20 internautes sur 23 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile
- Publié sur Amazon.com
The recent publication of "According to the Rolling Stones" to coincide with the Forty Licks Tour, is classic Stones-style media manipulation. Looking back over their career & my collection of Stones videos, books & CD's, it is obvious that once again Jagger (& to a lesser extent, Richards) are attempting to revise their personal history and somehow cleanse themselves of their bad-boy image. This particular effort is the penultimate revision of a well-documented history.
From the outset, the choices made by the books' editor (Dora Lowenstein, daughter of the financial advisor to the Stones, Prince Rupert Lowenstein) as to whom to include make it obvious this will be a trip thru the past brightly. The single most glaring omission is that of Bill Wyman; yes, he's not currently a Rolling Stone, but one would think that 25+ years as an official Stone would count for something. Obviously, Dora & Co. didn't agree. Other omissions include Mick Taylor (only the spark for the finest Rolling Stones guitar interplay recorded), Andrew Loog Oldham (even Jagger/Richards admit they probably never would gone beyond the Crawdaddy Club without ALO), Bobby Keys (Keith's best friend for many years & the leader of the Stones horn section since 1969) and the Stones women, past & present. Marianne Faithfull & Anita Pallenberg were considered adjunct members of the Stones for many years, most of them the most productive and artistically satisfying of their career. The list of those Missing In Action could also include dead, but on-the-record Stones members such as Brian Jones and (especially missed!) Ian Stewart who was the original founder with Jones of the band. Stewart knew where all the bodies were buried, and never failed to take the Jagger/Richards egos down a peg or 10. Ian's contributions to the Stones legacy are glossed over at best.
Instead, in the tween-chapters essays, we have represented two journalists (one of whom has no claim to any contact with any Stone at any time), Peter Wolf of J.Geils Band, Sheryl Crow, Prince Rupert and Ahmet Ertegun. Needless to say, their contributions tend more towards the sycophantic than the enlightening.
Many excellent photos, a number of them full-page, are reproduced here, but again, almost none of Wyman, and very few of those in the inner circle. The majority of the photos are (in descending order) Richards, Jagger, Watts & Wood. Poor Ronnie, although a Stone now since the mid-70's, is still attempting to rationalize the fact that he has almost never been giving song-writing credit even when he was the primary catalyst of a riff.
The main pleasures of "According to the Rolling Stones" are hearing Charlie Watts speak out openly, especially concerning his period of substance abuse in the 80's. He analyzes and philosophizes on many aspects of the Glimmer Twins collaboration, as well as the contributions of some of the more ignored members of the organization. It's as much a pleasure to read Charlie's words, as it is to hear his lovely, economical drumming.
Ronnie is his usual entertaining self, & Keith comes up with some classic quotes as usual. Jagger's contribution is to once again prove what a jerk he's become in the past 20 years. "Exile on Main Street" not a good album? Apparently Sir Mick thinks the sound too muddy. I hate to mention this, your Lordship, but you did start out as a blues band, after all. "Exile" is one of the greatest blues albums ever recorded by anyone. The Mick of 1962 thru 72 would have adored this album. Just goes to show....(and of course, we all know what Mick's solo work has sounded like). Mick is quoted at one point as justifying the Stones later work by saying "as long as it works live, that's all that matters". Keith, on the other hand, offers that he can't stand playing such recent dreck as "Emotional Rescue" or "Undercover of the Night". At least someone in the band still has some musical integrity left!
So there it is. "According to the Rolling Stones" won't change anyone's mind about any of the band members, although Mick & Dora might wish it would. I am just praying, that we, the "peeps" in the audience, won't be subjected to a 50th Anniversary Tour/Commemorative Book. The thought of a 70 year old Sir Mick wiggling his geriatric fanny is really too grotesque to bear!
8 internautes sur 8 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile
- Publié sur Amazon.com
This book makes for more than just a nice coffee table book. It's got more than cool shots (a good many of them posed for) and interesting tales of the band by its four remaining members (and a host of interviews by collaborators, fans and close friends). What's missing from the book almost speaks louder than wha'ts in it. It is inevitable to stumble upon the absence of ANY quotes from the late Brian Jones, his substitute Mick Taylor or the former bass player Bill Wyman. It's the proverbial invisible elephant in the room! Let's face it: the book is more about the vibe and chemistry that kept the surviving members together through the years. Those left behind (like Wyman) have only themselves or their legends to speak for them. Because of this, I take a star off my rating, and leave it still at a good four stars, because it is still a nice document.
4 internautes sur 4 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile
- Publié sur Amazon.com
A couple hundred years from now historians will write about the endurance of the `flash in the pan' phenomenon called, pop culture. ACCORDING TO THE ROLLING STONES will certainly be one of their reference books. This is history as it should be told--as it is lived--in all its informal, intimate, gritty, and compelling detail.
ACCORDING TO THE ROLLING STONES presents unique privileged perspectives of the evolution of rock from the earliest days to the present. Essays from friends and colleagues plus hundreds of photos spanning the Stones' career enhance the interviews of Mick, Keith, Charlie and Ronnie.
Older fans will fondly remember the `Bad Boys of British Pop' as an enduring icon of the extraordinary sixties and seventies. New fans will discover the history of the Stones through the group's lives and their music as told by the mythmakers themselves. Fans of pop culture will value these memoirs of the group that lived it.
17 internautes sur 23 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile
William M. Coughlin
- Publié sur Amazon.com
The new Stones "coffee table book" is a disgrace in how it treats Mick Taylor. Ronnie Wood feels "sorry" for Mick Taylor? What a pitiful joke! Ronnie Wood's guitar playing is the only thing that's "sorry"! And that story about Taylor passing a note backstage stating that he was broke and had no confidence. It sounds "fishy" to me, but even if it's true, Wood has no class for repeating it. Even Charlie Watts jumped on the bandwagon with some anti-Taylor remarks. What's the point? It's not like Taylor is cutting into their record sales or anything like that. Why are they being so vindictive? Overall, I still like their music and their shows are entertaining, but this book has angered me. One of the other posters nailed it on Woody: He's just Mick Jagger's mouthpiece. Ronnie Wood couldn't shine Mick Taylor's shoes when it comes to playing guitar. The biggest joke on their last tour was Ronnie's horrible guitar playing on Can't You Hear Me Knockin'. With all their money and all their success, their insecurity shines through with the terrible trashing they gave the most talented guitarist that ever played with them. If it wasn't for Mick Taylor, there would have been no "golden period" for the band. Can you imagine Wood playing on Exile or Ya-Ya's or Sticky Fingers? Those great albums would have been mediocre at best if Wood had played on them!!!! I can't even think about it. It's too upsetting! One last thing on this book: Keith, in particular, really let me down with his comments about Taylor. He says that Taylor hasn't done anything since leaving the Stones. To that I'll reply with one of Keith's own favorite responses: "Rubbish!" Just because Taylor's albums don't sell millions of copies doesn't mean he hasn't done anything or that he isn't a great musician or performer! Let's face it, other than Tatoo You (which was mostly pulled from the Taylor-year archives ANYWAY) and Some Girls, most of their stuff since Taylor left the band is lackluster at best or tired retreads of hits from their golden years with Taylor at worst. The Stones have no class...plain and simple. I saw Mick Taylor at the Stanhope House in Stanhope, NJ recently and he put on a great show! Nobody plays lead or slide like him and noone ever will. Keith and Woody are just jealous because Taylor proves his superiority every time he picks up a guitar. Sign me "Angry at the Stones in Jersey City"!!!
9 internautes sur 12 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile
E. A Solinas
- Publié sur Amazon.com
"According To the Rolling Stones" is a must-have for the Stones fan, but is hampered by the fact that you must already be a fan to know fully what's going on. With amazing pictures but incomplete text, this is a pretty good but unsatisfying coffee table book.
It charts the Rolling Stones from their respective childhoods, to becoming the baddest rock band in England. Then it follows them into parenthood, marriage, addiction, rehab, the death of messed-up bandmate Brian Jones and the near-breakup of the band in the 1980s. Music, mayhem, and the occasional arrest make up this book.
The pictures virtually MAKE this book. Many of them are ones I hadn't seen before, and there are actually more candids than posed pics. Pics of Mick Jagger being punched in the street, Keith Richards playing with his son on a tire swing, and the Stones examining possible cover photos are among these. The pictures have an intimate quality, and many of them get across the camaraderie or alienation between the Stones.
One of the major problems with the book is the lack of insights into the dynamics behind the music. Wives, girlfriends, children, fellow musician friends and so on are barely mentioned, occasionally pictured (Marianne Faithfull is barely visible behind her huge hat). It feels incomplete to have no view of what these guys are like to anyone except one another.
If they had included interviews from more than just the Stones themselves, it would feel more rounded, like the Aerosmith autobiography "Walk This Way," which included interviews from just about everybody associated with the band. And about half of the essays don't add to the book's content at all, especially the ones that analyze the Stones from a distance instead of talking about the writer's personal experience.
"According to the Rolling Stones" will delight fans of the Stones, especially those who like to see backstage pictures and hear how this song or that song came to be. But though this book is a hefty snack, I finished it feeling vaguely hungry.