I've just finished reading John Cale's autobiography, What's Welsh For
Zen. Here's what he says: "I found the resurgence of interest in the
Velvet Underground, and in particular an attempt to see their influence
everywhere, fatuous. I don't think rock and roll is based on influence.
The notion of the father figure handing down the baton is a classical
music thing. In rock and roll, people sound similar, but they don't
influence anyone. Dylan didn't influence anyone. He created a cult of
personality. He's an individual entity and he bagged for himself a huge
parabola within the expression of the form we're talking about. One of
rock and roll's distinct, precious qualities is that individuality
counts for more than almost anything."
I reckon the evidence is against him much of the time, but it's a view.
Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: David Cantwell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 5:53 PM
To: passenger side
Subject: Re: Single Most Influential
At 01:49 AM 4/21/99 -0400, Tera wrote:
>Yes, I know what you mean - however...Crosby was influenced enough by
Jolson
>to forego his previously scheduled future to pursue a career in music.
>After Crosby began singing he took other influences into account and
thus
>established his own style. I'd say Jolson was the greatest influence
for
>Crosby as Jolson was responsible
>for kick-starting a career which may not have been otherwise.
Personally, I'd call this more inspiration than influence. Maybe i'm
unusual (watch it, now Tera!) but when I talk about musical influences I
tend to think not only the person or thing that inspired or motivated an
artist to create art in the first place but primarily the persons or
things
that actually influenced or helped shape the KIND of art that was made.
In
Crosby's case, that figure was largely Armstrong.
To use a far less significant example to illustrate this distinction,
the
writer who first got me thinking that, hey, I want to be a writer too
was,
no snickering, J.R.R. Tolkien. It would be a lie, however, if I said he
had
been an actual influence on the kind of writing i do or the way i do it.
>Well, it seems to me that Jolson was responsible for changing the way
in
>which music was presented.
as well as a whole lot else, as Tera articulated quite well. Like I say,
he
was hugely important. But my only point is that the things Jolsen did,
while significant, tended to end with him. Crosby came along, basically
refuted the Jolsen model--Crosby's singing and acting is diametrically
opposed to Jolsen's in nearly every way--and helped create (no
exageration)
the world and musical style we tend to think of as being "Twentieth
Century"--that is, the world we live in and the musical styles we still
use. Jolsen, by contrast, was merely the high point of a world we long
ago
left behind.
>Tera (and you still skirted around the issue of great female
>influentials...harummph! Can I hear a Ma Rainey or a Bessie Smith?)
You can hear a Bessie Smith, and I'll repeat Mahalia Jackson, and add
Aretha Franklin. All three would be "top ten most influential"
candidates.
But I'm standing pat with my Satchmo/King then JB/Bing Top 4. --david
cantwell
