Moves like Jagger: a short piece

Anyone who says Mick Jagger couldn't dance is .... not so much a moron, but rather just someone who has probably been too enamored with what wound up happening to modern culture **after** Mick Jaggers heyday . The symbolism of Jaggers dance is really completely integral to what rock and roll was in its prime: a rather chaotic style of fairly masculine and aggressive music, that combined itself rather ingeniously with feminity, whilst at once obeying **next to no rules** or "organized moves".

Dancing in an organized planned out style like we now see Beyonce do or Michael Jackson etc, would have been antithetical to the entire rock and roll movement, becuse those dances that those artists do are actually , in some sense, almost like GOOSESTEPS were for the nazis. It's all about moving absolutely in time, doing the same thing that all the other dancers are doing, having everything planned in advance, etc. Beyonces dances are cohesive and, again, almost militaristic. Jaggers moves are not at all in this vein, which is why people like to say he "couldn't dance". Jagger was able to dance just fine. He just didn't dance in line with others. He was literally all on his own.... With Jagger you have to really look at it more as someone , basically, whose suddenly breaking out of some sort of very tight and constricted cage, and they're completely ecstatic about their escape. Go back and watch some of the original Rolling Stones performances, for instance, in the middle of the 1960s, when it was still being shot in black and white, and you will start to see just how long it actually took for Jagger to finally reach the style of dance, that he has now been made even more famous for, with the Maroon 5 song "Moves like Jagger".

It's actually incredible when you really watch it, and to me it has always stood for MAN finally breaking free and adopting a sort of curvy , feminine "looseness" for his musical expression that , in previous decades, (and even now, believe it or not) is still considered rather off limits for him. Jagger in my opinion did a great deal for the feminine liberation movements that followed, but of course he's never acknowledged by any feminine movements becuase he's considered the man side of it all. But he was essentially, in some respects, one of rocks most "female' performers, of that rather constricted time period. In Keith Richards autobiography a young Mick is described as having practiced his dance moves in front of a mirror, "pretending to be Marilyn Monroe". He had feminine heroines at a time when few others did. I see him as an early transgender icon almost, myself. The Rolling Stones are often compared to the Beatles for instance, as though they are one in the same, but the truth about the Beatles is that they were dead by the time the 70s hit, and the 70s is really when Jagger actually hit, completely, his wild boy dancing prime. The Beatles were good musicians, but they weren't sexy, and ....well, they certainly had no "moves' like JaggeR"...... - end