Dear Mr. Wagemuffin

I don't think we should continue to bandy-about the word "rockism" without going to the source.

From one of Simon's RIU&SA footnotes, with Wikipedia link added by me:

"rockism"

As used first by Pete Wylie in Wah Heat! Feature in NME, 1/17/81.

Paul du Noyer's piece addresses Wah! Heat's "race against rockism" (geddit?). Wylie says words like "album" are rockist and declares that Wah! are against all the deadening rituals of the gig, the encores, etc. "If rock is dead then we're not a rock band. If rock has the potential to be an exciting, inspirational thing, then we are… It's rock as a ritual that's the bad thing, when it's not done out of love or passion, when it because that's what you're used to doing". Yet Wylie's favourite band was The Clash and Wah!'s sound and stance was totally epic-guitar rocky!

A great contemporary example of Wylie-defined (bad) rockism is Rock Star: Supernova, or that other reality show, Supergroup — bunches of "rockers" trying to sustain/enhance their market viability by clinging dearly to a gamut of tired, but still annoyingly market-viable, clichés.

When Bill Haley and Big Joe Turner recorded their respective versions of "Shake, Rattle and Roll", they weren't trying to rock, they were trying to swing. Same goes for early recordings of "Good Rockin' Tonight", etc. It was a gradual transition to where "to rock" became a contemporary synonym for "to swing", then overtook it.

The song I chose for the "Ace of Spades" thread (the Tight Bros' "So Sneaky") doesn't just rock, it, too, swings. (As does Aerosmith's "Back in the Saddle", IIRC.)

Coleman Hawkins, John Coltrane, and Art Pepper have recorded great renditions of "Body and Soul" in different eras, but whatever the many differences in their respective recordings, people tend to agree that it's all "jazz". Why can't we do the same with "rock"?

My introduction to rock (beyond Top 40), back in the 60's, came from a older cousin whose record collection had Smokey Robinson and the Miracles side-by-side with Sly Stone, Cream, and Jefferson Airplane. My introduction to the blues came from early-electric Dylan and Peter Green and Beefheart; there isn't a world of difference between Beefheart's "Sure Nuff" and Rufus Thomas' "Tiger Man" (an early Sun Records single) and the millions of other variations on the "Rollin' and Tumblin'" riff over the past 50-60 years. The differences are something to enjoy and celebrate, but they shouldn't be compartmentalized into marketroid-apartheid boxes named "blues" or "soul" or "rock" (or "race music"); they're all branches of the same family tree. I don't have to choose between Rockpile's or the New York Dolls' variations on Chuck Berry versus the original article — it's all good, and it's all rock.

We're really talking about music with (usually) a 4/4 beat that induces positive visceral reactions; there are regional and generational variations, but it's really all part of the same continuum, one that includes Louis Jordan and Count Basie (whose orchestra at one time included Big Joe Turner, and whose 50's sets sometimes included rock/R&B material) and Funkadelic and Sly & Robbie and Timbaland, just as much as the artists in your "13 essential albums". I think you will derive much enjoyment, over time, from exploring this continuum. I think you will, at various times, nod your head, bang your head, move to the groove, get busy one time, dance to the music, and rock out.

Just sayin'.

NP: Art Ensemble of Chicago, "Tutankhamun"

[And, once again, I hope this shit is valid HTML.]