| Subject: Re: British Singers |
Author:
David UK
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: Mon February 04, 2008 04:52:03
In reply to:
D.
's message, "Re: British Singers" on Fri February 01, 2008 11:25:43
"I thought the early Cliff Richard was very good ("Move It"- one of the greatest rockers ever) But, us Americans didn't get much exposure to British rock & roll, pre- Beatles."
Yes, it's a rockin song that one. I performed it myself only last night. Hank Marvin's lead playing makes it. Dates from 1959.
Likewise, before The Crickets came over in 1958, Brits were a bit disappointed with what they had seen. Bill Haley came across as old, overweight, and 'stodgy'. Then there was Jerry Lee Lewis who created scandal when it emerged he'd married his 13 year old cousin.
Buddy and The Crickets were the FIRST to emerge with any credit or great respect. Cochran and Vincent followed in 1960, and I have no doubt that had tragedy not struck, that music could have gone in a different direction than it did, with 2 or 3 years of 'teen idol' types, such as Fabian, Frankie Avalon, and a thousand others named 'Bobby'. I also think that Cochran and Vincent would have, at least somewhere down the line, have played with the Beatles. I believe they were scheduled to play at the Cavern in Liverpool, on their return from a trip back home.
Alas, they never made it. They were friendly with the forementioned Marty Wilde though, and his group, the Wildcats, backed them on their 1960 tour of the uk.
Simply, without Buddy Holly bringing his group over, and showing a small group combo could work, and create a good sound, British music could have been so different. I mean, the first acetate cut by the Beatles in a downbeat Liverpool studio was 'That'll Be The Day'. Lennon and McCartney heard Buddy and then said "Let's play".
People say "Before Elvis, there was nothing". I think Buddy may have said it himself. But before Buddy, Jerry, and Joe B came over, WE had nothing. I recently raised this point on another forum, over in the uk. I had ridiculous statements suggesting this group, and that group were the most influential, in the uk, with regards to being pioneers. Most dated from the 70's etc (laughable, really, IMO) and was shouted down when I stated that it was Buddy Holly and The Crickets who were the REAL influence on the uk scene. But it is true. I argued that the bands they were mentioning, ALL listed 'The Beatles' as a MAJOR influence. Now, we know that they were influenced by Buddy and The Crickets, so I think it proves my point. But would they admit it? No.
I think that too many in the uk 'buy into' the Busey movie, and have Buddy down as some 'hick' who did a few songs. As we know, he is far more than that. He was an innovator. He showed the world that no matter how you look, with glasses, etc, as long as you can rock, you CAN rock. The timespan doesn't help and the fact that we are left with less and less people who actually saw him first time around.
Bill Griggs has it spot on when he says that with any mention of Buddy, it gets the same reaction. "Everybody smiles".
Quite an epitaph.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
