The Rolling Stones kicked off their North American tour last week in my hometown of Los Angeles.  Because of the relentless media frenzy over this tour called, ‘The Rolling Stones: 50 and Counting’, the world of pop music has penetrated the normally impervious fortress that I have erected around myself as it pertains to such matters. This, in and of itself, is an impressive achievement.

When this band started out, rock and roll was an exclusive providence of young people and considered to be a rite of passage on the way to adulthood and a more sophisticated aural palette. The Stones laid to waste this notion decades ago as baby boomers, who once exhibited some iconoclastic values relating to sex, drugs and especially rock and roll, have now become as unadventurous musically as could have ever been imagined. The Stones have mined this seemingly never ending need for the masses to be offered up the same thing over and over and over again.

Now, what was once money for a week’s vacation represents a couple of hours in a basketball arena checking out your favorite childhood band. The Stones’ shows here in Southern California of course sold out in moments. I guess somebody has found satisfaction. When the ticket prices were announced my first reaction was the only people who could afford to go to a Rolling Stones concert these days would be The Rolling Stones.

As far as rock and roll theatrics are concerned it may not get any better than The Rolling Stones. I don’t know. It sure doesn’t get any bigger.

Part of the allure of this tour is that each member of the band is now just a stone’s throw from age 70. Time may not be on their side. This could be the last time they crank up the largest rolling juggernaut in the history of mankind outside of an armored tank division.  As far as I am concerned, I have seen this band a few times over the years. Most recently was well over twenty years ago when I attended my last rock concert in a sports arena.

I welcomed The Rolling Stones music back into my ear holes today as I share my thoughts on this little slice of pop culture with our readers. If one has to listen to rock music, I suppose you could do a lot worse. What I have always liked about this band is what they are not. Charlie Watts is not Ginger Baker and I like that. The non-Keith guitarists, Jones, Taylor or Woods are not Jeff Beck and I like that too. Keith is not Jimmy Page and I like that very much. They don’t play a whole lot of blues music and I like that as well. The world doesn’t need another mediocre blues band. It’s only rock and roll and I like it and by all accounts they are very good at it.

On the other hand, I have no idea what to make of Mick Jagger. He could be the most overrated and underrated singer of all time, all at the same time. I can however tell you that watching him work the stage gives me a kind of uncomfortable feeling in my stomach. I guess he is playing to the back row and if you are the front man for The Rolling Stones, that back row is an awfully long ways away. So I kind of get that. Mick Jagger’s act however has always reminded me of an anorexic Howlin’ Wolf, doing kabuki theatre, while having a seizure in a wind storm.

The band’s music, in my mind, is what rock and roll should be. Despite the enormity and excesses of their live shows, they rarely exhibit the pretentious elements that have made so many rock bands sound so bad. Just one example would be the seemingly mandatory 70’s arena rock drum and bass solos that were a part of virtually any show from this period. The Stones never made their audiences suffer through these egomaniacal journeys to nowhere. The other thing I like about this band is that they aren’t perfect. Neither is life and these Stones haven’t been polished to a high-gloss sheen. They have some very rough edges and, if I am going to venture into the world of rock and roll, this is what I am looking for.

The person most responsible for The Rolling Stones sound is Keith Richards. He has always been fond of referring to his role in the band as being part and parcel to the bass and drums or as he calls it, “the engine room.” Something that is also very telling about Richards is that even though he is in a position to do whatever he wants in the context of the music made by his band, he prefers to work closely with another guitar player. He calls the sound, “the ancient art of weaving.” This empathy on stage and in the recording studio towards Ronnie Woods, for instance, is commendable. This is something that has always been a hallmark of blues bands when they are doing their finest work.  In the rock world it seems no matter how big or bright the spotlight, it just isn’t big enough. In an ego driven industry, this feature of Richard’s musical sensibility shouldn’t be overlooked. Richards also seems to have a real sense of his own musical limitations. Again, as a bona fide guitar rock God, this is not only rare, it is unprecedented.

This of course makes Keith Richards the perfect foil for Mick Jagger. Jagger in many ways represents what people love or hate about rock and roll in general, and The Rolling Stones specifically. I can recall that some critics wrote when he turned thirty, he was too old for his over the top stage antics. Let’s be honest, James Brown he is not but, in his late 60’s however, he still has it. I just have never been able to figure out what “it” is.

Heck, there I go talking about music again. As it relates to The Rolling Stones, at this point, it isn’t about music. It is has always been their deep understanding of what makes America tick. Whatever nuances, rhythmic propulsion or lyrical content of their music captivates audiences, this misses the point.

America is addicted to two things, excess and celebrity. The Stones give you both. They sell out their shows immediately because no matter how much it costs, there is always someone who will buy a $600 plus ticket to sit in the upper deck of a basketball arena to see a rock band. It is for the same reason they purchase four homes or a dozen automobiles. It is because they can. Greed too is as American as apple pie or an apple martini. The folks who will be attending these shows can most definitely relate to the great capitalists from across the pond.

There is nothing that the Stones can or are inclined to do on this recently launched tour that they haven’t done many times before, so there is no story there. The story lies in the band’s longevity. It is completely unprecedented in rock and roll. Hell, 50 years is a long time to be doing anything. The two big killers in the world which the Stones inhabit have always been drugs and transportation. Yet despite years of substance abuse and world travel, they are still here.

The Stones longevity is also tied directly to a number of things, not the least of which is that if there is any reoccurring theme to their music it is sex. Let’s face it, sex has a universal appeal that has a better shelf life than just about anything. By not being topical they have remained timeless. It is the same appeal that blues music has for many of our readers as well as myself. They have ripped through generations of popular musical styles with only an occasional nod to any of the flavors of the month that have come and gone in the last 50 years.

This band’s affinity to blues is also a huge contributing factor to their enduring popularity. Having this music at the deep core of their sound, as opposed to say any other stylistic trends or musical fashion, has made them the all time endurance champions. It puts their music in a place that is just outside the nostalgia factory. Who knows, maybe The Rolling Stones, who began as a blues cover band that took their name from a Muddy Waters song, will be like some of their heroes. They may play music as octogenarians and move on from this mortal coil with gigs still on the books.

It should be noted that The Rolling Stones have a deeper understanding of blues music that far surpasses any British invasion era, blues-rock band. They know enough about blues to know they aren’t all that good at playing it. Jagger even mentioned this last year during the PBS broadcast called, Blues at the White House. This band loves blues music enough not to foist their own ego driven excesses onto the music they hold in such high regard. Sure they have covered Muddy Waters, Mississippi Fred McDowell, Jimmy Reed, Slim Harpo, Robert Johnson and others, but they know the difference between blues and rock and roll. I wish more people in the blues business knew the difference.

As the world celebrates this band’s 50^th anniversary in show business, I am reminded that as youngsters growing up in London, the concept of longevity was not ensconced in their psyche. As survivors of the Nazi blitzkrieg, the ethos of live hard, die young and leave a good looking corpse seemed like the thing to do. In the case of The Rolling Stones, one out of three ain’t too shabby. Nicely played...

Whether or not this band has gathered any moss through all these years, who knows? Are they still cool? Were they ever cool? The answer lies I suppose in the ears of the beholder. All I know is that retirement is very uncool, so congratulations to The Rolling Stones for doing things your way for 50 years and counting. It’s been a gas.

- David Mac