Credit: Far Out / Alamy
Tue 1 September 2026 13:02, UK
Mick Jagger has never been shy about dishing it out. Throughout The Rolling Stones’ career, the band has proved to be loose-lipped on more than one occasion, falling in and out of feuds, delivering some cutting one-liners, and never keeping their opinions to themselves, as they had interview mics in their faces in the golden days before media training.
Some of the lines are pretty funny, though. Music history is truly blessed by quotes from back then, before artists, or their label and PR teams, began worrying about the implications of being a bit catty from time to time. Now, you’d never hear anything like Keith Richards calling the Grateful Dead “boring shit, man”, or Mick Jagger calling the New York Dolls a “load of rubbish”.
But at the time, the band was open about it all, always willing to share their digs and praise, ensuring there was at least some balance. Some of it simply came down to opinion; Jagger didn’t like a certain guitar sound or a particular energy someone brought to the stage, or Richards thought someone’s artistic persona was posing and false. However, sometimes it came down to the weirdness that so often lingers around comparison.
“For fans of” is a phrase you hear a lot in the music world. It’s like one band can’t exist without instantly being likened to another, only being contextualised and explained through comparison rather than being allowed to stand on their own.
Sometimes it must be somewhat flattering, especially if a group is being put in the same category as their idols or people who inspire them, suggesting they’re on the right track for their goals. But if that comparative label attaches them to an act they’re not into, it must feel like a slap in the face – it did to Jagger.
Credit: Alamy
The Beatles and The Rolling Stones’ rivalry was the stuff of legend. How much you want to believe the two groups disliked each other or enjoyed some kind of antagonistic posturing every time they released a song is u to you and your daydreams. The truth is far more likely to be that they enjoyed one another’s music, often thought that the other band copied them a little, would get a little grumpy when they were outperformed by the rival but, otherwise, would enjoy a pint with them. but this grace wasn’t reserved for many acts.
Especially during the British invasion, when The Beatles and The Stones were taking the world by storm, thousands and thousands of copycat groups emerged. Everyone wanted a bit of the action, so suddenly, there were countless groups just like them worldwide, and everyone was scrapping for attention. It was mildly insulting, though, to Jagger when his band began being compared to any of these trend-riders, especially one group in particular.
Further reading: From The Vault
“One of the most impossible things was going out to have a hamburger, and some guy would go, ‘Are you Herman’s Hermits?’” he said it in an interview, spitting it with total disgust as even the name, which is, admittedly, a terrible band name, made him tense up.
Herman’s Hermits, one of the many acts riding the wave of the British invasion, but one of the most successful at surfing it. After forming in 1963, they did see success with a few charting tracks. But to Jagger, they were nothing but a knock-off, and so being likened to or even mistaken for them was an embarrassment.
“It would kill you,” he said of these moments when he’d be asked if he was a member of the band, his own forgotten in the shadows, “So you go, ‘Fuck you. Herman’s Hermits is shit.’”
For Jagger, being compared to an act like The Kinks or the Liverpudlian quartet that seemed to litter every single interview was one thing. IN his mind, they had some artistic credibility worth being stood up against. But Herman’s Hermits was, quite siply, a step too far. The Rolling Stones were, in his mind, far beyond the group and almost as catchy.
