Rolling Stone : The Immortals of Rock

johnfoyle · Post by **johnfoyle** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 7:55 am

From the same feature that has Elvis writing about The Beatles ; some interesting writing .

http://www.rollingstone.com/features/co ... p?pid=2846

The Immortals are the greatest rock & roll artists of all time. They are also more than that. The fifty men, women and bands celebrated in the following pages (and in an exclusive photo gallery) are the singers, songwriters, record makers and performers who are continually in the music -- as pioneers, teachers and stars; touching our souls and pulling us to our feet, on a daily basis -- even when they are no longer with us. And this is not just a list.

1) The Beatles by Elvis Costello

2) Bob Dylan by Robbie Robertson

3) Elvis Presley by Bono

4) The Rolling Stones by Steven Van Zandt

5) Chuck Berry by Joe Perry

6) Jimi Hendrix by John Mayer

7) James Brown by Rick Rubin

Little Richard by Little Richard

9) Aretha Franklin by Jerry Wexler

10) Ray Charles by Van Morrison

Bob And Charlotte · Post by **Bob And Charlotte** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:12 am

thanks john... but why´s Dylan always in the second place? Behind the Beatles????? I mean, This ONE man wrote much more masterpieces than the Beatles (both as a group or in their poor individual careers)

selfmademug · Post by **selfmademug** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:26 am

Yikes I think that's a bit overboard, B&C. I think it's pretty well accepted that the Beatles had a much broader range and a much larger impact on what popular music actually is. Such ratings are pretty dumb, I think, but if pressed I'd make the same choice. As it is, these lists almost always reflect white culture, whihc is a huge limitation in itself...

Post by **BlueChair** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 9:37 am

The Beatles influenced Dylan as much as Dylan influenced The Beatles. Any documentary or book on the history of rock 'n' roll will tell you so. If it weren't for Dylan, The Beatles wouldn't have started writing more interesting lyrics and pushing the envelope, but it wasn't for The Beatles, Dylan wouldn't have gone electric.

I'm not sure that list is supposed to be in order anyway, but it looks like a very interesting read. I'll have to check that out at some point.

Bob And Charlotte · Post by **Bob And Charlotte** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 10:07 am

BlueChair wrote:The Beatles influenced Dylan as much as Dylan influenced The Beatles. Any documentary or book on the history of rock 'n' roll will tell you so. If it weren't for Dylan, The Beatles wouldn't have started writing more interesting lyrics and pushing the envelope, but it wasn't for The Beatles, Dylan wouldn't have gone electric.

I'm not sure that list is supposed to be in order anyway, but it looks like a very interesting read. I'll have to check that out at some point.

Not sure about that 'Dylan went electric becouse of the Beatles' stuff Blue...
Any documentary or book on the history of rock´n´roll will tell you that Dylan only started listening folk when he was a grown teenage. And he listened to Buddy Holy, Elvis, Chuck Berry, etc etc before that.
It was a natural step. BTW, as MacCartney said, Dylan was a hero for them. And i can´t see how Lennon could write such songs as I´m A Loser, Hide Your Love Away or I´m The Walrus without Dylan. MacCartney said that he even bought a hat - after seeing Dylans debut album cover.

noiseradio · Post by **noiseradio** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 10:26 am

Nor can I imaginge "Like a Rolling Stone" or many other songs from his electric period without the Beatles influence on Dylan. (I can't imagine Eleanor Rigby without thinking of Dylan. It cuts both ways).

You're a Dylan fan, and that's cool. But the Beatles did more to change the face of modern music than any other artist or group, hands down.

Post by **BlueChair** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 10:28 am

Bob, I'm not denying Dylan's influence on The Beatles. It was profound. An album like Rubber Sould could have never happened without Dylan. He also introduced the Beatles to marijuana.

BUT,

You can't underscore the influence The Beatles had on Dylan. It may have not been immediate, but it was there. Sure, Dylan never tried to do anything psychedelic or orchestral, but it was after his exposure to The Beatles that he started moving away from the whole protest thing. I remember an associate who was close with Dylan saying that it was because of Lennon that Dylan went out and purchased an electric guitar. That alone speaks volumes, as it would shape two and a half of Dylan's pivotal mid-60's albums: Bringing It All Back Home, Highway 61 Revisited, and Blonde on Blonde. It's also widely known that "Fourth Time Around" is heavily inspired by "Norwegian Wood."

As for noise's comment:

noiseradio wrote: You're a Dylan fan, and that's cool. But the Beatles did more to change the face of modern music than any other artist or group, hands down.

I agree with you, although one could argue that without Dylan's influence, The Beatles wouldn't have become innovative. But you could also say that about a lot of different influences.

I dunno, for me it's hard to imagine popular music, or any form of music without The Beatles or Bob Dylan having ever existed. Both are extremely important to the development of music as we know it.

The Beatles and Dylan both pushed the limits when it came to genre... The Beatles can't simply be called a pop band, and Dylan can't simply be called a folk artist.

Both Lennon/McCartney and Dylan, and even Harrison had groundbreaking songwriting methods that would influence generations upon generations of songwriters.

The Beatles (thanks in part to George Martin) used ground-breaking and production techniques in the studio, which led to many future classics of the 70's, 80's, 90's, and today.

In the case of Dylan, he proved that you didn't have to have a conventional "good" voice in order to be an effective singer/songwriter.

pophead2k · Post by **pophead2k** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 11:09 am

Methinks we have a chicken and egg situation here.

Bob And Charlotte · Post by **Bob And Charlotte** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 11:29 am

Alright guys... i agree with you all... Dylan´s the best!

.... 'nothing is better nothing is best' ....

noiseradio · Post by **noiseradio** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 11:39 am

pophead,

true dat.

pophead2k · Post by **pophead2k** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 2:36 pm

I can't wait til ten years from now when someone's kid finds this back issue and says "who the hell is this John Mayer guy who wrote about Hendrix?"

selfmademug · Post by **selfmademug** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:19 pm

I too will relish that moment, PH2K.

Poppet · Post by **Poppet** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:28 pm

okay, fine, i'm gonna get thumped. go ahead, y'all.

dylan does nothing for me. i've got blonde on blonde on tape, i can't listen to it.

i ADORE the beatles. if i had to ditch all my elvis or my beatles, i'd pitch elvis. i'd be quite unhappy about it, but the beatles are the best, for me.

is there something else i shoud try by dylan? i know he's great and all that, fine, but what i've heard has not grabbed me at all.

come on, educate poor widdle me.

(but am i a goner if i dislike blonde on blonde?)

miss buenos aires · Post by **miss buenos aires** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:30 pm

It's okay, Poppet. Come hang out with me and Gilli and gethappier's girlfriend...

Jackson Monk · Post by **Jackson Monk** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:32 pm

as Yoko would have said: "Beatles rock"!

gethappier · Post by **gethappier** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:37 pm

miss buenos aires wrote:It's okay, Poppet. Come hang out with me and Gilli and gethappier's girlfriend...

If you smashed Dylan and the beatles together and drugged the offspring with methamphetamine and beer, then you would have ELvis Costello and the Attractions...

This is why I don't understand Elvis fans that are indifferent to the Beatles or Dylan..

Poppet · Post by **Poppet** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:42 pm

i'm okay w/ the speed and beer, as long as i don't hafta do the speed, (can i have single malt instead maybe?) and i did say i love the beatles. i just don't get dylan.

so WHAT THE HELL SHOULD I BE LISTENING TO PEOPLE???

or, is the only thing you have to say "Listen to Blonde on Blonde, it'll hook ya!" ???

hey, whatever, i need more cd's to buy like, well, nothing.

HungupStrungup · Post by **HungupStrungup** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:59 pm

Poppet, in my opinion you should listen to Blood on the Tracks and New Morning. You're almost bound to find something to like on one or the other, and once Bob gets a foothold, he'll reel ya in.

If you don't have an objection to live albums, Before the Flood is a real good intro. It includes some inspired performances of quite a few of his great early songs, and the Band do kick some serious ass!

Poppet · Post by **Poppet** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 4:01 pm

HS, thank you. i've added those to my running list of things to find to listen to, or procure cheap from the used store.

Mike Boom · Post by **Mike Boom** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 6:13 pm

Rolling Stone Sucks

Madonna by Britney Spears - Wow, cant wait to read that - must rush out and buy a copy.

And this is not just a list. - Oh yeah? And why is that then? Because you say so? Because you are ROLLING STONE? Bite me.

Pov · Post by **Pov** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 6:30 pm

To this day, the Beatles are just much more ingrained in our culture. Pick any person off the street. Ask them to name 5 Beatles songs, then ask them to name 5 Dylan songs. I suspect that most people would have an easier time with the Beatles songs.

My teenage niece went to summer camp with a very diverse group of people. She told me the one thing that brought them all together was when someone took out a guitar and started playing Beatles songs. Everyone knew the words, regardless of what country they were from, ethnic backgrounds or socio-economic classes.

Tim(e) · Post by **Tim(e)** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 7:18 pm

Bob And Charlotte wrote: It was a natural step. BTW, as MacCartney said, Dylan was a hero for them. And i can´t see how Lennon could write such songs as I´m A Loser, Hide Your Love Away or I´m The Walrus without Dylan. MacCartney said that he even bought a hat - after seeing Dylans debut album cover.

One could argue that Dylan probably would not have been where is is today without the inspiration of the likes of Woody Guthrie and Pete Seeger.

I for one would not classify Dylan as an immortal of "Rock" as he had (imho) very little influence on the direction that rock music took. The Beatles on the other hand have had a profound influence...and that influence is still being felt over 30 years after their demise.

Oh, and if Dylan can rank #2 on this list as a major influence on rock, then why isn't Robert Johnson in position #1?

Mike Boom · Post by **Mike Boom** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:23 pm

Dylan was actually instrumental in bringing the Beatles and the rest of the rock world back to earth after the psychedelic "kitchen sink" productions of Sgt Pepper and its ilk by showing along with the Band that the way foward actually lay in a stripped back approach ala John Wesley Harding.
This is obviously apart from his infuence in showing the world that the you could actually use words in other ways and say things other than "She loves you yeah yeah yeah" in a rock n roll song. I read once how Dylan used to laugh at how eveyone screamed and shouted at the Beatles shows - he took great pride in saying that at his shows eveyone would shut up and try to catch to every word.

wehitandrun · Post by **wehitandrun** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:55 pm

Hey! Hey! Everyone....

.... lets all give John Mayer some credit here.

<3,
s.

Jackson Monk · Post by **Jackson Monk** » Fri Mar 26, 2004 3:23 am

and what about the undoubted influence of Bryan Adams??

Elvis Costello Fan Forum

Rolling Stone : The Immortals of Rock

Rolling Stone : The Immortals of Rock

Dylan+Beatles=Elvis

Re: Dylan+Beatles=Elvis