Elijah Wald's Allegation!

Here's the LATimes review of Wald's book"

http://www.latimes.com/features/books/la-et-book11-2009jun11,0,5874096.story

And here's my letter to the editor [just in case the LAT's doesn't publish it!!] ;-)

Erik Himmelsbach's excellent review of Elijah Wald's [dare I say] screed on The Beatles' alleged roll in the destruction of rock and roll is right on point -- especially when he points out that "Wald tries to have his cake and eat it...." Yes!

To sharpen his point -- Wald has contradicted himself: If popular acclaim is the key indicator of what should be regarded as important...then unless I've missed something I believe the Beatles are important -- in Wald's own terms. Of course, Wald may want to say something about the use and abuse of Black music. Ok. But what? That it was destroyed by The Beatles? If so, I haven't noticed it's destruction. And perhaps he'd better ask Fats Domino why he was so grateful to Pat Boone's cover-versions of his songs.

Yes times and technology change and music is affected by such things. But how this change occurs needs to be understood more critically.

Dare I suggest a book with which I am quite familiar?? It goes into the very nature of such change and proposes a theoretical basis for understanding it. Yes, it's my book: You Say You Want a Revolution: Rock Music in American Culture. Wald is partially correct -- there is a "destructive" quality to rock music [a "negation" if you will; however, it is part of an on-going dialectic resulting in an "affirmation" of something new. Remember "thesis, antithesis and synthesis"? I thought so!

After rereading Erik Himmelsbach's commentary I've come to the conclusion that he is actually being totally unfair to Elijah Wald -- Himmelsbach is employing reason; whereas, Wald has come to the discussion unarmed.