|
Subject: Keith Richards on the box From: mikesamwild Date: 29 Oct 10 - 08:36 AM Wasn't that a great interview and programme on BBC last night. The book should be worth buying. As a war baby and child of the 50s and early 60s what struck me was how that scene arose out of a reaction to drabness, an identification with poor black America and the opportunity to British kids to mess about a bit at art college! Without British skiffle, trad and modern jazz and folk and blues I don't know whether R&B would have progressed to Rock and Roll as it became . Oh and some drugs apparently. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST,johnmc Date: 29 Oct 10 - 08:59 AM I thought the clip showing him being interviewed as a young man for his reaction to Brian Jones death showed the humanity of the man. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: mikesamwild Date: 29 Oct 10 - 09:04 AM I thought it was a great interview and he obviously trusted his co writer and the interviewer. A great collaboration. I'm please he kept his marbles, what a constitution and an upbringing that left him able to cope with fame and falling out of his tree!. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: WalkaboutsVerse Date: 29 Oct 10 - 09:09 AM ...but, as I've suggested here, why not let Americans be Americans and practice/perform from England's own fine cultural heritage - thereby helping keep our world nice and multicultural? |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: mikesamwild Date: 29 Oct 10 - 09:33 AM Well some white Americans did carry on the British tradition, that's why Cecil Sharp went out to collect. Do you mean Americans are only white? and were all whites British (or English as you imply)? Anyway stop trying to hijack the thread. This was atribute to Keef |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: fat B****rd Date: 29 Oct 10 - 09:53 AM I thoroughly enjoyed the interview. Keef comes over as a decent human being with a broad world view and a respect for others. I shall be buying the book very soon. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Nicholas Waller Date: 29 Oct 10 - 10:00 AM I quite liked his art-college-student conception of silence being for a musician like an artist's empty canvas or a writer's blank page, the thing you draw on or scribble on or in his case make a noise on (and playing with it and using it without, he said, obliterating it). |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST,Alan Whittle Date: 29 Oct 10 - 12:43 PM Yes indeed, I've often wondered.... When you're one of the most talented original artists in the owrld, who has produced the most memorable music of your generation...music which has been played and sung and danced to and given pleasure to every class of humanity in every country in the world..... Why won't you accept the restrictions placed on you by some mediocrity who performs unmemorable songs to three mates - all of whom can't wait to get up themselves and bore their mates shitless? it really puzzles me. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: WalkaboutsVerse Date: 29 Oct 10 - 01:06 PM Early in the last century, English tended to be over-confident to the point where other cultures had to be conquered and converted; it's gone from one extreme to the other, and Keith Richards is but one example. If you love our world being multicultural, then you appreciate other cultures AND perform/practice your own (more on this via link above). |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: The Sandman Date: 29 Oct 10 - 01:13 PM was there something about mick jagger having a small willy? |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST,johnmc Date: 29 Oct 10 - 01:40 PM Could Alan explain his comment - it is lost on me, I'm afraid. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Suegorgeous Date: 29 Oct 10 - 02:03 PM Yeh, I didn't understand what Alan meant either. I also liked the bit about silence, giving it equal weight and validity to sound. Well, there wouldn't BE any sound without it! |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST,michaelr Date: 29 Oct 10 - 02:09 PM Al was responding sarcastically to WAV's post. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST,Alan Whittle Date: 29 Oct 10 - 02:35 PM Yes . I was being sarcastic, which isn't nice. However I've just read through a thread with people slagging off Leadbelly and Robert jOHNSON. And I really do think its a bit of a bugger. Keith Richard.... well he's a bit special. His music is all over the world, but his artistic message transcends even that. When he was younger, the world's greatest photgraphers and film makers all captured his physical beauty, and every young musician aspires to that sort of grace. He comes from a working class English family with no advantages that our class and education system can confer on one. His techniques have their origins in recordings which had an honourable place in folk music and English folk clubs in the 1960's - the Sam Charters compendium of the blues and the chess albums reissues. The late Peter Bellamy used to sing some of Keith's songs. Keith is worthy of a measure of respect. Its a bit like that Harry Enfield character - I think what you really meant was ..... No he bloody didn't. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: WalkaboutsVerse Date: 29 Oct 10 - 05:11 PM I agree when Keith mentioned, light-heartedly, peaking, in terms of culture, as a boy soprano. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST,toftwoodtoft Date: 30 Oct 10 - 12:19 AM and all on five strings what a genius |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Mavis Enderby Date: 30 Oct 10 - 03:59 AM Link to the programme here on iPlayer (I think UK only though): Culture Show |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Monique Date: 30 Oct 10 - 04:55 AM Indeed! It says "Not available in your area" (France) but you can listen to and download this interview |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST Date: 30 Oct 10 - 09:09 AM i noticed, on the film that, like Alan , the TV announcer at the time of the drugs bust called him Keith Richard without the 's' (I think he meant Sir Cliffe actually, now he would have been a real wild man)
|
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Suegorgeous Date: 30 Oct 10 - 11:09 AM You mean Cliff, of course.... |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Tattie Bogle Date: 30 Oct 10 - 01:14 PM I've often puzzled over the name: he WAS RICHARD without an s in the earlier days, was this a mistake or did he get fed up with people calling him the (commoner) RICHARDS all the time? He is credited as RICHARD on the 2 LPs in our collection (1964 and 66) |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: WalkaboutsVerse Date: 30 Oct 10 - 01:26 PM GUEST,toftwoodtoft - PM Date: 30 Oct 10 - 12:19 AM "and all on five strings what a genius"...the English cittern has 5 times 2 courses of strings, traditionally plucked with a feather plectrum. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Tug the Cox Date: 30 Oct 10 - 03:03 PM TB, Wiki tells all. In 1963 Richards dropped the "s" from his surname and began using the professional name "Keith Richard", because Rolling Stones manager Andrew Loog Oldham felt it "looked more pop".[17] (He used the s-less version as his pen name and stage name until the late 1970s.) |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Desert Dancer Date: 30 Oct 10 - 08:13 PM Also on National Public Radio: The Rolling Stones' Keith Richards Looks Back At 'Life'. ~ Becky in Long Beach |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST Date: 31 Oct 10 - 10:30 AM Does anyone know who the posh british balding angular-faced commentator is - who contributes a lot to the programme but doesn't seem to be attributed? |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: bubblyrat Date: 31 Oct 10 - 10:46 AM I thoroughly enjoyed the programme,and thought that he seemed quite lucid compared to some previous interviews. I agree that he has indeed been an important and influential figure in his chosen field,and I admire him for that,but I hardly think that he could be called a "genius " !! |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: EBarnacle Date: 31 Oct 10 - 10:55 AM Breaking news: there was an article indicating doubts that he would be redoing his role as Jack Sparrow's dad in Pirates of the Caribbean 4. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST,Alan Whittle Date: 31 Oct 10 - 11:30 AM 'I hardly think that he could be called a "genius " !! ' Maybe not, but what he has achieved is more crediatble in my eyes that many people who are called a genius. I heard Ann Widdecombe described as 'a bit of a genius' just recently. Fleming, Brunel, Frank Whittle (no relation), Mozart, Einstein, Shakespeare.... I suppose we can all agree on the obvious ones. But you don't get far down the list before it becomes debatable. I met a jazz trumpeter last month who didn't reckon much of Bix Beiderbecke. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Johnny J Date: 31 Oct 10 - 11:52 AM The most talented musician in the band was Brian Jones although, admittedly, not much of a songwriter. However, he took even less care of himself than Keef and couldn't last. Also, Iain Stewart contributed much but was always hidden away from the limelight as Oldham reckoned he didn't look the part. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST,Woodsie Date: 31 Oct 10 - 12:43 PM Long after Oldham they still kept Stewart in the dark! |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: s&r Date: 31 Oct 10 - 12:59 PM Just a quote for you WAV "Citterns were very popular throughout Europe. The English Cittern, having four courses, a bizarre but useful tuning, and often a built-in hook for wall hanging, had a low reputation, due to its popularity in taverns, barber shops and houses of ill repute. It is normally strummed with a crow quill, and it produces a rich, banjo-like sound which is ideal for accompanying vulgar ballads. Like the guitar, it has a limited published repertoire of simple fantasies. The French commonly used a five course instrument, and the Italians a six course, both of which attained honourable places at court." OOps Stu |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: WalkaboutsVerse Date: 31 Oct 10 - 01:47 PM "OOps" (Stu) you didn't give the source; but, e.g., in the BBC series "Tales from the Green Valley" a period-instrument expert came on with several, including a 5 times 2 course English cittern. Either way, don't you think it a shame that English who are good at another culture tend to get so much more reward than those who are good at their own? |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Desert Dancer Date: 31 Oct 10 - 01:59 PM Rolling Stone (magazine) article |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST Date: 31 Oct 10 - 02:34 PM Suegorgeous I gave Cliff an 'e' because he is a Sir. ye olde Cliffe , |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST,Alan Whittle Date: 31 Oct 10 - 02:44 PM 'Either way, don't you think it a shame that English who are good at another culture tend to get so much more reward than those who are good at their own?' No. I believe the Rolling Stones and indeed, the whole of the English R and B revival was uniquely British - as was the trad jazz boom, just prior to it. Listen to American r and b and American trad jazz side by side with the English stuff - it is qualitavely very different stuff. Not inferior - not superior - just different. Just as English heavy metal is very different.And English reggae is nowt like the Jamaican stuff. Its cos we are a different country. A different culture. We are a distinct and unique voice - even without a cittern, a finger in the ear, or a song from Cecil Sharp house. Unmistakable. As the late John Peel put it - 'people used to tell me that Eric Clapton was a inferior version of BB KIng, and that BB King was 'the real stuff'. Its rubbish. Eric has his own voice, it's English, and I much prefer it.' |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: s&r Date: 31 Oct 10 - 03:27 PM Ah well WAV, as an Englishman I am happy to absorb, enjoy and reproduce other cultures. I play a cittern, and a ukulele, and sing Geordie songs with a bizarre accent (not alone there cobber), and violin and guitar and mouth organ and I feel free so to do. I am delighted to spend my energies in music art and literature of all kinds. I value the American accent(s) and spellings as my own. Much good literature comes from the USA Do I think that performers of English folk music are under-rewarded? Some - but that's true of all human endeavour. There are equally underpaid wannabees in all of the Arts, hence 'Don't give up the day job.' Congratulations by the way on moderating some of your more extreme pronouncements, I appreciate it Stu |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: WalkaboutsVerse Date: 31 Oct 10 - 03:48 PM Stu and Alan: if you listen to the interview, Keith himself has no such delusion about the fact that he was copying aspects of American culture, partly in rebellion; all his heroes were (mainly African) American musicians, and he still thinks copying their styles was a good thing - although, as I said above, he light-heartedly mentioned being a boy soprano as his cultural peak. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST,Alan Whittle Date: 31 Oct 10 - 04:41 PM No delusions involved. He uses American music, but not even as a basis, he is English - so what he delivers is really as English as fish and chips. there are dead giveaways 1) the music is high camp - more kenneth williams than muddy waters 2) that salacious gleam in the eyes of the stones isn't the jaded knowingness of a worker in the sex industry 3)can you imagine buddy guy having a sitar on one of his records? 4) 'schooled with a strap right across my back' - no one who has been so schooled writes an upbeat song about it and so on ad mauseam. Get your finger out your lughole and listen - its all there. english, high camp, sexually ambiguous - its noel coward/ with a patina of chuck berry. Project for tonight: compare the artistic message of Play with Fire or 19th Nervous breakdown with Coward's Poor Little Rich Girl. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: WalkaboutsVerse Date: 31 Oct 10 - 05:40 PM Forgive me, Alan, but I'm afraid it's you who is muddying the waters. And, speaking of waters, the Rolling Stones did, at least once, have a go at folk (if not English folk, perhaps because of the rebellious streak that, I think, we do agree on): I'm quite sure it was The Chieftains' "Water from the Well" where I saw that. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST,Alan Whittle Date: 31 Oct 10 - 06:09 PM Well I'd have no problem seeing the Stones output as folk. But English folk, on account of them being English. its not really worth arguing about. I see them as quintessentially English, you don't. I suppose your compass points in a different direction. We're both writers and take what we need from the folk process. Writing songs that sounded like say Mike Waterson writes songs would be for me betrayal of my roots. It would confront the way my parents and grandparents sang. I can see and I respect the skill involved in what the Watersons do, but its not for me. As for writers 'in the folk tradition' getting less financial rewards. I can't really see it. It seems to me the big wheels on the folkscene get access to all sorts of artistic opportunities, which are denied to writers who are far more passionately committed to writing for the English sensibility. Don't lets argue about it. this was a nice little tribute thread to Keef. None of us who like contemporary folk would dream of hi-jacking a thread about Martin Carthy, or Sam Larner. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: The Sandman Date: 31 Oct 10 - 06:26 PM they a recorded a cyril tawney song with marianne faithful, sally fre and easy, however heres another version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2tUvD0IjQY |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: s&r Date: 31 Oct 10 - 07:15 PM Just by the way WAV have a listen to some wonderful English blues on Al Whittles website. Stu |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST,Alan Whittle Date: 31 Oct 10 - 07:34 PM That's nice of you to say Stu. I'd be the first to admit that I'm nowt special as a musician. But I have tried with my playing, and I think that gives you an insight into whats worth respecting. And I think Keith is pretty special - he has that vision thing, which marks out the Jansch's, the McTells, the Carthy's; from the 'tries hard' blokes like myself. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: s&r Date: 31 Oct 10 - 07:46 PM Spot on Al with the Keith comment. However, don't undersell yourself as a wonderful entertainer and good wordsmith. For WAV look here Stu |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST,biff Date: 31 Oct 10 - 08:41 PM someone give us a link that an american computer can access? |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST,Alan Whittle Date: 31 Oct 10 - 09:24 PM http://www.bigalwhittle.co.uk/ |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: fat B****rd Date: 01 Nov 10 - 06:04 AM I think Mick and Keith's 'Factory Girl' is pretty damn "folky" and 'Lady Jane' is not exactly Rock'n'roll, is it?. I'm with Al this is a Keef tribute fred. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: WalkaboutsVerse Date: 02 Nov 10 - 11:31 AM Loving our world being multicultural, I admire those who are good at their own culture. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: mandotim Date: 02 Nov 10 - 12:06 PM You need to understand that for Walkaboutsverse, every thread is about Walkaboutsverse. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST Date: 02 Nov 10 - 02:32 PM Was the ghost writer (Old Etonian) a son of the actor ? Fox. he looked like The Jackal but was quite good on the programme.
|
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: s&r Date: 02 Nov 10 - 07:11 PM Loving MY country being multicultural I am delighted to see the results of the intermingling of cultures. I admire anyone who works to develop their musical skill: I don't give a toss about their accent or where the are born. Sadly there are some (not many) people who believe that culture should be kept in a pretty tin box sealed with blue ribbon. Stu |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: WalkaboutsVerse Date: 03 Nov 10 - 07:17 AM As I said in a brief talk, about this time last year, as part of the BBC/Sage Gateshead Free Thinking Festival, "If you are not American, don't Americanise, for the love of our world being multicultural" - quickly stressing the difference between being anti-American and anti-Americanisation, of course. And this year, by the way, at 3.30 on Saturday at the Sage, my brief talk will be: "Cut Capitalism." |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: alanabit Date: 03 Nov 10 - 07:36 AM I agree Stu. The mind boggles to think how many English folk songs would have been lost for ever had not Irish folk singers kept them alive. As for blues and rhythm and blues music, it is worth pointing out that until British blues bands started touring the US in the sixties, Muddy Waters and BB King were both virtually unknown in their own land. Indeed, their popularity, which had only ever existed in a small market, had already long since waned. They both generously acknowledged this in many interviews. The musicians, who revolutionised pop music in the sixties, could only possibly have done so by mixing US and British influences. In some ways, with their swagger and attitude, the Stones are the ultimate American band. However, only spiteful middle class English boys could have written "Play With Fire", "Mother's Little Helper" or "Nineteenth Nervous Breakdown" - let alone the casual vulgarity of "Brown Sugar" or "Honky Tonk Women". If you just hear the bass and drums at a distance, the Stones sound distinctly British, yet they are the template for the ultimate American bands like Aerosmith and Guns and Roses et al. The Stones mixed up what they knew and passed it on. That is what happens in a living culture. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: The Sandman Date: 03 Nov 10 - 02:56 PM the problem with the Rolling Stones[imo] is that jick, magger.the rest of them were genuinely into the music, but jick was into himself |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: alanabit Date: 03 Nov 10 - 03:15 PM He is narcisstic for sure. On the other hand, in the time he has been with the Stones, he has become a reasonable pianist, a fair rhythm guitarist and nifty harmonica player. That does not suggest to me that he is indifferent to music. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Lonesome EJ Date: 03 Nov 10 - 06:34 PM Imagine! Jagger having an ego! Next you'll tell me Dylan has one too! |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: s&r Date: 03 Nov 10 - 07:51 PM What do you see as the difference between being anti-American and anti-Americanization WAV. Just interested because it seems to cause you some confusion... Stu |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Jack Campin Date: 03 Nov 10 - 09:30 PM The mind boggles to think how many English folk songs would have been lost for ever had not Irish folk singers kept them alive. My mind would boggle if there was even one song in that category. Name one? |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: WalkaboutsVerse Date: 04 Nov 10 - 06:22 AM For you Stu: the main difference between being anti-American and anti-Americanisation is, as I've said, a love of our world being multicultural. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: alanabit Date: 04 Nov 10 - 09:52 AM The mind boggles to think how many English folk songs would have been lost for ever had not Irish folk singers kept them alive. My mind would boggle if there was even one song in that category. Name one? Shall we start with The Wild Rover, which was collected in Norfolk? It is a shame we do not have Malcolm Douglas here, who I am sure could have reeled off a list from memory! |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Jack Campin Date: 04 Nov 10 - 10:14 AM Why would it have been lost? The Irish posters got it from a Walter Pardon recording which is still available. All the Irish popularization did was turn it into a drunken cliche. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Jack Campin Date: 04 Nov 10 - 10:14 AM For "posters" read "popsters". |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Desert Dancer Date: 04 Nov 10 - 02:17 PM Liz Phair's lengthy review/summary of Keith Richards' book in the New York Times: click. ~ Becky in Tucson |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: Jack the Sailor Date: 04 Nov 10 - 02:36 PM I Love Keith's playing. It think he probably the best writer and player of Blues/Pop guitar riffs ever. Though Jimmy Page gives him serious competition in that field. I used to think Keef was a genius, until I saw Muddy Waters in concert. Keith obviously picked up his skill by using Muddy and perhaps Buddy Guy, Chuck Berry and some others as templates. I don't call that genius. I do call it damn good musicianship. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: s&r Date: 04 Nov 10 - 03:54 PM Just a bit of a non sequitur in your 'explanation' WAV. It doesnt't make sense. no change there then Stu PS I had thought that your jingoism had taken a back seat. Sorry it's not so. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: WalkaboutsVerse Date: 04 Nov 10 - 06:09 PM Stu: further to the above, then: if, e.g., more and more people around the world choose to present their verses in a pop or rock style, rather than traditionally, our world will become less and less multicultural. And loving our world being multicultural is surely not "jingoism". |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: mandotim Date: 04 Nov 10 - 06:53 PM WAV; you seem to assume in all these discussions that there is a single, defineable 'rock or pop style' in music. I guess this is because your ear is insufficiently discriminating to discern the difference between (say) Ray Davis and Lynyrd Skynyrd, or between Pink Floyd and Aerosmith. This may also be because you don't listen to much rock or pop music. To those who know, there are similarities, but also clearly identifiable differences. These differences are often the result of cultural influences. It is an undeniable fact that all cultures are influenced by other cultures to a greater or lesser extent, and bemoaning this fact doesn't (and cannot) change it. Cultural influencing is a reflection of the human urge to learn, grow and develop, and it is utterly impossible to stand in the way of this basic impulse. What I'm saying, WAV, is; get over yourself, stop whining about cultural mingling and learn to appreciate the wonders of learning from the glorious mix of influences that make up the world. Don't bang on about your bloody travels though; you've made it absolutely clear (ad nauseam) in your previous posts that you didn't learn a single thing from any of the cultures you observed (but didn't participate in.) |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: s&r Date: 04 Nov 10 - 07:47 PM 'and colloquially to excessive bias in judging one's own country as superior to others' is a fair contextual definition from your own sources. If we had frozen our development 2000 years or so ago we'd be speaking latin. There is nothing any more traditional about your tea-parties with the vicar with buxom serving wenches serving mead while minstrels play citterns than in listening to my (Bradford) grandson rapping or the band in the pub playing rock and roll. Loving the zoo being multicultural while you walk around smiling at the antics of inferior cultures seems to me to describe a world that isn't mine. I'm with Mandotim - I see more value in 'learning from the glorious mix of influences that make up the world.; Nice phrase Tim Stu |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: WalkaboutsVerse Date: 06 Nov 10 - 03:45 PM Listening to Keith in this interview, and members of the Beatles in others, the musicians who inspired them were all Americans - as I say, they, rather, were not kidding anyone about the fact that they were copying aspects of American culture (according to them, it was, and is, a cool thing to do); and the Beatles were so pop, they even tried talking in American accents. |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: mandotim Date: 06 Nov 10 - 04:14 PM Hi again WAV. Are you familiar with Liverpudlian history, particularly the development of the distinctive accent? I think you'll find that the blues singers of the Mississippi Delta were in fact scousers to a man. If you study the linguistics of Liverpool, you will hear the words 'this, that, them and those' prounced as 'dis, dat, dem and dose'. This was largely as a result of poor adenoidal care in the Liverpool hospitals, but it appears to have travelled the Atlantic and become embedded in the accents of the older blues singers; for instance, you would never hear a proper bluesman saying 'that' when he meant 'dat'. As for the Beatles, I was a teenager at the time (you were an infant) and I never heard the Beatles affect any accent than Scouse (apart from Paul, who would occasionally try to talk posh to impress Jane Asher). |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: s&r Date: 06 Nov 10 - 06:49 PM WAV how would you describe your own accent? I would not recognize it as anything that emanates from the northern hemisphere. But I don't mind your attempts at an English accent any more than I mind Maurice Chevalier or Marlene Deitrich. My grandchildren speak variously Yorks, Irish, Oxford, Lancashire other members of my family speak Notts, Canadian, Norfolk, Devon, Scots. We get together, and talk and sing... What is your problem? Stu |
|
Subject: RE: Keith Richards on the box From: GUEST,biff Date: 06 Nov 10 - 07:29 PM thanks alan for your link, I checked it out. I was asking for a link to the Keith interview that could be accessed by an american computer. |
| Share Thread: |
