Never understood the adulation this band has received over the years. A couple of songs are nice enough I suppose, but to my ears totally mediocre. I kind of partly hold them resonsible for britpop and laddism. Just go on about how great you are 24/7 and people will be gullible enough to agree with you.
"Idiot groups with no shape or form Out of their heads on a quid of blow The shapeless kecks* flapping on the storm Look at what they are: a pack of worms"
Yeah I mean they undoubtedly were partly responsible for laddism and britpop, but then lots of influences fed into that - like, say, The Beatles, punk, football - and not all of these things are easily dismissable. The Stone Roses were a pretty political proposition, largely because of Ian Brown, in a way that would recede in the mainstream of British indie in nineties and die in the noughties. And I can't agree about the music being mediocre: there's plenty of middling jangle pop in the canon but the best stuff (Fools Gold, Waterfall, I am the Resurrection) is utterly unique.
there's nothing laddish about the stone roses as people
(or indeed as performers - they were never rowdy or boorish onstage)
as individuals they are all really intelligent, well and widely read
in interviews they've always spoken about politics, history, the Kinder trespasss i think it's called when masses of people walked across a private estate, crimes of the british empire etc
way more in common with manic street preachers than they do with Oasis
3 comments:
Never understood the adulation this band has received over the years. A couple of songs are nice enough I suppose, but to my ears totally mediocre. I kind of partly hold them resonsible for britpop and laddism. Just go on about how great you are 24/7 and people will be gullible enough to agree with you.
"Idiot groups with no shape or form
Out of their heads on a quid of blow
The shapeless kecks* flapping on the storm
Look at what they are: a pack of worms"
Yeah I mean they undoubtedly were partly responsible for laddism and britpop, but then lots of influences fed into that - like, say, The Beatles, punk, football - and not all of these things are easily dismissable. The Stone Roses were a pretty political proposition, largely because of Ian Brown, in a way that would recede in the mainstream of British indie in nineties and die in the noughties. And I can't agree about the music being mediocre: there's plenty of middling jangle pop in the canon but the best stuff (Fools Gold, Waterfall, I am the Resurrection) is utterly unique.
there's nothing laddish about the stone roses as people
(or indeed as performers - they were never rowdy or boorish onstage)
as individuals they are all really intelligent, well and widely read
in interviews they've always spoken about politics, history, the Kinder trespasss i think it's called when masses of people walked across a private estate, crimes of the british empire etc
way more in common with manic street preachers than they do with Oasis
Post a Comment