Quote
camper88
New York Times Article on how and why people and bands might get remembered.

The "conclusion" may surprise you . . . or maybe not.

Which Rock Star Will Historians of the Future Remember?

One quote from the piece: "When I think of rock and who might survive, I immediately think of the Rolling Stones. They’re a band that sounds like what we’ve all decided rock ’n’ roll should sound like: loose and wild. Their story reflects that ethos and sound: loose and wild. And also, they’re good.”

I'm not sure I agree with everything he says, but it certainly is a very interesting article with some interesting ideas.

Good story

[www.nytimes.com]

I think the piece becomes somewhat deeper as it goes on.

~"Love is Strong"~

[www.google.com]

Quote
frankotero
This subject is hard to tackle. It makes me wonder what people thought of Beethoven and Mozart at their time. Maybe people thought they were talented, but did they revere them the way we do with The Beatles and Stones? For instance could they walk freely through town without being tackled? And did they wait impatiently for new music for inspiration as we do/did? Another thought I'm having lately is why there isn't something as great as our heroes. It's kind of strange to see young people digging the dinosaurs. I know I didn't care about somebody that was 50 years older than me back in the day.

Beethoven's funeral was allegedly attended by more than 30,000 people outside the church. I think that gives a pretty good indication that he was well respected in his own time, despite being an extremely difficult person to be with and around.

Brilliant Stanlove

assuming the stones are still around in 300 years time, im sure people will still look up to them.

maybe the tours will be a bit shorter than today and they might not even record an album, but they might still influence younger generations.

The great songs will endure ... especially the songs that future musicians will play.
People don't remember Chuck Berry so much as the songs he wrote. A young kid playing guitar today will learn to play Berry's songs and as time goes on his kids won't even know who Berry was but they'll know Johnny B Goode.
I would guess that Dylan has written a vast catalog of songs that future musicians will interpret.

I don't think 'music' alone will survive. It will take more.
So I think Hendrix in all his brilliance, Johnny Rotten for shaking the whole world up; Beatles for being the Beatles. Michael Jackson for the flashy insanity. Madonna for much of same.

Yes - need to add Elvis.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-05-28 10:43 by Palace Revolution 2000.

Quote
stanlove
First and foremost it will be Dylan. There are already college courses about him. His music will live on because his songs blow everyone elses away as works of art. The Beatles will be remembered for their impact. The Stones will a minor point at that time. Elvis will be remembered for his impact and popularity.

There are also college courses about The Beatles.

--
Captain Corella
60 Years a Fan

Quote
The Worst.

Beethoven's funeral was allegedly attended by more than 30,000 people outside the church. I think that gives a pretty good indication that he was well respected in his own time, despite being an extremely difficult person to be with and around.

That's about the same number of people who turned up to John Peel's funeral in the UK. I'm still trying to work out what that means in the context of this thread.

(How many turned up to Brian Jones' funeral?)

--
Captain Corella
60 Years a Fan

despite i've been a Stones fan for a long time (40 years in june 2016), I believe that Elvis Presley will remain as the number one Rock star cos he has everything it takes to be so : physically and musically (his voice of course !)

then, to me, as the second Rock star, Mick Jagger is a reasonable choice cos he also has the required qualities for this way of living. But he arrived on the rock stage after Elvis otherwise he would be number one for sure.

then, behind these two rock monsters, I think of John Lennon, Jimmy Hendrix, Freddie Mercury in any order you will like.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-05-28 10:43 by jpasc95.

The real issue is...will www.iorr still be around in 300 years time ?

Quote
jpasc95
despite i've been a Stones fan for a long time (40 years in june 2016), I believe that Elvis Presley will remain as the number one Rock star cos he has everything it takes to be so : physically and musically (his voice of course !)

then, to me, as the second Rock star, Mick Jagger is a reasonable choice cos he also has the required qualities for this way of living. But he arrived on the rock stage after Elvis otherwise he would be number one for sure.

then, behind these two rock monsters, I think of John Lennon, Jimmy Hendrix, Freddie Mercury in any order you will like.

Sometimes people are just wrong. Freddie Mercury before Bob Dylan huh?

Quote
jlowe
The real issue is...will www.iorr still be around in 300 years time ?

Yes, and there be a movement to re-examine Dirty Work in a positive light.

Chuck Berry.

Freddie Mercury before Bob Dylan huh?

I'd say Mr Zimmerman would prefer to be behind him than right in front of him ..



ROCKMAN

Quote
CaptainCorella

Quote
The Worst.

Beethoven's funeral was allegedly attended by more than 30,000 people outside the church. I think that gives a pretty good indication that he was well respected in his own time, despite being an extremely difficult person to be with and around.

That's about the same number of people who turned up to John Peel's funeral in the UK. I'm still trying to work out what that means in the context of this thread.

(How many turned up to Brian Jones' funeral?)

I was just responding to frankotero who wrote "It makes me wonder what people thought of Beethoven and Mozart at their time." That quote was the context.

BTW: Not too many people have their funerals attended by thousands of strangers, and especially not if you´re known to the public as rude, sour, bitter, angry, obnoxious and selfish - as was the case with Beethoven. To me that shows that although he had an unlikable personality, he was still respected as a composer and genius in his own time - just as he is today, nearly 200 years after his death.

Elvis Presley and Bob Dylan - the body and mind of rock n roll

The Beatles and Lennon will be remebered as a perfect capsule containing... the worst of the 60's (fashion drugs music). and Lennon ha! He'll be a laughing stock for the future generations (Yoko, the "bed-in", etc etc)

Elvis will be remembered as a nice harmless hick a relic, much like today we look back on Delta bluesmen from the 1920-30's. Seminal but soooooo far in the rearview mirror.

The Who won't be remembered... at all!

Therfore remain :

- Dylan for his genius
- Hendrix for his genius
- the Stones : not geniuses but highly talented guys.

The conclusion Klosterman reaches seems berry arbitrary to me.

The importance and influence of rock stars will decline as time goes by and in 300 years the Stones will be best known for their logo and the infamy of Richards. That and 'Satisfaction'.

.....

Olly.

Brian Johnson

I hope Jimi and Frank will be remembered also...(besides my first suggestion Lennon)



2 1 2 0

Historians delight in writing about obscure figures whose contributions have been overlooked and also like to write about tragic failures who could have been so much more. So I pick Sly, Peter Green, and Esquerita as the tragic figures who will be reclaimed by future historians. The obscure figure has got to be either Flo and Eddie from the Turtles or Melanie.

Artists that will absolutely NOT be remembered in the future:

Helen Reddy

Wild Man Fischer

Carl Douglas ("Kung Fu Fighting" )

Bob Lind ("Elusive Butterfly of Love" )

Tony Orlando and Dawn

Bobby Goldsboro