Throughout the history of pop music, rivalries have always existed. Pop enthusiasts have continuously found ways to compare and contrast artists. From the Britpop battle between Oasis and Blur to the boyband rivalry of One Direction and The Wanted, these comparisons fuel passionate debates. One of the most iconic pop rivalries emerged during the rock boom of the 1960s. Two of the most influential bands in history were seen as polar opposites. On one side, we have the rebellious energy of The Rolling Stones, while on the other, we find the new and exciting talent of The Beatles.
It is worth noting that this rivalry was primarily fueled by the music press and record companies. The bands had a strong camaraderie and enjoyed a close friendship. Interestingly, the Beatles actually penned a few songs for The Rolling Stones in their early days, including the 1963 hit ‘I Wanna Be Your Man‘. However, as both bands gained immense popularity, they frequently found themselves in fierce competition for chart positions and airplay. The coveted title of Britain’s most popular rock group was a prize both Oasis and Blur strived to claim. Ultimately, there should be no dispute about the clear victor – The Beatles. They are arguably the most influential band in the history of popular music. The Stones’ output declined significantly in the late 1960s.
However, the debate about which group truly embodied the spirit of the swinging sixties continues to captivate music enthusiasts. In terms of image and style, The Stones were often perceived as rougher and more rebellious compared to The Beatles. The Beatles earned recognition for their polished and mainstream appeal. The public widely knew and deeply ingrained the reputation of both groups. Singer Marianne Faithfull also acknowledged this reputation. She was in a relationship with Mick Jagger, the frontman of the Rolling Stones, for a significant portion of the 1960s.
Regrettably, her association with Mick Jagger frequently overshadows Faithfull’s immense talent. However, in this particular scenario, she had a unique vantage point to observe the distinctions between the two factions. It was evident that she had a deep admiration for John, Paul, George, and Ringo. She had performed many Beatles classics during her career, with ‘Yesterday‘ being one of the most notable. Interestingly enough, one can even hear her voice on the recording of ‘Yellow Submarine’. This suggests a harmonious relationship with the talented musicians from Merseyside.
On the other hand, Faithfull has valid reasons to feel resentful towards Jagger and The Stones, given that their four-year relationship was far from harmonious. In her 2007 book, Marianne Faithfull provided insight into the distinctions between the two bands. She expressed that “The Beatles underwent a complete transformation from the pop industry.” The Stones started off as a British Chicago R&B group and later embraced a more provocative style that even surpassed The Beatles. Stating that when The Beatles ceased their touring in 1966, they remained the adored Fab Four – the epitome of rock ‘n’ roll charm.
Although her portrayal of The Beatles may come across as critical, particularly for a band as influential and successful as they were. It is difficult to argue against the notion that The Rolling Stones were somewhat more rebellious than The Beatles. Despite their later forays into drug experimentation and their creation of iconic psychedelic albums like Revolver, the Beatles remained the same fresh-faced young rockers who had once graced The Ed Sullivan Show. This was evident when they decided to stop touring.
Marianne Faithfull confidently stated that The Stones exuded a captivating blend of danger and allure. This set them apart from The Beatles in the intense artistic competition that defined the music scene of the 1960s. It’s worth noting that she did have a four-year relationship with one of them. Given this, it’s not surprising that she finds The Stones more alluring than The Beatles.
1 comment
The early clean image of the Beatles wearing suits was a creation of their manager Brian Epstain; the wild looks and behaviors they had enjoyed on stage in Humburg were no longer allowed.
After the manager died, John Lennon could have made it rougher or more rebellious than the Stones, but McCartney’s work ethics, model student-like music making, happy-go-lucky lyrics and family-man portraits have saved the Beatles’ decent image till this day, in spite of their “transformation from pop music” and Lennon’s eccentric behaviors. The bit of upper-class taste of classical music certainly came from the producer George Martin.