@Nathan Clark -- It took several days of emails and phone conversations to at least get my name in the article, as well as have it spelled correctly. The original version (check out the print edition) didn't even mention my involvement.
@matt Terrell Your name was mentioned man. :) deep breath
@Matt Terrell - Get over it. No one cares.
Wow! I feel like a real Outsider artist in Atlanta. I can't even get written up in an article about the photo show I helped cofound!
"The Beatles had the same percentage of filller"
Not even close, dude. Do not make me break this down for you in an Excel spreadsheet complete with line graphs and pivot tables.
Haha - should have just let the benign observation sit there...I had to provoke him.
Ringo hit the drums. Charlie Watts plays the drums. The Beatles had the same percentage of filller, just less time, and they couldn't keep it up. The worst singer in the Stones is definitely Keef. Just dig my third favorite Stones tune "Happy." It's horrible! I love it!
Ringo hit the drums twice as hard as Charlie Watt. The Beatles also didn't have entire decades worth of filler, and knew when to hang it up. Lastly, the worst singer in the Beatles played drums. The worst singer in the Stones was the frontman.
the Rolling Stones has Balls
Ain't never heard a no Johnny ORANGE-seed have ya?
Daan-dah daduhdaaa...dadadanana...Daan-daah daduhdaaa...dadadanana....
Apples and oranges. Still, this seems like a good read.
both were great bands but when it comes time to choose a pandora station, i'll take Creedence or Zeppelin.
I haven't read the book yet but I will. Here's my definitive take on the debate: http://jakepollard3.wordpress.com/2010/12/13/beatles-vs-stones/
Get off our backs, elsavio !
This stuff is not as clear-cut as you make it out to be.
Did you guys even read the story? or are you utterly dense? Clearly, "bitter" refers to Patterson Hood's "duality of the southern thing," i.e. loving a place and its people but still being critical of many aspects of the culture, e.g. the still-pervading racism, ignorance, and stupidity of would-be neo-Confederates. Is it really all that difficult to understand?
That thugs-gentlemen commentary says more about Sean O'Mahony's class prejudices than anything else. The Beatles were working class blokes, the Stones from middle class families.
Stones...all the way.
I still remember hearing "Satisfaction" as a yout and realizing that rock n roll would take my soul.
"The Beatles were thugs who were put across as nice blokes, and the Rolling Stones were gentlemen who were made into thugs ... "
I get no emotion from the Beatles. The Stones have swagger and groove.
His picture looks like Roseanne Barr's ex, Tom Arnold.
Maybe they’re "bitter" because some white southerners are still bitter about losing the War.
What the South needs more of: purple prose written by upper-middle-class white people.
Creative Loafing Atlanta
Powered by Foundation