Re: Uppity Rock Stars

["Mark R. Leaman" <mleaman@sccoast.net>]

> rock stars feeling they have to write beyond the three-minute single.  One
> of his statements is that "Tommy" will soon be forgotten while "My
> Generation" will live forever.

Brian:

While I feel MG has always been more important in the "grand scheme" of
Rock music, I don't know that Davies is correct here. I think they will
stand fairly equally in the long run as two examples of the band's
career. Hopefully QUAD will outshine them both!
Then again, if one were to consider The Kinks' career they're much more
well known for the early singles than for their (IMHO) better works,
like ARTHUR and MUSWELL HILLBILLIES. So it might simply be his
perspective.

> This is rather a sore point with me.  I feel that the basis of this is an
> ingrained prejudice that WORKING CLASS ROCK STARS SHOULD STAY IN THEIR
> PLACE.

Better yet, why have "classes" at all. Then again, we Americans do tend
to cross or disregard such lines.

> >Rock is not, never was,
> >and never will be art.  Rock music is essentially just a very long lasting
> >fad.

McGoo:

Are you a Who fan, writing this? It sounds like something Mitch Miller
said back in the early `60's. Mitch who? Yeah, he used to have a
national TV show and people actually respected his opinion on such
things.
TOMMY & QUAD are certainly Art, and as legitimate as any other form. I
can think of many plays and paintings with less to say than Townshend's
songs. His Art is a form of expression from the common man, not from
some high-minded "artist" who "has visions beyond the common man." IMHO
this makes it MORE legitimate, not less.

> But here's the question that's being begged.  Why is rock this way?

It's not all like this, Brian.

> Because the fans and critics wouldn't let it be anything more and because
> almost all rock musicians weren't capable of anything more, or because the
> form of rock music itself meant it couldn't be more?

It's because it's an "anyone can join" club which feeds on itself as a
popular medium (much like television). While there are Ted Nugents out
there, the Pete Townshends will never get the respect they deserve.
However, it's my belief that down the line when those not intimately
involved look back they will see it all as it is, not as it appears at
the moment. Yes, my friend, there will be a time when Kansas, Journey,
Genesis w/Collins, Fleetwood Mac w/o Peter Green, and Styx will be
forgotten. Lynyrd Skynyrd too, I hope...
Rock is hardly unique as a medium with 90% crap. Read any books lately?
But that does not dilute the medium as Art. Let's say Rock is like
Science Fiction, another form with little respect and many cheap
meaningless offerings. Do you think because Plan 9 From Outer Space is
crap that 2001 will be considered crap as well? Of course not!

>  First of all there ARE too many of them. Just yesterday I listened to
> to Ian Anderson of Tull going on about how great THEY were

Derick:

There's no doubt Tull had great moments, but it's been my experience
when the artist has to tell people how great there are...they usually
aren't that great. Townshend, as you will have noticed, tends to
downplay The Who's place in Rock history...

-- 

 "I'd like to buy her (Mary Bono) some skis."
               Howard Stern, commenting on the impeachment

                      Cheers                ML