Possibly a touch off topic here (hell, this thread has already gone off on a few tangents) but this whole business has brought up an issue that's always been a bit of a bone of contention for me, that of claiming that certain people (or bands) are responsible for 'inventing' a scene...

Nothing is actually ever 'new', no band exists in a vacuum, scenes and styles evolve naturally with bands drawing on a shared set of influences, inspiring each other and shaping their sound via a kind of peer review.

Obviously certain acts can be credited with pushing a scene out into the mainstream and gaining mass popularity (and obviously The Beatles acted in this capacity on both sides of the Atlantic) but there still needs to be an audience which is receptive to that sound, conditioned by what has gone before.

I'm not suggesting anyone here would be guilty of this but you do get this crap all the time. Just the other day someone said to me:

"So, who would you say invented punk?"

"No one did you fucking retard! It was all derived from what had gone before!"

(argument ensues...)

Little Steven's comment seems to more or less support this naive idea of 'invention', when as we know full well bands in both the UK and US (and all over the bloody world) were drawing on the same set of references and forming a similar sound.

Being on the wrong side of the pond to be hearing Little Steven's radio show I'm not really aware of his work in this area but from what I can gather from this thread he seems to be setting himself up as some sort of authority on Garage and Rock n' Roll (let me know if I'm wrong there).

Whilst the comment may work as hyperbole to highlight the impact The Beatles had on popular music, it seems to me that if you're going to be try and be some sort of musical oracle spreading spurious bullshit ideas like that only serves to undermine your authority...

Constant nods to the Beatles is boring as hell.
There's two left who don't really need anymore smoke blown up their asses.
It's not like Paul and Ringo are constantly plugging Chuck Berry.
Little Steven could have wasted the time on a band equally deserving & lesser known.
Maybe he should have gotten out a little more or listened to the Kingsmen to tide him over cuz, yeah, everyone else in America at that time was listening to Pat Boone.

I believe what Lennon actually said was, "Nothing affected me until Elvis," which goes along with your point. He was making a personal statement, not a categorical one. IDON MINE said:

I don't know, that's basically my problem with all that quote-ing from experts, it just cuts out a lot of superb people and many more people forge their opinion after that.
Just like Lennon saying: "Before Elvis there was nothing." Which also maybe right for the mainstream explosion of making R'N'R a Pop phenomenon, but also a very subjective view coming from their own learning and experience with getting into R'N'R thru a certain happening in their life. I love the King, but he was not the sum of all raw music back then.<</body>

And as for local radio stations, I can never never never never get enough of R. Fink's "Rock 'n' Roll Dance Party" on WUSB in Stony Brook, NY. I live all the way down in middle-Georgia, but I make it a point to download his show every week. Hours and hours of the secret history of rock 'n' roll. I don't know what I would do without that show and the GP podcasts. Bob Blackstone said:

What about Mike & The Ravens....Del Shannon....John Kid & the Pirates.....I think Little Steven's show is so/so....I live outside nyc and a local station (vassar college) plays much better stuff. Little Steven plays the usuals...the Music Machine, Kinks, Ramones, the Cramps and so forth. His radio show is a disapointment, I never hear any cool shit like the Risingstorm, Contents Are, Mike & The Ravens, Bent Wind, Les Sinners or Back From The Grave shit....I guess this isn't mainstream enough...The Cramps are mainstream dude.

I do appreciate Manfred's show on the Undergarage channel. He's a fellow with his heart and ear in the right place. But as for much of the newer material forced into the station's playlists, and often celebrated as "the Coolest Song in the World" I find it weak, middle-of-the-road neo-psyche, whose biggest crime is how unassuming, unassertive it is. For its preaching about how garage, its influences, and offshoots are fueled by lust, kicks, and primitive beat that disregard the mainstream and raise skirts and eyebrows and blood pressure, the station champions some of the most timid and frigid tunes. Nothing by the Grip Weeds or the Charms would cause a blip in Alan Freed's pulse. The best thing I can say is I like seeing The Woggles and Maggots getting distro and airplay.

What about Mike & The Ravens....Del Shannon....John Kid & the Pirates.....I think Little Steven's show is so/so....I live outside nyc and a local station (vassar college) plays much better stuff. Little Steven plays the usuals...the Music Machine, Kinks, Ramones, the Cramps and so forth. His radio show is a disapointment, I never hear any cool shit like the Risingstorm, Contents Are, Mike & The Ravens, Bent Wind, Les Sinners or Back From The Grave shit....I guess this isn't mainstream enough...The Cramps are mainstream dude.

"Predictable, safe, and tame". That's pretty much how I'd describe Little Steven's radio program. Michael Kaiser said:

Well bless Little Steven for doing so much toward educating the goofy kids about Rock 'N' Roll! I know that a lot o' folks that sign-up for The Hideout list his show as their "Favorite GaragePunk Podcast(s)" (does he podcast, or is it a radio show?), so folks like what he does... But, seriously folks, that sound-bite/magazine quote ain't cutting edge or sensational in any way, shape, or form. Plain and simple: it's predictable, safe, and tame. Just admit it! We could all think of a nice, compact quip that could have shaken up the interviewer real good, couldn't we?
Saying that the quote leaves a lot to be desired is no knock on the man or what he has accomplished.

Well bless Little Steven for doing so much toward educating the goofy kids about Rock 'N' Roll! I know that a lot o' folks that sign-up for The Hideout list his show as their "Favorite GaragePunk Podcast(s)" (does he podcast, or is it a radio show?), so folks like what he does... But, seriously folks, that sound-bite/magazine quote ain't cutting edge or sensational in any way, shape, or form. Plain and simple: it's predictable, safe, and tame. Just admit it! We could all think of a nice, compact quip that could have shaken up the interviewer real good, couldn't we?

Saying that the quote leaves a lot to be desired is no knock on the man or what he has accomplished.

Good for Little Stevie for bringing the Sonics back, but it would certainly be bitter sweet if I had to to hear LS wank all over it.

I understand how looking at Little Steven’s comment on the Beatles in isolation can be taken as flippant, or even insulting, in regards to the great pre-’64 bands. Maybe many people here don’t listen to Little Steven’s show or station often. But if you take a look at his other words and actions, it might put things in a different light. The guy regularly plays the Wailers, Sonics, Beach Boys, Trashmen, Ventures and many other pre-’64 bands on his station (as well as the rock ‘n roll pioneers). He calls the ’63 recording of “Louie Louie” by the Kingsmen the “Gospel of Garage”. He has done syndicated shows specifically dedicated to Surf. He has spoken glowingly about the early-‘60s Pacific Northwest scene, including calling it the beginning of the garage rock movement. There was a comment earlier in this discussion about Little Steven practically ruining the Sonics show in Seattle last year with his on-stage antics. I can’t speak to that specifically, and perhaps that’s the case. But give him some credit. He’s the guy who coaxed the Sonics out of retirement in the first place, and helped promote their return.

Is it hyperbole or is it the ubiquitous revisionism and flattening-out of historical events, complex issues and societal trends that runs rampant through the mediashpere? Either way, I think it's total bullshit and it's exactly why popular culture is a waste of time.

While I wish that Little Stephen might have chosen to expand on the topic to reflect a greater degree of accuracy, it certainly would have lacked the punchiness of what a magazine editor is looking for. While I think it's unfair to criticize L.S. for being media savvy... why am I so completely annoyed by his statement? Maybe it's *not* too harsh to expect that L.S. who has been a (dare I say) champion of the garagerock cause to not willfully gloss over details in pursuit of a tasty quote. I think I'd feel pretty insulted if I'd played in a pre-'64 r&r outfit.

And what inspires the greatest amount of pissyness and resignation in me is that nothing about this (the "story" and the debate that follows) comes as any surprise (Please pass the rageahol).

Finally, here's a book suggestion: True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society by Farhad Manjoo. A good book that'll explain why You, Me and Little Stephen can all have the "right" story and why that should make you even more depressed.

Also worth sayin', not sure how cool I am with LS even being a loose spokes person fer garage rock ...maybe that's part o' the reason I am slippin' away from straight garage rock and fallin' mo' & mo' in love with garagepunk

Thee Crucials said:

I just picked up this:
Elijah Wald's How the Beatles Destroyed Rock n Roll: An Alternative History of American Popular Music. I hope to get to it this week after I finish Sonic Boom, a history of the northwest rock 'n' roll scene. I might send Little Steven some copies, or at least the Cliffs Notes versions.

Richard Meltzer was once asked to do a comprehensive "best of the 60s" article for a magazine (in 1969 no less). He "pulled a fast one" and only covered the early 60s. Funny shit. If you don't own the anthology of his essays "A Whore Just Like The Rest", I highly recommend getting it!

Ha, good point! Anyway, I’m just saying that LS's is using hyperbole to illustrate the incredible impact the appearance of the Beatles on Ed Sullivan had on rock ‘n roll, and popular culture as a whole. Just my two cents… kopper said:

OK, so my point is an "understatement" yet Little Steven's comment is "being taken too literally."

Whatever, man. I don't read "Black is black" and construe that to mean "Black is kinda like dark gray."

Gas-House Gorilla said:

RayDanger has hit the nail right on the head. I think Little Steven’s statement is being taken way too literally. The point is that rock 'n roll was completely hemorrhaging until the Beatles hit the Ed Sullivan show, and that singular event changed everything. Kopper saying that this appearance gave rock ‘n roll a huge shot in the arm is too much of an understatement. It completely resuscitated rock ‘n roll – to the point of it becoming the dominate form of popular music. And thousands of bands cropped up throughout the country essentially the next day.

As for Little Steven, I am a bit fan his. Perhaps he makes some mistakes and missteps along the way, but he is doing as much as (and likely more than) anybody to promote great music. Outside of his program, and the GaragePunk podcasts, it’s very difficult to hear music of any quality. You sure as hell can’t do it by turning on the radio.

OK, so my point is an "understatement" yet Little Steven's comment is "being taken too literally." Whatever, man. I don't read "Black is black" and construe that to mean "Black is kinda like dark gray." Gas-House Gorilla said:

RayDanger has hit the nail right on the head. I think Little Steven’s statement is being taken way too literally. The point is that rock 'n roll was completely hemorrhaging until the Beatles hit the Ed Sullivan show, and that singular event changed everything. Kopper saying that this appearance gave rock ‘n roll a huge shot in the arm is too much of an understatement. It completely resuscitated rock ‘n roll – to the point of it becoming the dominate form of popular music. And thousands of bands cropped up throughout the country essentially the next day.

As for Little Steven, I am a bit fan his. Perhaps he makes some mistakes and missteps along the way, but he is doing as much as (and likely more than) anybody to promote great music. Outside of his program, and the GaragePunk podcasts, it’s very difficult to hear music of any quality. You sure as hell can’t do it by turning on the radio.

RayDanger has hit the nail right on the head. I think Little Steven’s statement is being taken way too literally. The point is that rock 'n roll was completely hemorrhaging until the Beatles hit the Ed Sullivan show, and that singular event changed everything. Kopper saying that this appearance gave rock ‘n roll a huge shot in the arm is too much of an understatement. It completely resuscitated rock ‘n roll – to the point of it becoming the dominate form of popular music. And thousands of bands cropped up throughout the country essentially the next day.

As for Little Steven, I am a bit fan his. Perhaps he makes some mistakes and missteps along the way, but he is doing as much as (and likely more than) anybody to promote great music. Outside of his program, and the GaragePunk podcasts, it’s very difficult to hear music of any quality. You sure as hell can’t do it by turning on the radio.

OK Everyone, keep slappin' those highfives! Kopper: Exactly my say! MK: Me neither am an expert, hahahah. Jorge: Right my say again! Well, now to be seriuos: To say it with the friendly mock-yer-ass-words of Bo Diddley: Little Steve, if you wanna be so true to the facts then ya better "Quit mumblin' and talk out loud!" Make that shit clear, and don't be another quoter on the back of a book. Am I riled up, shit yes! 'Cause people listen to you - and then you got another round a teenagers that take years to figure out the good shit behind the big sellers. PC is, I guess, not so much the topic here, as little Steven hardly seems to be Mr. Controversial and his quote not the kind of thing that gets people thinking thru the backdoor of provoking shit. Crucials: I think that "Twist and shout" example stands quite well for what the Beatles have partly built their success on at that point, namely covering songs that don't need any covering (...covering them in the Beatles sense) and making the big buck with that. Yeah sure, covering also was pretty common do back then, whole sets of teenage bands just being covers of R'n'B and stuff, but it's just something else. Now it's "their" song to many people that never went after the source. But it was already awesome. the Beatles always had the reputation of making songs "better" by their technically good playing (compared to real raw rockers). I don't see their covering in the same rank as, say Hasil Adkins doing "the Banana boat song" because that's a reinterpreting by an original musician (who would also have much more than deserved his place in the charts) and not a hype-up crowd pleaser for the dancefloor by a band with a business plan. But all grudges aside, ya can't make a song like that better, because it is perfect in it's original form, as a friend of mine used to say. I guess that's one part why the Beatles can't stand as a seminal group in the vein of that quote. They just had a different position than most of the bands at that time. Just like little Steven has among rockfans and journalists. I'm afraid I thread dangerous/dorkish waters here, but his past makes him pretty biased on that topic and his viewpoints on R'N'R. AND to finally set myself up as a wiseass: R'N'R might have been dead to the media and to musicians as a new, inspirational music genre, but did that ever stop it from growing until now?? I couldn't care less what some dickwaddddd (not meaning LS) would say. There is always something growing and brooding somewhere in some small cavern, and that's what this music lives from, not epoch making news and (s)hits.

I've heard of him. I've never heard his radio show. And the only Bruce Springsteen song that I am positive that I've heard is "Born in the USA". I truly live under a rock. Alex said:

BUT... one point I think we're missing here... am I to understand that Michael Kaiser hasn't heard of Little Steven? Steve Van Zandt? Of Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band?

I agree with everyone that there were clearly rock 'n' roll bands before the Beatles. And certainly there were bands that stuck to that same sound even after the Beatles changed their sound to move away from the traditional "rock 'n' roll" sound (not that they could ever rock half as hard as the Sonics). BUT... one point I think we're missing here... am I to understand that Michael Kaiser hasn't heard of Little Steven? Steve Van Zandt? Of Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band? Michael Kaiser said:

When folks make ignorant claims like that it's either that they are trying to be sensational, and thus cementing their status as "expert", or they only know - and are concerned with - mainstream popular culture.

I stick with my tired & worn-out assertion that most folks don't really care too much about music (except in the socially acceptable, "clique-ish" manner of a college student), and even more don't know very much about the vast wealth of recorded music that is available.

I would think a more educated statement would have gone along the lines of "There were millions of Rock 'N' Roll groups throughout the world until The Beatles watered it down to something that parents could dig. Thus they (The Beatles) killed Rock 'N' Roll! You can thank The Beatles for Steely Dan et al."

*edited to note that I don't know Little Steven, nor have I ever heard his radio show. So it's nothing personal - It can't be; I just think that that quote is odd.

So yeah, that's what. I love these interviews, they are pretty recent. Thought you might give it a go too! MICK COLLINS DEAD MOON MIKE WATT PS: I KNOW you hate IAN SVENONIUS, I don't, so frakkin' what, hahahahahha!

Oh, YEAH!

I love your work on that cover!
I also love reading that little recap on the photo, erm, story.

I'm thrilled to hear this one out!!!

Bitchen! Can't wait to hear album too.

The A-Bones approached me about the cover of their latest LP, and the idea was to emulate the cover of "The Rolling Stones, Now!" cover from 1965. What a fun homage! In the mid-60's, the Stones were really breaking out with their 3rd record stateside, and photography was at a crucial juncture in time. David Bailey was king, and the first Pentax Spotmatic SLR was introduced. In our 2009 version on the left, I tried to keep the intimacy, but break through to a range of focal lenghts, while showing more of the location. It's tricky to modernize something so astutely perfect the way it is. I can't say how proud I am to have been a part of this really special record, The A-Bones' first full-length recording in 15 years! I spent 2 days (Jan. 12th and 13th, 2009) underground at N.Y. Hed studios while these guys made magic with track-master Matt Verta-Ray, and an organ-player like you wouldn't believe! Dave "Baby" Cortez , who had a mind-blowing guest appearance on the track "Catnip". I snapped away silently while they laid down pure gold, and was frankly awe-struck at the level of musicianship, and genuinely entertained by the dynamics of the group. These guys are on my A-LIST of favorite people ever. Below you'll find some more gems from the shoot! (Read more about it on Miriam Linna's blog http://nortonville.blogspot.com/)! Left to Right: Marcus "The Carcass" Natale, Lars Espensen, Ira Kaplan (Yo La Tengo), Bruce Bennett, Billy Miller, Miriam Linna, Dave "Baby" Cortez. **** CLICK HERE FOR MORE PHOTOS!****

HA! I like the collag-y look of it - corporate stuff = we all got to earn our records somehow, man! Mr. Twitcher said:

Just one - the first and only cover I have done so far. Not nearly as interesting as those above, but the band liked it and I was satisfied. (Most of my work is boring corporate design stuff.)