Sunday, 6 June 2010

[4 - 11] How useful is a production of culture perspective in understanding the birth of Rock ‘n’ Roll?


Numerous facts and myths have explained the birth of rock and roll during the 1950s.






In particular Richard Peterson’s discussion explains how the economy, cultural and social, and technology factors produced the platform for the birth of something new.

His discussion has strengths and weaknesses due to certain parts not being addressed. For instance his technology factors do not go into the development of the electric guitar of amplification.

He does not go on to explain why rock and roll was successful.
There was not just rock and roll during the 50s. Jazz, blues and hillbilly emerged during this time. This gives the question. Why weren’t these genres the something new?

In my opinion Peterson’s discussion effectively explains how rock and roll became the something new.
However the discussion would improve if there was reasons addressing why it was successful.

Perhaps he wasn’t interested in the music he was addressing.

No comments: