uTopianTurtleTop

DEFENDING THE THESIS PROPOSAL

A friend forwarded a link to my post on the myth that blues + country = rock and roll, to a subscription e-mail list of serious roots music fans, critics, and scholars. The gathered professors of roots music -- including contributors to the leading roots music mag, No Depression, and one of the authors of a book on "Country Music's 500 Greatest Singles" -- raised the following valid objections to my oversimplified reaction to the oversimplified blues-country equation.

My posts falsely implied that (black) blues and gospel musicians weren't listening to (white) country and (white and black) pop musicians. Not my intention to imply that, but I can see how someone could think I meant to.

More specifically, people pointed out that I was wrong say that country didn't have any discernable influence on Fats Domino. They cited country songs in his repertoire, which is interesting and considerable but in itself inconclusive evidence -- Tony Bennett and Louis Armstrong recorded Hank Williams songs too, and I wouldn't say that their musical styles were notably influenced by country. But then I found 2 quotes in Robert Palmer's book "Rock & Roll, an unruly history." First, Fats Domino scored more '50s hits than any other rocker besides Elvis. Second, his bandleader, record producer, and co-songwriter, Dave Bartholomew, "believes an important element in Fats Domino's broad appeal was that while he played boogie woogie and blues, he sang more like a country and western artist." This is conclusive evidence.

Carl Wilson answered my original question -- how did the "blues + country" myth represent an improvement in understanding? Easy, said Carl -- it was replacing an even more simplistic myth that "the blues had a baby and they named it rock and roll." Good point; still, more nuanced versions of the story were in circulation at the time people started pushing the blues + country myth.

Glad to get the feedback. And exciting (if sometimes embarrassingly humbling) to get schooled!

I have at hand two sources for the blues + country myth. "The Rock Story, The Names, The Faces, The Sound That Turned On A Generation," By Rolling Stone Editor Jerry Hopkins, from 1970 begins with this sentence: "The roots are in blues and country."

The doubly-datedly titled "Rock Revolution, From Elvis To Elton -- The Story Of Rock And Roll," By The Editors Of CREEM Magazine, from 1976, begins with these sentences: "The origins of rock 'n' roll have been repeated so often it sounds like a litany. Black blues and white country music were the basis of rock 'n' roll."

So by 1976 the myth was well established. The origin of the myth is unknown to me, but "Rolling Stone" magazine was involved in its dissemination, if not its creation.

Reading past their openings, both books make it clear that they are going to include gospel in the story, but only as a subset of "blues." Many people subscribe to the notion; I think it muddles understanding. While influence has gone both ways, and both fields of music share roots in 19th century African American spirituals, gospel has always had rhythms, solo vocal styles, duo vocal styles, group vocal styles, and typical instrumentation recognizably distinct from those of the blues. For example, piano plus organ is rare in blues, but not in gospel, or in rock and soul. The interweaving piano, organ, and electric guitar on Sister Rosetta Tharpe's magnificent 1956 album "Gospel Train" influened Bob Dylan's studio band of 1965 as much as it did the mid '60s music of Aretha Franklin.

And sometimes when I lather myself up about all this I'm in danger of forgetting that the nub of it all is to -- listen to the music!