The upcoming Rock and Roll Hall of Fame 25th Anniversary Celebration has got me to thinking. In the history of popular rock in the 20th century — let us say from 1950 to 2000 — what will our great-grandchildren still be listening to an 100 years? And of those musicians, how many emerged after 1975?
Am I being too provincial to suggest that the enduring legacy of Rock and Roll comes from 1950 to 1975?
Make your own list of musicians that you think we’ll still be listing to in a hundred years. Now, how many of those acts formed after 1975?
The first list is easy:
- The Beatles
- The Kinks
- The Rolling Stones
- The Who
- Pink Floyd
- Led Zeppelin
- Bruce Springsteen
- Billy Joel (I think he is our generation’s Cole Porter)
- The Talking Heads (forming just under the wire in 1974)
I could go on and on and on…
Now, name groups that came on the scene after 1975.
- The B52s (1976)
- U2 (1976)
- REM (1980)
- Dave Matthews Band (1991)
Any others?
I think a very good argument could be made for The Clash (1976), possibly more so than for the B52’s and DMB.
Good post, Sean.
Staying power is not an easy thing to spot, and history is such that it’s not the present generation’s call. In 1975, do you think there were a lot of people our age who would have picked the artists you mention?
Having said that, I’d like to think there are plenty of musicians now who will survive. People like Steve Earle, Wilco, and even Radiohead come to my mind as making more lasting music than the B-52’s or DMB. And not to rain on your Billy Joel parade, but I think there are a LOT of today’s singer-songwriter types that are writing amazing stuff. Will they have the longevity and continued relevance to produce a body of work that survives? That’s hard to say, but I think today’s music stacks up very well.
I think a bigger issue is the fragmentation of the music marketplace. When we were kids, everyone listened to pretty much the same things. There was much less access to musical diversity, so we all had similar musical reference points. I prefer things now – it’s great being able to discover new music so much more easily, but the downfall of that is that there are fewer universal musical touchstones.
Thank you for writing, Andrew. You make a good point about the current lack of generational touchstones. I have no idea what this generation of teenagers likes. My own almost-15-year-old, ironically, likes the music of my youth: The Ramones, The Who, David Bowie, and the B-52s.
There was an interesting point about generational music touchstones made by a music critic (can’t recall who) following Michael Jackson’s death. He was the last musician to sell across genre lines. Nothing since Thriller has sold across the board-rock, soul, pop, r&b, etc. The two other names thrown out in comparison from were The Beatles and Elvis Presley. Everyone who was around when Thriller hit knows some of his songs, just like everyone who was around during the Beatles and Elvis’s prime knows some of their songs.
So, even though I’m not a fan (but I do know the words to many of his songs), I’m going to say that Michael Jackson should be on the list. I probably would have said the same thing if you asked this question before his death.
It’s really interesting to look at the top selling albums and artists and see who is at the top.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_music_artists
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_albums_worldwide
I’d add to the lists:
pre-75:
Johnny Cash (not rock, but certainly influential to the genre)
Elvis Presley
Bob Dylan
Bob Marley
post-75:
Michael Jackson
You make some excellent point, Rich, and set an interesting new standard. What was the last album to come out where everybody who was around then (at least, anyone even tangentially connected to popular culture) knows at least some of the songs? “Thriller” just might be the last one. I, too, was not really a Michael Jackson fan, but I could not escape his music.
All the musicians you list would certainly be on my pre-1975 list of enduring acts, but I would also add Michael Jackson. True, “Thriller” did not come out until 1982, but it was not released in a vacuum, either. Michael Jackson had a long career even before then, and that was his sixth album.
Interesting, I was actually unaware that he had 4 solo albums before Off The Wall in 79. I’m not very well versed in Motown, so I was under the impression that he only recorded with the Jackson 5 for them. Thanks for the correction.
So, now to add to the post-75 list, maybe Metallica? I think metal will have an interesting legacy, and there will always be a following riding under the mainstream. I think they have the greatest chance of being the ones who will stand out as representative of the genre 100 years down the road. Possibly Black Sabbath, Iron Maiden, and Judas Priest as well, all from the pre-75 era.