Acheter d'occasion
EUR 0,01
+ EUR 2,99 (livraison)
D'occasion: Bon | Détails
État: D'occasion: Bon
Commentaire: Ancien livre de bibliothèque. Peut contenir des étiquettes de bibliothèque Le dos et les coins peuvent montrer des signes d'usure. Les pages peuvent inclure des notes et quelques signes de feutre. Sous garantie de remboursement complet. Plus de plus d'un million clients satisfaits!
Vous l'avez déjà ?
Repliez vers l'arrière Repliez vers l'avant
Ecoutez Lecture en cours... Interrompu   Vous écoutez un extrait de l'édition audio Audible
En savoir plus
Voir les 2 images

According to the Rolling Stones (Anglais) Broché – 2 septembre 2004

5.0 étoiles sur 5 1 commentaire client

Voir les formats et éditions Masquer les autres formats et éditions
Prix Amazon
Neuf à partir de Occasion à partir de
"Veuillez réessayer"
EUR 38,66 EUR 1,99
Broché, 2 septembre 2004
EUR 3,47 EUR 0,01

nouveautés livres nouveautés livres

--Ce texte fait référence à une édition épuisée ou non disponible de ce titre.
click to open popover

Offres spéciales et liens associés

Descriptions du produit

Présentation de l'éditeur

For the first time in paperback—and in a great reading edition—here is the real story of the Rolling Stones, as told by the Stones themselves. In their own words, Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, Charlie Watts, and Ronnie Wood get right to the heart of what makes the Stones the Stones, as musicians, songwriters, and performers, describing how their music has evolved, and revealing frankly how their own lives have helped or hindered their music-making. The Stones' own stories are complemented by insider reflections from key players in their story over the years. Also included are 64 pages of vintage photographs. 'For fans, here's proof that you can sometimes get what you want.' (People) --Ce texte fait référence à une édition épuisée ou non disponible de ce titre.

Biographie de l'auteur

The Rolling Stones formed in 1962 in London and have sold more than 200 million albums worldwide. --Ce texte fait référence à une édition épuisée ou non disponible de ce titre.

Aucun appareil Kindle n'est requis. Téléchargez l'une des applis Kindle gratuites et commencez à lire les livres Kindle sur votre smartphone, tablette ou ordinateur.

  • Apple
  • Android
  • Windows Phone
  • Android

Pour obtenir l'appli gratuite, saisissez votre numéro de téléphone mobile.

Détails sur le produit

Commentaires en ligne

5.0 étoiles sur 5
5 étoiles
4 étoiles
3 étoiles
2 étoiles
1 étoile
Voir le commentaire client
Partagez votre opinion avec les autres clients

Meilleurs commentaires des clients

Format: Relié Achat vérifié
J'ai choisi cette note car je fus très agréablement surpris du très bon état du livre.le livre est comme neuf.
Remarque sur ce commentaire Avez-vous trouvé ce commentaire utile ? Oui Non Commentaire en cours d'envoi...
Merci pour votre commentaire.
Désolé, nous n'avons pas réussi à enregistrer votre vote. Veuillez réessayer
Signaler un abus

Commentaires client les plus utiles sur (beta) 4.0 étoiles sur 5 37 commentaires
15 internautes sur 15 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
3.0 étoiles sur 5 Rolling Stones History Re-Written-A Whitewash 12 novembre 2006
Par R. Morris - Publié sur
Format: Relié
From reading this coffee-table book, a person who did not know much about the Stones could possibly conclude the following:
1. Bill Wyman was not in the Stones
2. Brian Jones made no great contributions and was a drug-addled pain in the a--.
3. Mick Taylor was a Stone briefly
This is a book written by the three original Stones who still play together, plus long-time member Ronnie Wood. It is written in their words and at times I found their comments to be self-serving and overly harsh of others. Wyman, the great bassist, is discussed by his rhythm-mate Charlie Watts because of his effeminate bass playing and tiny hands. Brian Jones, who WAS the Rolling Stones early on and made their music special, is dismissed for his lack of song-writing ability, his drug use, and his mental problems. Should Rolling Stones throw Stones, especially ones who live in glass houses? All of these guys were drug-addled and messed up at one point. Even if he was hard to live with, why not dwell on the many positives that the guy brought to the group? And Mick Taylor, who laid down some of the greatest lead guitar riffs in Stones history, is, like Wyman, alive and well, and yet he and Wyman were never even interviewed for this book. Why is that? Is it because this is a self-serving project aimed at boosting the stock of Rolling Stones, Incorporated, the remaining members?
The photos are excellent. Some of the commentary is interesting, especially from the usually tight-lipped Charlie Watts. The essays by outsiders that are inserted between chapters give new meaning to the term sycophantic.
Reading this as the definitive autobiography of the Stones is like reading a Soviet history textbook from the fifties, the one where all the purged heroes have been airbrushed out of the photos and written out of the index.
For a good illustrated history of the Stones, I highly recommend Bill Wyman's Rolling with the Stones. He kept great records, and he is fair-minded to all the members, past and present.
I love the Stones, but this book brought them down a notch in my pantheon of rock gods.
23 internautes sur 27 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
3.0 étoiles sur 5 Thru the past in a rose colored light. 1 mars 2004
Par L. Alper - Publié sur
Format: Relié
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!
9 internautes sur 9 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
4.0 étoiles sur 5 Great story of 4 rockers and 3 invisible elephants 7 novembre 2004
Par Manny Hernandez - Publié sur
Format: Relié
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.
8 internautes sur 9 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
1.0 étoiles sur 5 Bill anyone? 13 décembre 2005
Par John Berry - Publié sur
Format: Relié
I would agree with most of the negative reviews this book has received so far, and history has indeed been re-written. While Mick Taylor's role in the Stones' career could not be overstated, it is Bill Wyman's virtual absence that is the most shocking. Most of the band's shots from the 70's, but especially the 80's and 90's seem to deliberately leave him out. This is insulting to any self-respecting Stones fan and quite a disappointment (although not a complete surprise). As everyone knows, Bill was an original member of the band and his career as a Stone lasted almost 40 years. The Mick'n'Keef show could never have existed without the steadfast rythm section that anchored the band throughout most of its history. Shame on the other Stones for going out their way to practically eliminate Bill Wyman from this biography. And who exactly does Mick Jagger think he is fooling when he sings about neo-cons, then proceeds to pick Ameriquest, one of the worst predatory lenders in America, as a tour sponsor? Who said the Stones aged gracefully? Get Bill's book instead.
7 internautes sur 8 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
4.0 étoiles sur 5 Buy it for the photos only 31 août 2006
Par Konrad Baumeister - Publié sur
Format: Relié
If you want this beautifully laid out coffee table book for its many excellent and in some cases previously unpublished photos, you will not be disappointed. There's a wealth of great shots here, though the emphasis is predictably on Mick, Keith, Charlie and Ronnie, in that order; there are hardly any shots at all of Bill or Brian and only a couple of Mick Taylor.

The spliced up series of interviews that make up the rest of the book, and presumably justify the "according to..." name, are uneven. Keith's excellent (if highly selective) memory and ascerbic wit are still there; Woody is as genial and upbeat as one has come to expect; Charlie is actually pretty reflective at times; but Mick's comments could have been cut in half without losing anything important. Contributions from Wyman or Taylor would have been welcome, but apparently in a book over 350 pages long there was not room for a single word. Especially in the case of Bill Wyman, a founding member putting in 25 years service, this is unforgiveable. There is virtually no, as in zero, indication of who played bass with these clowns for all those years; Darryl Jones is covered in greater detail, and is featured in at least as many photos. Sad.

There are many many good books out there on the Stones which cover, in detail, most of the important ups and downs of their often fascinating career. This is not one of them. If you want to know about the blues scene in early 60s London, it's okay. If you want to know about the tours since the 1980s, it's okay. If you want to know about much in between, it's pretty lame. I looked in vain for some word on Woody's solo albums (frankly the best Stones-related products since 1990), the New Barbarians tour, Maggie Trudeau, Altamont (!! - only Charlie has any comments at all), groupies, Allen Klein, family life on the road, changing wives and girlfriends, etc etc. The text is basically a general whitewash over anything that might be interesting. Too bad.

After each chapter there is an interview with someone associated with the band in 'some' way, and ironically a couple of these are better than most of the Stones contribitions. Most of the comments are sycophantic in nature - Sheryl Crow, Peter Wolf - but two especially stand out: Giorgio Gomelsky and Prince Rupert Lowenstein. Neither are often heard from, both had unique perspectives, and in particular Prince Rupert in very insightful and funny. Fleshing this stuff out into a chapter and ditching a couple thousand words of Mick Jagger's often dishonest and deluded puffery would have been of benefit.
Ces commentaires ont-ils été utiles ? Dites-le-nous

Rechercher des articles similaires par rubrique


Souhaitez-vous compléter ou améliorer les informations sur ce produit ? Ou faire modifier les images?