the JULIA LENNON PRINCIPLE revisited:
(recap: the debate is, who, in a JUST world, gets paid band-royalties for creative contribution? the guys on-stage, the guys on-record, the gals behind the guys? “who wrote the song?” vs “who made the song possible” etc etc)
anyway the idea behind MICK’S GIRLS seems routinely inquirer-prurient enough – channel 5 mid-evening automatic – until you think abt, you know, the actual SUBJECT of ROLLING STONES SONGS… ugly love, ugly sex, ugly life -> look, these are actually the ppl we shd be FED UP with seeing interviewed, surely, the material that had become TOO obvious (even if marianne and marsha and bianca and jerry none of them showed): i want to know the relationship between mick in bed and mick in the studio, cz it seems kinda exactly pertinent, no? i mean, musicologically, for starters… ALL ROCKGROUPS (jazzbands, hiphop crews, soukous orchestras, electronica units) are POLYAMOROUS GANGBANGS w.weird intense stuff going on between members&audience, members&members, thisgroup&thatgroup – and seeing as how “world-famous supergroupie” pamela des barres is a GOOD DEAL MORE PSYCHOLOGICALLY ACUTE than the male groupies who always end up being interviewed (you know, chauffeurs and PR guys and biographers and…) then why not ask HER abt how songs work for her, why not get all the girls here comparing notes together, abt how THEY relate the sex to the records? (half of them were a lot older and wiser and funnier now then when they passed through the space-under-scrutiny, and past the need to be scamming the camera in regard to future modelling work…)
of course in the event, a few scatter of charming anecdotes asides, the voiceover and general approach wz sniggeringly and bafflingly plzd with itself for its “daring” and its “iconoclastic cheek”, when something really obvious and interesting (and horndoggy and irreverent and not-at-all-academic and anti-rockist and CENTRALLY TO DO WITH EVERYTHING AT ISSUE) wz right there in front of them, being excavated inadvertently – i mean obviously even with its shouty faux-tabloidy lameness this wz actually far better and more insightful than the south bank show or late review or blah blah blah