about it?

The photographer's story is interesting-every picture tells a story, as it were.
But, why is this story 'incredible', as in 'unbelievable' or 'amazing'?
He was in the right place at the right time and got lucky. Every professional photographer has moments like this....and a lot more which are mundane, out of focus, blurry or over-exposed. People at the venue got out of his way for a 30th of a second, Jagger wagged his tongue and he snapped the picture. How 'incredible' or miraculous, or unbelievable or amazing is that? I find it completely credible. The added 'facts' about this photographer not having a ticket, running out of film, buying a roll from another photographer next to him or this picture being the last possible exposure on his roll make for good copy, but also are unsubstantiated, unprovable and perhaps 'incredible'. What's really 'incredible' is the fact that the author of this article doesn't bother to mention the venue and exact concert date of this 'iconic' image. "Early 70's"? Again, give me a break-can't you be more specific than that?

But the real corker is this.

Thirdly: The writer has allowed the photographer's quote "and then, of course, the tongue became the logo" to go unqualified or unchallenged. The tongue did indeed become the logo - long before this picture was taken. The reader is left with the notion that this photo predates the creation of the Stones trademark and that the trademark is in some way related to this photo-making the picture sound more interesting than it actually is. I don't blame the photographer; he's trying to promote his work. And the vagueries of the English language could account for his words being merely an aside, and not a 'cause and effect' kind of notion. Hearing a recording of his words could clairfy that. But this is not a Youtube video, so the writer is expected to clarify the content for the reader. Otherwise it's just a bit of journalistic fluff, not the kind of thing that would get a passing grade in an Journalism class. (Did the author of the article ever attend a journalism class? Now that would be 'incredible'.)

I know, I know...there's no business like show business and the show must go on.
But I often wonder if the overwhelming amount of cotton-candy journalism we see on the internet these days helps or hinders people's ability to perceive reality in any sensible, practical or meaningful way.

Just saying....Happy October.

I've never seen it before. Nice pic though.

I took this one of Mick who actually posed for me at Earl's Court in 76. It's OK but a bit out of focus as it happened so quick.

Nice picture. Thanks!
Hervé

Boy, does that guy tell a tale.

This is as good as the Keith Richards "Muddy Waters was painting the ceiling" story.

Crawley lays it on a bit thick. Maybe it is "iconic" in Australia, but it hasn't quite made the rounds in the rest of the world.

Agree, there are a bazillion photos of Mick sticking his tongue out, but I don't think very many of THOSE are 'iconic' either. Pouting his infamous lips? THAT'S iconic.

I love how prominently displayed the photo is in his home too -- in a corner, practically covered by a curtain.

And his website/gallery has none of his rock photography?

I'm all for selling your wares, but at least be straight up about them. WAY too many 'incredible' factors in his story. And like many, he has little specifics -- including the year/date of a Stones show/tour that pretty much only happened once in 25 years -- and is probably melding a few of his rock experiences together.

Interesting photo, especially from that camera and under those supposed conditions. Nothing I'd want on my wall.

J

A very incredible story indeed.

www.rsundercover.eu

@Silver Dagger:

No interesting story about how you got into the venue? Or about running out of film? Or a miracle moment when the crowd parted? Come on, man.

But seriously, nice photo.