Sjoerd Bakker wrote:
> On 6 Apr 2006 15:18:19 -0700, darrint68@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
>
>>DGDevin wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Spleen Merchant" <waterboy1019@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>news:ceda32d49c89hg47vcsa67bkv2q9aq9hh7@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>>
>>>>I'll never understand what made Elvis the "King". He didn't write his
>>>>own songs, wasn't a real great singer, could barely play guitar, and
>>>>couldn't act to save his life. Towards the end, he was nothing more
>>>>than a Vegas show act. He was mediocre, at best.
>>>>I guess he just shook his hips at just the right time. He could hardly
>>>>be classified as a "rock" musician.
>>>
>>>Some truth there, he appeared at the right time and helped kick open
the
>>>door, people who appear at those turning points do tend to be
remembered.
>>>However, let's be fair, there were *no* rock musicians when Elvis came
>>>along, and there really wouldn't be any until well into the sixties.
And
>>>Elvis wasn't just lucky, he was a skilled showman and at least for
awhile
>>>delivered some cool music, even if later it got kind of smaltzy.
>>
>>Speaking of bizarre manifestos, when did you begin listening to music?
>>Yesterday?eh The most im****tant decade in rock 'n' roll was from the
>>'50s! DOH! Such founding fathers as Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry, Jerry Lee
>>Lewis, Little Richard, Bill Haley & The Coments, Fats Domino, Carl
>>Perkins, etc. Why else did Fab and every other British act cover a half
>>a gazillion of their songs? Like it or not, the '50s shall forever be
>>the "true" decade in rock 'n' roll. While Elvis may have had a greater
>>impact on pop culture, Buddy Holly was the one with true talent. One of
>>the first to produce, write, and perform his own music.
>
>
> He was pretty boring though, IMO. Chuck Berry would have been a better
> example as a talented singer/songwriter and he was far more
> influential than Buddy Holly.
>
Chuck was great and influential, but more so than Buddy? I think not:
especcially since the Beatles (most obviously especially Paul) were
heavily influenced by his brand of melodic rock, and - via the Beatles -
he influenced the course of pop ever since. He was also one of the first
rockers to grab control of his record production, and to demand a high
standard in the studio. He died young, and - it seems to me - had just
begun to fully explore the limits of rock and pop. Boring? Hell no!
dmh
|
