Quote from rollingstone's site disses our Beatles [Archive]

View Full Version : Quote from rollingstone's site disses our Beatles

LivingInTheMaterialWorld

Jul 24, 2002, 08:55 AM

"Four decades ago, they burst on the scene like a supernova, seducing the world while singing about sex and drugs and having "Sympathy for the Devil," a far cry from what any of their contemporaries were doing. While the Beatles were singing about "holding hands," the Stones cut right to the chase and said "let's spend the night together."
http://www.rollingstones.com/band.html

Aren't they supposed to be FRIENDS of our beloved Beatles? How dare they exaggerate the Beatles' cookie cutter image in order to look superior!

I've realized what the difference between the Beatles and the Rolling Stones are: and it's more than leather jackets and French suits. It's the fact that this garbage will never be posted on the Beatles' official site, while on the Stones' official site the Beatles are mentioned, only to be made out to seem infantile in comparison.

I've had enough!

------------------
________________________
"Without going out of my door, I could know all things"

LivingInTheMaterialWorld

Jul 24, 2002, 08:56 AM

And down with Mick Jagger!

------------------
________________________
"Without going out of my door, I could know all things"

PaulisMine

Jul 24, 2002, 09:09 AM

I'd rather hold any Beatles hand than spend the night with any of the Rolling Stones!! http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/smile.gif

------------------
Every night I just want to go out,
get out of my head.
Every day I don't want to get up,
get out of my bed.

LivingInTheMaterialWorld

Jul 24, 2002, 09:11 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>Quote:<HR>Originally Posted By PaulisMine:
I'd rather hold any Beatles hand than spend the night with any of the Rolling Stones!! http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/smile.gif

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I couldn't have said it better myself!

------------------
________________________
"Without going out of my door, I could know all things"

FiendishThingie

Jul 24, 2002, 09:16 AM

I think you need to kind of know how it was back in 1964 & on. People either loved The Beatles or they loved The Stones. There was some over lapping, but not a tremendous amount. The Beatles were seen as the good boys & the girls knew their parents would approve of them liking the cuddly little mop tops. The Stones had a rougher edge & any of the more rebelious teens seemed to follow them more likely. Parents thought they were bad boys.

The statement above probably isn't meant to "knock" The Beatles. I think it's more for the fans who have been around for a LONG time. At least, when I read it, it took me back to the 60s - in a flash! http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/wink2.gif

FT http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/wink3.gif

------------------
"Music always had a transcendental quality inasmuch as it reaches parts of you that you don't expect it to reach. And it can touch you in a way that you can't express. You can think that it hasn't reached you and years later you'll find it coming out." George Harrison

LivingInTheMaterialWorld

Jul 24, 2002, 09:28 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>Quote:<HR>Originally Posted By FiendishThingie:
I think you need to kind of know how it was back in 1964 & on. People either loved The Beatles or they loved The Stones. There was some over lapping, but not a tremendous amount. The Beatles were seen as the good boys & the girls knew their parents would approve of them liking the cuddly little mop tops. The Stones had a rougher edge & any of the more rebelious teens seemed to follow them more likely. Parents thought they were bad boys.

The statement above probably isn't meant to "knock" The Beatles. I think it's more for the fans who have been around for a LONG time. At least, when I read it, it took me back to the 60s - in a flash! http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/wink2.gif

FT http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/wink3.gif

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know how it was back then...but now that it's the year 2002, we know that that was just an illusion. The Beatles were bad *sses "in their own write" and they certainly weren't living happy-go-lucky lives.

I just think that for young people who r getting in2 the Rolling Stones, it might discourage them from discovering the wonderfulness that is The Beatles!! (Im 18 yrs old, mind u)

They were anything but soft! Even then..why does soft have 2 b a bad thing?

------------------
________________________
"Without going out of my door, I could know all things"

Clark Kent

Jul 24, 2002, 09:43 AM

Get over it Jagger!
The Beatles rule!

------------------

Magneto

Jul 24, 2002, 10:07 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>Quote:<HR>Originally Posted By PaulisMine:
I'd rather hold any Beatles hand than spend the night with any of the Rolling Stones!! http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/smile.gif

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Looking back, even Marianne Faithfull would probably agree. Just notice the way she talks about Paul in her autobiography compared to Mick...

------------------
"Who knows when a mystery begins..."

[This Message Has Been Edited By Magneto On July 24, 2002 10:08 AM]

beatlebangs1964

Jul 24, 2002, 10:39 AM

Loyal to one or the other -- sounds like the Sharks and the Jets to me! http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/joker.gif

Seriously, I like both groups, always have, but I love the Beatles much more than I ever did the Stones.

------------------
Then we will remember things we said today. Yeah.
-- Beatles, 1964

Read www.rooftopsessions.com (http://www.rooftopsessions.com) for high caliber Beatles fan fiction.

BB1964

dav-here

Jul 24, 2002, 11:19 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>Quote:<HR>Originally Posted By Clark Kent:
Get over it Jagger!
The Beatles rule!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/rocknroll2.gif

------------------
"He's so smart, he doesn't even remember what he knows." Dave here.

ImaginePeace78

Jul 24, 2002, 11:28 AM

I've heard that quote before about the Beatles holding your hand while the Stones wanted to spend the night with you. I don't think it was a knock at the Beatle really, they explained how different they're songs were. But of course, we all know the Beatles can the "bad boys" too just like the Stones were. Oh, I would also want to hold any Beatles hand rather than spend the night with the Stones. http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/smile.gif
-Kristi

------------------
"In the best of times, our days are numbered anyway. And so it would be a crime against nature for any generation to take the world crisis so solemnly that we would put off doing those things for which we were intended for in the first place, the oppurtunity to do good work, to fall in love, to enjoy friends, to hit a ball and to bounce a baby." --Allistar Cooke

Kristi's Writing Desk (http://www.geocities.com/lennon4080forever/index.html)

Danoota64

Jul 24, 2002, 11:57 AM

You couldn't *pay* me to go see the Stones. I wouldn't cross the street to see them. The most talented one never gets mentioned anyway (Brian Jones) - probably Mick's idea.

BEATLES FOREVER.

http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/clap2.gif

------------------
"Although I laugh and I act like a clown/Beneath this mask I am wearing a frown." - I'M A LOSER (64)

Tim

Jul 24, 2002, 02:02 PM

Sound like Andrew Loog Oldham.
Seriously,it's a joke,nothing bad in it.

------------------
Tim
http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/churchill.gif
Tim Brent's Yellow Submarine Page (http://www.geocities.com/timbrent.geo)
The Beatles' Record Advertisements (http://members.tripod.co.uk/seltaeb)
The Beatles' Record Covers Yahoo! Club (http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/beatlesrecordcovers)
The Beatles Video Theatre (http://timbrent.tripod.com)

Wonderwall

Jul 24, 2002, 02:18 PM

Totally wrong!
When The Beatles sang about "holding hands" (1964),the Stones records still depended on cover versions of old blues classics.When the Stones sang "Let's Spend Some Time Together,now I need you more than ever"(1967),The Beatles songs took a direction guided by a social and spiritual consciuosness."All You Need Is Love","I Am The Walrus","Strawberry Fields Forever" etc.The Stones might win the trophy when it comes to most rebellious "boy meets girl lyrics" and more official hangovers.But The Stones will never earn my RESPECT as socially consciuos people the same way that the Beatles do.

------------------
Free as a bird...it's the nearest thing to be.

Maccachic

Jul 24, 2002, 05:02 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>Quote:<HR>Originally Posted By Wonderwall:
The Stones might win the trophy when it comes to most rebellious "boy meets girl lyrics" and more official hangovers.But The Stones will never earn my RESPECT as socially conscious people the same way that the Beatles do.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Wow... i couldn't have said it better.

------------------
Maccachic
"Tha's an in-joke y'know."
-A Hard Day's Night
Tell me something I don't know already.

motherTheresa

Jul 24, 2002, 06:22 PM

Wouldn't you say this article is bottom line,
poorly written? I don't admit to being a Stones expert, but they compare "I wanna hold
your hand" to "Let's spend the night together" as if they were released at the exact same moment in time! Were they? I was
around, & I don't think so! Just because the
Stones were singing about SEX, that makes them a superior band? What stupid logic! A good song is a good song-who cares what the topic is-as long as you love it!
Any band should stand or fall based on their
own merit & accomplishments-and if the writer
of the Stones piece couldn't do better than
this with what they had to work with, he/she
is an IDIOT!

I love The Beatles!
& always will
mT

------------------

Rellevart

Jul 24, 2002, 06:28 PM

Maybe it's just me, but I don't see this as a big deal. It's not so much saying that the Beatles are bad, it's just saying that the Beatles and the Stones were saying different things. They were. They had different images.

I also don't feel like I have to hate everyone who dis's (is that even a word???) the Beatles. They're entitled to their opinion (wrong as it is) and I'll still judge them on their own merits. If I like some group's music, I'm not going to automatically hate it because they don't share my love for the guys.

------------------
I go back so far, I'm in front of me...

beatlebangs1964

Jul 24, 2002, 08:38 PM

Well said, Rell.

It is true the Stones portrayed a very earthy appeal that contrasted with the Beatles' refined image. I think that was in the way both groups were handled by their respective managers and marketed to the world at large.

In Freudian terms http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/joker.gif

Id - Stones
Ego- Beatles
Superego - Who

Still, seriously, there is a real psychology to sales.

------------------
Then we will remember things we said today. Yeah.
-- Beatles, 1964

Read www.rooftopsessions.com (http://www.rooftopsessions.com) for high caliber Beatles fan fiction.

BB1964

Magill

Jul 25, 2002, 12:11 AM

Why, those little back stabbers! They use to hang out with the Beatles. What's up with this article? http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/angry9.gif

------------------
Thanks for the lift, sailor!

SleepyHead

Jul 29, 2002, 03:40 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>Quote:<HR>Originally Posted By LivingInTheMaterialWorld:
http://www.rollingstones.com/band.html

Aren't they supposed to be FRIENDS of our beloved Beatles? How dare they exaggerate the Beatles' cookie cutter image in order to look superior!

I've realized what the difference between the Beatles and the Rolling Stones are: and it's more than leather jackets and French suits. It's the fact that this garbage will never be posted on the Beatles' official site, while on the Stones' official site the Beatles are mentioned, only to be made out to seem infantile in comparison.

I've had enough!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You may wish to take another look at that website - it is NOT, and I repeat NOT the "official site" for the Rolling Stones, but for the Rolling Stones Fan Club...
And therein lies a world of difference.

------------------
http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/sleep2.gif
In Memory Of Robby (http://inmemoryofrobby.50megs.com)
Our Lady's Psalter (http://ourladyspsalter.50megs.com)
Bearkat77's Beatlemaniac Page (http://bearkat77.www9.50megs.com)
Bearkat77's Tribute to John Lennon (http://bearkatjl.50megs.com)
Bearkat77's Tribute to Ringo Starr (http://bearkatrs.50megs.com)

Jul 29, 2002, 10:15 PM

god! this topic is formed by marines!
why so much rage folks?
artists say rubbish all the time.

------------------
The Love You Take Is Equal To The Love You Make

SleepyHead

Jul 30, 2002, 12:31 AM

Well, I believe the "rage" was directed at the erroneously blamed Stones for the paragraph found at the Official Fan Club site - obviously, neither the Stones nor Rolling Stones Magazine can be held responsible for the opinions of any fans of any group whatsoever...

------------------
http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/sleep2.gif
In Memory Of Robby (http://inmemoryofrobby.50megs.com)
Our Lady's Psalter (http://ourladyspsalter.50megs.com)
Bearkat77's Beatlemaniac Page (http://bearkat77.www9.50megs.com)
Bearkat77's Tribute to John Lennon (http://bearkatjl.50megs.com)
Bearkat77's Tribute to Ringo Starr (http://bearkatrs.50megs.com)

Rellevart

Jul 30, 2002, 04:57 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>Quote:<HR>Originally Posted By SleepyHead:
You may wish to take another look at that website - it is NOT, and I repeat NOT the "official site" for the Rolling Stones, but for the Rolling Stones Fan Club...
And therein lies a world of difference.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ah-ha! It all becomes clear! http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/images/icons/smile.gif

------------------
I go back so far, I'm in front of me...

SleepyHead

Jul 30, 2002, 05:05 AM

I wonder if anyone else bothered to check out the link for themselves...

------------------
http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubb/smilies/sleep2.gif
In Memory Of Robby (http://inmemoryofrobby.50megs.com)
Our Lady's Psalter (http://ourladyspsalter.50megs.com)
Bearkat77's Beatlemaniac Page (http://bearkat77.www9.50megs.com)
Bearkat77's Tribute to John Lennon (http://bearkatjl.50megs.com)
Bearkat77's Tribute to Ringo Starr (http://bearkatrs.50megs.com)