Sneelock
god
Ice Cream by night
Posts: 9,087
|
Post by Sneelock on Dec 8, 2020 4:06:02 GMT
Shakespeare?
|
|
|
Post by daveythefatboy on Dec 8, 2020 4:21:54 GMT
Bob Dylan wrote Wiggle Wiggle. So?
|
|
Sneelock
god
Ice Cream by night
Posts: 9,087
|
Post by Sneelock on Dec 8, 2020 5:53:48 GMT
Cole Porter wrote “I am Ashamed Women are so Simple” #CancelCole
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2020 8:36:14 GMT
It seems Jagger is being given a free pass here because he's "sophisticated" and the lyrics are imaginative exercises rather than autobiography ( an odd distinction, but anyway). I don't want him hung from the city walls or deleted from rock history, I can enjoy these records as much as anyone as I've already said. But to point out that there was an undercurrent of misogyny in some Stones lyrics that peddled some unsavoury sexist attitudes and that they stood out at times even amongst their peers for this is not too condemn them absolutely, neither does it deny their musical or lyrical ability and intelligence (an odd thing to have to state, but that point keeps being made for some reason). It just means what it is, that they seemed to take more relish in these attitudes than many of their peers. How much this should detract from their standing is a difficult questiion, but I do think it is a valid charge to level against them. I've not really added any new points there so we're beginning to go round in circles, so I'll leave it there.
|
|
|
Post by daveythefatboy on Dec 8, 2020 9:00:58 GMT
Who is giving him a free pass? We just aren’t really debating the “he was a product of his times” argument because we all seemingly agree with it.
To the extent that Jagger WAS a misogynist, I would submit that his lyrics were far less of a problem than his actual womanizing. But I’m not a big fan of judging others based on their media portrayals. Still - every time someone reminds me what a horrible person Woody Allen or Roman Polanski are, I wonder if the likes of Jagger and Bowie aren’t guilty of similar. Some people are allowed more leeway than others.
I’m fully willing to accept the possibility that Mick Jagger might be a misogynist. I’m less interested in getting the vapors over the lyrics to Under My Thumb.
|
|
|
Post by tory on Dec 8, 2020 9:03:10 GMT
Under my Thumb's lyrics are anachronistic, just as many other songs were from that period.
It's also a cracking arrangement - perhaps one of their best.
It is possible to hold both positions.
|
|
|
Post by *LORD 'X'* on Dec 8, 2020 10:11:33 GMT
I generally have two rules about assumptions about songwriting: 1) I assume, unless told otherwise by the writer, or am privy to their personal life, that lyrics are NOT autobiographical. It's not assumed of novelists, poets, directors, painters, etc. etc., why should songs be different? How exactly would you be 'told otherwise by the writer'? What about 'Like A Rolling Stone'?
|
|
loveless
god
Bringing ballet to the masses. Sticking to the funk.
Posts: 3,001
Member is Online
|
Post by loveless on Dec 8, 2020 12:36:13 GMT
I think, in light of what we assuredly know about Jagger's upbringing (raised by a toothless, bearded hag) and personal history (drove a tank, held a general's rank, killed the czar AND his minister, takes tea at three), he was BOUND to throw up a few dark shadows in his work.
|
|
|
Post by sloopjohnc on Dec 8, 2020 14:41:22 GMT
Still - every time someone reminds me what a horrible person Woody Allen or Roman Polanski are, I wonder if the likes of Jagger and Bowie aren’t guilty of similar. Some people are allowed more leeway than others. I don't know if that factors into it. The same tabloid press that would cover Allen and Polanski are the same that would cover Jagger and Bowie. Even more so, as they're bigger household names. It's not the same as beat writers covering sports teams.
|
|
|
Post by daveythefatboy on Dec 8, 2020 15:10:30 GMT
Still - every time someone reminds me what a horrible person Woody Allen or Roman Polanski are, I wonder if the likes of Jagger and Bowie aren’t guilty of similar. Some people are allowed more leeway than others. I don't know if that factors into it. The same tabloid press that would cover Allen and Polanski are the same that would cover Jagger and Bowie. Even more so, as they're bigger household names. It's not the same as beat writers covering sports teams. I would submit that “the same tabloid press” treats sexually alluring rock stars differently than less attractive Jewish film directors. It’s like those stories that pop up once in a while where a boy in his early teens is sexually abused by a sexy female teacher. A lot of people smirk and call the boy lucky. Just as any underage girl who may have been seduced by Jagger or Bowie might be thought that have had a positive experience (which indeed - they may have had... but it is still statutory rape). The point being: We feel more disgust and outrage when unattractive people transgress. Attractive rock stars are judged by different rules.
|
|
loveless
god
Bringing ballet to the masses. Sticking to the funk.
Posts: 3,001
Member is Online
|
Post by loveless on Dec 8, 2020 15:22:56 GMT
I mean, all Lyle Lovett did was get MARRIED...
|
|
|
Post by daveythefatboy on Dec 8, 2020 15:50:35 GMT
But to point out that there was an undercurrent of misogyny in some Stones lyrics that peddled some unsavoury sexist attitudes and that they stood out at times even amongst their peers for this is not too condemn them absolutely I don’t want to pass this by without some form of acknowledgment. I’m just not sure what else we’re supposed to do with it. I think it is fine to acknowledge that some of their lyrics both reflected and reinforced negative ideas about women. But where the line between Jagger’s artistic instincts and his actual feelings on women begin and end just isn’t something I’m going to take a hard stand on. I doubt he even fully understands it. So what more is there to say? Old songs. Outdated attitudes. File them away under: ‘interesting cultural artifacts’ and then move on.
|
|
|
Post by sloopjohnc on Dec 8, 2020 16:13:20 GMT
But to point out that there was an undercurrent of misogyny in some Stones lyrics that peddled some unsavoury sexist attitudes and that they stood out at times even amongst their peers for this is not too condemn them absolutely I don’t want to pass this by without some form of acknowledgment. I’m just not sure what else we’re supposed to do with it. I think it is fine to acknowledge that some of their lyrics both reflected and reinforced negative ideas about women. But where the line between Jagger’s artistic instincts and his actual feelings on women begin and end just isn’t something I’m going to take a hard stand on. I doubt he even fully understands it. So what more is there to say? Old songs. Outdated attitudes. File them away under: ‘interesting cultural artifacts’ and then move on. It's a funny ol' world. It didn't seem to upset their female fan base. As a follower of reggae, the most suggestive songs sold as singles are supposedly bought by women, reggae being a singles oriented genre. My daughter is a huge fan of hip-hop and also a staunch feminist and I asked her what she thought about guys like Drake, YG, Travis Scott, et al, when they wrote derogatory songs about women. Astoundingly, she responded that she writes it off as part of the genre and pays more attention to the beats and the rhyme flows more than the lyrics.
|
|
|
Post by sloopjohnc on Dec 8, 2020 16:15:04 GMT
I don't know if that factors into it. The same tabloid press that would cover Allen and Polanski are the same that would cover Jagger and Bowie. Even more so, as they're bigger household names. It's not the same as beat writers covering sports teams. I would submit that “the same tabloid press” treats sexually alluring rock stars differently than less attractive Jewish film directors. It’s like those stories that pop up once in a while where a boy in his early teens is sexually abused by a sexy female teacher. A lot of people smirk and call the boy lucky. Just as any underage girl who may have been seduced by Jagger or Bowie might be thought that have had a positive experience (which indeed - they may have had... but it is still statutory rape). The point being: We feel more disgust and outrage when unattractive people transgress. Attractive rock stars are judged by different rules. I expected this response. I kinda set you up for it to see what you'd write, not that I don't think you're not correct. The Weinstein Factor.
|
|
|
Post by *LORD 'X'* on Dec 8, 2020 16:19:17 GMT
I think he's got a point there, for a change
|
|