Search for "rushmore"

Search Results : rushmore » Rock Town Hall • Rock Music Discussion

The Mount Rushmore of Rock & Roll: New Wave Edition

Posted by al

Oct 152020

Who belongs on the Mount Rushmore of New Wave?

Wow, there’s a broad category, huh?

And I’m not going to try to define it or narrow it down; that’s up to Rock Town Hall.

Whatever the definition, I say Talking Heads has to be there. Three-piece, four-piece, expanded funk version, it doesn’t matter. The fact that they were so good in all those incarnations is one of the reasons they belong on the Mount. I’ll leave it to the other better musical explicators on the list to explain just how good, just how innovative, and just how timeless (40+ years later we now know that) they are.

Frantz/Weymouth-type complaints aside, what criticisms can you level against them, unless you want to hold then to account for the pale white-boy funk imitators that followed in their wake?

Who else shares the Mount with them?

The Mount Rushmore Of Rock & Roll: Motown Edition

Posted by al

Sep 082020

No need to shoehorn Motown acts into some Rushmore; here they get their very own.

Here are my ground rules but feel free to go ahead and make your own.

This is Motown, not soul more generally, not Stax/Volt, not Philly International. If you are on the Motown Rushmore then your bones had to be made at Motown.

We all know that Berry Gordy, the Funk Brothers, Holland-Dozier-Holland, and a bunch of other behind the scenes people had as much to do with Motown’s success as any act did. Maybe they will get their own Rushmore one of these days but for now, for this Rushmore, these are the acts (individuals or groups) whose names were on the discs.

I’ll offer up the act I think is the Beatles of Motown, the undisputed act that has to be carved on the Mount – Marvin Gaye. Singer, songwriter, sweet soul-pop love songs, the duets, and the pièce de résistance of “What’s Goin’ On.” A song so magnificent we have to present it twice

With James Jamerson:

Who shares the Mount with Marvin?

The Mount Rushmore of Rock & Roll: America’s Counter-Attack to The British Invasion

Posted by al

Sep 012020

Following up on the Mount Rushmore of Rock & Roll: British Invasion, which American bands held the line against the invaders, trying to champion the rock & roll that those British groups had co-opted from the United States?

I will propose that the Beatles equivalent for this Mount Rushmore is The Beach Boys. Yes, I know they had an album’s worth of hits before the Fabs ever met Ed Sullivan, but I think that makes them even more deserving. They were at the top of the heap, they took the challengers’ best punch, lost the championship, but came back stronger than ever.

Here’s a Beach Boys deep cut that is one of my BB favorites:

I don’ think there is a counterpart to the Rolling Stones, but I think there are more worthy contenders for the remaining spots than there were for the British Invasion mount.

Who would you put up there? Anyone disagree with me about the Wilsons & family?

The Mount Rushmore of Rock & Roll: British Invasion Version

Posted by al

Aug 242020

Looking back in the RTH archives I see where there were some threads choosing assorted Mount Rushmores of Rock & Roll. Let’s resurrect that now with this British Invasion version.

What four acts would be on the British Invasion Mount Rushmore? Would anyone argue that The Beatles are not on it? Or The Rolling Stones? If you want to, proceed at your own risk.

Ah, but what are the other two?

I say The Kinks have to be number three. I think it can be creditably argued that “You Really Got Me” alone justifies the selection.

Add in whatever else you want – the other early hits, the string of impeccable albums from Face To Face up to Lola Versus Powerman & the Moneygoround – and they have to be carved on, although I’m afraid Ray’s gapped teeth could cause sculpting problems.

But what’s the fourth. The Who were just a little late. The Animals would bring something very different to the Mount but were they really that good, that impactful, that lasting?

And how about the bands with an album’s worth of great pop hits like The Dave Clark 5 or The Hollies or even Herman’s Hermits?

I hope this will be the first of many such threads. Feel free to define your own Mt. Rushmore and get it up here. But first, argue for or against my three locks and tell us your fourth.

The Mt. Rushmore of Punk

Posted by cherguevara

Oct 032011

NPR’s All Songs Considered posted this image on FB, a mural in Asbury Park, going up near Asbury Lanes. They asked posters to identify the faces in the photo, a task which every Townsperson could probably tackle while threading a needle and riding a unicycle, blindfolded. But what I found interesting was one poster’s comment that it was the “Mt. Rushmore of Punk.” If that is to be true, the first thing to do is eliminate two faces.

To me, it seems like there are three people here who are givens and three whose presence is arguably dubious. Which four faces go up on your Mt. Rushmore of Punk?

Rock Town Hall Completes the Mount Rushmore of Rock

Posted by Mr. Moderator

Sep 182009

What artist completes the Mount Rushmore of Rock?

It goes without saying that The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and Bob Dylan constitute three quarters of this soon-to-be historic monument, which the U.S. National Park Service is planning to sculpt in an undisclosed location. Who’s the fourth and final artist (solo or band) to be chiseled into stone?

What We Talk About When We Talk About The Who

Posted by Mr. Moderator

Oct 052009

In a recent thread, Townsman jungleland2 raised an interesting point that I’ve heard raised many times over the years:

Just got the 2-disc The Who Sell Out. I know this is their “great” record of the 60’s but I am not connecting to it so far

Have you had this feeling? Have you heard this feeling expressed by other rock-loving, Who-loving friends when they finally get around to checking out this critically acclaimed Who album?

I love the album, myself, and I’ve recommended it to aspiring rock nerds through the years. However, there must be a half dozen friends who love The Who, whom I thought would surely love Sell Out, but who felt the same way jungleland2 does. It’s made me wonder what we talk about when we talk about The Who.

We don’t ask this question about The Beatles or The Rolling Stones or Bob Dylan, do we? Factoring in all artistic progressions, we still seem to find a common thread through their music, despite the fact that some of us prefer early Beatles or pot-smoking Beatles or Exile-era Stones or feel comfortable writing off the last 30+ years of Dylan’s output.

With The Who, however, an acknowledged titan of rock and contender for the Mount Rushmore of Rock, fans of the band seem to have more wildly varying notions of the band’s essence. Some fans feel the band is best defined by the early singles. Some feel it’s the epic stuff from the early ’70s. Most seem to be uncomfortable with the legacy of one of the band’s best-known works, Tommy, and all seem split on Sell Out and Live at Leeds. The funny thing is, I don’t think their music changed that much over the years, just the parts they emphasized at any given era.

What do we talk about when we talk about The Who?

Older Entries