Here you can discuss other musicians and CD reissues etc

Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Sat Mar 17, 2012 10:08 am

How would the future of music in the rock era, and beyond, have been different, had he lived? The possibilities are endless, because he was all potential . . . and was starting to go in very unusual directions, both personally and musically. Both, actually, together.

phpBB [video]



rjm

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Sat Mar 17, 2012 9:30 pm

This was inspired by listening again to American Pie in the "Did Rock and Roll Die With Elvis" topic. I listen to this, by Buddy, and wondered what things would look like. He was going to move to Greenwich Village, which really would turn things in a totally different direction. Maybe, no Dylan, if Buddy was there first . . . and a lot of things you can imagine.

biography.com wrote:Solo Career and Untimely Death

In October 1958, Holly split from The Crickets and moved to Greenwich Village in New York City. Due to legal and financial problems resulting from the band's breakup, Holly reluctantly agreed to tour through the Midwest in 1959 with The Winter Dance Party. Tired of enduring broken-down buses in subfreezing conditions, Holly chartered a private plane to take him from a show in Clear Lake, Iowa, to the tour's next stop in Moorhead, Minnesota. Holly was joined on the doomed flight by fellow performers Ritchie Valens and The Big Bopper. The plane crashed within minutes of leaving the ground, killing all aboard. Buddy Holly was just 22 years old. His funeral was held at the Tabernacle Baptist Church back in Lubbock.

Buddy Holly proposed on his first date with Maria Elena Santiago, a receptionist four years his senior, and married her less than two months later in 1958. Maria Elena did not attend Holly's funeral, as she had also just suffered a miscarriage. She still owns the rights to Buddy Holly's name, image, trademarks and other intellectual property.

Holly's death was memorialized in Don McLean's iconic song "American Pie" as "the day the music died." Holly's music never really died, though, despite the singer's tragic and untimely death. Unissued recordings and compilations of Holly's work were released in a steady stream throughout the 1960s. Due to the continued popularity of his music and film adaptations of his life's story, Holly's hiccup and horn-rimmed glasses are easily recognizable today. Though his professional career spanned just two short years, Holly's recorded material has influenced the likes of Elvis Costello and Bob Dylan, who, at age 17, saw Holly perform on his final tour. The Rolling Stones had their first Top 10 single in 1964 with a cover of Holly's "Not Fade Away." The Beatles chose their name as a kind of homage to The Crickets, and Paul McCartney has since purchased Holly's publishing rights.

Buddy Holly's lasting impact on pop music was even larger. The Crickets pioneered the now-standard rock lineup of two guitars, bass, and drums. Holly was also among the first artists to use studio techniques such as double-tracking on his albums. Despite Holly's numerous contributions to rock 'n' roll, a 1957 interview with Canadian disc jockey Red Robinson suggests that the singer questioned the longevity of the genre. When asked whether rock 'n' roll music would still be around after six or seven months, Holly replied, "I rather doubt it."

© 2012 A&E Television Networks. All rights reserved.


(Actually, by 1955, Elvis had pioneered the standard rock 'n' roll line-up of two guitars, bass and drums. Elvis, Scotty, Bill, and D.J.)

rjm

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Sat Mar 17, 2012 9:44 pm

rjm wrote:How would the future of music in the rock era, and beyond, have been different, had he lived?

The same question may be asked if Chuck Berry didn't get sent to jail, if Little Richard hadn't given up rock for the solid rock, if Eddie Cochran hadn't been in that auto accident or if Elvis had not been drafted.

In Buddy's case, what was really tragic is he was so clearly broadening his horizons by getting married (with a baby on the way), moving to New York, cutting demos in his Greenwich Village apartment, producing other acts and forming his own publishing company. IIRC, he was looking to create a record label as well. To realize how much he left, how much he'd already done, when we lost him at the age of 22 and a half, is mind-boggling.

Of course, it would have been very different. Would it have been better, who knows?

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Sat Mar 17, 2012 10:06 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:
rjm wrote:How would the future of music in the rock era, and beyond, have been different, had he lived?

The same question may be asked if Chuck Berry didn't get sent to jail, if Little Richard hadn't given up rock for the solid rock, if Eddie Cochran hadn't been in that auto accident or if Elvis had not been drafted.

In Buddy's case, what was really tragic is he was so clearly broadening his horizons by getting married (with a baby on the way), moving to New York, cutting demos in his Greenwich Village apartment, producing other acts and forming his own publishing company. IIRC, he was looking to create a record label as well. To realize how much he left, how much he'd already done, when we lost him at the age of 22 and a half, is mind-boggling.

Of course, it would have been very different. Would it have been better, who knows?


Thanks, Doc. I wasn't sure if he had already moved to the Village. That always blows my mind: that notion. Almost exactly two years before Dylan took the subway down, Holly was there! He would DEFINITELY have been affected by the roots music scene at the clubs. And it's like . . . a Twain novel: a Texas rockabilly in New York's court. Fascinating to contemplate.

Since he was of draft age, you wonder if they would have taken him . . . taken him away from all that. And then, it would be pretty routine. But if he had continued . . . it's hard to contemplate, but kinda fun. Would HE be the one to "go electric" at Newport? (Well, he was already electric, but in their world, perhaps he would have gone a different way for a while, and then brought it all back home. I just imagine the possibilities. I think maybe Dylan's "Shooting Star" was about him.)

rjm
P.S. --
"Seen a shooting star tonight
And I thought of you
You were trying to break into another world
A world I never knew
I always kind of wondered
If you ever made it through
Seen a shooting star tonight
And I thought of you

Seen a shooting star tonight
And I thought of me
If I was still the same
If I ever became what you wanted me to be
Did I miss the mark or overstep the line
That only you could see?
Seen a shooting star tonight
And I thought of me

Listen to the engine, listen to the bell
As the last fire truck from hell
Goes rolling by
All good people are praying
It’s the last temptation, the last account
The last time you might hear the sermon on the mount
The last radio is playing

Seen a shooting star tonight
Slip away
Tomorrow will be
Another day
Guess it’s too late to say the things to you
That you needed to hear me say
Seen a shooting star tonight
Slip away"

Copyright © 1989 by Special Rider Music

Bob was at (one of his very) last concerts.
Last edited by rjm on Sun Mar 18, 2012 1:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Sat Mar 17, 2012 10:32 pm

rjm wrote:Bob was at that last concert.

No, Bob was not at the last show.

On January 31, 1959, during his senior year in high school, Dylan made the ninety-minute, southeast drive to Duluth to see Buddy Holly, the Big Bopper, Ritchie Valens, and Dion and the Belmonts play at the Duluth National Guard Armory. Holly's last show was two days later.

When the last rays of daylight go down
Buddy, you'll roll no more
I can hear the church bells ringing in the yard
I wonder who they're ringing for


Bob Dylan, "Standing in the Doorway" (Time Out of Mind, Columbia, September 1997)

Dylan talked about Buddy Holly in his Grammy acceptance speech for Time Out of Mind winning Album of the Year.

"I just wanted to say, one time when I was about sixteen or seventeen years old, I went to see Buddy Holly play at the Duluth National Guard Armory (late January, 1959)...I was three feet away from him...and he looked at me. And I just have some sort of feeling that he was – I don't know how or why – but I know he was with us all the time we were making this record, in some kind of way."

http://www.muddywatermagazine.com/Bob-Dylan-Buddy-Holly-Time-Out-of-Mind.html

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:11 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:
rjm wrote:How would the future of music in the rock era, and beyond, have been different, had he lived?

The same question may be asked if Chuck Berry didn't get sent to jail, if Little Richard hadn't given up rock for the solid rock, if Eddie Cochran hadn't been in that auto accident or if Elvis had not been drafted.


No it couldn't, Doc. Buddy Holly had far more vision than those artists that you listed above.

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:41 pm

It's impossible to tell. It's easy to get all excited when you hear a track like "Well All Right" that anticipates the folk singer/songwriter movement, but it's important to remember at the same time that Holly was struggling mightily from a commercial perspective when he died. He hadn't been in the Top 40 in almost five months, a very long time at that time, and he hadn't a record in the Top Ten in more than a year. His last two records prior to his death were flops in the US although they did decently in the UK. "It's So Easy" didn't even make the charts. The godawful "Heartbeat" crapped out in the 80s. It's possible when you consider that and the quality of a track like "Heartbeat" that his days as a hit maker and popular influence could have been done. On the other hand, tracks like "Well All Right" or "Think it Over," a song some believe influenced Dylan's cadences, were ahead of their time and perhaps Holly would have had a resurrection in the middle '60s when folk emerged and the Mersey Beat acts declared their allegiance to his music that he could have resurrected himself in that era, and been open to the new sounds of the day and pushed himself further to become a popular force again. Or maybe he would have taken the Gene Vincent route and devoted himself to the UK where made recordings that appealed to a cult and not much beyond. Or perhaps he would have developed into a cult figure making music on the edges that inspired argument as much as consensus. Or considering the friendship he was blooming at that time with Dion Di Mucci, soon to become one of the biggest stars of the early 1960s, he would have found a way to reinvigorate himself commercially at that point maybe incorporating vocal group sounds into his rockabilly style. Or given his growing fascination with the studio and determination to spend more time at home, he may have focused on producing like fellow rockabilly star Jimmy Bowen. Or perhaps with his distrust for the long term possibilities of rock and roll, he may have found his way into soundtrack work. The possibilities are endless.

I don't think though it's a no brainer that he would have been the great innovator of the 1960s. As great as he unquestionably was, I think his early death, the biopic and "American Pie" have somewhat inflated his reputation. I've always seen him as a cut below, Elvis, Fats, Richard, Berry, the Drifters and Leiber and Stoller. Those were the people that set the stakes for '50s and early '60s rock and as large and genuine as Holly's influence was on the British movement and to a lesser extent on a folk rock, there's not even a game on without those other players.

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Sun Mar 18, 2012 12:02 am

I have a different opinion about Buddy Holly than many people do.

I think that if Buddy Holly had lived he might have had a couple of big hits in the early 60s but after that his hit making days would have been over.

Like Fats Domino, Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Bo Diddley, Dion, Jerry Lee Lewis, Bill Haley, The Everly brothers etc. they all had a chart lifespan of about 2-5 years and then it was over for them.

I think Buddy Holly would have have been in the same boat as them and you would have seen him participating in those Rock n' roll package tours in the 1970s.

I think any new music that he came out with in the mid to late 1960s would have been viewed the same as when the Everly Brothers or Ricky Nelson made new recordings.

He would still be regarded as a musical hero by rock n' roll musicians of the 1950s and the British invasion just like he is now.

No idea as to specifically what songs or styles he would have attempted to record.

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Sun Mar 18, 2012 1:36 am

brian wrote:I have a different opinion about Buddy Holly than many people do.

I think that if Buddy Holly had lived he might have had a couple of big hits in the early 60s but after that his hit making days would have been over.

Like Fats Domino, Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Bo Diddley, Dion, Jerry Lee Lewis, Bill Haley, The Everly brothers etc. they all had a chart lifespan of about 2-5 years and then it was over for them.

I think Buddy Holly would have have been in the same boat as them and you would have seen him participating in those Rock n' roll package tours in the 1970s.

I think any new music that he came out with in the mid to late 1960s would have been viewed the same as when the Everly Brothers or Ricky Nelson made new recordings.

He would still be regarded as a musical hero by rock n' roll musicians of the 1950s and the British invasion just like he is now.

No idea as to specifically what songs or styles he would have attempted to record.


But Buddy had such vision, self-determination, and a powerful will. Richard Penniman didn't know what he wanted to do, Berry continued doing what he did, Jerry Lee was probably clinically insane (but he wore it well!), and Elvis had no "will" at all, apparently. (Or he once did, but it disappeared.) Elvis had the musical authority to do almost anything he wanted, IF he had wanted . . . that was the crucial, crucial difference. Buddy saw no limitations, in my view. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's hard to imagine Buddy Holly ever saying "I can't" about anything involving his work.

rjm
P.S. -- I edited the post, Doc. I was two days off. Or, well, Bob missed that show by two days.

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Sun Mar 18, 2012 5:23 am

likethebike wrote: "It's So Easy" didn't even make the charts.


That still amazes me. It's a great song and a great performance, easily one of the top five Holly recordings. I can't imagine why record buyers didn't go for it.

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Sun Mar 18, 2012 7:06 am

Buddy was already moving beyond the scope of being a performer and songwriter at the time of his death.
He had produced Waylon Jenning's first recordings.
He was in the process of starting his own record label "Taupe Records" with Snuff Garrett.

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Sun Mar 18, 2012 7:57 am

rjm wrote:
brian wrote:I have a different opinion about Buddy Holly than many people do.

I think that if Buddy Holly had lived he might have had a couple of big hits in the early 60s but after that his hit making days would have been over.

Like Fats Domino, Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Bo Diddley, Dion, Jerry Lee Lewis, Bill Haley, The Everly brothers etc. they all had a chart lifespan of about 2-5 years and then it was over for them.

I think Buddy Holly would have have been in the same boat as them and you would have seen him participating in those Rock n' roll package tours in the 1970s.

I think any new music that he came out with in the mid to late 1960s would have been viewed the same as when the Everly Brothers or Ricky Nelson made new recordings.

He would still be regarded as a musical hero by rock n' roll musicians of the 1950s and the British invasion just like he is now.

No idea as to specifically what songs or styles he would have attempted to record.


But Buddy had such vision, self-determination, and a powerful will. Richard Penniman didn't know what he wanted to do, Berry continued doing what he did, Jerry Lee was probably clinically insane (but he wore it well!), and Elvis had no "will" at all, apparently. (Or he once did, but it disappeared.) Elvis had the musical authority to do almost anything he wanted, IF he had wanted . . . that was the crucial, crucial difference. Buddy saw no limitations, in my view. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's hard to imagine Buddy Holly ever saying "I can't" about anything involving his work.


It wouldn't be about Buddy Holly just giving up.

It was about the fact that the general public stop buying the records of all the 50s rockers except Elvis.

The Everly Brothers started experimenting with country rock and folk rock but they didn't have any commercial success except for one song in Europe.

Ricky Nelson started doing country rock but no one was buying those records.

I think Buddy Holly would have struggled commercially just like they did.

As Likethebike mentioned the last few Buddy Holly singles didn't chart very well.

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Sun Mar 18, 2012 8:20 pm

rjm wrote:
But Buddy had such vision, self-determination, and a powerful will. Richard Penniman didn't know what he wanted to do, Berry continued doing what he did, Jerry Lee was probably clinically insane (but he wore it well!), and Elvis had no "will" at all, apparently. (Or he once did, but it disappeared.) Elvis had the musical authority to do almost anything he wanted, IF he had wanted . . . that was the crucial, crucial difference. Buddy saw no limitations, in my view. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's hard to imagine Buddy Holly ever saying "I can't" about anything involving his work.

rjm


Well said! ::rocks

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Mon Mar 19, 2012 1:54 pm

I don't see where Elvis had no "will" RJM. He created an incredible body of diverse work, most of which was a direct expression of his world view, tastes, and disposition. I think the problem Buddy would have to deal with was the same as the one that Elvis faced and that was the difficulty of continually anticipating the tastes of the popular audience. In the 1960s, it wasn't like it was in the 1980s where cult audiences were so large that an act could basically miss the charts entirely and still move a half million copies of an LP. In those days, a pop artist had to hit and move big numbers to stay in the game. And a huge part of Elvis' woes in the 1960s was trying to gauge what that audience wanted. (Ironically in the Elvis just can't win category, when we evaluate the 1970s audience where Elvis basically discovered he could do what he wanted in the studio he gets ripped for that as well.) When GI Blues and Blue Hawaii are out earning Elvis is Back by margins between two and TEN to one, it's going to define where you want to go if you want to stay on top. Even so, Elvis continually would challenge his audiences expectations even into the 1970s where he released "An American Trilogy" only weeks after the original vacated the charts.

Cze- I agree about "It's So Easy." Its commercial potential became apparent when Linda Ronstadt took a far inferior version into the Top Ten years later. I'm not sure why Holly's record flopped. Perhaps its sound was too 1957. Holly's great "Rave On" barely made Top 40 in 1958. Even more, Eddie Cochran's great "C'mon Everybody" barely made Top 40 as well in early 1959. His third signature song "Somethin' Else" didn't even do that well. So maybe the pop audience was burned out on rockabilly. You never know. Pop taste change on a dime and for often no really good reason.

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:03 pm

likethebike wrote:I don't see where Elvis had no "will" RJM. He created an incredible body of diverse work, most of which was a direct expression of his world view, tastes, and disposition. I think the problem Buddy would have to deal with was the same as the one that Elvis faced and that was the difficulty of continually anticipating the tastes of the popular audience. In the 1960s, it wasn't like it was in the 1980s where cult audiences were so large that an act could basically miss the charts entirely and still move a half million copies of an LP. In those days, a pop artist had to hit and move big numbers to stay in the game. And a huge part of Elvis' woes in the 1960s was trying to gauge what that audience wanted. (Ironically in the Elvis just can't win category, when we evaluate the 1970s audience where Elvis basically discovered he could do what he wanted in the studio he gets ripped for that as well.) When GI Blues and Blue Hawaii are out earning Elvis is Back by margins between two and TEN to one, it's going to define where you want to go if you want to stay on top. Even so, Elvis continually would challenge his audiences expectations even into the 1970s where he released "An American Trilogy" only weeks after the original vacated the charts.

Cze- I agree about "It's So Easy." Its commercial potential became apparent when Linda Ronstadt took a far inferior version into the Top Ten years later. I'm not sure why Holly's record flopped. Perhaps its sound was too 1957. Holly's great "Rave On" barely made Top 40 in 1958. Even more, Eddie Cochran's great "C'mon Everybody" barely made Top 40 as well in early 1959. His third signature song "Somethin' Else" didn't even do that well. So maybe the pop audience was burned out on rockabilly. You never know. Pop taste change on a dime and for often no really good reason.


There was some hyperbole about Elvis having "no will." He certainly had to have a strong will to even have broken into the business - and then to continue under difficult circumstance, and to do that Comeback - which was more his decision than anyone's, but at a certain point, he let other people define him. Signs of that appeared quite early, but it became very noticeable once he got trapped in Hollywood. I'm not saying that Holly was "better" than him in terms of personality, because they had different lives, and so that just isn't fair. But they were different. If you asked Elvis if he was good at something, he'd generally tell you he wasn't. Elvis on himself as an actor: "pretty bad." As a singer: "if you call it singing." That last one could have been sarcasm, but it was partly his way. I understand some of that, and I don't understand all of it. How could he expand with that type of attitude? Finally, how could he even survive? I mean, not only did Steve Binder tell him "I hear you, Elvis, but I don't think you're strong enough," but gave an interview in the relatively early '70s, where he pretty much predicted exactly what happened. (It's posted in the archives here . . . one would have to search.)

That's all I meant. It was kind of a bird's eye view.

rjm

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Tue Mar 20, 2012 1:15 pm

Linda Ronstadt would have had many more LP's !

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Thu Mar 22, 2012 12:49 am

By 1964 with a lack of hits and arrival of the Beatles, I think Buddy would,ve converted to country and been prolific at it (ala Jerry Lee Lewis) before the R N R revival of the late 1960's provided him (and the Crickets) a new fan base and the chance to crossover back. BUDDY HOLLY -NOT FADE WAY !!!!

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Thu Mar 22, 2012 12:59 am

memfisking wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:
rjm wrote:How would the future of music in the rock era, and beyond, have been different, had he lived?

The same question may be asked if Chuck Berry didn't get sent to jail, if Little Richard hadn't given up rock for the solid rock, if Eddie Cochran hadn't been in that auto accident or if Elvis had not been drafted.


No it couldn't, Doc. Buddy Holly had far more vision than those artists that you listed above.

Yeah, Chuck Berry had no "vision" in the'50s.

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Thu Mar 22, 2012 2:05 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:Yeah, Chuck Berry had no "vision" in the'50s.


Really? I am surprised that you feel that way about one of the great innovators of Rock 'n Roll., Doc. :shock:
Each to his own i guess. ::rocks

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Thu Mar 22, 2012 2:41 am

memfisking wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:Yeah, Chuck Berry had no "vision" in the'50s.


Really? I am surprised that you feel that way about one of the great innovators of Rock 'n Roll., Doc. :shock:
Each to his own i guess. ::rocks

There's no point that you cannot miss, is there?

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Thu Mar 22, 2012 2:44 am

likethebike wrote:It's impossible to tell. It's easy to get all excited when you hear a track like "Well All Right" that anticipates the folk singer/songwriter movement, but it's important to remember at the same time that Holly was struggling mightily from a commercial perspective when he died. He hadn't been in the Top 40 in almost five months, a very long time at that time, and he hadn't a record in the Top Ten in more than a year. His last two records prior to his death were flops in the US although they did decently in the UK. "It's So Easy" didn't even make the charts. The godawful "Heartbeat" crapped out in the 80s. It's possible when you consider that and the quality of a track like "Heartbeat" that his days as a hit maker and popular influence could have been done.

"Heartbeat" was "godawful"? It's one of his most well-liked recordings, from Lennon to Blondie. And this from a guy who defends Elvis' worst moments in the '70s!

You have your facts wrong as well. Buddy Holly was not "struggling mightily" as of February 3, 1959. In fact, in the previous year he nailed the Top 40 six times, starting with two in the top 10, "Oh, Boy!" (Brunswick 55035) hitting Billboard U.S. Pop #10 and "Peggy Sue" (Coral 61885) making it to Billboard U.S. Pop #3 in January 1958.

He did OK on the 1958 R&B charts, too, with "Peggy Sue" making #1 in January, and "Maybe Baby" getting to #4.

His other pop hits through 1958 were "Maybe Baby" (Brunswick 55053, #17), "Rave On!" (Coral 61985, #37), "Think It Over" (Brunswick 55072, #27), and "Early In The Morning" (Coral 62006, #32). The last one was in the Top Forty in September, just four months before his fatal accident.

His solo New York session in October 1958 with live orchestra pointed to new directions, and the single released in the new year was doing well at the time of his death.

It's very easy to tell that Holly would not have stood pat as the decade ended, whether he reunited with the original Crickets and producer Norman Petty or not. He would not have faded away.

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Thu Mar 22, 2012 7:59 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:It's very easy to tell that Holly would not have stood pat as the decade ended, whether he reunited with the original Crickets and producer Norman Petty or not. He would not have faded away.

I agree with that assessment.

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:34 am

For years I've heard/read this kind of speculation about Buddy if he had lived, but I don't have any reason to believe he would've fared better than his contemporaries from the 50's. I don't know where this kind of thinking comes from. Chuck Berry was THE rock and roll songwriter in the 50's, but even without his legal troubles, he faced changing tastes and times. Did he suddenly dry up? No, he was recording regularly right into the mid 70's, but the general public, for the most part, was not interested. Little Richard tried to "come back" many times in the 60's and 70's, but again, his moment had passed. Was Buddy so much more creative and original than these guys that he could just keep on cranking out hit after hit and never falter? I suspect he would've still made music that pleased the hardcore fans, maybe even had a few hits, but I doubt he could've survived the onslaught of the British Invasion any better than Elvis, Everlys, Nelson, etc. Roy Orbison is revered by everyone these days, but he had many lean years in the 60s/70's80s before his late career resurgence.

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Thu Mar 22, 2012 11:24 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:
memfisking wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:Yeah, Chuck Berry had no "vision" in the'50s.


Really? I am surprised that you feel that way about one of the great innovators of Rock 'n Roll., Doc. :shock:
Each to his own i guess. ::rocks

There's no point that you cannot miss, is there?


Whoosh!!

Re: Had He Lived . . . Buddy

Fri Mar 23, 2012 10:40 am

Lonely Summer wrote:For years I've heard/read this kind of speculation about Buddy if he had lived, but I don't have any reason to believe he would've fared better than his contemporaries from the 50's. I don't know where this kind of thinking comes from. .


It's because Buddy died so young that people tend to only think of the positive possibilities that could have happened.

It has happened with James Dean as well.

If Elvis had died in 1958 everybody would have said that he would have become a great actor if he lived.