Thursday, October 28, 2010

Re: The Beatles vs. The Stones

Following up yesterday's post about The Beatles vs. The Rolling Stones: Sound Opinions on the Great Rock 'n' Roll Rivalry, here's The Boston Globe's (bloodless) review of it.

As DeRogatis writes in his preface, the only real answer is both. So it’s not surprising that (spoiler alert) the book does not reach a definitive conclusion. Rather, “The Beatles vs. the Rolling Stones’’ stacks the two legendary acts head to head in chapters covering a rubric that includes the contributions of individual members, each group’s “cool’’ factor, and the role of drugs on their music. Though both DeRogatis and Kot confess to a personal preference for the Rolling Stones, this bias doesn’t prevent them from offering well-considered and, importantly, subjective debates for each set of criteria.

No comments: