Bob Dylan, rather than the Beach Boys would be the act everyone would try to emulate, which would probably have evolved into a lot of byrds-y and Donovan like folk rock...which kinda did happen.
DEPRAVOS DE LA MOUR said:
what was the real state of rock and roll in the us immediately pre invasion? i don't think that the beach boys would have inspired many kids to start a band. that singin' was way too hard. by styalistic plateau do you meant stagnant? cause a lot of the end of swing days sounds to us like strictly going through the motions and doing what is expected.
Lendell Ervin said:I absolutely agree with you, Nick. I'm merely posing the question. If a British Invasion never took place what would our musical landscape sound like? Would rock n roll have hit a prolonged stylistic plateau the same way swing and big band did a generation before? Would a new sound come out of some over looked pocket of the country?
Nick X said:Loe Reed once said the British shouldn't make rock n roll and while I can imagine sympathizing with the beatles ubiquitous captivation, I'm glad the British invasion happened. Some regional diversity is what America needed after the good ol commie-fearin' 50s. I also think that, while America was making raw, wild rock n roll before England, English bands like the stones, kinks and who brought a uniquely dismissive and disaffected attitude to rock that was very punk rock. The beatles may have seemed like the whole of the British invasion to someone who was there but there really was an diversity of bands on either side of the Atlantic and even more r&b rooted rebellions against the beatles in the uk. You can definitely hear how the stones influenced the chocolate watchband, the remains, stooges, new York dolls, etc. Let's keep the British invasion.