Lemmy Kilmister’s Criticism About The Rolling Stones
Throughout a music career spanning six decades, the Rolling Stones have defined what rock and roll is. With their mid-1960s contemporaries like Bob Dylan, the Beatles, Eric Clapton, and Van Morrison, the Stones have maintained a permanent place in music history, influencing generations of musicians greatly.
Fans long debated whether the Beatles or the Rolling Stones are the most prominent figures in the scene. Even so, there was a friendly rivalry between the two bands, each claiming they were better. As it seems, Lemmy Kilmister also had something to say about this comparison, along with criticism for the Stones.
Which Aspect Of The Rolling Stones Lemmy Kilmister Disliked?
The comparison between the Rolling Stones and the Beatles has been a huge topic, especially in the ’70s. Although both bands respect each other, they have been in a war of words since the ’60s. However, this was a friendly rivalry, and they always became friends through the years.
Active in the music scene of Britain from 1960 until his passing, Lemmy Kilmister witnessed the time the Beatles and the Stones dominated the decade. In his 2004 memoir ‘White Line Fever,’ Kilmister also joined the debate and revealed his thoughts on this years-long comparison.
Kilmister described the Stones as ‘mummy’s boys’ who were college students from London’s outskirts. The musician then said they went to London to starve and give themselves ‘an aura of disrespectability.’ Moreover, Kilmister argued the Stones were never near the Beatles, not for their humor, originality, songs, or stage presence.
According to the Motörhead icon, all the band had was Mick Jagger’s dance moves. Although they contributed to the music scene with outstanding records, Kilmister argued the Stones weren’t good on stage. However, he believed the Beatles were more prominent than them in this aspect.
Here is what Lemmy Kilmister wrote about the Stones and the Beatles in his memoir:
“The Rolling Stones were the mummy’s boys. They were all college students from the outskirts of London. They went to starve in London, but it was by choice to give themselves some aura of disrespectability. I did like the Stones, but they were never anywhere near the Beatles, not for humor, not for originality, not for songs, not for presentation. All they had was Mick Jagger dancing about. Fair enough, the Stones made great records, but they were always sh*t on stage, whereas the Beatles were the gear.”
So, it seems Lemmy Kilmister wasn’t a fan of the band taking advantage of Jagger’s showmanship. He believed the Stones lacked the humor, originality, songs, and presentation that the Beatles had. On the contrary, the Stones frontman opposed this, saying their stage shows and dances make them better than the Beatles.