Forums > Queen - Serious Discussion > Rolling Stone - WTF

forum rss feed
Author

Angeline user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 344 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 29 Nov 09, 13:33 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

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 user not visiting Queenzone.com
Bo Alex
Bohemian: 494 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 29 Nov 09, 13:36 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

RS is crap, they've always been crap and they'll be crap forever. Their rankings are totally shit.



A man who learnt how to teach, but forgot how to learn.

A la grande le puse cuca!!
GratefulFan user not visiting Queenzone.com
GratefulFan
Deity: 3776 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 29 Nov 09, 14:31 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

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 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 194 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 29 Nov 09, 14:43 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

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 user not visiting Queenzone.com
GratefulFan
Deity: 3776 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 29 Nov 09, 14:56 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

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 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 344 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 29 Nov 09, 15:18 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



Benn Kempster wrote:

And again, for all those uninitiated with Queen's history........





Oh please...


bobo the chimp user not visiting Queenzone.com
bobo the chimp
Deity: 12703 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 30 Nov 09, 02:59 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Save yourself an aneurysm and don't ever bother with anything that has "Rolling Stone" written on it.


"Your not funny, your not a good musician, theres a difference between being funny and being an idiot, you obviously being the latter" - Dave R Fuller
Angeline user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 344 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 30 Nov 09, 05:47 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



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... user not visiting Queenzone.com

Deity: 8271 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 30 Nov 09, 11:51 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

No Smile, No The Cross... Damn!


Benn Kempster user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 194 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 30 Nov 09, 12:36 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

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 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 344 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 30 Nov 09, 12:47 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



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 user not visiting Queenzone.com
ready to reload
sexmachine
Bohemian: 466 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 30 Nov 09, 12:52 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



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??








Picture yourself in a boat on a river with tangerine trees and marmalade skies.
Angeline user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 344 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 30 Nov 09, 13:00 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

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 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 344 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 30 Nov 09, 13:04 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



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 user not visiting Queenzone.com
master marathon runner
Royalty: 1237 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 30 Nov 09, 13:39 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Right , - I'm going over there to confront this bloody Rolling Stone lark.- i'll let ypu know how i get on.



Master Marathon Runner
Angeline user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 344 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 30 Nov 09, 13:59 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



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.



Thistleboy1980 user not visiting Queenzone.com
You wanna ring the bell?
Thistleboy1980
Deity: 3057 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 30 Nov 09, 19:53 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

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!


It ain't about how hard you can hit, it's about how hard you can get hit: how much you can take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done!
Through the eons... user not visiting Queenzone.com
Through the eons...
Rocker: 38 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 30 Nov 09, 20:47 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

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.


and on, and on........till the end of time.
dragon-fly user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 600 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 01 Dec 09, 10:36 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

That's interesting.
USA liked Freddie-ballerina wearing frocks and leotards in 70, but disliked Freddie wearing jeans (ok, IWTBF) in 80s. :)

GratefulFan user not visiting Queenzone.com
GratefulFan
Deity: 3776 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 01 Dec 09, 13:00 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



 



 



 



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.