clement wrote:I don't think this is mean, but this is sorta what I think...
I grew up in St. Louis and I can tell you that nobody played the Clash on the radio in St. Louis. I mean nobody. Sure, "Train in Vain" got a few plays on KADI (it was in Casey Kasem's Top 40 for goodness sakes), but I never once, not even once heard any other song, not London Calling, White Riot, Tommy Gun, I Fought the Law, Safe European Home, Police on my Back, or any of other early Clash material, up to and including Sandinista on commercial St. Louis radio. The only way and the only reason that I was buying the Clash records (and other similar bands) was because of doing research and reading on my own to find out what was going on in New York, London, and L.A. (among other places). I bought each of the Clash records without having ever heard a single track off any of them. All of my suburban friends who were listening to Rush, Van Halen, and Foghat thought I was a freak.
I know not everyone here is from St. Louis, but I don't think that most midwestern cities (and certainly other Missouri/Illinois cities) were much different (with the exception of Chicago). The Clash never even came to St. Louis. Neither did the Ramones. Neither did Devo. Not even Blondie, with all their #1 hits, ever came. Talking Heads came only once, before anyone even knew who they were. Because ticket sales were so bad, they had the record company come in and pay KSHE to sponsor the show and sell seats for $1.95.
By the time Combat Rock came out in 1982 (and with the help of MTV), they were still okay, but not nearly as inventive or interesting as their previous 4 albums. And that's when St. Louis radio started to give the Clash any airtime whatsoever.
So while the Clash are a much more acclaimed band in rock history, most people who grew up in St. Louis or similar places, just didn't really get a chance to grow up on that music. They grew up on the classic rock that KSHE (the biggest station of the sort) promoted.
Lastly, I would add this. While guitar is a very important element to rock music, so are lyrics. ZZTop sang about "legs" and girls going crazy for "sharped dressed men". The Clash sang about class struggle, disenfranchised youth, racial tensions, and a myriad of social issues. I still remember the first time I saw the Clash being interviewed on TV, Joe Strummer was asked what "punk rock" is about, and he said, "it ain't about playing the right chords for a start".
That's well and good, but it doesn't overcome the fact that when I listen to the Clash, I find myself bored. And I'm a punk guy.
I'm also a classic rock guy. And despite ZZ Top's "gimmicks" (the beards, the cheesy lyrics, etc.), their music was quite good. Were they just another band of their era? Not really. After Jimi and early Zeppelin, the blues were quickly exiting rock stage right. By the early 80's, ZZ Top and SRV (who is oddly absent from this tournament) were the only ones keeping the blues in rock. Which is important, since rock developed out of the blues in the first place.
I think what we have here is a divide between those who are afraid to vote for (or listen to in the first place) bands that look cheesy in hindsight, even though they made great music. The Clash may sound cool that you listen to them, but I really don't find them that listenable. Sex Pistols yes. Ramones somewhat. Clash no.
Vote ZZ.
--P--
