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.

Excerpt:
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: