By Clarence Yu
Contributor
THE Rolling Stones simply defy categorization. They have played and recorded songs in every imaginable genre, be it jazz, blues, reggae, disco, rock and roll, hard rock, and pop.
This is probably why they have such a short supply of Stones fans in Manila, and why they never pervaded our culture, even after existing as a fully functioning band for the last 46 years.
While the rest of the world has celebrated its “Greatest Rock N’ Roll Band” throughout the years, the Philippines has yet to follow suit. How many Filipinos can name at least three songs of the Stones? The normal answer I get is “(I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction,” their 1965 worldwide hit. Outside my musical circle of friends, no one can give me any other two songs. And in my opinion, it is a crying shame.
The Rolling Stones were cool before cool was cool. They were the Metallica to the Bon Jovi, the Sex Pistols to the Osmond Family, and indeed, the dark, inverted persona contrasted to the mop-topped Beatles.
Perhaps not many people know that the Rolling Stones were actually marketed as the anti-Beatles, and that the Stones and Beatles, throughout the ‘60’s, actually existed together in cooperation: every time the Stones or the Beatles had a potential new single for release, each would call the other to see how the other band’s current singles were doing. If the Beatles were on top of the charts at the time, they would give sufficient way for the Stones to release theirs, and vice-versa, thus ensuring a virtual lock on the charts for both bands.
Many Filipinos still remember the 1966 concerts that the Beatles performed here, and the subsequent back story of the band being mauled and physically abused by henchmen of the former President Marcos. The Internet is abundant with accounts of these stories. Indeed, even my mother-in-law saw them perform. With enthusiastic glee uncharacteristic of me, I asked her if she remembers anything about the Rolling Stones: I get a glare and a short, “No.”
What is it about the Stones that Manila didn’t like in the ‘60’s? My take is that they didn’t write pop songs that were “poppy” enough for our tastes. We just didn’t get their darkness, their rebelliousness, and most of all, the quality of their music, which is kind of weird because we Filipinos are normally discriminating when it comes to music. The Lennon/McCartney songwriting team was far more popular than the Jagger/Richards partnership, though much higher output can be credited to the latter.
The Rolling Stones started out with a mission to “educate” the masses with the Blues and Rhythm and Blues music. Thus, they started out recording cover songs of black artists, respectfully giving a nod to their forbearers, such as Muddy Waters, Chuck Berry and Robert Johnson.
The story then goes that their manager at the time, Andrew Loog Oldham, locked Mick Jagger and Keith Richards in a kitchen and told them not to come out without writing an original song, because the belief at the time was that the band could not continue existing playing and recording cover songs. Jagger and Richards emerged with “The Last Time,” a vaguely prophetic song of things to come, considering that throughout the next 40 or so years, the band would be frequently asked if this record or tour would be “the last time.” Output during these years also included the ballad “As Tears Go By,” the controversial “Let’s Spend the Night Together,” and the doom song “Paint It Black,” which my generation was familiarized with via the 1980’s TV series “Tour of Duty.” Everyone thought it was a new song.
Perhaps the Stones didn’t have an “All You Need Is Love” type psychedelia attached to them? Well, those looking for it just have to direct their attention to 1967’s “Their Satanic Majesties’ Request,” the Stones’ only experiment in psychedelia, considered a big blunder by many hard core fans and the band itself, but still, an oddity with a gem of a song in “2000 Light Years From Home.” The Stones toyed with old Beelzebub long before Led Zepellin, Ozzy Osbourne ever did.
With the First Quarter Storm anti-government movement in the late ‘60’s and the onset of Martial Law in 1972, the Stones’ music would have been perfect for the times (“Gimme Shelter” in particular, from the 1968 album “Beggars Banquet,” comes to mind.)
Of course, with the Beatles, the rest is history. After breaking up in 1969, the most significant things to happen were Lennon getting shot, and George Harrison passing away. In between, solo records, the Wings, Yoko Ono, rumors of McCartney’s death and guest spots.
The Stones just kept playing, touring, recording, and defining a whole new era of music to the world, while the rest of us sat during the Martial Law years, cursed to listening to apolitical disco music (which the Stones also partially defined, albeit in rock parlance, with the 1978 hit, “Miss You” off the album “Some Girls.”) pop/rock music from the Eagles and Steely Dan, or hard rock like Nazareth and Led Zepellin for those who could afford the imported albums. We still missed out on the Stones for some reason.
The year 1981, the end of Martial Law, marked a great chance for us to get acquainted with them via the excellent riff-renaissance rocker, “Start Me Up,” off the album Tattoo You, but close, no cigar. MTV came out, and of course, as it really happened, video killed the radio star and paved the way for the invention of the modern rock star—with more than a few cues from the Rolling Stones.
Take any bad, naughty band existing today. Chances are, the charismatic lead singer learned more than a few moves from Sir Mick Jagger or his descendants. The would-be bad boy guitarist with cigarette in mouth and seemingly deliberate nonchalance probably studied Keith Richards’ profile more than once. Movie star Johnny Depp decidedly did so, mirroring Richards’ stance, gait, look and drunken accent in his Captain Jack Sparrow Pirates of the Caribbean movie role. The cool, detached and well dressed drummer will always have Charlie Watts as his model.
What we got from MTV were either the New Wave crew (Tears for Fears, Duran Duran, etc.) or the resulting new bad boys of Heavy metal/Hard rock — Motley Crue, The Black Crowes, Guns N’ Roses, The White Stripes, to name a few. While excellent bands in their own right and more than a few serving as front acts during several Rolling Stones tours, not many saw the parallels in the bad boy images that these bands projected, with the originals (of course, the Rolling Stones), which, in my opinion, is just plain unfair, and again, another crying shame. Most of us never got the point, which was all but stepped upon with the onset of Seattle grunge in the 1990’s. All these “I hate myself and I want to die” themed songs were just overkill.
With more than 150 million albums sold worldwide, a 46-year career spanning five decades with more than 25 studio albums recorded, chart breaking tour grosses (they still hold the world record for the highest grossing tour in history from their 1995 “Voodoo Lounge” tour, bettering themselves subsequently with their 2002 “Licks” Tour and their 2005 “A Bigger Bang” Tour), the Rolling Stones has been vital, relevant, and surviving, serving as the prototypical bad boy band, and writing the blueprints for the modern rock song.
Most importantly, they are still as bad as they were, and even more active than ever. Count on them to play the hell out of “Satisfaction” anytime. For those who watch NFL football, they did, during the 2005 halftime show.
For us locals, the Eraserheads were smart enough to capitalize on the poppy songwriting of the Beatles. The 70’s era Juan De La Cruz band took on the mantle of Cream, with Wally Gonzales’ Claptonesque inspired guitar work (though Mr. Joey “Pepe” Smith soon turned himself into a Filipino Keith Richards). The modern day rockers Wolfgang and Razorback took their cues mostly from AC/DC and the 80’s sensation Skid Row, who were all, in the first place, heavily influenced by the Rolling Stones to begin with. I have yet to see a local band who has taken on the Rolling Stones’ music and carried it on.
With the Martin Scorcese directed “Shine A Light” documentary movie on the band (was supposed to be released in September 2007 but was actually premiered February 2008), I have high hopes that many of us will get to see the band as they are now and reach back on the heaping of musical history that the band has created over the years, and finally give the World’s Greatest Rock and Roll Band the credit they deserve.
The Rolling Stones are:
Mick Jagger – lead singer and knight of the British Empire
Keith Richards – guitar and the human riff
Charlie Watts – jazz drummer in the World’s greatest rock and roll band
Ron Wood – the confederate lead guitarist
Former members:
Brian Jones (deceased, founding member) – guitar and the original Kurt Cobain
Mick Taylor – lead guitar, blues extraordinaire, currently still asking himself why he left
Bill Wyman – bass, and original stone face, now a restaurateur
Ian “Stu” Stewart (deceased, founding member) – boogie woogie pianist who hated minor chords

August 26th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
Hey Clarence, and to all readers who may have followed this thread, peace! I offer my apologies for whatever untoward feelings my passionate posts generated.
Actually, several times after re-reading these posts I had to drink a glass of water and ask myself this question: what is really in music that makes one feel so passionate about? I may have imputed juvenalia on you but in doing so, I reverted back to being a juvenile myself. haha!
Music, whether by Sinatra or the Stones, simply has a way of sharpening one’s senses and sensibilities back to their elemental forms. And I guess we are all kindred in that sense. After all has been said and done, please take comfort in the fact that my rantings might actually have been right-handed compliments.
Peace! And Rey Valera at wee hours in the morning isn’t really so bad indeed…
August 26th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Dear Mr. Villa,
Whatever you desire. It seems that there is no pleasing you.
I don’t think I ever sought out to, or did, trample upon any other artists. All I asked as the main intent of my article, was for the mainstream to “reconsider” the Stones in light of their relative unpopularity here compared to other big name artists. No offense meant, nor none taken.
Hey, go to any club nowadays, and you’ll find many a player holding more than just my old crummy Fender. It wasn’t bragging, rather just a personal anecdote in order for me to relate my personal experience more.
Perhaps a personal meeting would sort things out. Music is as much of a passion to me as it is to you. And hey, there’s nothing better than singing Rey Valera tunes in a karaoke in the wee hours of the morning.
It’s a bit bent to talk about a person you hardly know, isn’t it? Do you have some vexation towards me? Again, let’s meet for a drink if you’d like.
Best Regards
Clarence Yu
August 25th, 2008 at 4:43 am
i like the rolling stones, they are a very good band but they’re just not that great for people to just go crazy over…the 60’s is owned by the beatles…they may have been equalled by other bands but never surpassed…as rolling stones magazine said in 1968….the stones never had an album of mind blowing proportions like st. pepper or nevermind that somewhat just change the playing field for everyone…
sorry rolling stones fan…you are just a michael buble compared to frank sinatra
August 25th, 2008 at 1:42 am
I would have let you go but since music is my passion (and not just fashion), here’s my rejoinder to you.
You called me elitist then afterwards you bragged about having a Fender. I don’t have a Fender and probably never will ( I have a ukelele, huhu). But what I do have is attitude, the attitude that makes music, and ROCK especially, rocks. It seems to me that given yours, even a Stradivarius won’t do you much good.
Here’s why—in elevating the Stones to the position you think they deserved, you trampled a lot of musicians in getting there. These musicians (even the “uncool” ones) you flippantly dismissed are artists I (along with thousands of others) listen to intently, depending on particular moods. Hell, I even have a Yoyoy Villame collection to go along my Cheech and Chong, and I would go into a wordfight with anybody who will trample on their music. They’re artists, man, and as been said, the critic could go to hell.
You also messed up with Rolling Stones diehards like me and the guys who earlier wrote their comments. My hair stood on reading your title. “Reconsidered?” “Please?” Maybe it would have been better if you attached a disclaimer—“This article is not for the thousands of Filipino Stones diehards who swear, and live, by their music, among others.” That way, you would have preached to the heathen. As it happened, you preached to the choir. And your explanation on the title was just too lame to cut it. Thus, the flak you got (including mine’s) is I think well-deserved and just.
The person who wrote about your juvenile attitude got it right. When I was a teen-ager, it was a habit among the barkada to upstage one another with rock bands. They’re into Pink Floyd and Deep Purple? Nah, were into Uriah Heep and UFO. Ahh, Led Zeppelin or Neil Young? Well, we’re into Cream and Jackson Browne. It was all in serious fun and part of growing up. Once grown up, however, one begins to appreciate that even the Osmond Family, Toto and His Children, the Madonnas and the Mariah Careys have their rightful places in the musical universe. One simply outgrows the juvenile attitude of pitting one artist against the other as you have done.
The Rolling Stones? Perhaps not the greatest (will there ever be one?) but they’re indeed one of the elites across space and time. And you’re absolutely correct, I am an elitist in this respect.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:48 pm
the problem is that they are all still around. If they had died the they would probably be appreciated more. when keith croaks from lugging all that louis vutton or if one of mick’s cricket players stabs him in the heart and dies…… ah then the stones will truly be immortal.
later,
fred