I’m a little surprised at the early votes rolling in for Keith Richards (4 of the first 6 respondents) in our current poll requesting your choice for second-favorite member of The Rolling Stones. I thought for sure that Keef would not get many votes on account of being the obvious favorite. Perhaps Townspeople misread the question and thought they were voting for their favorite. Perhaps Keef was voted as second-favorite Stone behind the choice that only my most cynical brain cells could imagine rock nerds voting for as Favorite Stone: Mick Taylor. Perhaps – and this is hard for me to imagine, but it would be nice – these Townspeople who voted for Keef as #2 Stone agree with my choice for Favorite Stone:
Mick Jagger.
Considering that the Stones are barely worth listening to past Exile or Some Girls or Tattoo You, if you must, any credit that present-day Keef gets for maintaining his rock ‘n roll credibility and keeping the ship afloat is worth a hill of beans. Considering that the early version of the band made its mark on as many covers as it did originals, I say that Jagger’s showman’s snarl and humor made the difference as much as any of Richards’ musical firepower. That late-60s through Exile period also gets a boost from Mick’s larger-than-life leadership, and I don’t know the ins and outs of all songwriting efforts by the Stones, but isn’t Mick the primary lyricist? I love much of the Stones’ lyrics from their two main golden eras, and I think the lyrics continue to be an important part of what I consider their last great effort, Some Girls. Go Mick!
In declaring Mick as my Favorite Stone, I’m willing to overlook the clown he turned into as early as his “Satanic” spell on Rock ‘n Roll Circus. Almost nothing in rock was lamer than his football pants and Capezios Look during the band’s Tattoo You period, but Mick’s still my Stone. I like his attitude, and he’s got great hair to boot.
How about you? Who’s your Favorite Stone? What challenges to your favorite Stone’s legacy have you had to overlook/forgive?
Bill Wyman is my favorite Stone because he had the balls to quit the greatest rock and roll band in the world.
I love them all though, and like the crew of the USS enterprise, their magic is in their combined chemistry.
…or maybe Bernard Purdie is my fave…
I’m gonna say Mick, just because Studio 54 has become more interesting to me than Gram Parsons (sorry Keith). Ol’ (American) football pants seems to try more new things than finding a rare bead to weave into his hair. Keith is probably the better Stone to invite to a party, though. He seems more down to earth, but since that will never happen, Mick gets it on ambition points.
However, if there’s a contest for second-favorite Stone, I have to say that Charlie is the original “I’d prefer to play jazz, really” rock drummer to me. Many have attempted to steal that line, but to me it will always be his even if he never actually said it.
NIcky Hoplkins. ;-P
Hopkins
Since the question is “who is your favorite Stone” rather than “whose musical contributions do you like the most”, I chose Ronnie.
Keef is my favorite because even as he lapses into self parody, he is the embodiment of rock and roll to me. He’s got it all: great Look, great stance, great taste, cool guitar choice (the Telecaster, the most basic of guitars which he further simplified by removing a string), great quotes (“five strings, three chords, two fingers and one asshole.”), cockroach-like ability to survive, etc, etc.
Mick seems cold and calculating, and he always struck me as a bit of a climber. With Keef, my sense is that you get what you get. With Mick, I believe that you are getting a pose, albeit usually a very good pose.
Musically, I am decidedly in the Mick Taylor-era camp. You pointy-headed, beard-stroking rock nerds can debate the relative merits of I Just Want To See His Face all day but when you actually listen to Exile, rather than analyze it, it shouldn’t take long to realize that it is the Greatest Rock Record Ever. That said, Mick Taylor’s stellar musical contribution is inversely proportional to his “bloke factor”. He seems like a hothouse flower: aesthetically pleasing but not that much fun.
Ronnie, on the other hand, seems like he would be a great hang, and this is supported by taking a look at his career. A reliably good, but never outstanding, guitarist, he’s the consummate team player. He’s always the bridesmaid but appears to be fine with letting the others shine as long as the cocktails and the birds keep coming. Disclosure: I’ve been stuffing the ballot box for him.
The rest:
Charlie – There a lot to like about Charlie: His “outsider in his own band” vibe, the gentleman-heroin-addict thing, his steadfastness. But ultimately, he seems like a bit of a stick in the mud.
Brian – A good looking, charismatic guy with a great record collection who amounted to a bit of an empty suit. Even if he hadn’t flamed out, his time as a key player was limited because how many non-traditional instruments can you suggest for rock songs before people figure out your formula? Personality wise, he strikes me as a tedious combination of ego and insecurity.
Bill – Bill is creepy. Really creepy.
What? No Ian Stewart?
You’ve done it again Mr. Moderator.