The new 'Marquee Club' set has exactly one shot of Wyman, a group shot obviously. Usually they take pains to crop him out of photos. Been going on for years now. (the new Sticky Fingers set had the courage to include multiple pics of him, to their credit).

So why do they hate Bill and Brian so much? Because Bill had the sheer audacity to quit the band? Because Brian was an "unpleasant person", is that why they refuse to play any music from his era other than Satisfaction, Let's Spend the Night Together or occasionally Get Off My Cloud (JJ Flash and Beggars Banquet material don't count for obvious reasons).

What could be behind this? Is Keith too wet-brained to be able to re-learn other songs, even big hits, from before '68?

EDIT: Oh yeah - Paint It Black occasionally. Still...

I'm not sure, I'm not a lawyer and I'm not a musician, but I suppose they have to pay to sing their ABKCO songs. 

And, regarding Bill, I guess there aren't many family reunions.

Well, they did bring Bill back for a couple of shows in London if I recall correctly, so they're not trying to erase him entirely.

I'm thinking they would be obligated to compensate Bill for using his likeness so they try to minimize that as much as possible.

Mick wants to put up good numbers for the stockholders, ya know.  :thatwassmart

I've been trying to get rid of my bills for years...

"  ................. I've been trying to get rid of my bills for years...... "

************************************************************



http://www.grioo.com/images/rubriques/7/1005.jpg

PERKS?

http://31.media.tumblr.com/152cd87fa2f467d113cac4058e1404dc/tumblr_mrbga3FJow1qd3udso5_250.gif

BILL PERKS IS ALIVE AND WELL. I TEXT WITH HIM OCCASIONALLY. A NICE CHAP.

sadly even without the revsionist history very few people outside boards like this know or even care about Mr Perks and his contributions.

I would imagine that they would have had a helluva job putting this 'Stonesism' exhibition together without a LOT of input from Bill.

Hopefully that input will be reflected in the end product and there'll be less rewriting of history that what has been the norm in recent years.

The true history behind history is that it is manipulated, it was and it is and it will.

They can eliminate Brian, Stu and Bill from the Band’s history, and yes, a lot of us know what they did and more remarkable in the hardest period of the growing of an unknown band, but if the "historians" want they can say the stones were 4

Many years from now a few people will not have LPs or CDs just clouds or public clouds or beyond there won’t be books, only in libraries but I think there will be serious cloud and on-line encyclopedias saying who were Brian, Stu and Bill

Bill has always suggested that it was Keith who had the biggest problem with him for leaving the band, but Bill said just the other week that during rehearsals for the O2 shows in London a couple years ago that Keith was very friendly and pleased  that Bill would be playing, and that it was Mick this time who couldn't forgive him and kept fixing things so that Bill wouldn't even get a soundcheck either night for his paltry two songs.

Those two have more problems than just being greedheads contemptuous of their audience.

Oh, Stu gets some lip service now and then; of course he was ALWAYS mixed low on stage, much lower than Nicky Hopkins or Billy Preston.

At least on the Vaults: Hampton set Bob Clearmountain makes an effort to pull Stu and Mac up in the mix, but reasons for mixing him low live are baffling. And of then there's them kicking him out in the first place in '64.
Nasty young punks then, nasty old punks now...

Hit me Ronnie!

http://i1306.photobucket.com/albums/s580/Jaybirdie/RSGroupBrianPunch_zps9q2fu1gl.jpg

Thanks Lil Brian

Edith Grove wrote on Jul 12^th, 2015 at 8:40am:

Well, they did bring Bill back for a couple of shows in London if I recall correctly, so they're not trying to erase him entirely. I'm thinking they would be obligated to compensate Bill for using his likeness so they try to minimize that as much as possible. Mick wants to put up good numbers for the stockholders, ya know.  :thatwassmart

I hadn't thought of that. Still very shabby if that's the case.

I wonder if anyone cares about the supporting musicians and their point of view. Darryl Jones has been with the band for a long time. So have Lisa and Bernard.

I spoke with the director of Crossfire Hurricane and asked him about Stu. I wanted to know if any of the members spoke about him. He told me that they talked about Stu a lot during the interviews that became that documentary, but none of it made it in to the final cut.

Also, I really have a hard time picturing everyone sitting around worrying about Bill or Brian and intentionally erasing them from the band's history. I can't see Keith Richards phoning up HQ and saying, "Hey, make sure Bill is photoshopped out of album covers."

It doesn't look like anyone is being erased or forgotten on their official website:

http://www.rollingstones.com/artist/ian-stewart/

http://www.rollingstones.com/artist/brian-jones/

http://www.rollingstones.com/artist/mick-taylor/

Look at how they end MT's section:

What’s also an interesting question is, “Have The Rolling Stones ever been as good as they were when Mick Taylor was in the band?”

I wasn't suggesting anyone sits around worrying about Bill being in official photos. They don't worry, they just obviously and intentionally crop him out whenever possible.

As to the Stones being "better" in one era or another - it's a moot point. There are at least four different eras for the band based on the lineup and approach. Plenty of people I've talked to have said the Stones, after Brian, became a trendy, druggy, morose hippie band. I don't agree obviously, but the vibe changed, as well as the sound and attack.

I don't think they are trying to erase them, just minimize their importance to make themselves seem more important to the unknowing public.

Bitch wrote on Jul 12^th, 2015 at 6:30pm:

I don't think they are trying to erase them, just minimize their importance to make themselves seem more important to the unknowing public.

Yeah, that's astute. That's probably what I really felt they were doing. Good point and well said, Bitch.

"Xhibitionism" is comin we shall soon see if your inquiry is true.

As Gazza pointed out above, it would be very hard to hold such an exhibit without Bill's involvement. But musically speaking, they still treat him as persona non gratis.

munichhilton wrote on Jul 12^th, 2015 at 9:04am:

I've been trying to get rid of my bills for years...

GOLD...COMEDY GOLD!!!

They airbrushed him out of the shot used for the RARETIES cover. Keith, "Well! Ya know man; it's only a bass player. S'not the end of the world, or the band." Bill fucking moaned and groaned from 1976 on. To the media, and that's bang out of order. Mick and Keith this, Mick and Keith that!

Then starting around 1979, it was every 18 months or so. "I'm leaving the band at the end of next year." Cool Bill! Thanx for the memories and bang a couple school girls for all of us. If I had my way, I'd airbrush him out of history. Dick Taylor come back, all is forgiven.