Aging Rock and Roll stars

costanza

Wed, Dec 19 2012, 3:29 pm

So last week I watched the 121212 conert to benefit Hurricane Sandy victims. The average age of the performers must have been 65 - The Rolling Stones, The Who, Roger Watters, Paul McCartney, Bruce Springsteen, Billy Joel.
Undoubedtly they are responsible for some of the best music of the past 40 -50 years. But I couldn't help but feel that seeing them perform at this stage of their lives is depressing. Most of them have been performing the same hits for decades (including Bruce - but he is one of the only ones who is still producing solid new material). Is Rock and Roll purely a young man's game? In some respects I think it is.
But then I felt sad that there is no one I can foresee in the current music scene who is making music of the quality that these guys did - that will be relevant and meaningful and sound as great 40 years from now as The Stones' etc. music still sounds today. By the way, I thought Mick Jagger was the best performer of the night.
I'm feeling old, but kind of lucky that I grew up in a time when music was great, when whole albums mattered, when you studied the record labels every time you listened and they, together with the music, were art.