Angeline 29.11.2009 13:33 |
I was just looking at Rolling Stone's Immortals list of top 100 Artists and Queen are not on it. They are also only at number 230 of the 500 greatest albums of all time, behind Abba and loads of other tripe. WHY???? AGAIN, WHY? it seems like sour grapes - just patently untrue! I'm not saying they are objectively the best band ever, but surely this is ridiculous! |
Bo Alex 29.11.2009 13:36 |
RS is crap, they've always been crap and they'll be crap forever. Their rankings are totally shit. |
GratefulFan 29.11.2009 14:31 |
No Pink Floyd either. So whatever 'transformative' and 'inspirational' and 'immortal' meant in 2004 in this wildly subjective exercise, it clearly didn't just mean brilliant, innovative, influential and enduring. Truthfully, Queen may find itself left off more and more of these kinds of high browed reverential insider's collections due to their own sometimes cringeworthy career choices. Maybe that matters, and maybe it doesn't. They've never been the darlings of critics, but any rethinking the musical intelligencia might have been flirting with in later years has surely been mostly quieted once again. |
Benn Kempster 29.11.2009 14:43 |
And again, for all those uninitiated with Queen's history........ They have had virtually no presence in the USA since 1982. Rolling Stone is a US publication that caters for the US market - therefore, it reflects the taste ans state of the US scene. To whit, Queen have absolutely no impact outside of a hardcore of fans. Therefore, their omission is entirely understandable. |
GratefulFan 29.11.2009 14:56 |
Rolling Stone has 15 or 20 international editions, and Pink Floyd, also omitted from the list, has sold like 75,000,000 albums in the US. It's just the nature of subjectivity and the the stickiness of cultural memes. |
Angeline 29.11.2009 15:18 |
Benn Kempster wrote: And again, for all those uninitiated with Queen's history........ Oh please... |
john bodega 30.11.2009 02:59 |
Save yourself an aneurysm and don't ever bother with anything that has "Rolling Stone" written on it. |
Angeline 30.11.2009 05:47 |
Zebonka12 wrote: Save yourself an aneurysm and don't ever bother with anything that has "Rolling Stone" written on it. Heard loud and clear! It's not just the queen thing, it's the whole list which makes me so very very cross. |
Serry... 30.11.2009 11:51 |
No Smile, No The Cross... Damn! |
Benn Kempster 30.11.2009 12:36 |
Angeline, re: >>it's the whole list which makes me so very very cross. I can only imagine what an exciting existence you have. Given that, I'm inclined to agree with you. I'm now very very cross with RS too. What should we do about it? I suggest we gather guns and ammo, storm the home of Ben Fong Torres and hold him to ransom until the current crop of RS journos see the error of their ways and insert Queen in their damned list at number 34. |
Angeline 30.11.2009 12:47 |
Benn Kempster wrote: Angeline, re: >>it's the whole list which makes me so very very cross. I can only imagine what an exciting existence you have. Given that, I'm inclined to agree with you. I'm now very very cross with RS too. What should we do about it? I suggest we gather guns and ammo, storm the home of Ben Fong Torres and hold him to ransom until the current crop of RS journos see the error of their ways and insert Queen in their damned list at number 34. Teehee. I think number 39 would be more apt though. |
sexmachine 30.11.2009 12:52 |
Angeline wrote:It's not just the queen thing, it's the whole list which makes me so very very cross. queen have and always had a bad image in the eyes of many music critics and music fans because they only know their overplayed hits, their 80s pop-plastic sound or simply find freddies looks emberassing. when i mention that i love queen, many of my music friends don't take me serious anymore. the thing with music is that it is like food. either you like your sandwich or not. it is not politics where you can discuss about and being a fan of a certain band doesn't make you a better person. i always liked these top 100 list from music-critics because you can discover a lot of new interessting music and nowadays with the internet and youtube etc. it is easy to find out if this band is something for you or not. there are reasons why these bands are in these lists. and there is so much more good music out there aside from queen. and so my dear angelina, how many of the top 500 albums do you know? why not checking them out and find out why other people like them so much?? |
Angeline 30.11.2009 13:00 |
I know of and have heard nearly all of them, I own about 200 of them. That wasn't my point. I understand the appeal of even bands that I dislike, like ABBA or whatever, but I was questioning the ordering and how they picked the records. My point was that with RS it IS political in a sense. You say the problem with Queen is people only know hits etc, which is fair enough but I would expect that if RS journalists felt they were knowledgeable enough to put out a list of the ultimate 500 Albums that they would perhaps know a little more. My top 500 would be different of course, it's all subjective, I just think that OBJECTIVELY Queen should rank a little higher, no? |
Angeline 30.11.2009 13:04 |
GratefulFan wrote: They've never been the darlings of critics, but any rethinking the musical intelligencia might have been flirting with in later years has surely been mostly quieted once again. Is this a funny reference to Five, Robbie Williams, American Idol and the X Factor? If so, i'm tickled! |
master marathon runner 30.11.2009 13:39 |
Right , - I'm going over there to confront this bloody Rolling Stone lark.- i'll let ypu know how i get on. |
Angeline 30.11.2009 13:59 |
master marathon runner wrote: Right , - I'm going over there to confront this bloody Rolling Stone lark.- i'll let ypu know how i get on. Tie them up and play Adam Lambert's new single to them. On repeat. They'll cave eventually. If not try the Cheeky Girls. Sure fire success. Oh and please do keep us updated. |
Thistle 30.11.2009 19:53 |
they're not on it because they never existed. It's all just a figment of our imaginations, dear Angeline. We all made Freddie up because the American Americans at RS wouldn't know good music if it bit them on the testicles. But we know better. It is is annoying but we should learn to understand, accept and move on....or just kill them. Whatever takes your fancy! |
Through the eons... 30.11.2009 20:47 |
The problem is that the U.S. is one giant homophobic country. You can't imagine how many people I've introduced Queen to. Some have embraced cd compilations that I have given them and have thoroughly enjoyed Queen's versatility. They had never heard Las Palabras or Love of my Life. They glow after listening. Warms my heart. Then, there are the others who can't get past the name, stadium rock, and Freddie. They flat out refuse to listen to anything beyond what they are used to listening to in the sports arenas. I try to enlighten them by sending them links to Rock Montreal, Live Aid, Wembley etc., but they are beyond rescue. Sadly, their brains are toast. They'll never get it, just like Rolling Stone. |
dragon-fly 01.12.2009 10:36 |
That's interesting. USA liked Freddie-ballerina wearing frocks and leotards in 70, but disliked Freddie wearing jeans (ok, IWTBF) in 80s. :) |
GratefulFan 01.12.2009 13:00 |
Angeline wrote:GratefulFan wrote: They've never been the darlings of critics, but any rethinking the musical intelligencia might have been flirting with in later years has surely been mostly quieted once again.Is this a funny reference to Five, Robbie Williams, American Idol and the X Factor? If so, i'm tickled! Don't forget those damn Muppets! :) It's worth noting that RS includes Mercury and May in their Greatest Singers and Greatest Guitarists lists. So the absence of Queen is even odder in it's way, unless of course the magazine thinks Roger and John really, really, really suck. |
mickyparise 01.12.2009 13:38 |
Rolling Stone always had it in for Queen every since Roger Taylor wrote a letter to the editor. Since then, RS was so bias against Queen, and seems like still to this day. link |
GratefulFan 01.12.2009 14:09 |
Every Goddamn Thing is Broken © Roger Taylor 1981, 2009 Here's the article he was slagging off: http://www.rollingstone.com/artists/queen/articles/story/23501689/queen_holds_court_in_south_america P.S. Thanks for that letter...I hadn't seen it before! |
dragon-fly 01.12.2009 14:26 |
mickyparise wrote: Rolling Stone always had it in for Queen every since Roger Taylor wrote a letter to the editor. Since then, RS was so bias against Queen, and seems like still to this day. link I love Roger. That was a masterpiece. My favourite part is about "motion-sickness bag". :D |