The results for the second poll are in.
In your opinion, who contributed most to the development of rock and roll?
Jimi Hendrix 33%
Janis Joplin 33%
Jim Morrison 33%
I am glad to see a three way tie, personally, because I think they each one contributed an equal share to how rock and roll developed. Sad they were never around to see what their contributions effects were.
7 comments:
You gotta think that the development of rock-n-roll was a gradual evolution. Starting in the mid-fifties with Bill Haley, Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry, and Elvis Presley, it was 3-chord blues-based structured songs -- influenced by several blues legends of the day, among them Buddy Guy, Muddy Waters, and Bo Diddley.
But if there was one pivotal moment in the evolution of rock-n-roll, it was the Beatles. Their emergence changed everything. The music, the hair, the clothing; they helped inspire the sexual revolution and the general acceptance of the drug culture. Also, the strong popularity of the Beatles just about sunk the careers of former fifties heart-throbs Frank Sinatra, Bobby Darin, Paul Anka, and others of their era - their style of music was suddenly out of vogue when the Beatles came on the scene.
The Beatles appearance on the Ed Sullivan show in February of 1964 kicked rock-n-roll into high gear. And the Beatles appearance on the Sullivan show inspired thousands of young boys at home watching on TV. Including future stars Tom Petty and Don Henley among them to pick up a guitar and let their hair grow. Yes, if you want to point to the one moment in time to an event that had the biggest influence on rock-n-roll, it was the emergence of The Beatles.
There have been several defining moments in the evolution of rock, and you certainly hit on one of the biggest ones, indeed. Hard to believe the Beatles career was so short when you consider the ever lasting impact they had on the genre.
I have to wonder where rock would have continued to go had the three I mentioned in this poll had lived. I am almost certain it wouldn't be where it is today, that much is sure to be true.
I also have wondered for many years if Jim Morrison did indeed die in Paris in 1971, or did he "fake" his death, as he had been talking about doing for some time. I'm almost certain, given all the circumstances surrounding his "death" that it is not him that is buried in his grave in France.
Do I believe he is still alive? No, too many years of substance abuse and heavy, heavy drinking surely did take their toll on him, but I tend to believe that Jim did indeed "fake" his death to escape the public eye.
Quote: "I have to wonder where rock would have continued to go had the three I mentioned in this poll had lived. I am almost certain it wouldn't be where it is today."
I kinda think music is exactly where it would be today regardless of whether Jimi, Janis, and Jim had survived their substance abuse.
Look back to the early to mid '90s with the emergence of hip-hop and rap in conjunction with the decline of rock-n-roll. I never thought new rock-n-roll would basically be dead, but it happened when rap and hip-hop took over with the young people. These newer rock-n-roll bands are just not writing the catchy tunes like the ones that were written in the '60s, '70s, and '80s. Eddie Van Halen was the last guitarist that innovated an all new guitar style. But that was in the early '80s. The new rock-n-roll artists of today just don't cut it like Eric Clapton, Carlos Santana, and others did in the past.
Did you know that the top selling artist of the first decade of this century was Eminem? But the 2nd highest selling artist was - get this - The Beatles. That tells you right there that the buying public is hungry for quality rock-n-roll that the new artists of today aren't providing.
While I don't agree with you, at least in some aspects, I do agree with you in others. It's impossible to say whether or not the trio would have totally redefined music as we know it, and we'll never know the answer to that question because they are all, indeed, gone. However, I do firmly believe that if they had survived and continued their musical contributions, who's to say what influences they might have created? A Jimi Hendrix who lived could have had such a profound impact on another guitar player's life that the other guitar player could have been influenced enough to have made his own impact, which would have forever changed the path modern rock music has taken.
Regarding hip hop and rap: An amazing impact this has had on our music. While I am not a fan by any stretch of the imagination, I have to say that both of these have contriubted greatly to the decline of musical quality today. When I was younger I would have never believed I would feel a generation gap where music is concerned, but it has happened. Maybe not musically, because I don't think either of those two genres are truly music in the true sense of the word. You can put about any kind of music on for me to listen to and I can find enjoyment in it, but I find no enjoyment or true musical contributions when it comes to rap or hip hop, either one.
Will true rock and roll music ever make it back with the arrival of someone new who can save it? That question remains to be answered.
If their contemporaries' contributions to music are any indication, the trio of Jimi, Janis, and Jim would not have totally redefined music as we know it.
As an example, the best guitarist of Hendrix' era, and still one of best today, Eric Clapton, did not redefine music. While Eric's career since Cream has been very good, his defining moments were with Cream's Jack Bruce & Ginger Baker. Eric's career since Cream has been up & down. Today he's transitioned more to the blues, and has had a big influence on younger guitarists, most notably Eddie Van Halen. But Van Halen developed his own style using the two-handed tapping method that no one else was successfully performing at the time. While Hendrix' very fast bluesy style coupled with extreme volume and tube distortion have influenced thousands of guitarists, it's Van Halen's two-handed tapping style that really took the speed of guitarists to another level.
Other guitarists of Jimi's era, Carlos Santana, Jimmy Page, Alvin Lee, Ritchie Blackmore, Brian May, Jeff Beck, Pete Townsend, and several others kept the rock-n-roll home fires burning, but none of them redefined music as we know it after their early glory years had passed. Very few of them picked up the two-handed tapping technique, but none of them has mastered that technique like Van Halen and Steve Vai have. Would have Hendrix copied the two-handed tapping technique? Who knows? But with a lot of the older guitarists, their ego got in the way - if they didn't develop the tapping technique on their own, they sure as heck didn't want to be seen as copying some young, hot guitar slinger.
If Hendrix had survived, his career would have basically followed a similar path of the guitarists mentioned above. Hendrix had stated in interviews that he preferred not singing, but that it was required of him if were to experience success as a solo rock artist. If Hendrix had lived, I can imagine him joining a successful band along the lines of Joe Walsh joining the Eagles. But then again he would've maintained a solo career as well. No, I cannot see Hendrix redefining music as we know it if he had survived into the seventies and beyond. Hendrix would have been very good, as Clapton is, but redefining? No.
Janis would've settled into a career as an obscure lounge/blues singer in her later years (think Etta James or Billie Holiday). And then there's Jim Morrison. He may have written a few more hit songs, but that would have been about it for him. Jim was more into new-age, off-the-wall poetry, which didn't lend itself well to commercial success. The way their careers were going, Janis & Jim would have eventually faded into the background with sporadic success along the lines of their contemporaries, Van Morrison and Joe Cocker.
While I respect your opinions, I do not agree with them in lots of ways, but then that is what makes us all individuals.
And alas, we will never know if either one of us right in our opinions, either, since all three of this truly talented individuals left us way too early in their young careers.
Thanks for commenting, as always, and glad to have you on board as one of my Faithful Few.
Yeah with Jimi, Janis, & Jim dead going on now 40 years, we'll never know for sure what, if any, mind-blowing contributions to music they would have made had they not overdosed on drugs, alcohol, and self-mutilation.
One thing's for sure: these rock bands today that pass themselves off as great would not have gotten a record contract back in the glory days of rock. Some of today's bands: Green Day, Black Eyed Peas, Kings of Leon, the songs they perform are just not that catchy. No one will mistake them for the Beatles or the Rolling Stones, either in record sales or in popularity.
There's just not that much memorable about today's rock bands. That's why classic rock radio stations are so popular. People hear a Kings of Leon song start up on the radio and immediately I hear, "Yuk, get rid of that crap!!!" and then change the radio station to classic rock. Why listen to Black Eyed Peas when the Beatles, Doors, Stones, Eagles, and Hendrix are just a touch of the radio button away?
Post a Comment