Originally Posted by ann ashtray
They WERE important, yes. BUT>..they were designed to reach a mass audience. Original blues wasn't designed to reach anyone but yr next door neighbors. Of course, approaching the mid 1930's it had become "pop-music" (for blacks and the weirdo whites that considered it to be "avant garde", which in some way it was).
Let's not forget, the Stones visited Chicago only to discover their "hero" Muddy Waters painting the inside of a recording studio in order to make ends meet. Those folks were not playing because financial security was a guarantee. A "hope" at best.
Opera REQUIRED talent, blues required honesty. There is a difference. Holy shit, some of them early blues singers didn't have the most beautiful voices....but the lyrics, matched w/ at least minimal skill on whatever given instrument, went a long way. Blues has been, time and time again, ripped off...honestly, how many people you know listen to opera AND CONSIDER IT TO BE AN INSPIRATION? On the other hand, how many people you know listen to some variation of rock n roll (a DIRECT descendant of the blues)...?????
seriously man, don't do this, you aren't really saying much that doesn't apply to every kind of music that ever existed. do you think in all the millenia arabs existed before the usa was founded they never once managed to be bad at an instrument or express themself honestly? that applies to every other group in the (world except russians)
aside from technology based advancements the main thing americans have done with music that was not common practice in every corner of the world(except russia) is think they that they invented it
i love the fact that you think my using opera as a single example of lyrics being central to music means i think it's totally the best and most popular thing ever, it's also funny that you tried to make me
look stupid and then went on to imply IN CAPITALS that no one finds a centuries old artform inspiring