FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2067667794> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2067667794 endingPage "191" @default.
• W2067667794 startingPage "170" @default.
• W2067667794 abstract "Through the Lens, Darkly:Peter Whitehead and The Rolling Stones Victor Coelho (bio) Click for larger view View full resolution Figure 1. Bill Wyman in Charlie Is My Darling, 1966 Click for larger view View full resolution Figure 2. Charlie Is My Darling, 1966 [End Page 170] Click for larger view View full resolution Figure 3. Filming in the sixties Click for larger view View full resolution Figure 4. Filming the Stones, Charlie Is My Darling, 1966 [End Page 171] Click for larger view View full resolution Figure 5. Mick Jagger in Charlie, 1966 Click for larger view View full resolution Figure 6. Whitehead with Keith Richards, Charlie, 1966 [End Page 172] Click for larger view View full resolution Figure 7. Whitehead with Mick Jagger, Charlie, 1966 Click for larger view View full resolution Figure 8. Carolee Schneeman in per formance in New York City, 1966. Photo by Peter Whitehead, shot during the time he was making Charlie Is My Darling. Courtesy of Carolee Schneeman. [End Page 173] Despite their seminal importance in rock history—institutionally memorialized as Rock and Roll Hall of Fame laureates; economically powerful for almost half a century through outstanding market success and clever product and tour management; and, most important, for the durability of their roots-derived musical template—The Rolling Stones have never been the recipients of a detailed examination commensurate to their musical influence and cultural range. Academic surveys of rock music, typically organized by album or a genre-based chronological narrative, usually conclude their discussion of the Stones' music in the 1970s, thus ignoring the cyclic and dynamic processes of revival, the powerful communities created by downloading and sharing, the new listening and viewing strategies enabled by mobile technology, YouTube, and remixing—all of these the main ingredients, I would argue, for determining long-standing cultural significance in popular music.1 And while the foundational musical role played by the Stones during the English blues revival of the early 1960s is an unalterable part of the group's history, the question remains of how and why the blues—a moribund, culturally distant, and racially distinct vernacular music—became a point of reference for the synthetic, materialistic, and evanescent culture of London during the early sixties. To answer this, we need to consider the refraction of The Rolling Stones—the group and its music—that took place through the third-party industries of art, film, and popular fashion. Peter Whitehead's close and complicated relationship to the group during the 1960s and early 1970s, as chronicled through many completed and proposed projects, has left a fascinating documentary paper trail that offers valuable insights into these questions. [End Page 174] Performer, Audience, Cultural Critic What I call third-party is a crucial stage in the circuit of representation since it visually translates music into culture. Performers, as the first party, are traditionally reluctant about ascribing meaning to songs and making pronouncements about their cultural significance. Bob Dylan, uncomfortable with the sobriquet attached to him as The Voice of a Generation, remembered in his Chronicles that in 1968, All I'd ever done was sing songs that were dead straight and expressed powerful new realities. I had very little in common with and knew even less about a generation that I was supposed to be the voice of. I'd left my hometown only ten years earlier, wasn't vociferating the opinions of anybody. My destiny lay down the road with what ever life invited, had nothing to do with representing any kind of civilization.2 More bluntly, following the release of the Stones' 1971 album Sticky Fingers, Keith Richards similarly minimized the alleged meanings (in this case, references to drugs) that became attached to his songs: I don't think Sticky Fingers is a heavy drug album . . . I mean, you can't take a fucking record like other people take a Bible. It's only a fucking record, man.3 In short, the consideration of cultural meaning is usually not of primary importance by new groups. But, at the same time, rock musicians can no longer retreat to the studio and avoid public scrutiny or interpretation, as The Beatles did in 1966, and enclose..." @default.
• W2067667794 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2067667794 creator A5041099337 @default.
• W2067667794 date "2011-01-01" @default.
• W2067667794 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2067667794 title "Through the Lens, Darkly: Peter Whitehead and The Rolling Stones" @default.
• W2067667794 cites W1497970192 @default.
• W2067667794 cites W1580481633 @default.
• W2067667794 cites W2795712397 @default.
• W2067667794 cites W584217115 @default.
• W2067667794 cites W588249532 @default.
• W2067667794 cites W624598633 @default.
• W2067667794 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/frm.2011.0010" @default.
• W2067667794 hasPublicationYear "2011" @default.
• W2067667794 type Work @default.
• W2067667794 sameAs 2067667794 @default.
• W2067667794 citedByCount "21" @default.
• W2067667794 countsByYear W20676677942013 @default.
• W2067667794 countsByYear W20676677942017 @default.
• W2067667794 countsByYear W20676677942019 @default.
• W2067667794 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2067667794 hasAuthorship W2067667794A5041099337 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConcept C138268822 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConcept C153349607 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConcept C178790620 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConcept C199033989 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConcept C2778344882 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConcept C2781168864 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConcept C52119013 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConcept C558565934 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConceptScore W2067667794C124952713 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConceptScore W2067667794C138268822 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConceptScore W2067667794C138885662 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConceptScore W2067667794C142362112 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConceptScore W2067667794C153349607 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConceptScore W2067667794C154945302 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConceptScore W2067667794C178790620 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConceptScore W2067667794C185592680 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConceptScore W2067667794C199033989 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConceptScore W2067667794C2778344882 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConceptScore W2067667794C2781168864 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConceptScore W2067667794C41008148 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConceptScore W2067667794C41895202 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConceptScore W2067667794C52119013 @default.
• W2067667794 hasConceptScore W2067667794C558565934 @default.
• W2067667794 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2067667794 hasLocation W20676677941 @default.
• W2067667794 hasOpenAccess W2067667794 @default.
• W2067667794 hasPrimaryLocation W20676677941 @default.
• W2067667794 hasRelatedWork W1986512145 @default.
• W2067667794 hasRelatedWork W2000641745 @default.
• W2067667794 hasRelatedWork W200239728 @default.
• W2067667794 hasRelatedWork W2008883818 @default.
• W2067667794 hasRelatedWork W2047697744 @default.
• W2067667794 hasRelatedWork W2314740404 @default.
• W2067667794 hasRelatedWork W2349425011 @default.
• W2067667794 hasRelatedWork W2371012984 @default.
• W2067667794 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2067667794 hasRelatedWork W3116256261 @default.
• W2067667794 hasVolume "52" @default.
• W2067667794 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2067667794 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2067667794 magId "2067667794" @default.
• W2067667794 workType "article" @default.