Stoned
Sir: While sharing Mr J. G. Watson's distaste (Letters. October 6) for pseudo, unmusica' "criticism" such as that Stones article, I feel that it's a non-sequitur for him to dismiss pop music on this basis; sloppy writing of that kind plagues all the arts/media. If the original piece nowhere offers coherent musical evidence of the supposed excellence of the group, Mr Watson fails to supply specific examples to the contrary. I can help him there — to my ears the Rolling Stones are a most over-rated group, only occasionally achieving the rhythmic subtlety of Chuck Berry (or the other black musicians who were their original inspiration) and rarely avoiding melodic/harmonic banality. Equally though I could (given enough space!) detail the excellent, dynamic use of modulation in Spirit's 'Uncle Jack,' the unique phrase-structure of 'I'll be hack' by the Beatles, the unprecedented degree of empathy and logic in the group improvisations of the Grateful Dead (who at their frequent best can equal the profundity and structural originality of any great music), the melodic beauty of the songs Toots Hibbert coMposes for his vocal group the Maytals; I could list a hundred such value judgements each of which could be the starting point for a long article. The onus would then fall on the denigrators of rock/pop (Which has admittedly produced quite as high a percentage of ephemera and drivel as any other medium) to prove me wrong — not with mere invective and prejudice, but with reasoned and detailed musical argument. Without that, a remark that "pop music has nothing to do with music" remains as unfounded and meaningless as a teenybopper's "Fantastic!"
Bob Quail
6 Holsworthy Square Holborn, London WCI.
Previous page
