SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home 50 Years On, The Rolling Stones Prove They Can Still Put Out...

THE FAMOUS DOOR OCTOBER 15, 2012

50 Years On, The Rolling Stones Prove They Can Still Put Out a Decent Song

The fact of its existence is marvel enough. Fifty years after the Rolling Stones started playing together, an aged manifestation of the band has released a new single, “Doom and Gloom.” The song is extraordinary for simply being—and all the more extraordinary for being not half-bad. That’s half-better than the majority of the tracks on the Stones’ last two studio albums, the most recent of which, the whimper called A Bigger Bang, was released in 2007. To put this in context: If it were 1962 (the year the Stones started out), and there was a new song by a group from an era fifty years earlier, that group would have come from 1912, the year of such chart-smashers as “When Irish Eyes Are Smiling” and “Waiting for the Robert E. Lee.”

To the ears of young music fans like my nine-year-old son, who’s growing up on Nicki Minaj, “Doom and Gloom” may sound as archaic as those old Victrola ditties sound to me. But in the broad terms that are often all that matter in rock-and-roll, “Doom and Gloom” has the feeling, the pulse and the swagger, of a solid late-period Stones rocker. Keith Richards slashes a Keefish riff, a variation on the chorus to Deep Purple’s “Woman from Tokyo,” over an impeccable and deceptively simple-sounding groove by Charlie Watts. The band sounds like the Rolling Stones, and at their age, that’s an accomplishment.

"Doom and Gloom," written primarily by Mick Jagger, is one of two new songs recorded by the Stones this year for inclusion in a fifty-year retrospective collection due out just in time for holiday gift sales. The second track, “One Last Shot,” which has not yet been released (or even leaked, as far as I know), was written primarily by Keith Richards. "Doom and Gloom" is made mostly from one chord, and the tune of the verses is essentially one note—not that that’s a failing, in itself. Plenty of other Stones songs exploit the possibilities of a single note (or near-note). So do a thousand punk and hip-hop songs; so did Louis Armstrong in his solo on the seminal recording of “West End Blues”; so did Cole Porter in the verse to “Night and Day”; so did Harold Arlen in the refrain to “Come Rain or Come Shine”; and so has Bob Dylan in dozens and dozens of songs since “Subterranean Homesick Blues.” Jagger, like both Armstrong and Dylan, is an interpretive artist with the skill and audacity it takes to extract a scale’s worth of colors in just one note.

With “Doom and Gloom,” though, the fuel of Jagger’s audacity—his ego—is burning too hot, as it can do when Richards doesn’t cool it down with spit. The lyrics are not much more than a soup of images and references intended to sound funky, sort of American, and smart: a Louisiana swamp, zombies, fracking, and a costly overseas war. Jagger, whose voice is much too high in the mix, overwhelming the band, groans about “feeling kind of hurt” by all the doom and gloom, as he puts “feet up on the couch” and locks the doors. Somehow, this leads him to the single lamest chorus ever written by a great songwriter: “Baby, take a chance/baby, won’t you dance with me?” Jagger comes across as detached and kind of desperate—a victim not of zombies or war but of the insatiable ego that, according to Keith Richards’s memoir, may be Jagger’s greatest endowment. 

Support thought-provoking, quality journalism. Join The New Republic for $3.99/month.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 2 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

2 comments

I dunno. I just listened to G&D on YouTube. Yeah, musically speaking, it sounds like generic 1980s Stones, but the lyrics are all so literal and topical and phony. "Lost all my treasure in a foreign war"?? "Plane crashed in a Louisiana swamp"???? "Feeling kinda hurt, sitting in the dirt"??????? I suppose you could argue that "I was raised by a toothless, bearded hag; I was schooled with a strap right across my back" is just as over-the-top and artificial, but then a second later you get, "It's all right now--in fact, it's a gas...I'm Jumpin' Jack Flash, It's a gas! gas! gas!" Who the hell even knows what that means? And yet you sure as shit know it's cool. Dionysus is in the house! The thirty year old Mick Jagger would've sneered at "Feeling kinda hurt, sitting in the dirt, all I hear 'em talking is gloom and doom." I love yer stuff, ye Rolling Stones, but I reckon that in your dotage y'all come off more like an elderly BB King than an elderly John Lee Hooker, if that makes any sense, and rather than listen to "Gloom and Doom" another time, I think I'll put on Let it Bleed.

- AaronW

October 16, 2012 at 11:33am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Methinks they be, like I'm one of, old fogies. I like their rock and roll, ahh who remembers rock and roll?, but they're anachronisms surrounded and hoisted up by their iconicism. I'm intrigued by AaronW's last sentence and think I get his point, maybe not. BB King was known equally for his single string and single note blues riffs and in his youth had a blues voice to die for, declamatory, passionate, piercing and incredibly affecting, located in the higher register while obviously short of soprano. He sounded comparable in those days to Elmore James, who sounded, too, like him. Both huge blues deals. But in his aging as his voice aged, what once was impassioned and exalting in BB's voice became a parody of itself in its gravelly, unaffecting unmusicality. His guitar playing waned not but his signature has always been and is his singing and guitar playing, one following the other, he couldn't and can't do both, and as his singing deteriorated so you have, as I read him, AaronW's "elderly" BB. But John Lee Hooker's voice, mellow before he was very old, always ranged with infinite musical subtlety within the boundary of a single chord, hypnotic and mysterious in its openness and nuance within that constraint. So age did not wither his hypnotic brilliance, just as it does not wither the the same in the Mississippi Hills music giants like Junior Kimbrough, Bo Diddley or R.L. Burnside. Hence the distinction AaronW makes between the "elderly" BB and the ever-fresh-to-listen-to John Lee Hooker who died in the early 21st Century, I'd argue.

- basman

October 17, 2012 at 4:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close