Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Seriously, you're trying to claim that Elvis Costello had any notable influence on The Ramones, John Wesley Harding, and Linda Ronstadt, who had already hit the peak of their careers by the time Elvis Costello released his first single?
That's very weird British revisionism.
It's actually evolution. Music is dynamic (unless you're Boston), and changes as artists hear other artists and influences. This is a very basic concept. Linda Ronstadt, who's covered at least a half dozen Elvis Costello songs, has said herself that listening to his music changed how she approached hers. Yes, she was a successful artist before Elvis Costello began recording, but if you listen to her music it's plain to see and hear how her music evolved with the advent of punk and new wave.
Quote:
That's not to say that none of these British bands have influenced any American bands, but you're listing these bands as influences with the implication that this proves that they were more influential than any American artists of their time, that could be listed as contemporaries.
Actually, you're erroneously inferring the "more influential" part. I can tell you that the Clash and the Sex Pistols were an influence on U.S. bands such as R.E.M. because I've heard the band members talk about their influences, listened to the songs they've covered.
Quote:
And since artists take inspiration from a range of influences, including from bands that might only be locally popular, this particular point of yours just comes across as ridiculous and ignorant.
Well, since you just paraphrased what I wrote, I guess I'm not that ridiculous and ignorant after all, am I?
LMAO ...
Quote:
No one said British bands and musicians weren't popular, or relatively numerous. The point of dispute was people like you claiming American bands and musicians weren't just as, if not more popular, influential, and/or numerous. A claim that is utterly ridiculous, and pointedly false.
Really, your emotional attachment to this topic is affecting your reading comprehension. The fact that British artists were influential to US artists does not mean that US artists were not influential as well. I claimed nothing to the contrary.
Quote:
Why do you hate US artists so much? You seem positively infuriated at any example of American influence and prolificness in music, it kind of makes you look irrational.
Now who's looking ignorant and ridiculous (and irrational)? Where have I said I "hate US artists so much"? As a matter of fact, quite a few of my favorite artists are from the US. I've mentioned a few of them in this very thread, but why don't you check through my posts in this forum? That way you can see for yourself that your assumptions are invalid.
there's nothing "sanitized" about Pat Boone cover versions.
Can someone give me a Homer Simpson "D'oh!"?
Quote:
The Beatles didn't become popular in the US until their appearance on the Ed Sullivan show. They were the lone British band releasing actually original music.
Ummmm ... no.
Quote:
The Who and The Kinks were practically one-hit-wonders as far as the 1960s is concerned.
Ummmmm ... no.
Quote:
The British Invasion bands you're talking about literally covered American songs and copied American styles identically.
They didn't cover American songs "identically", and that's the point. The Who's cover of "Young Man Blues" sounds nothing like Mose Allison's original. The Stones covered Muddy Waters, but played his songs at a faster tempo. British bands took that American music, made it their own, and gave it back to us both in the form of the covers you keep yammering about, and in the form of original music influenced by those US artists.
Quote:
The Blues came about as a combination of African American and European American folkways in the US south around the time of the Civil War.
So ... You're saying the blues was influenced by African and European folk music (most notably English, Irish and Scotch folk music)? Whaddaya know ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnazzyB
Dude, I think EVERYONE who has responded to you would agree with you on THAT.
To answer the question: " Is it just me, or does it seem that there's a pro-British/anti-American theme in a lot of Rock music discourse?"
I think that's the OP's perception. Which they are entitled to. However, based on the past 5 pages. I think that perception is also fueled by their own "'murica!!!!" tones.
These type of debates are like EV/ICE, Mac/PC, iOS/Android, and more... most people don't care. Or aren't THAT invested in it. However, the zealots are the ones that tend to fuel that fire. You have a PC or a Mac and you just use it - but here comes someone who either has an ax to grind, or got annoyed by a zealot in the past and immediate go on the offensive about YOUR choice..... rinse and repeat.
My favorite band is Van Halen. I consider them an arena rock band like other's in the 70's (Foreigner, Journey, Bad Company, Genesis, etc.). Their music is pretty much as American as it can be. But if you want to get down to the nitty gritty.... the brothers are Dutch-American. And one of Alex's biggest influences? Dave Clark of Dave Clark Five.
So.... what does that mean? Absolutely nothing. Other than they were AWESOME.
At the end of the day - this is like arguing over blue cars vs. red cars.
My favorite band is Van Halen. I consider them an arena rock band like other's in the 70's (Foreigner, Journey, Bad Company, Genesis, etc.). Their music is pretty much as American as it can be. But if you want to get down to the nitty gritty.... the brothers are Dutch-American. And one of Alex's biggest influences? Dave Clark of Dave Clark Five.
You probably know this already, but Eddie was a huge fan of Roy Clark.
They didn't cover American songs "identically", and that's the point. The Who's cover of "Young Man Blues" sounds nothing like Mose Allison's original. The Stones covered Muddy Waters, but played his songs at a faster tempo. British bands took that American music, made it their own, and gave it back to us both in the form of the covers you keep yammering about, and in the form of original music influenced by those US artists.
So ... You're saying the blues was influenced by African and European folk music (most notably English, Irish and Scotch folk music)? Whaddaya know ...
The Sonics, The Doors, and The Beach Boys "refined music" a lot more than The Beatles did.
The Beatles compressed more innovation into their brief, meteoric career than any contemporary American rock bands that outlasted them. Your claim above makes your entire argument a joke.
You were the one who started putting down people's tastes, if you need to be reminded.
Rock is a tiny sliver of what I listen to. I really don't care enough to sustain an argument about it. There is so much other music.
You keep equivocating on whether you want to compare British rock and American rock vs. comparing British popular music and American popular music overall. I would not want to try to make the case that any decade of British popular music was better than American popular music, but when it comes to rock, it's a different matter.
Last edited by ApartmentNomad; 09-08-2022 at 03:41 PM..
Acts like The Beatles and The Rolling Stones hardly have more name recognition than the likes of Elvis and The Beach Boys.
I'll give you Elvis, but do you seriously think the Beach Boys are as well known globally as either the Beatles or the Rolling Stones? That is what is insane.
To answer the question: " Is it just me, or does it seem that there's a pro-British/anti-American theme in a lot of Rock music discourse?"
I think that's the OP's perception. Which they are entitled to. However, based on the past 5 pages. I think that perception is also fueled by their own "'murica!!!!" tones.
These type of debates are like EV/ICE, Mac/PC, iOS/Android, and more... most people don't care. Or aren't THAT invested in it. However, the zealots are the ones that tend to fuel that fire. You have a PC or a Mac and you just use it - but here comes someone who either has an ax to grind, or got annoyed by a zealot in the past and immediate go on the offensive about YOUR choice..... rinse and repeat.
My favorite band is Van Halen. I consider them an arena rock band like other's in the 70's (Foreigner, Journey, Bad Company, Genesis, etc.). Their music is pretty much as American as it can be. But if you want to get down to the nitty gritty.... the brothers are Dutch-American. And one of Alex's biggest influences? Dave Clark of Dave Clark Five.
So.... what does that mean? Absolutely nothing. Other than they were AWESOME.
At the end of the day - this is like arguing over blue cars vs. red cars.
The Dave Clark Five are famous for American cover songs and song written by Americans.
The Beatles compressed more innovation into their brief, meteoric career than any contemporary American rock bands that outlasted them. Your claim above makes your entire argument a joke.
Can you describe what they innovated? No. It doesn't seem so. Because they didn't.
A ridiculously outrageous and redundant point when you consider the fact that they still covered and copied American musical styles. Their transitions into different styles - Psychedelic, for example - came after the explosion of psychedelic music and culture on the American west coast, which was yet another American cultural trend that "invaded" Britain at the time.
That's not mentioning that Britain was largely remade in the American cultural image from the 1940s. Mod, subcultures like rockers, teddy boys, the skiffle craze, British pop art, the Cunard Yanks that gave rise to the Beatles, these were all inspired by an American cultural obsession in the UK.
You're defining the points of competition in ridiculously narrow terms now - "than any contemporary American rock band that outlasted them".
Whether a given American band has outlasted them or not is irrelevant, there are American bands that were short-lived, or unpopular, and innovated a lot more than they did. This is another case of absurd Beatles fandom overcoming rationality.
So that claim makes YOUR entire argument a joke.
The Beach Boys have lasted for practically as long - and they were at least as original. Ditto Bob Dylan. Come on. Let's stop being silly.
Quote:
You keep equivocating on whether you want to compare British rock and American rock vs. comparing British popular music and American popular music overall.
"Keep equivocating" - not a proper use of vocabulary, in the context of that sentence. One.
Two, rock music is a form of popular music, and other popular music genres are related to rock music.
Quote:
I would not want to try to make the case that any decade of British popular music was better than American popular music, but when it comes to rock, it's a different matter.
That's because there have been some significant British rock acts - whereas there have been next to no significant British Jazz or Hip Hop acts.
The fact that Britain produced some major bands doesn't negate the reality of American predominance in the rock music space, decade to decade.
You had some major British successes in America, per decade - The Beatles, The Rolling Stones in the 60s, and, after the fact, Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd, in the 70s. You had broader British success in pop music during the 80s. My issue is that people on the internet are deliberately downplaying the American role in the global music scene (post-1960, when everyone around the world was playing their own versions of American styles anyways) to establish a ridiculously anglocentric narrative. It's even more absurd because it's the American music scene that largely establishes success for various British bands.
No one is saying there weren't successful British bands. No one is saying Britain hasn't produced a lot of good music. No one was even saying The Beatles or other British acts haven't been influential in some respects. I'm arguing against the anti-American insecurity of those online who are constantly proclaiming their favoritism for British music over American music, because this is the only context in which you see national music scenes competing - British people (or Anglophiles) nationalizing their music scene, and smearing or insulting the American one, exclusively.
This kind of anti-American discourse in regards to rock music seems like it was enhanced with the 1990s reduction of British activity in the rock music space, which came at a time when American rock music was diversifying, enjoying massive popularity, at home and abroad, and was as strong as ever. This resulted in massive amounts of anti-American resentment in the British music industry, which resulted in Britain aggressively, overzealously marketing any band of theirs, with eyes on the American market. It's largely this era that seems to have established the tradition of boosting any and every British band or artist, which looks conspicuous when you consider the American roots of "British music" (from rock n roll, to "northern soul", to "drill"), and how "un-nationalist" the American music industry, and fans of American cultural products, are.
Last edited by blanketstate; 09-08-2022 at 08:12 PM..
The Dave Clark Five are famous for American cover songs and song written by Americans.
Dave Clark and Mike Smith, or Dave Clark and other members of the band, were the principal songwriters for the Dave Clark Five.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
