This looks like a direct no-attribution repost from Letters of Note (sept. 28 post, recently re-popularized):

http://www.lettersofnote.com/2009/09/i-leave-it-in-your-capa...

Letters of Note is a fantastic site, and there are several other amusing/interesting ones on there despite the site's youth.

Just noticed this on Hacker News. It's been a busy day at the office, so haven't had a chance to see this post until now. I actually curate Burstoid as a side not-for-profit project. I did attribute it to the source swiss-miss.com where I saw it earlier today in my feed reader. Never saw the original site, because she didn't link to it -- it looks as if she was pointed to it via Twitter. Regardless, it's a neat letter and I'm glad someone submitted it to Hacker News for all to see.

Sorry, didn't really mean to imply it was intentional, i know these things get lost 'in the tubes' (although I did actually miss the source tagging the first time) - regardless, I stand by my post in support of Letters of note!

S'all good. :) Definitely not intentional, though. Also, added a link back to them.

Maybe there should be a mechanism that punishes / fines users who post links to stolen content and marks / blocks such sites.

In this case it seems the mis-attribution was unintentional.

Wow, Jagger was 26 when he wrote this. Writing one of America's top artists with such informality and confidence is amazing

Jagger was one of the most famous pop musicians of the day, and Andy Warhol has a reputation for being a freak. He never comes across as a very inaccessible guy.

Formality's best unlearned at as young an age as possible.

Jagger is also unusual among musicians in that he has an excellent grasp of business (including obviously the business of making popular music). Others might include Madonna, Sting... whatever you think of their music, those artists and a few others have done much better than the average rock star at maintaining control over their work and financial sanity.

another example is ZZ-Top.

Jagger was also one of America's top artists at the time.

America's?

A testament to success: when you can name your own price.

or jagger didn't care

From snippets I've read I have the impression Jagger was deeply involved in managing the band's finances, and damn good at it. I recall an interview with a musician who talked about negotiating how much he'd get paid for playing with the Stones on a tour (it wasn't very much). Jagger may have written "please write back saying how much money you would like", but notice that he didn't promise they'd pay it!

Yes, I somehow doubt Jagger expected to personally foot the bill.

I also visited both Mr. Cefalu's and Mr. Pasche's web sites and I have to tell you straight up, Mr. Cefalu's site is off the hook. He has done over 209 album covers and has some really incredible original album cover art and prints from the originals for sale. I highly recommend that everyone should check it out at: www.originalalbumcoverart.com I assure you it won't be a waste of your time. - Neo

For those who can access it, this BBC radio show has some great background on Warhol - http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00n3t6y/Archive_on_4_W...

It features Jerry Hall (Mick Jagger's Ex) interviewing David Bailey on his time making a documentary on Warhol.

the lesson: hire talent and get the hell out of the way.

also, get this record. it is a masterpiece.

I don't think Warhol did the Russian cover.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fe/Sticky-Fingers...

I just read both stories on -line at "RockPop" and according to both separate timelines it seems as though Mr. Cefalu's logo was done a good 3 months before Mr. Pasche's. - Neo

What album was this?

"Sticky Fingers", I think. The famous 'zipper cover'.

A bit of digging (http://www.iorr.org/talk/read.php?1,1138009,1138221) suggests it was originally meant for "Through the past, darkly", which was a hits album (released in 1969).

Warhol never recieved the materials in time and ended up doing the Sticky Fingers cover instead.

I believe Warhol also designed the famous Rolling Stones lips logo.

I thought the logo was Warhol too, but it was somebody else: http://www.johnpasche.com/

[edit: googling I see there's some controversy about whether it was Pasche or another artist named Ernie Cefalu. Either way, not Warhol]

I read both stories on-line at "RockPop" and according to their separate timelines, it looks like Mr. Cefalu was first with his logo by a good 3 months before Mr.Pasche. - Neo

Which means that there's a huge irony here. That cover is notorious for being the worst-of-all-time example of what it turns out Jagger was explicitly trying to avoid:

In my short sweet experience, the more complicated the format of the album, e.g. more complex than just pages or fold-out, the more fucked-up the reproduction and agonising the delays. But, having said that, I leave it in your capable hands to do what ever you want...

It's quite the detail that Warhol went ahead and did exactly the opposite. Of course, the fact that people are writing about it 30 years later just confirms what a genius at promotion he was. I heard an interview with a great album cover designer who mentioned that the zipper in the Sticky Fingers cover had the interesting property of shredding the albums that were sitting next to it. Scissors beats paper.

With that completely off-topic excursion (what, no "how is this HN" rants?) I hereby unplug the entire internet to get some goddamn work done. I wish PG had implemented that "I promise not to be on here for X hours and if I come back before then my user name will be red for all to see" feature. If you see me on here again today kindly tell me to GTFO...

I doubt it was sticky fingers because sticky fingers was not a hits album. More likely to be Hot Rocks?

That seems to be correct:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_Fingers#Cover

"Sticky Fingers", though, was not a "hits" album. (It was also two years after this letter, but I think that is a reasonable amount of time.)

Right, as a post above said, it was clearly _intended_ to be for "Through the Past, Darkly", but Warhol didn't get it in time.

Or maybe "Love You Live".