Hey there.
A few days ago, I had a conversation with a few guys and we ended talking about
te question of musical influences and cover versions. More precisely, they were
laughing at me because I said I discovered lots of bands thanks to other ones. For
example, I am today a huge fan of the whole “Rocket from the Tombs-Dead Boys”
era, thanks to Guns N’ Roses’ cover of Ain’t It Fun on their album The
Spaghetti incident.
It really shocks me that one would have to be ashamed of
loving a song he discovered thanks to another band. I don’t lke the song
because GN’ R covered it : I heard their cover, liked it, and listened to the
original. I don’t see what’s wrong with that. Thanks to them, I discovered
Hanoï Rocks, Soundgarden, Blind Melon, The New York Dolls, to name a few. The
cover created my interest for the song, but I don’t feel forced to like it
because it was covered by one of my favorite bands.
Critics tend
to hate The Rolling Stones’ Dead Flowers : I first heard it thanks to GN’ R
live renditions, and I prefer the original. Same thing for Wild Horses.
I think the
question of musical inspiration and influences should be about recognition and
pride, not so-called musical knowledge. The guys I was talking with were
seriously trying to make me believe that they discovered everything by
themselves, directly on the original record. That’s sad, man. Music should be
about legacy, about acknowledgement, inspiration. To me, an artist can be said
to have been successful if he inspired others, if he left his mark in popular
culture. And transmission of musical culture also goes through cover versions.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire