Tom - Was it not Keith Richards who always maintained Muddy Waters was the Stones' ever present touchstone in the deepest artistic sense that digs way beyond lifting the band's name from Waters' lyrics? The "old masters" would never say they were "ripped off," only honored. The Stones have always paid their respects to the founders, in interviews and on stage, and...all these posts on Japanese framebuilding "imitators" persuade me to go to Japan over France to learn, they seem to be rolling with the originators more so than any others, and...their saddle/post/stem/level top tube proportions look the way they should. - Joe Starck, Sun Prairie, Wisconsin
Tom Martin <tom@wilsonbike.com> wrote: Of course the stones were imitators. They homogenized R and B and rock n roll to a largely white audience. They happened to be in the right place in the right time. Keith Richards et al is quite talented and pop culture forgave them for ripping off the old masters and bestowed them as 'originators' of their own style of hand.
Tom getting off topic Martin
>
>
> > From: classicrendezvous-request@bikelist.org
> > Reply-To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> > Date: 24 Apr 2003 12:06:02 -0700
> > To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> > Subject: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 4, Issue 84
> >
> > [CR]On the idea of imitatation
>
> Tom Sanders wrote:
>
> : Are the Rolling Stones mere imitators =
> of Little Richard. Hell no!"
>
> well, actually, i think the Stones were more like Chuck Berry than that
wild
> man Little Richard ;-)
>
> (kinda on-topic)
>
>
> eric zamora
> fresno, ca.
>
> _______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.