Why the importance of rock ‘n’ roll waned, according to Keith Richards
Unlike many other bands, some of which have come and gone during The Rolling Stones‘ trajectory, Keith Richards and Mick Jagger have always been at the forefront of the rock ‘n’ roll lifestyle. While some shun the public spotlight and reserve their energy for the studio, Richards and Jagger paraded their rock ‘n’ roll lifestyle not just in their music but also in front of the press.
Throughout the 1960s, rock ‘n’ roll wasn’t just a sonic element within music but an attitude that bands like The Beatles and The Rolling Stones exuded in everything they did, whether in music videos, live performances, or press interviews. Granted, The Stones upheld this aura more overtly and confidently than The Beatles, but press notoriety came in almost as thick and fast as new material for both groups.
Given that studio capacity and platforming at the time could support only a small handful of acts and bands, perceptions of rock ‘n’ roll and the figures that occupied the label were easy to study and focus on. Of course, many more outfits tried their hand at the big time than just The Beatles and The Stones, but the structure of the industry at the time planted those two and a small number of others, left, right, and centre, of the firing line.
Within The Stones, rock ‘n’ roll didn’t just mean taking on a rebellious pretence; it meant going against the grain and doing the very things that were the least expected of you. Unlike The Beatles, The Stones did this not just in interviews but in their rhythm and blues roots, which gave rock a more nostalgic edge while firmly looking forward.
Fast-forward a significant number of years, and the landscape of rock ‘n’ roll has changed, not just because culture has changed but because the industry has become so saturated that it’s often difficult to keep tabs on who’s doing what and how long for. According to Richards, this is precisely the reason why rock ‘n’ roll has transformed from a leading force to something much more complicated to define.
He explained his views on this during a 1992 interview with LA Times, saying that while he has heard others accuse rock of losing its creative edge “several times” over the years, it makes sense more so at his time of speaking because “the business has gotten [larger]”. In his view, there used to be “room for three or four hot acts, and most of them came and went within two years”.
Now, however, “the business is so big” that “there are hundreds of bands, and new ones coming every day”.
This makes it even harder to “keep abreast of it all and know where it is leading,” Richards explained, adding that it’s difficult “to figure out which ones might really be important”. Perhaps what’s most important—and something that Richards would advise to other bands starting out—is not to be overtly chasing the “rock ‘n’ roll” label but to focus on band dynamics and rhythms instead.
In his view, this is more important if you’re going to want to make it in the current landscape. In fact, when asked if he was a teenager and starting a band today, he said he would look for “the right team”. Elaborating, he added: “You can be a virtuoso, but it won’t do you much good unless you have the right players with you. The hardest thing to find is a good rhythm section. I think back sometimes and think how lucky we were to find each other.”
