Wait...WHAT?
Saturday, December 20th, 2008 05:12 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
serai.
Okay, I hadn't realized this, and you probably haven't either, but...
Keith Richard is 65.
Yep, you read right. 65. As in YEARS OLD. I don't know about you, but I'm having a very hard time wrapping my head around that fact. I mean...CHRIST.
This is gonna bounce around in my head for days, I can feel it.
(The link above is to a report on NPR Radio.)
P.S. By the way, it's RICHARD. Not "Richards". There's no "s" at the end. People have been making that mistake forever, it seems.
Okay, I hadn't realized this, and you probably haven't either, but...
Keith Richard is 65.
Yep, you read right. 65. As in YEARS OLD. I don't know about you, but I'm having a very hard time wrapping my head around that fact. I mean...CHRIST.
This is gonna bounce around in my head for days, I can feel it.
(The link above is to a report on NPR Radio.)
P.S. By the way, it's RICHARD. Not "Richards". There's no "s" at the end. People have been making that mistake forever, it seems.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: Sunday, December 21st, 2008 09:10 pm (UTC)When the Stones first debuted, their manager thought that "Keith Richard" sounded more entertainment business-y than "Keith Richards" because of popular British pop singer Cliff Richard, so they urged Keith to drop the S. In all promo materials from the sixties and probably well into the seventies, you'll see him listed as Keith Richard rather than Keith Richards.
Am showing both my age, and my obsessive reading of material on rockers back in my youth ;)