[78-L] Rock & Roll rising

[Koen Kamphuijs & Gusta Harderwijk]

I wrote:

>There have been zillions of discussions on the distinction between
>Rhythm & Blues and Rock 'n Roll; or the lack of that; on what should
>be considered the first rock 'n roll record; and more.

Well - for as far as this discussion goes, it did prove the first 
sentence of my mail, and now we have zillions and a few more of them.

One of the things that's sure - and that also helps fuel the 
discussion - that things are not as clear and simple as you can state 
in a few hundred words.

There's nothing in this discussion that I don't second or have heard 
before, and I don't think it's really essential whether to call the 
new direction of late forties R&B rock 'n roll or not.

I use the distinction that I made for myself, also to guide myself 
what to play and what not on my radio show - together with my own 
taste.  It means that mainly I play what before '48 was called "race 
music" and afterwards "Rhythm & Blues" and that my show's interest 
mainly (but not completely) starts in the mid-thirties and ends in 
the mid-fifties.  My choice automatically makes that nearly all on my 
show is from African-American musicians. I include very little swing, 
bebop, "modern" jazz and rock 'n roll-as-I-define-it.  I favour 
raunchy down-to-earth blues lyrics over naive teenage love 
songs.  Raw blues over polished pop songs.  And I call the package 
Rhythm & Blues, knowing that half of it was before the term was 
coined, knowing that others include things I don't, and some call it 
either jazz or rock 'n roll.

Koen