"there are immaturities, but there are immensities" - Bright Star (dir. Jane Campion)>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"the fear of being wrong can keep you from being anything at all" - Nayland Blake >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "It may be foolish to be foolish, but, somehow, even more so, to not be" - Airport Through The Trees
Monday, July 14, 2025
a Rolling Stones biography + a Bill Wyman autobiography reviewed in The Observer (1990)
When I wrote this snide review of the dirty old man's memoir I'd clean forgotten that if nothing else he had made the best Stone-involved record of the last - well now it would 3 and a half decades - but in 1990 just a decade.
This and "Start Me Up", the last great actual Rolling Stones record, were released the same year.
"Start Me Up", the last great actual Rolling Stones record, were released the same year."
Oddly, 1980/1 marked the end of the cultural (if not the commercial) peak of a number of UK rock stalwarts - the Stones, Pink Floyd and (to a lesser extent) Queen & the Who all enjoyed their final period as definers of the zeitgeist during this era.
Meanwhile, John Bonham and Lennon died, Ozzy left Black Sabbath and though he would be a stalwart of MTV, there's a strong argument that the suitably elegaic "Ashes to Ashes" marks the end of Bowie's imperial phase.
There’s a spoof history book - possibly ‘1066 and All That’ - that has a line about some character realising that the 19th century was over, and promptly dying.
Rock bands and stars feel a bit like that. The transition from the 70s to the 80s was marked by all those deaths, breakups and peaks you mention. In the same way, the 60s/70s boundary was marked by the deaths of Hendrix, Joplin and Morrison, the breakups of the Beatles and the Velvet Underground, the burnouts of Brian Wilson, Sly Stone and Arthur Lee, etc.
It would be a great research project to see whether those psychologically resonant changes of epoch such as the end of a decade do actually drive an acceleration of cultural realignments, or whether it’s just a fake impression of order that we retrospectively impose on chaotic events.
I would take the opposing side on that conjecture. How many big music stars died / bands broke up in 1965-66 or 1975-76 or 1985-86? Elvis in 1977 counts, I suppose.
As I am now forming this theory of cultural great waves / supercycles, I am going to contend that decade ends are times of death and birth, while mid-decades are times of reenergizing and rejuvenation.
I dunno, I think deaths/break-ups happen at zeniths, which prompts the decline, during which you get good to great solo albums from bands that broke up, new bands formed the ashes that don't quite match the original, etc.
Another bystander in the Rolling Stones was Ian Stewart, who was the founder of the band and who gave them their name, and was also their acknowledged leader when they first started, Mick 'n' Keef being comparative latecomers.
After he was sidelined, he stayed with the Stones because he was an avid golfer, and touring with them allowed him to play on the best golf courses around the world. He even stayed in separate hotels to the rest of the band, these being selected on the basis of proximity to the course he wanted to play on.
Does anything age worse than an idea of rebellion dating several generations back?
ReplyDelete"Start Me Up", the last great actual Rolling Stones record, were released the same year."
ReplyDeleteOddly, 1980/1 marked the end of the cultural (if not the commercial) peak of a number of UK rock stalwarts - the Stones, Pink Floyd and (to a lesser extent) Queen & the Who all enjoyed their final period as definers of the zeitgeist during this era.
Meanwhile, John Bonham and Lennon died, Ozzy left Black Sabbath and though he would be a stalwart of MTV, there's a strong argument that the suitably elegaic "Ashes to Ashes" marks the end of Bowie's imperial phase.
There’s a spoof history book - possibly ‘1066 and All That’ - that has a line about some character realising that the 19th century was over, and promptly dying.
DeleteRock bands and stars feel a bit like that. The transition from the 70s to the 80s was marked by all those deaths, breakups and peaks you mention. In the same way, the 60s/70s boundary was marked by the deaths of Hendrix, Joplin and Morrison, the breakups of the Beatles and the Velvet Underground, the burnouts of Brian Wilson, Sly Stone and Arthur Lee, etc.
It would be a great research project to see whether those psychologically resonant changes of epoch such as the end of a decade do actually drive an acceleration of cultural realignments, or whether it’s just a fake impression of order that we retrospectively impose on chaotic events.
If you did decades as 1956 to 1965, 1966 to 1975, 1976 to 1985, 1986 to 1995, it would make as much sense, I reckon. Probably more.
DeleteI would take the opposing side on that conjecture. How many big music stars died / bands broke up in 1965-66 or 1975-76 or 1985-86? Elvis in 1977 counts, I suppose.
DeleteAs I am now forming this theory of cultural great waves / supercycles, I am going to contend that decade ends are times of death and birth, while mid-decades are times of reenergizing and rejuvenation.
I dunno, I think deaths/break-ups happen at zeniths, which prompts the decline, during which you get good to great solo albums from bands that broke up, new bands formed the ashes that don't quite match the original, etc.
DeleteAnother bystander in the Rolling Stones was Ian Stewart, who was the founder of the band and who gave them their name, and was also their acknowledged leader when they first started, Mick 'n' Keef being comparative latecomers.
ReplyDeleteAfter he was sidelined, he stayed with the Stones because he was an avid golfer, and touring with them allowed him to play on the best golf courses around the world. He even stayed in separate hotels to the rest of the band, these being selected on the basis of proximity to the course he wanted to play on.
Starting to become a bit of an E.L. Wisty on here, aren't I?
Delete