Naturally, the Rolling Stones are not relevant. This is not the point either. – letter

Naturally, the Rolling Stones are not relevant.  This is not the point either.  – letter

But is it really relevant anymore?

Variations of the same question were thrown around this week, after the Rolling Stones announced the release of a new album. They probably also released a single. Not bad, just that for three guys in their 80s.

But the answer to this question is probably self-evident: Of course the Rolling Stones are no longer relevant. that’s not the point.

New single: Ronnie Wood, Mick Jagger and Keith Richards released “Angry” this week, and talked about the new album due out in October.

Photo: Agence France-Presse

Once it was relevant, it was very relevant. That was in the early sixties. At the time, the band brought American blues-inspired rock and raw excitement to the charts and on concert stages.

And they continue to do exactly the same thing, after they stop being new, they stop being shocking, they stop being youthful, they completely stop being cool. They’ve been pulling out heavy music tracks, fast cars, and sexually explicit images at regular intervals for over sixty years. They survived time by not being noticed.

It’s really ironic that the new single “Angry” was released almost the day after Queen Elizabeth II died. In a way, they represented two polar opposites in British society. The Queen was installed on top of the foundation, and the Stones were the rebels who wanted to demolish the existing one.

Pay attention: the cover is for "Sticky fingers" from 1971 was relatively typical of the Rolling Stones' sexually rebellious image.

CAUTION: The “Sticky Fingers” cover from 1971 was relatively typical of The Rolling Stones’ sexually rebellious image.

In fact, the Rolling Stones’ history was influenced by Queen, or at least by her stature, long before the band even existed. The band’s legendary guitarist, Keith Richards, was a gifted boy soprano, and the star of the choir at Dartford School of Technology in Kent. In 1955 Handel sang for the young Queen Elizabeth in Westminster Abbey. The choir won prizes, and Keith was allowed to skip physics and chemistry classes to rehearse and perform. But when he ended up changing the voice, not only was he kicked out of the choir, but he was also required to make up for the lessons he had missed.

“I was very angry,” Richards wrote in his autobiography, Life. “I had a burning desire for revenge.” “Then I had a reason to want to burn this country and everything it stands for.”

He has always been highly critical of anyone who allows himself to be dazzled by cool titles and ancient pedigree, including Stones forward Mick Jagger.

Once Upon a Time: The Rolling Stones in 1965. The original line-up was Brian Jones, Bill Wyman, Charlie Watts, Mick Jagger and Keith Richards.

Once Upon a Time: The Rolling Stones in 1965. The original line-up was Brian Jones, Bill Wyman, Charlie Watts, Mick Jagger and Keith Richards.

Photo: AP

But over time, Queen and the Rolling Stones came to represent something of the same thing. Because the Queen, too, has done exactly the same thing for decades after decades, doing her rituals over and over again.

I sent her Christmas greetings, and went about the streets in a horse-drawn carriage, and crowded where she wanted in a colorful hat, and sensible shoes, and a purse, which was always quite large. The Rolling Stones have constantly traveled to the concert arenas of the world, opening concert after concert with their recognizable “Start Me Up” tune.

For the audience, both Queen and the band became a bridge to an earlier version of themselves. To a time when the world was as it once was. It also felt clearer. The need for confirmation is another strong reason why Elizabeth, Mick, and Keith become monolithic characters.

Representing Ritual: Queen Elizabeth, Mick and Keith all become unified and nostalgic characters at last.

Representing Ritual: Queen Elizabeth, Mick and Keith all become unified and nostalgic characters at last.

Photo: AP

When the Queen died, the newspapers were filled with pictures of her seventy years on the throne. There were countless photos of the Queen, with the crown on her head, with heads of state long gone and dead. Something similar could be seen when the video for “Angry” was released this week.

Some balked at the use of actress Sydney Sweeney as a buxom, curvy rock girl in an open car, a move that wasn’t entirely appropriate for 2023 (and again: maybe that was the point). Still others, myself included, are strangely moved by the video’s use of edited old film clips of the band themselves.

On some cliffs their hair is blond and wrinkle-free, on others their faces look like topographical maps. Here are the tasteful suits of the 70s, and the neon colors of the 80s. And through it all they play and play and play. On the one hand, the video is a shameless flirtation of the masses. On the other hand, there is a statement they are not fortunate enough to make: Our story is the story of an era.

Another generation: Sidney Sweeney, known since "trance" And "white lotus"Stars of The Rolling Stones' new music video.  Their core audience is usually a little different from that of a band.

Another Generation: Sidney Sweeney, known from “Euphoria” and “The White Lotus,” stars in The Rolling Stones’ new music video. Their core audience is usually somewhat different from the band’s audience.

Photo: Reuters

It was also the fate of belonging to the Rolling Stones, a fate from which some of them made small attempts to break away. The late drummer Charlie Watts was actually a jazz drummer, and he always kept his distance, as if playing in one of the biggest bands in the world was just something he was humbled to do occasionally.

Mick Jagger made regular attempts to become a pop star, trying to play music very different from the one that made him famous – also, of course, in front of Richards’ annoying snoring.

Shared Fate: Keith Richards probably takes credit for the fact that the Stones always look like Stones.  But it is questionable whether he did not take advantage of Mick Jagger's disciplined hold on his ears.

Shared Fate: Keith Richards probably takes credit for the fact that the Stones always look like Stones. But it is questionable whether he did not take advantage of Mick Jagger’s disciplined hold on his ears.

Photo: Agence France-Presse

It’s Keith Richards who has to be credited with keeping the Stones’ sound alive all those years. But it is also worth noting that he might not have succeeded had he not been kept in check by the ambitious and disciplined Jagger.

Now it seems as if they have come to terms with the fact that they are and will be related to each other. At the same time, we others discover that we have become attached to them. They are the witnesses of our time, and we are theirs.

See also  Kim Wigard from Demenskoret til Ungkaren
Ashura Okorie

Ashura Okorie

"Infuriatingly humble web fan. Writer. Alcohol geek. Passionate explorer. Evil problem solver. Incurable zombie expert."

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *