• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

Here we are stepping into rather complicated territory, for we know that songwriters do not always speak with their own voices in songs. Songs are a form of art, and many, in fact probably most, songs contain elements of fiction. So we must not suppose that everything Mick claims to have done in a song is in fact something he had done in real life. So, Mick and Keef could write a song from the perspective of a person who is thwarted in love, or torn up by drugs, without actually having had that experience.

However, we also know that art is often autobiographical, and that The Stones have made it their business to project a public persona of decadent rock’n’rollers. The public face of a celebrity is not always a mirror of the way that individual actually lives, but there are certain readily available facts about the Rolling Stones, particularly Mick and Keith, which offer strong evidence to support the belief that they have in fact lived quite hedonistic lives. Jagger has seven children with four women, and is well known for his many high-profile dalliances with bombshells. Richards has been tried five times on drug charges, from marijuana to amphetamines to heroin. Additionally, both men are multi-millionaires and, despite being more than a little crusty, remain the objects of sexual desire for hundreds of thousands of women.

These facts about Mick and Keef, while not giving us any conclusive information regarding the extent to which their songs are autobiographical, do give us very good reason to believe that, if they experience unhappiness in the face of a pleasure, that unhappiness is not the result of a thwarted attempt to attain that pleasure. If they want to experience a pleasure, they have the money, celebrity, and raw sex appeal to make that happen. This is one reason why the morality of The Stones is so interesting. They have, over a period of many years, presented the case for Cyrenaic hedonism. Yet, their songs persistently reveal a nagging unhappiness and frustrating search for satisfaction.

Satisfaction?

Given what we have learned, we are now in a position to offer a suggestion. Cyreanic hedonism has been well tried by The Rolling Stones, and it clearly is not an effective road to happiness. Rather than give up hedonism altogether, though, the Epicurean modifications to the theory ought to be given a shot.

What would Epicurean Rolling Stones look like? Would the Stones themselves find the Epicurean lifestyle acceptable? The Epicureans agree with the Cyrenaics that bodily pleasures are good, and to be embraced, so the Stones can maintain their dedication to physical indulgence. However, rather than grabbing every opportunity for pleasure, they will need to pause and consider the consequences of their pleasurable activities, choosing only those pleasures that prudence tells them will result in more pleasure than pain.

There’s some evidence that Epicurean-style hedonism would hold some appeal for The Stones. Consider “Waiting on a Friend,” from 1981’s Tattoo You: “Making love and breaking hearts / It is a game for youth / But I’m not waiting on a lady / I’m waiting on a friend.” Or, Exile’s “Happy” explains pretty clearly that Keith sees love, instead of money or a career, as the road to happiness. This lends more credence to the argument that tempered hedonism beats unbridled hedonism. The Epicurean version of pleasure fulfillment just might be the path to contentment and, finally, some real satisfaction.

III

Time Is on Rock’s Side

9

From Main Street to Guyville

GEORGE A. REISCH

In the summer of 1971, The Stones were living in the south of France. They left England after splitting with their manager, Allen Klein, and finding themselves broke and potentially in big trouble. Klein had purchased the publishing rights to their songs from Decca, their former English label, leaving The Stones with little income to pay the enormous tax bills they faced. Mick and Keith had already been arrested on drug charges in 1967,