Sandy Supposes....

MUSIC MONDAY

         PROMPT: Music Monday: Would you rather your favourite band or artist put out 4 or 5 of the greatest albums ever over a 20 year span and then call it quits, or have them put out a decent album every few years, ( and some terrible to okay ones), while still touring and playing live into their 80's??

         All I can comment is that The Rolling Stones aren't getting any prettier. They are old men refusing to retire in their dotage. When Maroon5 released their tune "I've Got the Moves Like Jagger", they were referring to the younger version with his swagger and strut. I don't find the creaking and shuffling of a senior very appealing or worthy of sex-icon status. They had and enjoyed their rightfully earned heyday. I sing and dance to their classics which have been recorded for posterity. I don't see the need for a reunion tour. Why re-hash the same old same old? I believe this is true of any artist or group.

          Rock and roll is a younger performer's domain. Live shows and touring must be physically demanding. Singing of angst doesn't seem as passionate from an oldie. A grey-haired and wrinkled, maybe paunchy, Bruce Springsteen is an unlikely rebel. Imagine if Michael Jackson had lived and continued to perform. Before he died, he was supposedly already self-medicating to do something as simple as sleep. He didn't seem to have a positive body image; plastic surgery was his crutch. How could he have carried on as he aged and raged? He destroyed his nose for one, and I'd think that's a very important item in a singer's arsenal. Yeah, a senior Michael dancing; no way. Maybe he wouldn't have needed quite so much make-up for the zombie routine? He was an artist who produced some memorable albums, but could he have created more? He struggled to regain that brilliance.

         Queen was a force. They were so powerful and theatrical. I can't see them as performers who dragged on and on; not that Freddie Mercury did. They sang in the context of their youth and their experiences. Elton John continues to write, produce and sing, but he's toned down his performances. No longer does he feel the need to adorn himself in costumes with the big glasses and hats. He's less flamboyant; a nod to his age?

         Madonna,or Madge as some refer to her, has re-invented herself over and over. Cher did the same thing. They aren't getting any younger. What's the harm in retiring with a great track record? They have to work so hard to try and maintain a façade of vitality and beauty. All the plastic surgery, make-up, and costumes cannot hide the inevitable signs of aging. They are pretending to be something they are not. They are competing with a younger crowd who have their youth as an advantage.

         No, I believe there is a time and a place for each performer. Their contributions will not be forgotten, in fact, many 'newer' singers incorporate some of these standards into their work. Is this not an homage?