Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

The DU Lounge

Showing Original Post only (View all)

MiltonBrown

(322 posts)
Fri Oct 27, 2017, 11:57 PM Oct 2017

'How the Beatles Destroyed Rock-n-roll' Has anyone read this book? [View all]

It poses some interesting ideas chiefly that rock-n-roll started out with black and white performers and black and white fans but separated around the time of Sgt Peppers into white rock music and black soul music.

The book states that rock-n-roll was dance music that emphasized rhythm and that the Beatles started out in this tradition, But that changed in 1966 when the Beatles stopped touring and concentrated on recording in the studio. Sgt Pepper, the book argues, is good music but not rock-n-roll since it is not dance music and has little to no connection to rock-n-roll's black roots. James Brown started out as a rock-n-roller but was reclassified as soul as a reaction to these changes. Since that time, there haven't been very many black rock performers or fans and a white artist could have soul but still won't fit in that category. Essentially, the book states that the Beatles resegregated popular music. Billboard had dropped the separate pop and r&b categories in 1962 because they were nearly identical but brought them back by 1967 because black people were listening to soul music and whites to rock.

The author does not portray the Beatles as doing anything wrong or lacking talent and they don't really get mention until the last chapter. Most of the book details the history of American popular music before the Beatles and the cross-pollenization between black and white musicians that happened.

I look forward to reading this book in it's entirety because it's a refreshing change from the normal rock music group-think mentality of the Rolling Stone Magazine types.





42 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Nuts! DonaldsRump Oct 2017 #1
'Beatles, Stones, Dylan, Who, none of us could do as good as 'Whole Lotta Shakin Goin On' so we MiltonBrown Oct 2017 #2
Except that many, many white artists continued to make dance music unblock Oct 2017 #4
True but disco is not rock-n-roll either. MiltonBrown Oct 2017 #5
I wasn't talking about disco, I consider that a brief blip, but then again unblock Oct 2017 #10
There was a pretty long break between Joey Dee and acts like KC and the Sunshine Band or disco era MiltonBrown Oct 2017 #16
My point is that the Beatles were EVERYTHING.... DonaldsRump Oct 2017 #6
They were rock-n-rollers from the start, even sporting leather jackets and pomps! MiltonBrown Oct 2017 #8
Maybe for those who emulated the Beatles, they were limited to just rock DonaldsRump Oct 2017 #11
Let it Be is a pretty good album but I can't dance to it like I can the 50s and early 60s stuff. MiltonBrown Oct 2017 #17
I'd point out that "909" was written in '62 or '63... malthaussen Oct 2017 #19
You make some great points malthaussen. MiltonBrown Oct 2017 #23
I expect anyone who chooses "Milton Brown" as a handle... malthaussen Oct 2017 #24
Yes I dig the swing music! Had an epiphany many years ago and have been exploring and enjoying MiltonBrown Oct 2017 #38
Music, like everything else, LWolf Oct 2017 #33
I don't see how he can blame that segregation on the beatles unblock Oct 2017 #3
The early Beatles songs were often covers of American rock-n-roll or at least in the same style. MiltonBrown Oct 2017 #7
Black folks were listening to Atlantic, Motown, Stax and other R&B labels before the Beatles... brush Oct 2017 #9
One of the Coasters (not sure which one) said that 'We play rhythm and blues music but if it's a hit MiltonBrown Oct 2017 #13
Blacks left rock and roll before the sixties Cartoonist Oct 2017 #12
The Bobbys were an aBOBanation! MiltonBrown Oct 2017 #14
Atlantic, Motown and other R&B labels... brush Oct 2017 #15
Not sure the Beatles or any one person/group "saved" rock n' roll whathehell Oct 2017 #29
No flames from me. nt Still Blue in PDX Oct 2017 #34
I grew up in the 50's and 60's. I agree with what you posted but it wasn't like forced segregation wasupaloopa Oct 2017 #18
That's one of my favorite movies of course! MiltonBrown Oct 2017 #21
They can't win caraher Oct 2017 #20
The book is 17 chapters and only chapter 17 is actually about the Beatles. It starts out with early MiltonBrown Oct 2017 #22
It really is an unfortunate book title... malthaussen Oct 2017 #25
I blame Obama and Hillary for destroying Rock! Chasstev365 Oct 2017 #26
Before the Beatles, surf music started this trend DBoon Oct 2017 #27
But the Beatles impacted everything in their wake whereas surf rock (Ventures, Chantays not BBs) had MiltonBrown Oct 2017 #39
Read the book and enjoyed it. The title is just a hook. rzemanfl Oct 2017 #28
Sounds like a big pile of BS to me. Zen Democrat Oct 2017 #30
If you're gonna blame the Beatles, you've gotta blame The Crickets sofa king Oct 2017 #31
Knowing the direction Buddy Holly was heading there is no doubt that he would've made rock MiltonBrown Oct 2017 #41
The author... Mike Nelson Oct 2017 #32
I danced my ass off at the last Who Hits 50 concert maxrandb Oct 2017 #35
What bunkum! No, I haven't and shan't. Does the author claim that a band that covered "Twist and WinkyDink Oct 2017 #36
The author would argue that the band that recorded 'Twist and Shout' changed radically by the time MiltonBrown Oct 2017 #40
To argue that the Beatles' music changed is not the same as arguing that said change ended Rock and WinkyDink Oct 2017 #42
The Beatles SAVED Rock and Roll Wolf Frankula Oct 2017 #37
Latest Discussions»The DU Lounge»'How the Beatles Destroye...