Dana Gier wrote:
>The Jam were way more than just a revival band. Of course, they utilized a
>lot of that which came before them. But they also added a >lot of
>different things to the mix, punk, soul, funk, and even a >little
>classical, to come up with a unique and modern product. They >didn't try to
>copy their forebears, note for note, chord for chord. >Does "Absolute
>Beginners" sound like anything that came before it? >Does "That's
>Entertainment" sound like anything from the 60s? >Does "Start" sound
>like... Uh, well, forget that
>one...
The Jam was a great band- my fav band, in fact- but they did more than just
"utilize" that which came heavily before them. They heavily "borrowed" from
bands like the Who and The Small Faces, maybe not note for note, but Weller
himself said that he would lift chord progressions straight from those bands
whenever he was having writers block. They all went out and bought
rickenbackers and lambrettas, weller styled his hair like Marriott, etc.
They were mods who were also into punk and soul, not the otherway 'round.
And if they were mods, making music for mods, they must have been a mod
band. And if they were a mod band, they must have been a mod revival band
since they were around in the late 70s rather than during the mid 60s.
But I think that we're just arguing about a technicality. The Jam was a
great band which ever catagory you put them in.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
_____________________________________________________________
Want to find the best email lists? Check out the Topica 20!
http://www.topica.com/topica20
