A Relatively Lazy Post About The Rolling Stones

I call this a lazy post because I wrote most of it before posting it to this here blog-a-roo. It all started when I did a drive-by past fellow On Time!er The Far North End, and found him having an existential dilemma regarding one of my favorite bands, the Rolling Stones. Besides asking for Stones album recommendations, FNE's question was: why does anyone consider the Stones to be equals to, if not better than, the Beatles? The rest of tonight's post is my reply to that question, spiced up with some stolen pictures. Enjoy!

* * *

For me, the answer to “Beatles or Stones?” will always be “Stones.” Almost exclusively because of the song “Sympathy for the Devil.” But I don’t see the Stones as being more innovative or influential as the Beatles. More talented? I’d call that a draw. Ultimately, I think it’s kind of like, whether a person believes in [INSERT PREFERRED CREATOR NAME HERE] or [INSERT PREFERRED CREATOR-OPPONENT NAME HERE], chances are they still believe that the creator is more powerful and influential than (and may have in fact created) the opponent.

I didn't live through the '60s, so I can't speak for the hippies, but that's how I've always viewed their rivalry: the Beatles were yang, and the Stones were yin. People just kind of go with whatever vibe they like the most. And yes, the Beatles were probably a more groundbreaking group than the Stones... but you’d be hard-pressed to prove they were cooler.

* * *

Two other things I just now thought to add -- first, the Stones gain a lot of props due to the fact the core members have been working together for 40-some-odd years, whereas the Beatles only lasted about a decade.

On a more superficial level, the Beatles couldn't boast anyone as awesome as Keith Richards, and the Stones weren't hampered by anyone as toolish as Paul McCartney (though arguments could be made in Mick Jagger's favor on that point). Discuss.

Ugh

Yeah, so as of today I'm 36. Thirty-six! Not recommended if you can avoid it, though I suppose the only known alternative is far, far worse.

In honor of this momentous occassion, today's playlist shall only consist of tunes released on or before my date of birth. It started with my perennial musical birthday starter, the Beatles' "Birthday," followed by the number one song on the day I was born (Edwin Starr's "War"), and now we're into Creedence's Bayou Country. Sweet jesus, that's a good album. In fact, I defy you to listen to CCR's cover of "Good Golly Miss Molly" and not contract a bad case of the boogie woogie flu.

Unfortunately, this whole "nothing after I was born" mandate means I'll hear plenty of hippie music before the day is through. Good thing such notable exceptions as Black Sabbath, the Stooges, the Velvet Underground and a few others were around back then, or this might not be doable.

Oh, and did I mention that the cable man is coming today? That's right, I somehow wound up with a cable appointment on my birthday. On a Sunday, no less. The Sunday before Labor Day. Bear in mind I've never gone to school or work on September 3 in my life, because The Man does not get access to me on my birthday, and this comes dangerously close to breaking that streak.

Maybe I'll wear one of those pointy birthday party hats the whole time the cable dude is here, and repeatedly point out that it's my birthday. Then I'll ask him if he brought me any cake, and look confused when he says he didn't.

"But," I'll say, "it's my birthday..."