[78-L] Rock & Roll rising (was: Escott, was Arnold Covey)

[gdkimball at cox.net]

---- Malcolm Rockwell <malcolm at 78data.com> wrote: 
> Could it be possible that the dynamism between city and country, black 
> and white, standard and non-standard, etc., musical forms is why Rock & 
> Roll developed? That's far more likely, in my estimation.
> Malcolm
> 
> *******

This.  Most creation stories of musical styles fixate on a specific recording or session or artist.  It makes for good storytelling but the result is almost always wrongheaded.  Musical styles, like all aspects of culture, develop out of an accretion of countless human interactions, many of which didn't even leave an historical record.  We are talking about processes that not only involve the artists and the music but the audience as well. When Rock and Roll became a defined genre in the minds of listeners is just as important as stylistic considerations in my book. By the way, I'd be interested in your stylistic definition of Rock and Roll, Joe. 

Given that the development of Rock and Roll was obviously a process of both music and market, it suprises me that the subtitle of Escott's book is so controversial.  "Sun Records and the Birth of Rock and Roll."  So what?  It's not "Sun Records Created Rock and Roll."  Yeah, it's a bit silly given the content of the book, which covers a wide range of musical styles and artists who recorded at Sun.  But are we really suprised that the title of a book might involve a touch of marketing hyperbole? 

Gregg