smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Sager, Greg" <greg.sager@bankofamerica.com> |
| Subject | Re: Johnny Ramone dead: R.I.P. |
| Date | Thu, 23 Sep 2004 13:21:50 -0500 |
[Part 1 text/plain (1.2 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 08:54:07 -0700
From: Michael Coxe <audities@sonic.net>
To: audities@smoe.org
Subject: Re: Johnny Ramone dead; R.I.P.
Message-ID: <4152F19F.3070807@sonic.net>
Sager, Greg wrote:
> One more reason why the Ramones were so cool -- they were not only
> thoroughly unphotogenic,
Hell, they were photogenic in the same way as the 50's beats on the road
& at home in SF/Upper East Side.
Which is to say, photogenic in a way not acknowledged or even comprehended
by the typical record-buying young person in 1977. And that's what Gary and
I were discussing: Why the Ramones didn't become stratosphere-level
superstars, or, as Gary put it, what went wrong with their "career
trajectory".
While the brit punks were hot, the Ramones
& Television were architypically cool. Way more bands (US at least) aped
Ramones than Pistols.
Nobody's arguing that the Ramones weren't influential, even in their heyday.
The discussion is about why the Ramones didn't achieve mass popularity,
which as any Big Star or Velvet Underground fan will tell you is a
completely different subject than achieving influence.
Gregory Sager
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.