smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Josh Chasin" <jchasin@nyc.rr.com> |
| Subject | Re: Sticky Fingers |
| Date | Fri, 11 Apr 2003 18:52:37 -0400 |
[Part 1 text/plain iso-8859-1 (1.1 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stewart Mason" <flamingo@theworld.com>
> I think of the '65-'67 Stones as being the Real Deal. Revisionist history
> has done the Stones no favors -- everyone acts like they were these
> degenerate rock and roll badasses who spent all their time pissing against
> garages and sucking Mars bars out of Marianne Faithfull, but in the
> mid-'60s, they were doing the same kind of pop-art exploration as the
> Beatles, the Kinks, the Who and all the other most worthwhile groups of
the
> era. It's hard for me to see the '68-'72 era, no matter how much I like
> those records, as anything but artistic calcification. "This is what our
> image demands we do. This is what we shall do, with diminishing returns,
> for the rest of our lives."
To me-- and clearly this is all subjective-- those Stones records all sound
dated. 60s Stones conjures for me an image of Brian Jones in a funny hat
playing a sitar. I'll take "Moonlight Mile" over Nineteenth Nervous
Breakdown" any day of the week. Of course, maybe you had to be there...
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.