Rant #668: The Day the Music Died

Today is the 53rd anniversary of the so-called "The Day the Music Died," when a horrific plane crash took the lives of rock and roll stars Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens and J.P. Richardson, better known as "The Big Bopper."

They perished in a small plane crash near Clear Lake, Iowa, the first of many plane crashes that have taken the lives of rock stars over the years.

I remember when Stevie Ray Vaughan died in a plane crash, I wondered why so many had perished this way, including one of my favorites, Otis Redding.

I still don't have an answer. I guess the best that I can come up with is that since part of their job is traveling all over the country and the world, the chances that one will perish via a plane crash goes up because of the frequency of use.

If you go on a plane once a year, then your chances are much less than a person who goes on a plane 100 times a year.

I guess.

But the original rock and roll-related plane crash took three of the brightest stars on the music horizon at the time.

Buddy Holly was a trailblazer, one of the first rock stars with broad appeal. His music--including "Peggy Sue" and "Maybe Baby"--has influenced countless generations of musicians, including the Beatles, and the areas he was trailblazing then as someone barely out of his teens was astonishing. Too bad the world didn't get to hear what he had next up his sleeve.

Ritchie Valens may have been a lightning in the bottle-type of act, but we'll never know. As the first Latino rock star, his music--including "La Bamba"--blazed trails for all Hispanic acts that followed.

"The Big Bopper" was a novelty act, but a real good one. One of the first disc jockeys to have a hit record, his "Chantilly Lace" was a huge seller, and he also was a songwriter, writing "Running Bear" for Johnnie Preston.

This date was immortalized by Don McLean's "American Pie," bringing the fact that there was such a day to a new generation of listeners in the early 1970s.

Why are we so in-tune with the day?

I guess it has a lot to do with youth that goes way before its time. It's also the legendary "crash and burn" situation, where youth rides a quick rocket to stardom and then gets it all taken away from them.

It's like they made a deal with the devil and this was the payback. Since many in society at the time thought that rock and roll was the devil's music, I am sure many believed they got what they deserved.

But I can't help feel that we lost more than Holly, Valens and Richardson as a result of that crash.

We also lost our innocence to a certain degree, and that would come to the fore just three years later, when JFK was shot in Dallas.

So, on the 53rd anniversary of the three rockers' death--and the upcoming 50th anniversary of the passing of our President--let's reflect on what these personalities did during their lifetime, not what they could have done if these unfortunate things didn't snuff them out way before their time.

Rant #667: Soul Train Derails

I am sure you know that Don Cornelius, the affable host of the "Soul Train" dance and music show, died yesterday at 75 years of age, apparently a suicide.

Cornelius had many demons in his life, and I am not going to go into them now.

But for awhile in the 1970s and 1980s, he was to soul music what Dick Clark was to rock, pop and soul music.

I am going to take a different path than many who are eulogizing Cornelius, who I think had his heart in the right place with his show but to me, the show was the antithesis of what Clark tried to do with his show, and more importantly, what America was trying to do during the 1970s and 1980s.

"American Bandstand" was a staple on the ABC schedule for years, and while it highlighted the hit-making singers of its day, it did much, much more than that.

Clark fought to have both white and black dancers mingle among each other--and remember, the show began in the 1950s (Clark came on board after its creation), and segregation in all parts of life was the norm during that time period.

Clark didn't want an all-white show, and the guests and regulars were a mix of all races. Whatever was the hot song at the time denoted who would be a guest, not what the performer's color was.

"American Bandstand" featured a gaggle of dancers, and although blacks and whites generally danced with their own kind on the show, they still mingled out on the dance floor together.

This was a revolutionary experience back then. Blacks and whites were separated by law in many cases, so for Clark to insist that his show have both blacks and whites on it was revolutionary.

And remember, early on, "American Bandstand" was a daily show, so it was probably the first daily network show to feature such a mix of the races.

Fast forward to the late 1960s.

There was plenty of racial tension during this period, but few cared that "American Bandstand" and Clark's other shows, including "Where the Action Is," had blacks and whites on them each and every week.

There were dance shows a'plenty on the air, many of them locally produced, and few cared that black kids and white kids were dancing on the same floor.

"American Bandstand" was still hot, featuring black kids and white kids cheering on their pop heroes, and dancing to their music.

In New York, "American Bandstand" was preceded on another station by Cleveland's own "Upbeat," a similar type show on a much smaller budget, so you could generally watch at least two hours straight of this type of show in the New York area on a Saturday morning.

"Upbeat" ended, and there was a void, at least on New York television.

I am sure the same void was experienced on other stations around the country, which had their own dance shows but saw them pretty much evaporate during this period.

This void was filled by the syndicated "Soul Train."

"Soul Train" went back to the 1950s, but took it one step further.

"Soul Train" was segregated, at least in its earliest incarnation, and for many years afterward.

What Clark had fought so long and hard to have on his show--both blacks and whites dancing to the hit sounds of black and white artists--was turned upside down by "Soul Train."

With few exceptions during a large chunk of its run, the show featured an almost entirely black cast of dancers grooving to the sounds of an almost entirely black cadre of artists.

Sure, you might see one or two white dancers on the show--and you might see a white performer, but in a supplementary role, not as a group leader, such as with an act like Sly and the Family Stone--but generally, the dancers and artists were black.

This is the one bone I had to pick with the show. "American Bandstand" was integrated; "Soul Train" was pretty much segregated.

I am sure Cornelius--who was the show's host during most, but not all, of its run--and others associated with the show had their reasons for doing this, and I guess it had largely to do with their desire to make the show a showcase for black soul acts.

But why take a step backward when Clark's show represented a step forward?

Cornelius once said something to the affect that when Clark zigged, he zagged, and vice versa, so "Soul Train" was done as kind of the opposite to "American Bandstand" purposely.

But to Cornelius' credit, he did see that America was changing, and later on in the show's history, white acts and more white dancers were featured.

If I remember correctly, David Bowie even appeared on "Soul Train."

But as a chronicle of the times, I have always thought the show completely missed the point that Clark made with his show, that exclusion leads to hate and misunderstanding.

In his own way, Clark more closely followed the world that Martin Luther King wanted than Cornelius did.

But that aside, you can't beat the lineup of guests that "Soul Train" had, everybody from Al Green to the Jackson Five to later funk creations like Earth, Wind and Fire.

And if you want to see a selection of some of the greatest Afros and outfits and dance moves in TV history, you had to watch "Soul Train."

And Cornelius was one of the snappiest dressers ever on TV. He made Clark look like a hobo.

Like most of us, I was sorry to hear of Cornelius' untimely passion, but I have to think that "Soul Train" was a show that meant well, but missed the boat, at least early on, on the changing times we were experiencing in this country.

You probably won't find that viewpoint anywhere else, but that is just how I feel about the show.

Certainly, growing up in a mixed-race neighborhood has something to do with the way I feel, but to this day, I do think that "Soul Train" was pretty much misguided, although incredibly successful.

So R.I.P., Don, it's too bad you had to go so soon.

Rant #666: The Number of the Beast

So, we have reached Rant #666, the dreaded number of the beast.

What will happen today to justify this blog reaching that number?

Will I be visited by the devil himself? Will something come that will hit us all in the head?

Will my angelic personality turn devilish?

Will I eat a Devil Dog as opposed to broccoli?

Yes, I know that I often have the devil in me, but I am not the anti-Christ, I am just a good Jewish boy.

But let's look at the number 666.

666 is the sum of the first 36 natural numbers, so if you add 1, 2, 3, 4 ... and through 36, you will get 666.

Honestly, that is about the only other thing I know about the number.

I've never been into devil worship or numerology, so my interest in the number really isn't that great.

But for some people, 666 is the worst number there is.

I know that if you are part of the Aryan nation, and you get a tatoo, this number will probably be scrawled across your body.

No wonder these clowns are perceived as idiots by most people. And they are just that.

I know I am rambling here, but reaching Rant #666 is a pretty good accomplishment.

Only 34 away from 700--which I should reach sometime in March--and only 334 away from 1,000--which I should reach in 2013.

Oops, 2013 ... the number 13 is perilous to some people as much as 666 is horrid to others.

I guess I can't win, can I?

Rant #665: P.K. Limited Music

Today is a crossover day, as I am linking this blog up with my Colgems Records Blog at http://colgems.blogspot.com/.

I want to highlight a pop group from the late 1960s and early 1970s to which I hope you would give a listen to.

P.K. Limited held down the fort as the Colgems label was on its last legs.

Colgems had one main artist--The Monkees--and a slew of one shots, wannabes and acts that simply fell through the cracks.

P.K. Limited was one of these under-appreciated acts.

The group--originally known as The Loved Ones but actually Dan Peyton and Marty Kaniger, two songwriters for Screen Gems/Columbia Music--recorded numerous tracks for the label, with some being used as singles, others as soundtrack music, primarily for the film "Getting Straight."

They kept the label going right before it was absorbed by Bell Records.

I really don't have that much other information on them, other than to say that they churned out a couple of pretty nice songs at the end of the 1960s and into the very early 1970s.

Peyton vanished off the face of the earth, but Kaniger re-emerged in the 1970s as a member of the band Big Daddy. This group took current tunes and recorded them 1950s doo-wop style. They put out a few albums in the 1970s and 1980s, and are still around, I believe.

Again, P.K. Limited never had a hit record, and I doubt too many people have heard of them, but they put out some fine records in the late 1960s, and they are worth a listen.

Go to the Colgems blog site for some MP3s of their work.

Rant #664: Eating Underground

This was an extremely slow news weekend.

Nothing much happened to report on, at least where I live.

But one story did make some news.

A legislator in Manhattan is proposing that eating be banned on the New York City subway system.

That's right, banned.

The bill, proposed by state Sen. Bill Perkins (D-Manhattan), stipulates that anyone caught eating in the subway gets a $250 fine.

Evidently, the proposal came up as criticism of people's cleanliness habits on the subway mounted.

Another bill proposes to ban garbage pails on the subway.

Thousands of people use the New York City subway system to get to work throughout the five boroughs. When I worked in Manhattan, I certainly used it, and yes, you do see all kinds on the subway.

As far as eating, you see people eating candy bars, drinking a can of soda, munching on chips.

And you also see people eating full meals, like spaghetti, tacos, pizza, you name it.

And they often don't clean up after themselves.

So the thousands of pounds of leftover food that has to be cleaned up from the subway cars each and every day is often the dinner for the millions of vermin that live and breed in the subway.

The legislator said that with this ban, the vermin population will go down, because these pests literally live off the discarded food that subway riders leave on the subway and don't eat.

It's a fine idea, but it will be completely impossible to enforce.

The New York City subway has taken generations to and from wherever they had to go. It is as much part of the city framework as, let's say, the Empire State Building is.

It is often the only free time straphangers have before they get to their work or other destinations.

Eating on the subway is part of its ambience. Vendors hawk every type of food right at platforms on even on platforms.

How is the city going to ban eating on the subway with it so part of the New York City culture?

They can't. It would be an impossible task.

Sure, they banned smoking on the subway, but honestly, that was more a health issue.

When you eat a slice of pizza on the subway, you are really only hurting yourself, with the extra calories you are piling on.

I would instead run an informational campaign, alerting straphangers that it is polite to clean up after yourselves, not leave food on the train when you exit.

I think that that, ultimately, would be the best way to lessen the mess that the subways have to put up with.

And remember, the fast food is named "Subway" for a reason.

Not that that really matters at all, but the subway is what it is, and no legislation banning food on the subway will ever work.

It is a waste of time and a waste of taxpayer money.

Rant #663: Sweathog Memorial

As a teenager, I really enjoyed ABC's "Welcome Back Kotter."

The show was about a class of remedial students known as "The Sweathogs," who were perpetual students in their high school.

Then one day they get a new teacher, Mr. Kotter, and all of a sudden, while they didn't become good students, they become at least students who cared--about their teacher, if nothing else.

The show was about as old fashioned as could be--one wonders what today's TV would do with such a show--but it was a hit.

John Travolta came out of that show, as did Gabriel Kaplan, as did Robert Hegyes.

Hegyes, who played Juan Epstein on the hit show, died yesterday. He was just 60 years old.

The actor, born in New Jersey, did many other things in show business. Right after "Kotter," people kind of forget that he was a regular on "Cagney and Lacey."

But in my mind, he will always be Juan Epstein, the Jewish/Puerto Rican member of those Sweathogs.

The show was probably the first to openly show kids who weren't brains or even average students. In today's world, they would probably be labeled as Special Ed kids, but back then, that monicker meant something much different than it means today.

Juan Epstein was the real comedian of the bunch, and he even looked a bit like Harpo Marx, but with a Latin accent.

Hegyes played the role to perfection. In real life, he was a mix of Hungarian and Italian, but his looks lent him to a role like this.

The Sweathogs' comic hijinks made Travolta a star, and the others became kind of his, and Kaplan's, support act.

But Hegyes' character never wavered. To me, he was the true star of the show. Maybe I gravitated to him because his character was openly Jewish--unlike Kotter, who was Jewish but wasn't very open about it--and that endeared the Epstein character to me, since so few openly Jewish characters were on TV then, and for that matter, now.

He had been in ill health for a long time, but when he appeared on the TVLand awards a year ago, there was talk of a "Kotter" reunion show, and Travolta was probably going to participate.

You just know Hegyes would have been there with bells on.

Rant #662: Hole-ier Than Thou

Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt are possibly the most annoying of all Hollywood couples.

They prefer to remain partners, not married, which is fine if that is what they want.

They adopt kids from other countries, as if they are the white martyrs looking to convert the black heathens. There are plenty of kids to adopt here, and if they wanted one of color, there are plenty of kids who would love to call Angelina and Brad parents.

The two are ubiquitous, carting their family off all over the place when they make a movie.

Of course, unlike just about all of us, they can afford, financially, to make their own rules.

The latest news about them is that based on news reports, they are softening their stance on their own possibilities of marriage.

"We'd actually like to, and it means more and more to our kids," Pitt told the Hollywood Reporter.

Obviously, their children are smarter than their parents.

But what riled me is their reason for not getting married.

Evidently, Jolie and Pitt vowed not to get married until all people in our country can get married, i.e., same-sex unions.

First of all, isn't that a holier than thou attitude?

You are basing your own commitment on the rules and regulations of a country that you don't even live in full time? What is that all about?

And who are you to talk about rules and the rights of others?

You are entertainers, not politicians.

More importantly, anybody who believes this nonsense is as full of hogwash as they are.

They aren't getting married because they are simply afraid of the commitment.

They enjoy all the perks and privileges of being married without having that piece of paper.

And with their wealth, what would happen if they split? Who gets what or whom?

Please, don't insult our intelligence by saying that you aren't getting married because not everyone can.

That's like saying that you can't quit smoking until everyone quits smoking.

It is ridiculous, no matter where you stand on the same sex marriage matter.

Even Pitt said it.

"But to be in love with someone and be raising a family with someone and want to make that commitment and not be able to is ludicrous, just ludicrous."

So do it already, and don't bore us with your histrionics about why you aren't doing it.