Marc Wielage
2004-06-10 01:29:08 UTC
As I said elsewhere in the message thread "Suggested Compromise On The Pat
Boone Issue," there's a lot of complex, convoluted, and controversial
arguments you can make as far as what constitutes the _real_ rock & roll of
the 1950s, vs. the traditional pop music of that era.
I missed one of Michael Scarlotti's original message, which didn't make it to
my main ISP's server, but found it elsewhere. Below are my responses.
Ballads; "Moody River" is still solid Pop to me, mainly by virtue of the way
it's sung and by the arrangement.
To me, the song gets the classification; not the artist. I do this mainly
because there are clearly artists that jump back and forth to different
genres; for example, Bobby Darin could slide from rock & roll ("Splish
Splash") to pure pop ("Beyond the Sea") to country ("You're the Reason I'm
Living").
But I would agree that all of the artists you name are solidly rock & roll.
I tend to put the songs of artists like Chuck Berry, Fats Domino, and Little
Richard in a hybrid R&B/rock & roll category, since the songs had their
greatest success on R&B stations. But certainly none of them are Pop.
Maybe the opposite is also true: I propose that your definition of Pop is
too *wide*, and you're trying to shoehorn in any kind of uptempo Pop that
begins to show a little influence from rock & roll arrangements. To me,
those songs _still_ aren't rock & roll songs! At best, we're looking at a
sliding scale, where maybe the song is 10% or 20% rock & roll, and 80% pop --
and that's not nearly enough to put it firmly in the rock category.
By the way, for the record (no pun intended), I believe the first bona fide
charted rock & roll hit was Bill Haley's "Crazy Man Crazy," from the summer
of 1953. That song, followed a year later by his version of "Shake, Rattle &
Roll," influenced a lot of what happened afterwards. And all of that was
well before "Rock Around the Clock," where most historians date the
beginnings of modern rock & roll.
R&B, Soul, Disco, and even a dash of Country -- because all of those
different genres were prevalent on radio stations during the 1950s and 1960s.
True, rock music dominates oldies radio playlists, but it ain't all rock &
roll, not by a long shot.
"Pat Boone issue" thread, and I don't remember seeing a single person who
agreed with you that Pat Boone was a rock & roll artist, nor that he
performed rock & roll music. Again, my opinion is that he was a Pop artist
who performed cover versions of R&B songs, arranged and performed in such a
way to placate a (mostly) white audience. It's the watered-down arrangements
and Pat's own laid-back singing style that prevent them from being rock &
roll, in my book.
I readily agree that some ignorant 1950s journalists termed what Pat
performed in the 1950s to be "rock & roll music," but I think that's because
they used the term interchangeably with POP music. For older audiences in
the 1950s, I'm sure they were confused by the erosion of the great jazz, big
band, and vocal crooners of the 1940s. To the old fogies stuck in that era,
I'm sure a lot of the music of the mid-to-late 1950s sounded like a lot of
noise.
So the bottom line to me would be: Pat Boone was considered by some in the
1950s to be a rock & roll artist, but he doesn't fit that definition today.
Since I live in 2004, and not 1954, I go with the modern definition.
artist, with a capitol P. Never did anything even approaching rock, but I
think he had some terrific hits. "Blue Velvet" and "There! I've Said It
Again" are among my favorite songs, as a matter of fact. But they ain't rock
& roll. Vinton's songs get played by oldies stations because they were HITS
-- not because they're rock & roll. Just because a song is one doesn't mean
it's automatically the other.
least kind of a rock/pop/country hybrid that was more rock & roll than
anything else. I think most of what they did could be classified as either
"Country Rock" or "Rock Ballads," but again, the songs had the *attitude*
that I think Pat's songs were missing. The Everly's also wrote half-a-dozen
of their own hits, including some bona fide classics like "When Will I Be
Loved," and I think that's another point to distinguish them from artists
like Pat Boone.
I object to a lot of what the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame does, particularly in
omitting out some important early R&B pioneers, but at the same time, I
understand their attitude (without necessarily agreeing with it). They often
cite INFLUENCE as a major issue for including an artist, and I'd argue that
there were few other artists that tried to sound like Pat Boone, let alone
tried to sing the same songs he did. So I don't think he had a lot of
influence on other artists.
Again, don't misunderstand me: Pat's a huge part of Pop music history, and
is still in the top dozen or so artists of all time (in terms of American
BILLBOARD chart success). But that doesn't make his music rock & roll, and
again, "Pop" is not an insult. Sinatra was almost certainly one of the
greatest singers of the last century, and he was Pop as well (with some
sidelines into jazz), and he was incredibly influential -- still is. But he
doesn't belong in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, either.
hearing Pat Boone sing "Tutti Frutti," "Ain't That a Shame," or "Long Tall
Sally" is a weird, out-of-body experience. I personally never got the
feeling Pat even *liked* singing those songs; I got the impression he was
more or less forced to sing them by the Dot execs who wanted more hits.
But at the same time, I have no problem enjoying the straight-ahead Pop hits
of the 1950s. We talked before about Patti Page; her big hits, like
"Detour," "Mockingbird Hill," "Tennessee Waltz," and "Cross Over the Bridge"
are dynamite songs, ones I have no problem listening to, and I'd classify all
of them as being 1950s classics. I wouldn't dismiss any of those as "bland"
or "square" at all. Same with some of
Johnnie Ray, though... well, we'll leave that for another argument. :-)
--MFW
Boone Issue," there's a lot of complex, convoluted, and controversial
arguments you can make as far as what constitutes the _real_ rock & roll of
the 1950s, vs. the traditional pop music of that era.
I missed one of Michael Scarlotti's original message, which didn't make it to
my main ISP's server, but found it elsewhere. Below are my responses.
But do you agree that MOODY RIVER is at least as close (especially in
attitude) to being a r'n'r song as any of these?
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<
As close to "Last Kiss" or "Teen Angel"? No. To me, both of those are Rockattitude) to being a r'n'r song as any of these?
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<
Ballads; "Moody River" is still solid Pop to me, mainly by virtue of the way
it's sung and by the arrangement.
I'm getting the impression that your definition of r'n'r is a very
narrow one -- corresponding to what I usually refer to as "r'n'r
proper" (Bill Haley, Elvis, Buddy Holly, Jerry Lee Lewis, Chuck Berry,
and similar artists from the mid-to-late 50s).
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<
I try not to characterize everything the ARTIST does as one particular genre.narrow one -- corresponding to what I usually refer to as "r'n'r
proper" (Bill Haley, Elvis, Buddy Holly, Jerry Lee Lewis, Chuck Berry,
and similar artists from the mid-to-late 50s).
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<
To me, the song gets the classification; not the artist. I do this mainly
because there are clearly artists that jump back and forth to different
genres; for example, Bobby Darin could slide from rock & roll ("Splish
Splash") to pure pop ("Beyond the Sea") to country ("You're the Reason I'm
Living").
But I would agree that all of the artists you name are solidly rock & roll.
I tend to put the songs of artists like Chuck Berry, Fats Domino, and Little
Richard in a hybrid R&B/rock & roll category, since the songs had their
greatest success on R&B stations. But certainly none of them are Pop.
Maybe the opposite is also true: I propose that your definition of Pop is
too *wide*, and you're trying to shoehorn in any kind of uptempo Pop that
begins to show a little influence from rock & roll arrangements. To me,
those songs _still_ aren't rock & roll songs! At best, we're looking at a
sliding scale, where maybe the song is 10% or 20% rock & roll, and 80% pop --
and that's not nearly enough to put it firmly in the rock category.
By the way, for the record (no pun intended), I believe the first bona fide
charted rock & roll hit was Bill Haley's "Crazy Man Crazy," from the summer
of 1953. That song, followed a year later by his version of "Shake, Rattle &
Roll," influenced a lot of what happened afterwards. And all of that was
well before "Rock Around the Clock," where most historians date the
beginnings of modern rock & roll.
I happen to like all of the "dead teen" songs cited above (especially
PATCHES), and first heard each of them on ... a r'n'r oldies station.
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<
Whoa! Oldies stations do NOT just play rock & roll. They play tons of Pop,PATCHES), and first heard each of them on ... a r'n'r oldies station.
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<
R&B, Soul, Disco, and even a dash of Country -- because all of those
different genres were prevalent on radio stations during the 1950s and 1960s.
True, rock music dominates oldies radio playlists, but it ain't all rock &
roll, not by a long shot.
Pat Boone might not have ever been what one would term a "hard rocker"
...but he was still an important r'n'r singer of his time and
deserves to be recognized as such.
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<
I again ask: by whose definition? I just went through 30 messages in the...but he was still an important r'n'r singer of his time and
deserves to be recognized as such.
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<
"Pat Boone issue" thread, and I don't remember seeing a single person who
agreed with you that Pat Boone was a rock & roll artist, nor that he
performed rock & roll music. Again, my opinion is that he was a Pop artist
who performed cover versions of R&B songs, arranged and performed in such a
way to placate a (mostly) white audience. It's the watered-down arrangements
and Pat's own laid-back singing style that prevent them from being rock &
roll, in my book.
I readily agree that some ignorant 1950s journalists termed what Pat
performed in the 1950s to be "rock & roll music," but I think that's because
they used the term interchangeably with POP music. For older audiences in
the 1950s, I'm sure they were confused by the erosion of the great jazz, big
band, and vocal crooners of the 1940s. To the old fogies stuck in that era,
I'm sure a lot of the music of the mid-to-late 1950s sounded like a lot of
noise.
So the bottom line to me would be: Pat Boone was considered by some in the
1950s to be a rock & roll artist, but he doesn't fit that definition today.
Since I live in 2004, and not 1954, I go with the modern definition.
Agreed. I don't hear any either. But many oldies "r'n'r" stations
will play it before they'll play a record by Pat Boone -- and compared
to Bobby Vinton Pat Boone is hard rock with a capital R.
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<
I'll agree only in that I also consider Bobby Vinton to be a straight-up Popwill play it before they'll play a record by Pat Boone -- and compared
to Bobby Vinton Pat Boone is hard rock with a capital R.
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<
artist, with a capitol P. Never did anything even approaching rock, but I
think he had some terrific hits. "Blue Velvet" and "There! I've Said It
Again" are among my favorite songs, as a matter of fact. But they ain't rock
& roll. Vinton's songs get played by oldies stations because they were HITS
-- not because they're rock & roll. Just because a song is one doesn't mean
it's automatically the other.
Agreed. And if the Everly's hybrid records can get them in the r'n'r
Hall of Fame, then Pat Boone's hybrid records should get him in as
well.
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<
I don't agree. To me, the Everly's were doing bonafide rockabilly, or atHall of Fame, then Pat Boone's hybrid records should get him in as
well.
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<
least kind of a rock/pop/country hybrid that was more rock & roll than
anything else. I think most of what they did could be classified as either
"Country Rock" or "Rock Ballads," but again, the songs had the *attitude*
that I think Pat's songs were missing. The Everly's also wrote half-a-dozen
of their own hits, including some bona fide classics like "When Will I Be
Loved," and I think that's another point to distinguish them from artists
like Pat Boone.
I object to a lot of what the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame does, particularly in
omitting out some important early R&B pioneers, but at the same time, I
understand their attitude (without necessarily agreeing with it). They often
cite INFLUENCE as a major issue for including an artist, and I'd argue that
there were few other artists that tried to sound like Pat Boone, let alone
tried to sing the same songs he did. So I don't think he had a lot of
influence on other artists.
Again, don't misunderstand me: Pat's a huge part of Pop music history, and
is still in the top dozen or so artists of all time (in terms of American
BILLBOARD chart success). But that doesn't make his music rock & roll, and
again, "Pop" is not an insult. Sinatra was almost certainly one of the
greatest singers of the last century, and he was Pop as well (with some
sidelines into jazz), and he was incredibly influential -- still is. But he
doesn't belong in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, either.
But the thing that gets me going isn't so much that it's being
forgotten (I figure that's inevitable), as when critics/historians
either come out and directly trash it, or dismiss it with words like
"bland," "whitebread," "square," and so on.
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<
Sometimes that's deserved, but sometimes it isn't. You gotta admit, though,forgotten (I figure that's inevitable), as when critics/historians
either come out and directly trash it, or dismiss it with words like
"bland," "whitebread," "square," and so on.
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<
hearing Pat Boone sing "Tutti Frutti," "Ain't That a Shame," or "Long Tall
Sally" is a weird, out-of-body experience. I personally never got the
feeling Pat even *liked* singing those songs; I got the impression he was
more or less forced to sing them by the Dot execs who wanted more hits.
But at the same time, I have no problem enjoying the straight-ahead Pop hits
of the 1950s. We talked before about Patti Page; her big hits, like
"Detour," "Mockingbird Hill," "Tennessee Waltz," and "Cross Over the Bridge"
are dynamite songs, ones I have no problem listening to, and I'd classify all
of them as being 1950s classics. I wouldn't dismiss any of those as "bland"
or "square" at all. Same with some of
Johnnie Ray, though... well, we'll leave that for another argument. :-)
--MFW