|
LadyJane |
I hope all of us Stonesians realize how lucky we are!!
Desite our individual musical tastes, I think we can all agree that in the past two years the Rock world has lost many great talents (Harrison, Entwistle, M. Gibb, Strummer, Joey and Dee Dee Ramone). Not only are the original members of most of the British invasion bands gone, so are some of the pioneers of the great Punk movement. We will never live to see the Beatles, the Who, the BeeGees, the Clash or the Ramones perform again. Yet still, the Stones continue to play night after night and seem to be aging like fine wine.
So to everybody who complains about the setlists, the venues, the ticket prices, the input of Chuck Leavell, etc. I say, "WHAT'S THE ATERNATIVE?"
Long live the Rolling Stones!
LadyJ. |
|
nankerphelge |
For me, it's setting this goddam Motion on fire, hopping in my car right now, and zipping up to Boston for a shot at Sully's and Fleet II!
And yet I sit here.
|
|
LadyJane |
Nank: How was Pittsburgh?
LadyJ. |
|
Nellcote |
Does there need to be an alternative? |
|
MP |
CYA at Fleet.... |
|
Nellcote |
MP, ya goin to Sully's ?
I think Nanky is... |
|
Mickjagger1963 |
And now, petey is being investigated for kiddie porn, OUCH!... So, thanks for pointing all that out LAdyJane.... and GOD BLESS THE STONES
[Edited by Mickjagger1963] |
|
sasca |
Sometimes I'm glad the Stones are still around, sometimes not - they haven't been consistently great for a couple of decades but each album has a couple of good or great songs -
I like 'Don't Stop' but I miss the experimentation of '66 and the intensity of '68.
The Stones I would like to have seen is one in which a Wyman-Jones writing partnership is nurtured, one in which Brian never leaves and one which either stays as committed as it once was or breaks up before that commitment fades.
[Edited by sasca] |
|
scope |
Good point LadyJane. We take a lot for granted. I guess we are spoiled that the Stones have been around so long, but I also have another perspective to add. I think the fact that they have lasted for so long, and still tour as major headliners, adds to the lack of respect they get. The Beales were hot, they broke up, they're dying, and can never exist again. Simply fact of life sometimes that you have to cease to exist before you get the recognition you deserve. "You don't know what you got 'till it's gone". |
|
sasca |
True. And who would have thought the Stones would be the ones to carry on? The Beatles and the Small Faces break up, the Who and the Kinks fade from view...the Stones, surely the most 'livefastdieyoung' of them all, steadily continue.
[Edited by sasca] |
|
stewed & Keefed |
I agree with you Ladyjane except bloody Chuck Leavell |
|
Chico |
I know what you mean scope. If Mick Jagger had died instead of Jim Morisson and The Stones split up and The Doors were still touring, im sure that The Stones would get a lot lot more respect. Morrison and co. not so much. Just the way it works I spose. I think its harder for folks to appreciate the massive legendary status the boys had in the early '70s cause they still tour and people see "wrinkly rockers"(actually, not sure about the quotation marks) prancing around and strutting their stuff. School students should be forced to sit through Ladies and Gentlemen and the like to aquire an appreciation for what they were.Fuck it,throw in some crappy eighties Bon Jovi concert for comparison.My campaign starts here.Chico for education minister!!!!! |
|