The Stone Roses’ self-titled debut album proves, more than anything, the importance of never giving up. While The Roses had been a band for many years and had never achieved much success in Manchester, their first album was greeted by nearly anyone as the work of pure genius.
The hype surrounding The Stone Roses was gigantic, and the fallout was just as significant. But which of the two reactions was an exaggeration? Today, I am reviewing and revisiting “The Stone Roses.”
The Stone Roses’ Long Road to Ever-Lasting Glory
In 1989, The Stone Roses was a rare example of a band that utilized pure magic, and everyone knew it. Their music united the English nation, made people want to start bands, and made kids want to fall in love.
Still, not many knew that The Roses had already been a band for nearly a decade at that point. Started in 1980 by guitarist John Squire and singer Ian Brown while attending grammar school, the musicians had explored numerous musical avenues. Few paid any attention in a city in love with The Smiths and Joy Division.
So, what changed? A cynic would claim that it was the right records, the right clothes and the right drugs, particularly ecstasy. But, it may have just as well been that the musicians had got better with time.
By 1987, the classic line-up was complete. The ever funky and well-dressed Mani, aka Gary Mounfield, was on bass guitar, while drumming virtuoso Reni, aka Alan Wren, brought the groove of club dance records to the studio.
A revolution was soon coming; nobody knew what it would be like, and nobody thought Ian Broown would be part of it.
The Stone Roses’ Debut Brings The Summer of Love to the Late 1980s
If you ask anyone who saw The Stone Roses play live during the late 1980s, they’ll all compare the band to genius footballers, to The Beatles, or the prophets of the scriptures. These high praises do say a lot. But remember that, like the band itself, most of the people in attendance were zapped out on the love drug Ecstacy.
Still, yes, it’s true. The Stone Roses achieved something close to magical on their debut album. It was something so special, in fact, that they’d never get close to it again. Neither did anyone else.
“The Stone Roses” is dance music for late 1980s discos. But it contains exciting guitar solos by one of the most talented instrumentalists of the time. And, to boot, it’s a hippie record, an invitation for love and peace.
The Stone Roses began Britpop, but, as we’ll see, they wouldn’t be around to enjoy living in the house they’d built.
Album opener, “I Wanna Be Adored,” is the best proof that you’re not listening to an ordinary band of ordinary partygoers. The music slips in like dust underneath your bedroom door, and the sound created by the quartet approaches a mystical crescendo that Syd Barrett‘s Pink Floyd would’ve been all too happy to have produced.
Songs like “She Bangs The Drums” or “Waterfall” sound like they ought to belong to bands of the 1960s, but The Stone Roses bring dynamism to the tunes that announce the group’s readiness to play arenas worldwide.
The group’s confidence and radical optimism are apparent in their songs just as well as it was in their interviews. “This is the One” and “Made of Stone” help the album sound like a the greatest hits package of a classic 60s group.
There are a few slightly forgettable moments in the middle of the record. The mood is unaffected, however, by these lesser tracks.
Wisely, The Stone Roses save the very best for last. “I Am the Ressurection” is another exercise in bravado. It contains peaks upon peaks, from the towering chorus to possibly the greatest outro in rock music history.
Finally, it’s all back to the dancefloor, with the closer “Fools Gold,” hinting at the mix of dance, rock and electronica that would dominate the 1990s music scene.
Failed “Second Coming”
“The Stone Roses” album created incredible excitement in Britain’s music world. No longer was the quartet overlooked. Instead, they were treated as infallible musical geniuses. They called the sound Madchester and party-rock groups like The Happy Mondays, The Charlatans, and Inspiral Carpets were all part of it.
But this excitement meant that more rock groups began appearing than they had since the 1960s. Some of them, like Blur, Oasis, or Suede, were good and ready to become big.
It took a long time for The Stone Roses to record a follow-up. By the time they entered the studio in 1994, they had no songs and the process of making some on the spot wore them out.
The band was done with the retro peace and love sound and aesthetic. Squire was working off chunky Led Zeppelin-like riffs. Ian Brown was intent on writing love songs.
“Second Coming” was panned by the press when it came out. It became a hit initially but soon was treated as an example of the “overblown second record.” In retrospect, it’s a respectable album, but not one that retains the same effortless magic. How could they do that?
Legacy of The Stone Roses
The group started falling apart. A few disastrous festival appearances later, The Stone Roses were history. By that stage, Oasis and Blur were only too happy to replace them.
“The Stone Roses” is considered an untouchable classic by most fans and critics. For once, neither group is wrong. There are moments on songs like “I Wanna Be Adored” or “I Am the Resurrection” that any other band on record may never reach again.
The NME and Oasis’ Noel Gallagher still praise the album. So do I. However, other publications have begun a movement to reappraise the record in recent years. The Quietus, The Guardian, and The Independent all think it was overrated and that the album doesn’t live past a few excellent singles.
While consistency is debatable, what isn’t is that “The Stone Roses” captures what most rock bands fail to do – their very best moment which, coincidentally, also gets recorded in the studio.
