|
Post by sayne on Jan 20, 2016 0:28:58 GMT -5
Not to be morbid or trivial, but it does seem that the 60s/70s generation pop/rock stars are falling quickly. Although all are a loss, not all are of equal impact culturally. For me, Natalie Cole, Scott Weiland, and Gerry Rafferty were not as meaningful as Chris Squire, Lemmy, and David Bowie. For me, David Bowie was the biggest loss of recency. Not being a post-Hotel California Eagles fan, Glenn Frey's passing was merely a current event for me.
Now, here's where this could get morbid. Of the pop/rock people still around today that are impactful to you, rank them based on how you would feel and how the world would react when they leave us. Here's my top 10:
Paul McCartney Ringo Bob Dylan Aretha Franklin Keith Richards Mick Jagger Prince Brian Wilson Bruce Springsteen Eric Clapton Jimmy Page
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Jan 20, 2016 1:36:27 GMT -5
That's pretty morbid. I'll play.
You can look as this as how it will affect the world or how it will feel personally. I'm going to do my best to consider both. Some of these are just painful. I personally can't relate to the loss. Bowie affected me more than Frey. Bowie painted the field in pop/rock music. Frey just played in that field.
The loss of Stevie Wonder would be a larger loss to me and I think the culture at large, than about half the folks on your list.
Aretha Franklin - A great soul/gospel singer. I'm not that big of her style of music. I suspect her loss would be a bigger loss in that sect of music lovers than what I can relate to. I might substitute Diana Ross and submit that she would be the bigger impact to the population in general. Soul/Motown - Smokie Robinson.
These five, I don't relate to on the same level as say, David Bowie, so it's hard to rate their loss on cultural impact. So I'll just put them in order of how I rate them.
10.Bruce Springsteen 9. Prince 8. Eric Clapton 7. Brian Wilson 6. Keith Richards
The ones below I think raise to the level of higher impact.
5. Jimmy Page - Thinking mostly about the younger generation, the older folks expect people to die, Led Zeppelin are right under the Beatle when raking all time greatest bands. Exchange Plant's name here, same thing, this is a major loss.
4. Mick Jagger - Mick is the heart and soul of the Stones. More so than any of the Beatles, he was the front man. He was the Stones. The Stones stayed at the top of the Pop/Rock charts from the early 60s to the mid 90's. They remain at the top of concert grossing tours today. 3. Bob Dylan - Bob is so many things to so many people. The The Times They Are A'Changin' Bob Dylan wins out. This was the spark that started the change that was the sixties.
2. Ringo Starr - I think Ringo, as much or more than Paul, is linked to the Ed Sullivan era Beatles. Losing him would be the last link to Beatlemania. Paul is 70's era or even 80's up to now, as much as 60s. When Ringo goes, even though he is a current starr, he is still that Beatle shaking his head behind the drums. This'll be a much bigger event than Bowie.
1. Paul McCartney - I can't imagine. We might as well rank him with my family members (those left), close friends and the girl I love. It would be a tremendous hole. This would be more personal. Cultural impact doesn't come into play.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jan 20, 2016 10:59:17 GMT -5
Debjorgo, I really liked your observation on Ringo's future passing(many years from now). Ringo is forever associated with Beatlemania for better or worse(because his solo career which started pretty hot ultimately tanked). YOu are right, when I think of Ringo I think of Ed Sullivan or AHDN! I don't think of dreadful 1982 Ringo or whatever. You are also right on Paul, because of his incredible solo career including reaching the Top of the Rockpile around 1976/1977, we think of Paul as much more than one of the chief Beatles. I disagree though with your statement on Mick Jagger being the heart and soul of the Stones! I'd say that is squarely Keith with Mick being the brains although that is also unfair to Keith! Keith is no slouch in terms of the Stones. But Keith is a vampire and will never die so we won't have to worry about what effect his passing will have! He'll never pass! Glen Frey's death is impacting my life more than David Bowie's death because I am a white, 53 year old male from Indiana(growing up in suburban sprawl) where The Eagles were much more likely to be played on the radios or tape decks in the vehicles I was riding in than Bowie would have been from 1975 to 1985 although Bowie caught fire in my world by 1983 or 1984. I can measure my observation on this by the number of texts, telephone calls and Facebook messages I have gotten over Glenn Frey's death versus Bowie's. I am not judging that or saying it is good or bad. Many of my high school friends have contacted me about fond memories of doing wild things as kids while The Eagles provided a soundtrack to our young lives! In fact, I have not been contacted by so many people over a Rocker's death since John Lennon's murder! In terms of impact, I can't really rank them but only give rambling thoughts. I think Paul's, Ringo's and Bob Dylan's deaths will be the biggest in terms of media coverage and general anguish among Pop Music fans because Paul and Ringo are what's left of The Beatles and Dylan is just Dylan although I could be wrong on that. Stevie Wonder's death will be huge in both the ebony and ivory communities as segregated sadly as they still can be. There are others, I'll be floored for Springsteen's death and others like Tom Petty. I think that we can agree that Elvis' and John Lennon's deaths were the benchmark of Rocker's deaths in terms of cultural impact as shocking as many others were like Jimi, Janis, Jim Morrison, Keith Moon, Buddy Holly, etc. Elvis and John(and those I just mentioned) died way too soon. Their deaths were bound to be high impact. From here on out, famous Rockers from the 1950's, 1960's and 1970's will start dropping like flies from old age and illness related to such and we need to be prepared for that. We never are though just as deaths in our families always bite us in the ass. Hmm, how 'bout that NFL Play-Offs!?
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Jan 20, 2016 14:22:29 GMT -5
I disagree though with your statement on Mick Jagger being the heart and soul of the Stones! I'd say that is squarely Keith with Mick being the brains although that is also unfair to Keith! Keith is no slouch in terms of the Stones. But Keith is a vampire and will never die so we won't have to worry about what effect his passing will have! He'll never pass! I don't mean that at all in terms of the band and the music. I'm speaking in regards to how the public and general media think of them. Most people know who Jagger is (if not for that Maroon 5 song), Keith, not as much. It would probably depend on who went first too. If Mick went first, that would be the end of the Stones. Keith's death later probably wouldn't impact as much. If he goes first, he would get the full treatment. Now if they could go out together...
|
|
kc
Beatle Freak
Posts: 1,085
|
Post by kc on Jan 20, 2016 19:35:42 GMT -5
As a huge Beatles and Paul McCartney fan it will be his eventual death that primarily affects me. Obviously, coming from a Beatles’ board poster, no revelation there. When he goes I suspect the dream really will be over for me though. I say this not just because of the obvious point (IMO) that McCartney was one of the two most important members of the Beatles (the greatest act in the global history of popular music IMO), but because he still regularly releases new music, and I continue to like a lot of it. I suppose it would be true that with his accumulation of unreleased material a continuing series of technically first releases would appear in the years following his demise. That would satisfy me to some degree, but it wouldn’t compare to the thrill I get when listening to a genuinely new Paul McCartney studio album for the first time. I will go as far as to say that his death would be the only one from the list of current artists which would affect me on a significant emotional level.
If I had to make a personal list, it might be a short one. Something like this:
1) Paul McCartney
2) Linda Rondstadt (I know she is in ill health and I had a crush on her when I was young. I suspect the wider world has almost forgotten her)
3) Bruce Springsteen (I rank him about the same level as Bowie)
4) Stevie Wonder (ditto as above and he seems a very nice man)
5) Bob Dylan (obviously the critics will play his importance to the max when it happens)
I’m probably missing a few I might think of later.
I’ve never been a big Ringo fan. However, I still buy his new releases and like some of his work. I’ll be brutally honest here and no doubt unpopular. When Ringo dies it won’t bother me much. I just have not experienced the same musical bond with him as I have with the other three. Having said that I hope Ringo happily lives to be a ripe old age and remains in relatively good health until that inevitable day comes. If Ringo goes, will the main media story be "just one Beatle left?"
Concerning the recent actual deaths, I am a moderate David Bowie and Eagles fan. I have a reasonably large number of Bowie’s albums and though my interest in him originated in the mid-1970s, I continued to buy his more recent sets if they received good reviews. Therefore, his death did affect me. I would say only John Lennon’s and Elvis Presley’s deaths caused me more reflection (and probably George’s). I see Bowie as one of the giants of music over the past four to five decades. Glen Frey’s death has not affected me to the same degree. It sure came as an unwelcome surprise and I like a lot of his work, but I just don’t see him as being of the same stature as Bowie.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Jan 20, 2016 21:46:54 GMT -5
How did we forget Chuck Berry and Jerry Lee Lewis? They were a little before most of our time, although some of here grew up in the sixties when AM radio would have their oldies weekends. Jerry Lee didn't have the body of work that Chuck did but he certainly was hot with the tracks he did have.
I bought Chuck Berry's the Great 28, packed with 28 truly great hit songs. It wasn't too long before I realized it didn't have either You Never Can Tell or Promised Land, the first revitalized by the big Pulp Fiction dance scene and the second a well known song by Elvis. And of course you have to love My Ding-a-ling. I ended up buying the two 4 disc sets that cover the complete 50s Chess recording on the first set and 1960-66 on the second set.
The sets have more alt tracks and live versions than different songs but that's what I like.
There are several songs that should have been major hits but weren't.
and
|
|
|
Post by scousette on Jan 20, 2016 23:05:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Jan 21, 2016 2:58:22 GMT -5
I've said that the death of John represented the death of our youth. It was time for us to grow up. The death of Paul, I think, will have a greater impact (not because Paul is bigger or better than John) because his death will represent something bigger - the end of our own lives. The metaphor of Paul's death will resonate more to us at our ages than John back when we were younger. Both tragic, but only Paul's will be about our own mortality, while John's was about the end of a concept - our youth.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Jan 21, 2016 13:17:38 GMT -5
I've said that the death of John represented the death of our youth. It was time for us to grow up. The death of Paul, I think, will have a greater impact (not because Paul is bigger or better than John) because his death will represent something bigger - the end of our own lives. The metaphor of Paul's death will resonate more to us at our ages than John back when we were younger. Both tragic, but only Paul's will be about our own mortality, while John's was about the end of a concept - our youth. If Paul & Ringo go before I do, I'll be thinking of all the great reunion concerts I am now missing. Something certainly to look forward to when I kick the bucket..... The early concerts will be a lot of new Lennon/Harrison numbers that Paul & Ringo have to learn.... And Paul will have to accept Stuart back in the band....He's had a lot of time to practice on his bass!!
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jan 21, 2016 13:45:37 GMT -5
I've said that the death of John represented the death of our youth. It was time for us to grow up. The death of Paul, I think, will have a greater impact (not because Paul is bigger or better than John) because his death will represent something bigger - the end of our own lives. The metaphor of Paul's death will resonate more to us at our ages than John back when we were younger. Both tragic, but only Paul's will be about our own mortality, while John's was about the end of a concept - our youth. Very, very thought-provoking and perhaps right on the money! But damn-it that was a depressing post and has put me in a funk! Thanks sayne! I need to go find some 22 year old babe to do The Mumbo Stomp with just to reassure myself that sayne is a little pre-mature in calling us deadmen walking!
|
|