• Follow us on Twitter
  • Join our Facebook Group
  • Pinterest
  • Instagram
  • RSS
Ego magazin - portal posvećen izuzetnim ljudima close

Ego-magazin

  • Maske
  • Shop
  • Magazin
    • Broj 20
    • Broj 19
    • Broj 18
    • Broj 17
    • Broj 16
    • Broj 15
    • Broj 14
    • Broj 13
    • Broj 12
    • Broj 11
    • Broj 10
    • Broj 9
    • Broj 8
    • Broj 7
    • Broj 6
    • Broj 5
    • Broj 4
    • Broj 3
    • Broj 2
    • Broj 1
  • Rubrike
    • Arhitektura
    • Dizajn
    • Dom
    • EGO Kviz / Test
    • Ego Megdan
    • Ego muzika
    • Ego Putovanja
    • English
    • Enterijer
    • Fotografija
    • Gastronomija
    • Intervju
    • Kako dizajn utiče na Vaš EGO?
    • Magazin
    • Novosti
    • Promo
    • Video
  • Impresum
    • O nama
    • English
  • Kontakt

Ivan Ivačković – The art of rebellion

in English / by Ljubomir Jankovic
31. 03. 2013.



Photo: Rade Kovač, www.radekovac.com

Long time ago I had seen a science fiction movie about conflict between two galaxies’ populations. When a stranger asked them: „Why?“ no one could answer, because conflict had started so long ago everyone had forgotten why it had started in a first place… It seems something like that is the case with The Rolling Stones, I mean today hardly anyone knows why they have become popular, but everyone knows they are! What’s your opinion about this?

It’s true that today very few people, especially younger, know anything about the causes which made The Rolling Stones the biggest rock and roll band ever, as well as kind of social, sociological, biological and even medical phenomenon. Especially is little known why have they become so great in a music field because that was happening in the 60s and those were years which have already become so far away to many people. Regarding that, this is a great question because it is nice to clear up those causes a little bit. As it is supposed to be, key cause is the music. Today, The Rolling Stones are the institution which is taken for granted, I’ll say it as Keith Richards said it once: „You know the Sun will rise every morning, the night will fall, and you know The Rolling Stones will record an album and start a tour every few years.“ The Stones have really become as the air we breathe – something that is obvious. However, in order to reach that position – which is unique, because no other band has reached it – next thing should happen: they should record few albums which became authentic masterpieces in the 60s and record singles which became popular music hymns and – I’ll exit art field for a moment – become the symbol of rebellion which was initiated by generation which tried to change the world in the 60s and to make it more tolerable place for life. The last thing is particularly interesting, because The Rolling Stones, and Mick Jagger especially, have never wanted to be a symbol of anything, some rebellion at least, nor they aspired to become leaders of any movement. However, this 60s generation which was also called „The Jagger Generation“, has just recognized symbol of its own wishes and aspirations in The Stones, and especially in Jagger whom has set to the leader.
A real truth is, however, that The Rolling Stones were taking of everyone, and also of the hippie movement of the 60s just what they needed and what was useful for themselves. So, we have the situation that they looked like a hippie movement in the 60s; in the 70s, with the virtue which no one else could ever approach, not to mention to repeat it, they followed two dominant music directions which were mutually opposing (which makes the whole matter even more interesting), and these are punk and disco; they became „capitalism children“ and huge businessmen in the 80s… and so on.
Although The Stones created trends, they could adjust to them as well. All of this brought them to this position we are talking about, and all these are reasons The Rolling Stones are unsurpassed until today. But the main are, to repeat, their music and amazing creativity explosion which they had from the mid-60s until mid-70s – this was the best and the most prolific their period.

May I ask you to explain this rebellion phenomenon since it is often mentioned in the media, and you are dealing with The Rolling Stones for a long time, because people do not understand the context: what the 60s youth fought against, what was causing changes? What change was supposed to happen in the society so The Stones were its catalyst?

It was a set of very complex social, sociological and many other circumstances which first gave Elvis Presley, then The Beatles, and at last The Stones as main rebellion catalyst. The Beatles had already been some kind of rebellion, with their long hairs, with the sound that many people considered something indecent and dirty, but in which young generation recognized its own energy, aspirations and demands. However, only with The Stones that rebellion was articulated completely. The basis of all of this was John F. Kennedy’s government in America, in the ambient and energy he created and which was transferred to England after and then returned back to America like a nice boomerang. The moment when this energy reached England was also the moment when the ambient for The Rolling Stones was created, for the band that confronted the stick-in-the-mud value system in England, its terrible conservatism and the consequences of a strong postwar apathy. So, The Stones had primarily rebelled against English conservatism, and their energy and rebellion were later transferred to other European countries and returned to America like some beautiful fire.
And, as much the older generation looked at The Stones with disgust and fear – because The Rolling Stones were breaking whole value system which they had established – so much the younger generation recognized in them, more than in anyone else, more than in Presley and The Beatles, their own aspirations, wishes and identity.

Ego-magazin-Intervju-Ivan-Ivackovic-1

You’ve explained those who are young today the social context in which appeared rebellion of youth then; since every generation has its idols, and every fan is trying to understand the performer or band he likes – can your book „The art of rebellion“ help new generations to understand impact and work of The Rolling Stones and greatness of what they’ve been creating for decades?

There is one sentence of famous American journalist James Reston which I had read long time ago, but it is stuck in my mind: he said that nothing is implied in good journalism and that he, while writing a text, imagines a small man sitting hunched in a corner, without any knowledge about it, and he writes to this man who knows nothing about anything. Therefore, right, nothing is implied. Everything has to be explained. I am not saying I’ve reached that ideal with this book. But, I’ve kept that in mind, like always when I write. I’ve made an effort not to show The RS as something taken for granted, something that came from Mars, but to explain this young generation which doesn’t remember world without Mick Jagger how The RS became what they became. But, I think it’s better if people who read a book speak of that. It is difficult for the author to speak whether something he wrote is successful or not…

I didn’t want to discuss whether someone succeeded or not, but each love implies some research, and everyone researches by own affinities. You have offered some data which can help young people to understand and love, and to research further…

Yes, but you’ve just mentioned very important thing: nowadays, with modern technology, whatever data you need, you can find it on the Internet. All the information is at your fingertips all the time. Though, you can never be completely sure if the information from the Internet is reliable, because anyone can upload anything on it, but anyway, you can neither ignore it; Internet offers so much information and there are a lot of valid ones among them. I want to say today is generally nonsense to write a book with the information as key factor. I think this was important in the 60s, 70s and 80s. Nowadays this is less important. What is important in book writing today is to show your passion, your attitude, your belief. And to present your opinion about the subject you’ve chosen to process in a strong way. That was the ambition I was writing this book with. This book is certainly full of information, but if anything in it is truly worth that is not information, but the passion it’s written with, belief and attitude which it is trying to transfer to other people. I have to say the great reception of the book is based exactly on what I am talking about. It is received well not because it offers a lot of data, but because people recognize the passion I wrote it with. And this is what generally makes one book worthy today.

I think the key word is: relevant. There is so much information, but the more energy and passion there is in communicating method, the more relevant it becomes. This way you become one of the sources, what is crucial for understanding of certain processes… And, do you still live your „rock ‘n roll life“?

Yes, obviously. I write about music I grew up with, which still educates me a lot, I have my own band The Spanks I play drums in, so it is obvious that rock ‘n roll hasn’t left my life. I think it is very logical, because RnR is not just a matter of teenage fascination or the fashion for people who go in a bit deeper. RnR represents certain value system and attitude, as much of a cliché this is. Of course, I don’t think we should stay trapped in our teenage views, because we are maturing as people, but this foundation which RnR gives us in education, in thinking method, in attitudes certainly stays. It has stayed with me, at least. I think some kind of honesty is also gotten through deeper view in the RnR idea. So, it is gotten not only through entering the music, but through entering the idea. If I’ve succeeded to keep more or less honesty and consistency even in this time we live in, if I succeeded to keep some nobleness and humanity inside me, I owe it to rock and roll completely.

OK, RnR is alive and I think it will be for a long time…

I think entirely opposite, that it is moribund or at least on the artificial lung. As an industry especially. Because, you see, RnR hasn’t a thousandth of the power, strength and impact today it had during the 60s, the 70s, the 80s and partly even in the 90s. RnR has lost its audience, its massiveness, and finally its power. When no one is behind you, no one is following you; you don’t have your power any more. Other genres and forms dominate today.

I have researched a little what happened and I came to conclusion this music has gotten some new form. It has got very bad connotation here, because RnR masters turned to money and started doing what people like – there are also fantastic rockers today who have turned to folk to make their living, but they are stronger authors today than 30 years ago. When they play RnR, they just don’t have the old massiveness. They have become little sources which look like little lights on stage. They do not have any impact on the pop culture, but the RnR form has stayed somewhere in peoples’ hearts, it somehow still lives and it is still required, just not massively…

Yes, but what I’ve mentioned is not only local, but global story. Not only here, but anywhere in the world RnR doesn’t represent dominant form and music with any special impact anymore.

Perhaps this is some transiting period…

No, I don’t think there is turning back. Rock music expired. And it expired because the social ambient has changed completely. Everything that represented a foundation of RnR has disappeared, primarily fairness, honesty and non-acceptance of the existing situation. After that, what is logical, the music which was a symbol of all of that disappeared as well. That’s why there isn’t rock music any more, in fact there is, in some reservations, now and then, but as a dominant art form, as a value system, as way of thinking, it is gone. Regarding this, The Rolling Stones are, to say so, one of rare and last exceptions.

Ego-magazin-Intervju-Ivan-Ivackovic-2

What does The Rolling Stones life look like today on social networks such as Facebook or Twitter? There are daily events, their fans still upload interesting information. What is your opinion of that? „You’ve got the Sun, You’ve got the Moon, You’ve got the Rolling Stones“… Is a band like this capable of producing enough new data to satisfy new media?

Of course, experience has shown it. We don’t need to assume anything, information about the concerts which The Stones have celebrated 50 years of existence with (concerts were held at the end of last year in England and America) attracted more interest than any other news from popular culture domain just on Facebook and Twitter! The Stones were always able to adapt unbelievably quickly to the technological development and technological innovations, among everything else, and not just to music trends, fashion, and so on… Moreover, they have made small revolutions in this domain several times. So, one of things we can always count on as long as The Rolling Stones exist is that they will always go up with the modern technology, and sometimes even a step ahead of it. They could be the only band which has never lagged in this – it has never lost its step technologically. It is also one of the reasons for their longevity.

Your activities on Facebook don’t include only posts about The Rolling Stones, sometimes you also post (very successfully, according to fans’ reactions) information about David Bowie. How do you look on the past cooperation of these popular music giants today?

You are probably speaking about the song „Dancing in the Street“ which is recorded in the mid-80s by Mick Jagger and David Bowie. There are many reasons that song was popular, and two of the most obvious are just in names Bowie and Jagger – the song these two sing is meant for success. Other thing, that song was recorded for Live Aid which was, and by many parameters still is the biggest concert ever. Live Aid was music, television, somehow even social revolution. One of the highlights of this event was exactly this song and following video. So, it’s not strange this song reached global popularity in a very short time. Since David Bowie is also very important man in my life, as well as Mick Jagger, I remember that moment, it was like my personal dream coming true – two of them together.

So, it was also an important cooperation for you, privately…

Yes, but, I was much younger, you know, the question is whether the fact two of them are singing together would still be so important for me today. But, in that moment, for that time, it was such an important and beautiful experience for me.

I have read Bowie’s biography, written by Mark Spic and translated by Dejan Cukic. Some loving relationship between Bowie and Jagger is mentioned there. The author writes about it decidedly, as something clear… Do you know anything about that?

Well, I don’t know, and neither does Mark Spic! Only Mick and David have reliable knowledge about this. What we know is that these two have always managed to use this very well for marketing. I don’t think just on this story, but on homosexuality in general. David Bowie made a media boom when declared as gay for the first time. This is always a worthwhile action, it brings publicity and popularity you cannot survive in the show business without. Two of them and perhaps their wives know whether there really was something more or not, that’s where the circle of insiders ends.

You have been dealing with pop culture phenomenon for a long time, you have written many texts about this topic. How and when the subculture became more popular than culture itself? I think on our region primarily, since in England the subculture became official culture of youth already with The Rolling Stones… and what happened here?

Yes, let’s limit on local story – the destiny of rock music and its culture has always been very strange here: on the one hand RnR has never been accepted of the establishment, and on the other it has always been a part of the establishment. I don’t know if you have noticed an interesting fact: dissidents have always existed here, even in former Yugoslavia. They were present in literature, cinematography, painting, even politics… but never in rock and roll! And naturally, it should be a brood of dissidents, a constantly boiling source. No local musician was trapped for saying something about Tito. That’s because – at least while Tito was alive – no one had said anything. On the contrary, musicians have even sung hymns to him. Look at this situation – you have dissidents in a party itself, but no one in the rock and roll!
This is interesting. I don’t know if there was such situation in any other country, a phenomenon like in the SFRJ. In the 80s, so only after Tito’s death, with a new wave, critical feature towards society and system started to appear in our rock music. While Tito was alive, no one had touched that. Rock and roll has always been in a halfway position here. On the one hand, I say, it wasn’t accepted of the establishment, and on the other it knew how to please it, to place itself in a way that will be tolerated of the establishment. RnR here has always been treated as a naughty child who can poop in the middle of kindergarten, but because it’s not making big troubles it could be left in peace. I repeat, only after Tito’s death rock started to be some kind of opposition: Stulic was the most intelligent about this and reached the furthest. And then, of course, the 90s… since RnR is, I might have already said it, a child of troubled times, in the 90s bands have suddenly appeared from everywhere and those were great bands which represented sharp opposition to Milosevic. RnR had a big part also in Milosevic’s overthrow in many ways – as in general young generation’s consciousness creating, so in concrete gestures: if you remember, when the elections which Kostunica gained were held, the rock bands were those who played on tour „It’s time!“ that was strongly supporting the opposition. Unfortunately, it’s shown this capital was invested wrong, since Kostunica, to say it politely, was not a man who brought any good changes. But this doesn’t reduce nobleness of the efforts and intention to change a system.

Let’s return to The Rolling Stones. I think it is very important to explain something to people: which taboos did they break?

Many taboos, really. At first, they broke taboos in music itself. Their music was forerunner of punk. They are real punk fathers, whose every or almost every early song had a sugar cube, music of The Stones was a reflection of disorder and noise and it represented a revolution in the art dimension. The second, they broke many social taboos. They’ve succeeded to bring to its knees whole value system which was terribly stuck-in-the-mud, terribly conservative, narrow-minded. After, they broke fashion taboos, in 1969 in a concert in Hyde Park, which was the most massive their concert until then, with an audience of half million people, Jagger went out in a tunic pleated at the waist, practically in a skirt. They broke sexual taboos… however; we could talk next few days about this.

Rock journalist occupation implies research. I’ve read somewhere it is about some kind of voyeurism – meaning that you always watch (read, observe) and never participate – because they are so great… How would you describe this profession?

First of all, if we are talking about these categories, journalism is exhibitionism as much as voyeurism. And let’s not forget there are people who entered rock journalism for the same reasons others entered music: to hook up to a girl. As this one goes up on stage so she would love him, the other one is waiting for the newspaper in the morning to show her, to fascinate her. It doesn’t immediately mean he’ll be a bad journalist, as well it doesn’t mean the musician will be bad. But sometimes the urge was that. And some kind of exhibitionism, I’d say. The journalists are people with a huge ego, strong vanity, and a lot of strength and will is often needed to discipline all this. And there is also voyeurism, of course. In investigative journalism especially. Overall, it is certainly a mix of exhibitionism and voyeurism. And probably one of the secrets of good journalism is to restrain and discipline own ego and vanity, and to set free own voyeurism.

What phase is promotion of your book „The Rolling Stones: The art of rebellion“ in? Is this „rebellion“ spreading through Serbia?

Yes (laughter). Unfortunately, this is also the only rebellion that is spreading through Serbia, although there are reasons for much more serious revolt. Book promotion is in such phase I’m on some kind of tour in Serbia, in fact in former Yugoslavia, because I was in Banja Luka, I’ll probably go to Sarajevo soon, and I also have some invitations and prepositions from other former Yugoslav republics… I don’t know how much time I’ll have for all this, but invitations exist and it is nice. And regarding Serbia, I’ve really got so many invitations, it is a real tour. And it is something that feels great. Because almost everywhere so many people came. There are no empty seats. And reaction is so good, so nice everywhere. This is encouraging, because you suddenly see there are a lot more nice people than it seems at first sight and this kind of culture attracts a lot more interest than you think while sitting only in Belgrade.

Maybe Belgrade isn’t real example for whole Serbia?

It certainly isn’t only one if we wish real and complete picture of spirit state in Serbia. I’ve met so great people in other cities, who are so educated about this topic and at the same time they have so good energy I often couldn’t believe myself. I’m really thrilled with people I meet in this tour and I’m so glad everything is as it is.

Maybe it is not nice, but it is appropriate to tell an anecdote here, and it can be understood as a joke: a friend of mine has spent fabulous night somewhere in Serbia, listening great music all the time and when he enthusiastically told to the host he hasn’t listened so good RnR for a long time in Belgrade, he confirmed with understanding that this is because all the „peasants“ had left this city and went to the capital…

(Laughter)…

Ego-magazin-Intervju-Ivan-Ivackovic-3

Do you like the sound of The Stones’ new song „Doom and Gloom“? It’s kind of incompatible – looking 70-years olds playing guitars…

It’s not incompatible, thanks to The Stones exactly. They’ve found a recipe for getting old in rock and roll and they’ve shown it’s a serious thing for whole life. But, this song… I think it’s pretty boring. I would dare to say even worthless. It can be interesting to younger audience, but to anyone who had listened what The Stones were recording in the 60s, 70s and 80s, „Doom and Gloom“ can only seem banal.
However, I think The Stones have reached a really unique position in this sense also, where it’s no longer important what their songs are like at all. No one is arguing whether The Stones’ song is good or not any more, only important thing is they’ve recorded something. This is an often situation in concerts, too. No one is discussing after their concert whether they played well or not. People are satisfied with the fact they saw them. It’s important only to have them on stage playing a concert, and how they played it – this hasn’t been of an importance for years, maybe even decades. This is also a very comfortable position and unique privilege which The RS have won, because there is no other musician with the status where no one in the audience cares about his playing. It’s just in their case. This is as good as bad, of course. I mean, it’s certainly good for them (laughter).

Yes, and people are satisfied because they’ve seen legends… all of this is showbiz! Now, there is a phenomenon with the long-lasting bands, I’ve accidentally found the information that Depeche Mode are thrilled with a band from FYROM which plays and composes in a similar way, but does not rewrite from legends, but approaches this creatively. They’ve even been some kind of inspiration for Depeche once… Is there a band, some younger band, which could inspire The Rolling Stones? Do you have such data? Is it possible at all when it comes to The Rolling Stones?

It’s not just possible, it was happening. Keith Richards is much more conservative about the music, but Mick Jagger has listened to what’s new, what is trend whole his life. He used to bring in something that was popular in one moment to The Rolling Stones’ music, or at least to allow himself to get inspired by something modern. I think this is important for The RS, because their music has been occasionally refreshing this way, it hasn’t stayed rigid as it could be other way. Just to remind you on one of their greatest hits of their later career „Anybody seen my baby“ with a rap sample in it. This certainly wasn’t expected of The Stones. This is an example, to say so.

Angelina Jolie is starring in that video. There is a story Jagger was involved with her then, in two years long „parallel“ relationship… Everyone knows the song, but a lot of people didn’t notice Angelina when the video was first promoted.

Yes, many people didn’t notice her because at the time she wasn’t what she is today. But she has been strongly promoted exactly with that video.

Are The Stones – Mick and Keith still creative center or are they a center for enthusiasm and life joy?

They aren’t the first thing, I think they are no longer any creative center, their creative batteries are limited, like any other person’s, it’s just not working other way. I think they haven’t artistically offered almost anything worth of attention for a very long time, almost nothing close to their best albums and songs. On the other hand, their enthusiasm is obviously inexhaustible.
And life joy? It is a special story… Many people could be convinced into this here in 2007 when The Stones had their concert on Usce. They played like there is no tomorrow. They played as a band which has just gone out of the garage, which is eager to prove, eager to show people what it knows and what it can do. Life joy is the basis of their enthusiasm and everything else that makes them special, unique and long-living. Hardly anyone has such love towards life and such life passion as The RS. For example, I remember that Keith Richards’ doctor said a few words when answering the question how is it even possible he is alive and especially he is functioning like that considering what he has been taking and doing himself all these years: „He likes to be here, you know.“ And, this is all the philosophy, all the wisdom, this is complete explanation. Keith likes to live so much that the complete drug quantity one Columbian narco cartel can produce in a year cannot harm him, nor brain surgery can, nor what he was doing in the 70s – experimenting on himself, didn’t sleep for a week, for example… Nothing could harm him fatally. That’s because his love towards life is greater than every trouble. It is not just his case, this is applicable to anyone. And if you don’t care about being here, troubles much less than Keith’s will bury you.

There is something Jagger might be the most famous for, and it is interesting to analyze – how do you see his moving on the scene? I think this is a subject for many generations, for both genders. Maroon 5’s „Moves like Jagger“…

Jagger’s moving on the stage, as many other things about him, has represented a revolution. This started quite weird: before they became popular, The Stones had lived in a rented apartment in London which had literally looked as a pigsty. And, whoever entered the apartment went out with the same description it was something he has never seen, such quantity of dirt and mess; and all of them swore it was unspeakable; something that man has to see… In a such ambient and apartment Keith Richards and Brian Jones, man who has practically formed The Stones, had practiced playing guitar to exhaustion and Jagger started to think out and perform his later recognizable style on stage. And these two, Richards and Jones, weren’t realizing what he was doing, they thought something was wrong, and they asked what’s wrong with him… And he answered: „I’ll do it on the stage this way.“ They said: „Please, don’t…“ but he continued to work out his moves and turned them into something absolutely revolutionary on the stage, something that represented sexual revolution and made him the biggest showman ever.
He succeeded to erase differences between man and woman in his performance, his dance and moving on the stage. He was the first RnR musician who excited men and women equally. I can confirm it from this „fan“ angle because I remember how I felt watching him on TV for the first time. It was a video from Stones’ concert in Paris in 1976 emitted on TV Sarajevo which was a part of Yugoslav Radio Television then. That was the first time I saw Mick Jagger moving on stage and my jaw was at floor all time! I was deeply fascinated by this unique being which succeeded to erase gender differences, which succeeded to touch, to say so, men and women equally. At the end, this song you’ve mentioned „Moves like Jagger“… This song doubtlessly made young generation to reveal at least one thing Jagger was so important for. One of things which made him so important. The fact that a song is recorded about someone’s stage performance speaks itself; we don’t have to speak more. And the fact this song is global hit – is even more beautiful!

Ego-magazin-Intervju-Ivan-Ivackovic-4

I don’t know how right I am, but as only competition I see performance of James Brown. Although these are two different approaches, two different styles…

James Brown was the first Jagger’s role model. Or the first great role model, at least. Jagger had imitated James Brown a lot, and difference between them was that Brown had everything pre-trained, every move, every gesture, every mimic, including the tiniest details. Everything was packed and practiced to perfection. On the other hand, Jagger has often improvised and has let the music carry him. I think he was succeeding to „portrait a song“ better, how one journalist has said nicely, and to follow emotion and message of that song. He allowed himself a lot more spontaneity and freedom than James Brown did. I have watched live performances of both and that difference has really existed.

Music is a universal language that everyone understands. But, someone needs to have certain subjects and goals so it could appear. What are The Rolling Stones searching for in their texts, which subjects inspire them to create music which everyone understands no matter what language speaks?

This is very broad question because their breadth search is very large. Jagger usually writes lyrics. And he is – nowadays generations perhaps don’t know it enough – one of the best lyricists in the entire rock music history. Some of his lyrics are real masterpieces. For example, „Sympathy for the devil“ inspired by Bulgakov’s novel „The Master and Margarita“ certainly is one of the best lyrics ever. I think Jagger’s value as a lyricist is, among others, exactly in that breadth searches. Some of his lyrics were social critics, and others love thematic par excellence. And he was equally good in both. There are no many authors which showed same ability level, same skill level, in covering so different topics. People are usually better in one of those fields. Either society description or songs about love. Jagger showed himself master in both fields. Lyrics were very important factor in The Stones’ success, especially in the 60s. One entire generation found itself in lyrics as „Satisfaction“ or „Paint it black“ and moreover, these lyrics haven’t stopped to fascinate until today. So, they’ve withstood the biggest and the most serious test which one piece of art can be put on, and it is time test.

Since I follow everything what’s visual, I am interested in your impression about Martin Scorsese’s movie „Shine a light“. First of all, there is a perfect stage light and after an unusual situation: Bill Clinton appears and makes some contact with musicians…

I’ll tell you right away, I have very low opinion about all that. I like Scorsese very much, but this movie is pretty poor, pretty weak and it is not representing the essence of The Rolling Stones, you can’t feel the band’s energy there and I think this movie is pretty boring. I’ve seen remarkably better movies about The Stones and Scorsese himself has made much better movies about rock musicians, for example about Bob Dylan. Regarding Clinton and The Stones, it is one of the most embarrassing episodes in their entire career; I’ll remind you they had rebelled against global warming together?! Why? Because Jagger has seen interest in this. His own and band’s. It was a business move, but I think it is still surreal to rebel against global warming with Clinton, who was one of creators of global warming. At the end, this is something we know, if anyone knows it. I mean the ozone holes were made in our sky during NATO bombing. That was an action where Clinton was Herbert von Karajan, he conducted whole this story. So, I think it is a huge shame and that Jagger’s desire to hang out with Clinton is pretty stupid. He has done it for two reasons: as I’ve told, the first reason is interest, because he knows American presidents are extremely popular even when retired; Clinton especially, he has great rating even today. The second reason for Jagger’s friendship with him is some kind of fascination by the chance to spend time with American president what is idiotism because Jagger is much greater sign of any American president.

Everyone acknowledges and recognizes you as a great source, the most informed source regarding The Rolling Stones. A man has to be very dedicated to get such renown. While watching various biographies in bookstores, I was thinking what would be interesting to you, would you even do it: to translate some of your books, for example „The art of rebellion“ so The Stones could see how good you are and there is someone who follows them on a very high level here? Maybe even they could add some comment, why not… You have contacts, you’re dedicated to that, everyone recognizes you… Did you try?

No, unfortunately. The only reason is lack of time. I had and I still have offers to translate this book in English. And in Spanish – the man from Buenos Aires has contacted me, he owns a site dedicated to The Rolling Stones and he told me, if book is translated to Spanish, I can get free advertising there, and site has a lot of fans. Anyway, all of that could be really nice, and probably also very useful… but I just don’t have time for that. I can’t just give my book to someone to translate it and let it go. For example, if I make a book for English market, I know whatever should be revised in it. That’s because people here don’t know many things which are well-known there and I spent a lot of time to explain them. That text has to be different. I had never had enough time to dedicate to that – first of all, to make English and Spanish edition of this book. Perhaps it could be translated to some other languages as well, but primarily these two. That’s because whole planet speaks these two – one half English and other Spanish.

Perhaps there’ll be an opportunity in the future… And what is about recent cooperation between Keith Richards and Tom Waits? Is this cooperation interesting to you?

Yes, of course. I think these two are some kind of twins – by spirit, temperament, way of thinking, passion, love towards music, world outlook… Really, they are like brothers.

Europe and America are two centers of The Stones’ work. These two centers are close, but at the same time completely different – by mentality, sensibility. Considering the fact The Rolling Stones are English band and they were immediately recognized as changes catalyst from the beginning, could you compare their development path in Europe and America?

It’s truth these two mentalities are different but The Stones’ success became quite similar in Europe and America pretty fast. Of course, they succeeded in Europe first and moreover, their tour through America was complete fiasco – it happened they played in almost empty halls. In the beginning all of that looked pretty discouraging. That was the same moment they had already rocked in Europe and filled every hall they showed in. But, really, all that had leveled very fast. Pretty soon they have become as great in America as here. I think that’s even one of the fastest successes in America ever. Simply, there weren’t any serious part of the world which could resist The Stones. This includes us, too! I’ll just remind you to the first Jubox’s edition cover, the magazine which educated one entire generation: in this cover weren’t The Beatles, but The Rolling Stones. That’s because The RS were extremely popular here from the beginning, even more than The Beatles. And that cover proves this. I don’t think it’s strange because our mentality has some similarities with The RS’ spirit. Just like The Stones in the 60s we like to be defiant, to disobey and disagree. Often even more than we should (laughter).

Ego-magazin-Intervju-Ivan-Ivackovic-5

Now – there are people who know everything about The Stones, and also the ones who know nothing about them. They need some statistic data as a basis to admit this group is really something special. Are there any official statistic data which prove The Rolling Stones are the greatest rock group in the world? For example: number of albums which are sold, number of concert visitors… some parameters which can help someone to understand the greatness of this band?

Of course there are. Here what first occurs to me: the most numerous their concert was held in front of almost million and a half people, their profit of tour A Bigger Bang was 560 million dollars, and all 40.000 tickets for last two concerts in London were sold in 7 minutes. These are only few of many numbers which prove for sure they are the greatest. Anyone who likes to look at numbers can be impressed.

How do you see The Stones’ members’ characters after all these years? Are there a harmonic unity or a creative chaos?

Without any doubt, they constitute a creative chaos. They are far away of any harmonic unity. Moreover, it’s hard to imagine two people who are more different than Mick Jagger and Keith Richards. Mick Jagger is a man who values social recognition a lot – at the end, he became Ser, a knight – and Keith Richards abhores that. Mick is a person who rises on a social scale and Keith is someone who falls of coconut tree and ends on surgery table. Mick care about his health thoroughly and Keith thoroughly destroys his. And so on… But, if there weren’t those differences between them, if there wasn’t constant tension and sparking, The Rolling Stones would’t be what they are. These two complement each other perfectly no matter how often they argue and give hard time to each other and to entire group. Keit is a soul of The RS and Mick is its brain. One without the other simply doesn’t work.

And through their solo careers it is clear that they themselves aren’t tenth of what they are together. This is especially Jagger’s case: his solo career failed infamously. He has recorded great albums and, when looked from that side, it’s not completely clear why this career was so unsuccessful. But, an important part of the explanation is in the fact that people weren’t ready to see him in any other role but The RS’ singer.

He has found his ideal place…

It is ideal according to whole world, but not to him. This place has never been sufficient to him, he has always wanted to be something more.

How would you describe your personal life concept? Your ego?

I’m afraid my only life concept is lack of any concept. There is as much concept in my life as there are methods in acting of someone like Paja Vujisic, for example. I’m an amateur in my own life and I’m not even sure if I am its major owner. I try to bite a life from as many sides as possible, I think this is how we should live, and we should experience and do as more different things as possible. All of us, in fact, live how we want and how we choose and all of us feed our own ego what is all right until we don’t allow it to overeat and until we more or less succeed to save others of the evil we could do to them. Because, when our ego overeats, we don’t vomit, the others do.

At the end, a little more about music. Bowie became recognized and famous for his makeovers and mystery he brings with himself, while The Stones try to remain true to themselves. What the next rock music phase will look like… not to say „the last“?

I equate the next Stones’ phase with next rock and roll phase and I think this is their and this music’s final phase at the same time. I think that with The Stones’ departure RnR will also go away. When The Stones finish their career, rock will move to our memories’ museums. In some ours sentimental treasuries. But physically, it will literally stop existing. Because today it lives only through the existence of The Rolling Stones and few more musicians, for example Paul McCartney or Bruce Springsteen. When these people leave the stage, the RnR will definitely disappear.

And regarding The Stones themselves and their next phase I think it will not defer from what they’ve been doing practically since the beginning of the 80s to nowadays. They are not capable of recording truly great song any more what is not even important as we have seen and mentioned. But I think they are capable of making a tour without competition. And this is what expects us this and next year.

So, their forthcoming concerts will be event of the season again, without any competition. On this field no one can compete them, and with their departure whole this story goes off. By that, their departure of the stage can be identified with their biological death. In fact, I mean they won’t retire until they die. They’ll die on stage or in studio like some of their greatest role-models. Simply, music is their life and not just their job.

This is kind of logical, it’s their way of expression and they will stay the same as long they live.

Well, yes, The Stones became millionaires playing this music but they would also do it not only for free, but they would even pay to play if they had to. They simply have an urge to play, so deep and strong. That’s who they are and they cannot break away from it. That’s why they will never retire. That won’t happen. No matter The Stones won biology laws many times, one day they will inevitably have to adjust to them and the same day they’ll go of the stage and out of life. And only then we’ll have full awareness of their importance for our civilization. Only when they aren’t here anymore, we’ll realize completely how important they were. However it seems we understand it already, we’ll see full and real dimension of the mark they’ve left only when they are gone.

Ego-magazin-Intervju-Ivan-Ivackovic-6

top

← Ivan Ivačković – Umetnost pobune
ITALICA – salon keramičkih pločica 1 →

Beograd
26. 01. 2021., 16:52
Showers
Showers
2°C
real feel: -6°C
current pressure: 1010 mb
humidity: 55%
wind speed: 6 m/s NNW
wind gusts: 12 m/s
UV-Index: 0
sunrise: 07:04
sunset: 16:38
© 2021 AccuWeather, Inc.
 
  • Da li znate kakav život živi puž?27. 04. 2014. - 03:15
  • Fascinantni portreti sa PRAVIM zverkama27. 04. 2014. - 03:10
  • Caras Ionut je izmontirao 12 nadrealnih foto prikaza11. 01. 2014. - 04:26
  • Da bi ojačali borbene redove protiv neodrživog ribolova, slavne ličnosti su se srodile sa – ribama!11. 01. 2014. - 03:14
  • Izbor najdivnijih instagram snimaka sinčića sa štencem17. 12. 2013. - 09:21
  • Plemenske grupe koje iščezavaju17. 12. 2013. - 09:16
  • Deset fascinantnih snimaka koji potvrđuju da ne postoje dve slične pahuljice26. 11. 2013. - 01:12
  • Fotografije nesvakidašnjih umetničkih postavki29. 08. 2013. - 08:17
  • Najlepše tačke planete Zemlje18. 08. 2013. - 08:38
  • The Rhine II 1999 Andreas Gursky born 1955 Presented by the Friends of the Tate Gallery 2000 http://www.tate.org.uk/art/work/P78372Deset najviše plaćenih fotografija (od svih na svetu)29. 07. 2013. - 13:27
  • Mark Cox and Sarah: “Strong”15. 07. 2013. - 23:47
  • Milan Josipović18. 03. 2013. - 05:37
  • Studiju Foster + Partners Stirlingova nagrada za 2018.godinu12. 10. 2018. - 22:32
  • Apple showroom u Makau24. 08. 2018. - 06:25
  • Pobednici Venecijanskog bijenala 2018.28. 05. 2018. - 20:14
  • The Krane – Kopenhagen, Danska28. 11. 2017. - 10:52
  • Petite Friture: Nameštaj koji stvara vibracije02. 11. 2017. - 10:31
  • Working Title, Andtradition, Harri Koskinen26. 06. 2017. - 09:09
  • INOVACIJE IZ KOMPANIJE VELUX – KROVNI PROZORI SA TROSTRUKIM STAKLOM06. 04. 2017. - 06:27
  • Pustinjska koliba – Doug Aitken15. 03. 2017. - 10:04
  • 108 – Kopenhagen, Danska01. 02. 2017. - 12:10
  • OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAKako da sačuvate drage uspomene?05. 12. 2016. - 10:25

Ego muzika

  • LISTA # 001425. 08. 2014. - 08:15
  • LISTA # 001325. 08. 2014. - 08:10
  • LISTA # 001217. 04. 2014. - 02:28
  • LISTA # 001117. 04. 2014. - 02:23
  • LISTA # 001007. 01. 2014. - 04:14
  • LISTA # 000907. 01. 2014. - 04:10
  • LISTA # 000823. 09. 2013. - 22:58
  • LISTA # 000715. 07. 2013. - 22:46
  • LISTA # 000603. 07. 2013. - 21:27
  • LISTA # 000503. 07. 2013. - 21:17
  • Ines Janković, Bike Jacket20. 03. 2017. - 09:59
  • DANIELLA MIDENGE09. 02. 2017. - 23:09
  • Alivar - Italia54. Međunarodni sajam nameštaja u Beogradu08. 11. 2016. - 11:34
  • Vila , Hrvarska, Istra, KrasicaPredrag Milutinović, Mapa27. 10. 2016. - 21:36
  • Katarina KuljačaFeel Pilates – Katarina Kuljača21. 06. 2016. - 20:38
  • INES JANKOVIĆ – MODNI DIZAJNER28. 12. 2015. - 09:31
  • Foodtones: Isabella Vacchi17. 11. 2015. - 16:47
  • ZORAN JEDREJČIĆ21. 10. 2015. - 12:05
  • Branko Starčević, fotograf20. 06. 2015. - 09:14
  • Irena Kilibarda20. 06. 2015. - 09:14
  • IDC dijamanti25. 01. 2015. - 18:26
  • Idis Turato09. 12. 2014. - 09:07

Tags

Amerika Amsterdam Arhitektura Australija Austrija Belgija beton Brazil Danska Dizajn drvo Engleska enterijer Fotografija fotografije Francuska Holandija Hong Kong Hotel industrijski dizajn Italija Japan Kopenhagen Krovni prozori kuća Loft London Milano minimalizam moda nameštaj Nemačka New York Njujork Paris Pariz Portugal rekonstrukcija restoran stan Uk USA Velux Španija Београд
Popular
  • Možete li da pogodite koliko je grad Njujork platio arhitektu...05. 05. 2016. - 20:06
  • Fotografije: Rade Kovač,www.radekovac.comAleksandar Gligorijević09. 12. 2012. - 21:53
  • Lipstick productiona weekend in Belgrade: powder & pancakes!28. 12. 2012. - 23:34
  • Bogdan Cvetković, začetnik parkura u SrbijiFilozofija kretanja03. 12. 2012. - 20:55
Recent
  • 50 godina kolekcije Alhambra17. 10. 2018. - 21:58
  • BIG – ORB17. 10. 2018. - 21:16
  • One Room Hotel – DMVA17. 10. 2018. - 19:43
  • Kuća na jezeru – Fran Silvestre Arquitectos14. 10. 2018. - 14:43
Comments
  • Simonvrhunski kvalitet, i zaista su nenadmašni kada je topotna...06. 04. 2017. - 06:27 by Simon
  • […] Možete li da pogodite koliko je grad Njujork...05. 05. 2016. - 20:06 by NAJSKUPLJI METRO NA SVETU | Cacanski glas
  • АнониманМогу да плате колико хоће, Московски...05. 05. 2016. - 20:06 by Анониман
  • Arhitekta u usponuBravo! Samo tako nastavite! Obožavam i redovno pratim Vaš...10. 07. 2015. - 12:34 by Arhitekta u usponu
Tags
Amerika Amsterdam Arhitektura Australija Austrija Belgija beton Brazil Danska Dizajn drvo Engleska enterijer Fotografija fotografije Francuska Holandija Hong Kong Hotel industrijski dizajn Italija Japan Kopenhagen Krovni prozori kuća Loft London Milano minimalizam moda nameštaj Nemačka New York Njujork Paris Pariz Portugal rekonstrukcija restoran stan Uk USA Velux Španija Београд

Prijavite se za Newsletter

Periodično ćemo Vas obaveštavati o najnovijim dešavanjima iz sveta arhitekture, enterijera i dizajna!

Pratite nas

  • Follow us on Twitter
  • Join our Facebook Group
  • Pinterest
  • Instagram
  • RSS
© Copyright - Ego-magazin - Wordpress Theme by Kriesi.at