For the first half of Delta Blues, Ted Gioia focuses on very obscure characters in the Blues World, who nonetheless, had a very large impact on the future direction of the blues. Examples of these people include Son House, Charlie Patton, and Robert Johnson. These men had a very good grasp of how to make really blue blues, but had almost no formal training. Despite this they had a huge impact on future Blues musicians who gained great fame, like BB King, Howlin Wolf, and John Lee Hooker. These better known men, while they seem to have made it farther, cannot be said to have been as important to the development of the blues, except for its development from a little known entity to that of a national favorite. They had less influence on the actual music and are responsible for less of the sound and feel of the Blues than their lesser known predesessors.
Examples of this the influence that the first guys had on the blues are plenty. For example, these men were the ones who were "lean loose-jointed guitarists playing the blues with a knife at Tutwiler train station" (Gioia 234) in the early 1900s. They are also the ones who have a sound so distinct and blue that it is unreplicable by modern day pros. "'Pony Blues' includes many of the elements that are most endearing - and maddening - about the country blues. The piece sounds deceptively simle, but many highly trained musicians would struggle to imitate Patton's rendition" (Gioia 68) The new pros like king and Wolf used much of their predecessors material for inspiration. "Johnson would never record these songs, or any Patton composition for that matter, but attentive ears will hear hints in his music that seem to point back to the older bluesman." (Gioia 106) This shows how much of the later blues was less original. Becasue of this, I don't feel like it can be given the same level of respect. While I do like listening to more modern blues, I think that what modern performers do is less impressive than the more original works of older bluesman.
3 comments:
It's too bad that the ones who actually developed the blues have much less creditors than those who followed after them. That seems to happen too many times that people receive credit for something they played a small part in.
Perhaps. Good topic though-- should the people who make it famous receive more credit than the people who develop it? Morally, it should be said that the developers should get the credit, but that's often not the case. It leads to think that we should all develop the skills of those who can become famous, instead of the skills of innovators. Kind of a sad world, though thankfully our society contains both types...
I think that the impact on blues that the more obscure characters is representative of the blues itself. It can be taken up by anyone, and is about the performer than the composer.
I think the lack of blues being as popular, or as good, today is the lack of talented performers. The blues is about your own experiences being transferred into the music, and fewer people have the kind of life story that would make good blues.
Post a Comment