Arts in ReviewCan The Rolling Stones still satisfy?

Can The Rolling Stones still satisfy?

The Rolling Stones are one of the most beloved bands in history, but should they hang up their guitars after 61 years?

Reading time: 3 mins

I’m what you’d call a Rolling Stones super fan. Record collection? Check. Avid follower of any and all news? Check. Can’t go a day without listening to at least one song? You bet. But even as the Stones nerd I am, I was apprehensive at best about the Hackney Diamonds tour. Legacy acts, such as the Rolling Stones, Queen + Adam Lambert, and Aerosmithwho happened to retire from touring as I was penning this article — occupy an interesting niche in the music world. One doesn’t go to an AC/DC concert in 2024 expecting to be wowed by an energetic performance, it’s about seeing AC/DC live, and all the bragging rights that entails. It’s essentially a nostalgic novelty, and that’s it. But with all that said, I think I was wrong thinking this way about Mick & the boys.

Hackney Diamonds wasn’t my first time at the legacy rodeo. I saw AC/DC some years ago, and I don’t remember being very impressed. Brian Johnson’s vocals were obviously strained to the max, which makes sense given his age. I expected a similar outcome here, Mick Jagger out of breath, Keith Richards slumped over in the corner, etc. But I’ve got to say, Jagger, Richards, and Ronnie Wood all seemed to be having an absolute blast, with minimal signs of age at all. Mick belted “Satisfaction” louder and prouder than I ever could at the local bar’s karaoke night, and he’s 81! “Keef” Richards, while still having that classic “stoned” expression on his face he’s had since the beginning, still oozed the same passion from over half a century ago — especially during his solo set, his smile at the end being the most genuine I’ve seen from the man — it wasn’t hard to see that he was genuinely proud of what he’s accomplished. Ronnie Wood shredded his guitar and belted vocals to the best of his abilities, appearing, like the others, to be enthralled with his work.

That all probably sounds a bit like the reaction of a shill, who’d applaud Mick Jagger for eating an apple, and although I am of course a diehard fan of the band, I was shocked at how much I loved the concert. The Stones are often used as one of, if not the example of a group overstaying their welcome, performing long past their prime, but it was plain to see that money wasn’t the driving factor in this instance. If Jagger wanted an easy paycheck, which he absolutely could get performing at minimal effort, he wouldn’t have strutted down the stage 100 times, travelling the distance of a marathon in two hours while dancing. It never felt hollow or unenthusiastic; the band was firing on all cylinders the entire night. 

Despite my testimony, there’s always those who say they should “just retire already.” I’ve heard my own friends make statements like that, and sometimes, they might be right. Did Queen still need to tour after Freddie Mercury’s death? Probably not. But the cold hard truth is that a lot of these acts are labours of love, performed by artists who already have all the money they could ever want, and choose to create for themselves and the joy of others. I can’t in good conscience tell you that Mick Jagger was just trying to swindle me out of $400 by appealing to my nostalgia, because he wasn’t. I think my perception of legacy acts was formed by what others had to say, making me believe that they were the musical equivalent to Disney’s soulless live-action remake films; but now that I’ve seen my idols myself, I can say that I was indeed satisfied.

 

Other articles
RELATED ARTICLES

Latest Reads

About text goes here