Really enjoyed what you said . Thank you for adding your voice and perspectives. I totally binged all your content and ended finding more creators from watching your videos
This is a great video. However, I think it disregards the fact that Zeppelin, just like The Beatles, The Who and Rolling Stones, were British. Not to say the British society of the 50s and 60s were not racists towards Black peoples, but black music was more widely distributed to working class children. The Beatles did not cover little Richard or Chuck Berry because they wanted to white wash rock n' roll but because they, just like so many other great British rock bands, genuinely loved and admired those artists and they always made that very clear. It is how art evolves, you start by "stealing" from people you admire and with time you develop your own style. The foundations of The Rain Song, Stairway To Heaven and The Song Remains The Same can for sure be drawn from blues and jazz, but it is original nonetheless.
Yes britain was wayyyyy less racist. When lynching was still a thing in the US black amricanas where starting lives and having children with white people during ww2
yes, there is something in the creative world regarded as influence. A lot of the British bands basically took riffs, progressions, but that is the nature of the blues. Jimi also played blues based rock and had the same demographic in the audience. I think you'd find more white people at R&B shows. Why is this being discussed as a thing??
Jimi Hendrix's death was probably one of the biggest changes to rock history. Imagine if he hadn't died and joined the then forming ELP. I think progrock would've been an entirely different genre,
Just a note...Hendrix was scheduled to record with John Mclaughlin, Miles Davis, Larry Young, Gil Evans, within a year of his untimely death. Considering the professional and artistic respect he received from fellow musicians and composers, music may have taken a much different journey had those projects come to fruition. Zeppelin is held in account, more than most because they gave no artistic or $$ credit to the writers and performers they interpreted
@@bradrehn1007 well, I hear you, but they didn't actually owe anything to anyone for the amazing art they produced. What has been happening for.... damn... 20+ years is guys like Chuck Berry being welcomed on stage with the rest of the rockers, and others black artists, too, being treated like royalty. There has been monetary compensation paid to some black artists, but I don't know much about that. Even Albert Lee, the great and amazing guitarist from the C&W scene is welcome onstage with the likes of Eric Clapton, Tom Petty, Neil Young, Roger McGuinn, and more. I really don't care for the shoddy, negative view of rock and roll of those looking back from now with their cancelling eyes and critical theory ears. They know nothing.
Led Zeppelin, Cream, The Rolling Stones, The Beatles, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, The Who: all these bands that took The Blues and led to the evolution of Stadium Rock have one thing in common (other than being White) - They're British (I would say all English, but Cream's Jack Bruce ensured some Celtic representation, as did Rory Gallagher) These British bands weren't taking Black music to sell to White people - they took American music to sell to British people. This happened quite literally with Jimi Hendrix - he was ignored in his native land until he was embraced here. It would be churlish to claim that Britain didn't/doesn't have a problem with racism, but it's different from racism in the USA. In the 1960s, the UK wasn't a decade years from Jim Crow, or barely a century from a civil war over slavery. Furthermore, post-war UK (and Europe as a whole) was different from post-war USA. Even in the 60's there was many ruins from the war, with neighbourhoods destroyed and families enduring losses (I don't think it's a coincidence that Ginger Baker and Roger Waters are the two angriest men in British rock and both had lost their fathers in the war). 1950s and 1960 Britain was a bleak place, and the mood of Blues music fit the mood of the people here, even if the specifics of the lyrics are less applicable I'm not trying to invalidate in any way the points made in this video. However, I feel this is very important context that was completely missed. I enjoyed he interviews in this video, but I feel it would very much have benefitted from hearing the voices of Black Brits in addition to Black Americans.
Yeah, I think you tackled something very important. From a European perspective, many of the racial tensions and cultural differences in the USA are not that visible. In Europe it is not race, but rather ethnicity the main aspect of differentiating people (which may be discriminatory or not), and the exploitation of black people is rather addressed within the post-colonial rather than racial discourse. In result, we are not trained/sensitized to look at the USA in terms of race, so we do not do it. The culture that is coming from the USA to Europe is perceived as "American", and the intricacies of racial differentiations within the US-American cultural landscape are often invisible to us. . When I was a kid growing in a Central European province, I didn't know blues was black music. For me, it was American music. I did not know that country music was white. I thought it was simply rural/Southern type of American music. It took me years to even spot the curious whiteness of rock music (coming from a predominantly white country, it was likely that white was the default and therefore "invisible" skin colour to me), or that R&B was not simply part of pop music, but distinctively black genre of music in the USA. When I was a kid, Eminem was big, so I never realized that white rappers are an exception and rap is black music. I know these things now, but it took years of exposure and learning to even see it. Black American music is simply American music to many people outside of USA.
@@berlineczka that's the problem. The average music consumer does not know but the musicians knew. So they need to credit the culture of music they are influenced by. That what this is all about. Musicians taking music of other cultures and not crediting them is cultural appropriation.
@@berlineczka i guess as a born American who has lived in Scotland France and currently Germany, its a little confusing because i was always stereotyped as a black American. "You sing jazz well because you're black" " you dance well because you are black" "you do xyz well because you are black". So it was always confusing as to why these stereotypes were acknowledged but NOT the cultural importance and impact of certain black american cultural phenomenons/ achievements. Its not that any of these genres "belong" to black people specifically, they are free for anyone to partake in just like i enjoy indian music and have also participated in it but i acknowledge that indian music was born and developed through certain shared cultural experiences. I feel like with black american music, the world acknowledges the cultural experiences (i.e slavery, segregation) but wont acknowledge the actual byproducts (many genres of music that were developed as a direct reaction to what people were feeling during those times.) The Blues was developed as a way to cope with slavery but at the same time it has nothing to do with black people? It just confuses me a little. "You sing jazz well because you're black" but at the same time jazz isnt considered a "black" genre or apart of the black cultural experience to Europeans apparently. I guess what i dont get is why one would stereotype someone based on music but then also not understand how that same music has strong cultural ties to said person or their community. I get that racial tensions are not and have not been the same in Europe as I've lived in a few European countries as well as America. But from my perspective it seems many people will acknowledge one thing but choose to not accept the other. And i understand that to the outsiders perspective, there is only one culture of America, but that just isnt the case or else there wouldn't be such division, no? Culture is usually born out of experiences and clearly not everyone in America has the same history or experiences so cultural achievements will vary
Thank you! I tried to explain this, though less eloquently in another comment. The British aspect is crucial to this story. Also missing is the fact that rock and roll was all but dead in America when the British version began taking shape. And that groups like the Stones and the Animals saw themselves as blues bands in the beginning. Theirs was a path of musical purity, misaligned with the pop aspirations of groups like the Beatles or Herman's Hermits.
As a huge fan of Little Richard, The cherry-picked points about him force me to reconsider how valid any argument in this video actually is. Not only a black artist in the 50s, Richard was Gay and struggled with acceptance (of his sexuality) -especially within his religious community and upbringing- throughout his entire life. To reduce that to “oh he had to dress androgynous because he was black” is an insult to the man and artist. Obviously this is a good and thoughtful vid but that irked me so hard
Agree, this video is heavily spun to make Zeppelin look like racist stealers of black music. Anyone that knows anything about music knows this is flatly untrue.
It's not Led Zeppelins fault for being capable of being inspired by "black artists", the question that's always left unspoken concerning the subject of "cultural appropriation" is why the hell "black artists" feel obliged to reject anything and everything that may be considered "white". The source of this sort of racial segregation IS NOT coming from "white culture", it's coming the "black culture" that defines itself in primary opposition to "white culture". Fuck anyone who would presume to criticize Led Zeppelin for having the audacity to NOT be racially conscious. God damn, the racial baggage that continues to plague American culture is absolute cancer, if anything, that is the reason why the most successful musicians of the 20th century were British... because British artists have absolutely zero inclination to be so parochial and small-minded as to adopt artistic limitations predicated on such a ridiculously frivolous consideration as skin color.
this reminds me a lot of the discourse surrounding 'young Americans' by David Bowie. A lot of people argue about how he appropriated the Philadelphia soul sound at the time, but I think what a lot of people forget is that he described it as "plastic soul" - he knew he wasn't going to sound like all the other artists he was inspired by, but he created that record as a tribute to the sounds that he loved
Bowie's way of doing soul was very different to LZ's way of doing blues rock. Bowie presented the YA era as a novelty, deeply understanding soul was more than just a way of making music. On the other hand, LZ really never cared (or at least we don't know if they did/do)
Bowie also made a point of citing his sources. He wasn't always perfect at shouting out his influences, but he was sure better at it than most white pop stars who were using black music as part of their vocabulary.
Just want to add what could be considered a layer into the discussion about Zep. These guys were born during World War II. Their country was being invaded and bombed (unlike the U.S). Post WWII in England was pretty bleak. They had a long recovery following the war full of economic strife and uncertainty. I wonder if this contributed to their youth becoming more aligned with American "black" music?
Keith RIchards has talked about this. Britain was still rationing its food to the public well up until the mid 1950's. all of the guys who came from the British invasion were either poor or impoverished at some point during their lives, and their comments on the subject of Black American music was that it was more meaningful to them and was depicting their experience. the fact you bring up is overlooked in this video
@@PhantomOutlaw its a combination of all those things. Britain was poor, destroyed and economically unstable as mentioned above, accessibility was another big factor thats why it was so significant when Bill Wyman had a bass and amp, which was VERY uncommon at that time. Most of these guys were rellegated to skiffle or busking
I have seen an interview with Roger Daltrey where he specifically states this. He and Keith Richards have also spoken of the shock they felt witnessing the treatment of black people in the States.
Little Richard's pain was not only rooted that he was black man in the mid-20th Century American South, his pain also had to do with his being a poly-sexual being from an evangelical background. Led Zeppelin, and the Beatles, Rolling Stones etc. came from a very class structured society and the blues part of rock & roll/rhythm & blues spoke to their lower class status in that society (they were not American) - the celtic roots of country music, which fused with the blues to create these genres between Appalachia and Missippi Delta in the 20's, 30's and 40's to create American Rock & Roll - on their first American tours Zeppelin frequently covered Rock-A-Billy artist Johnny Burnette & the Rock & Roll Trio's "Train Kept A Rockin'" - I have never heard anyone accuse Johnny Burnette of cultural appropriation, although he appropriated an equal amount from race records as Louis Jordan appropriated from Country & Western artists like Bob Wills & his Texas Playboys. One of the big "threats" of Rock & Roll was that it brought the races together, which is something which the American elite viewed as a Socialist Plot. Sam Phillip's Sun Records stable did not just consist of Elvis Presley, Roy Orbison, Jerry Lee Lewis, Carl Perkins and Johnny Cash, he also signed Howlin' Wolf, Sonny Burgess, James Cotton and Junior Parker. The Beatles did not just cover the Isley Brothers and Smokey Robinson, they covered Buddy Holly and the Everly Brothers, too. One of the most interesting things about Led Zeppelin's 1973 Madison Square Garden concerts is that on the exact dates when they occured, 120 miles north in Watkin's Glen, NY, what was for a long time the largest amount of people to gather for an American Rock & Roll Festival were attending Summer Jam; featuring the Allman Brothers Band, the Grateful Dead and the Band, while photographs of that concert are just slightly more diverse than the Song Remains the Same it bears in mind to remember that with gate crashing Watkin's Glen was too many a "free" concert the cost of traveling deep into the Catskills during an OPEC embargo must be factored into that price, where as Zeppelin's last three American concerts of 1973 were able to be scalped at far greater prices than their $7.50 listed price; the lack of diversity at both of these shows could partially be blamed on ecoomics.
Also the fact that so called White Rock and Roll sounded to much like, well, White Rock and Roll and therefore to Blacks it sounded like watered down Rock and Roll!
Led Zeppelin instructed me about the Blues. They introduced me to Robert Johnson, Muddy Waters and Blind Willie Johnson. I have seen interviews when they give credit to these musicians but unfortunately, they didn’t on their albums initially. Nobody’s Fault But Mine, especially in the intro is Blind Willie’s but who can argue that second part is Led Zeppelin’s. Great content!
Nobody’s Fault But Mine was credited from the first pressing. Every cover that was recorded from LZ3+ was always credited. The only 4 instances where they did not initially credit we’re on the first two albums.
12:44 - Yeah, another black Nirvana fan! To Kurt Cobain’s credit, his cover of Leadbelly’s “Where Did You Sleep Last Night?” shakes me to my bone marrow. P. S. - I really think the Carpenters are “whiter” in terms of sound, but there is a ton of soul in Karen’s voice and she duetted with Ella Fitzgerald.
There was a time when the influence of artists upon the creativity of artists of other cultures was appreciated and even celebrated. These days it is called "cultural appropriation," and it is transparent bullshit created by people whose only goals are creating excuses to be offended and amplifying divisions between people.
Cultural appropriation is an interesting thing bc culture in itself wouldn't exist unless everyone was taking something from someone else. I mean human society is built on the idea of sharing ideas, technology and values
I never understood the concept of cultural appropriation since for me being a better human means to be in touch with other cultures than mine. Why is it really wrong to embed these cultural nuances in your own fabric of life?
@@juho7271 it’s not necessarily wrong when it comes to the interpersonal exchangement of cultural ideas and practices (done respectfully); the problem of appropriation arises when one community expressly makes a profit of some sort out of another’s practices, usually adding in the fact that the latter community’s cultural ideas and practices are looked down upon/undervalued. like, in this instance of rock and roll, how many black artists were maligned and sectioned off from receiving their due credits only for white artists to gain influence from the same style, then become the faces of said style of music/receive all the praise. then in turn the music has been so far removed from its original context, it doesn’t really embed any differing ‘cultural nuances’ into your own understanding of art if you arent even made aware of its origins. it’s an issue that’s better understood structurally than interpersonally, imo
@@juho7271 Because people want a way to complain about "white people" when all this can be boiled down to "these people did something that was inspired by and made more money". The idea of "cultural appropriation" is just a politically charged term to make people sound bad when it's clearly inspiration instead, or just them liking something. Because at the end of the day, everything is inspired by something, music itself was most likely inspired by the sounds of nature, and rock isn't just at its soul from one group of people, it takes queues from many sources, but people just attribute it to "black music" to make them sound righteous and superior because "they know the history".
This video name drops Zeppelin because this is “Zeppelin Month” and Polyphonic is releasing a variety of videos about Led Zeppelin. This is as much a part of their legacy as Stairway to Heaven.
10:51 “Cultural appropriation is when you try to be something that you’re not by hiding behind someone else’s culture. When there’s that lack of authenticity.” As you rightly point out at 22:20 , by that definition, Led Zeppelin did not appropriate black culture. They did not hide behind anyone and they certainly didn’t lack authenticity. 19:22 “That’s what cultural appropriation is...its how the history books are written by the dominant class and the dominant class gets to choose who really made history.” I really appreciated the way you sought out the voices and opinions of people of colour. However your premise that Zeppelin’s success “Kept black communities from doing the same. Intentionally or not, Zeppelin played a big part in us missing out in two generations of potentially incredible black rock” is unfounded. Of course, that isn’t your fault because you, like many other well intentioned individuals, operate within a misguided paradigm. The problem is that the very notion of cultural appropriation is fundamentally flawed. Even if you record the exact same song, but make it your own, you aren’t stealing or diminishing the original. When Stevie Wonder covered the Beatles he arguably made “We Can Work it Out” a better song. Same goes for Jimmi Hendrix culturally appropriating Jewish American culture when he covered “All Along the Watchtower”. White people playing “black music” does not make Chuck Berry cease to exist, it does not erase African-American culture, it expands upon it. Culture with a capital “C” does not spring out of the void, every culture is built on the influences of others. We would not have Led Zeppelin without Muddy Water and we wouldn't have Muddy Waters without Robert Johnson, but we wouldn’t have him without the guitar, which we wouldn’t have without the western traditions of the lute and chromatic scale influenced by the Moorish 4 string oud. Unfortunately, the idea that rock music was stolen is therefore misguided. Culture, unlike many other things of value, is not a commodity with a single user. Culture can’t be stolen, it can only be propagated. It is the same lack of understanding which leads certain conservative mindsets to think that immigrants steal jobs. More people in an economy diversifiy economic potential. There aren’t a finite number of jobs just as there isn’t a finite amount of culture which only one ethnicity can monopolize at any given time. The more people participate, the more economies and cultures grow. What cultural appropriation is trying to convey is systemic racism. Unfortunately the term is misleading and misguided and it makes it harder to understand the mechanism of repression. Culture, when disseminated openly, is not a tool of oppression, it is a means of liberation. Fundamentally, Culture is not a zero-sum game. It cannot be stolen or appropriated. An individual piece of art can be stolen. If Led Zeppelin had stolen a Son House tune and passed it off as their own, that would be intellectual property theft, not cultural appropriation. What white societies did to Native Americans/First Nations or to Africans and blacks or to Jews and Arabs is irredeemably reprehensible. The depraved slaughter and enslaving of millions stole lives, not Culture. Thankfully, despite the horrors of racism and repression, Culture lives on.
Exactly. As long you give credit where credit is due… which Led Zeppelin did most of the time (and most artists in this media climate do nowadays… for fear of this sort of thing). Honestly… without the contributions of white musicians… blues (or any other form of BAM music) would’ve never expanded past its grassroots origins. That’s just simply a fact.
What this comment misses is that while culture itself cannot be stolen, the cultural expression of a certain art certainly can be dominated and stolen. The colonization of jazz in particular is notable; the artists who made the most money off of the New Orleans sound in the 20s, 30s, and 40s were not its originators; they were the white adopters who were taken with jazz. The issue is not that white musicians were allowed to play jazz, it is that black musicians were largely not allowed to profit from it.
If you look at the black artists in those days they got the exposure and recognition through and loved to play with the white artists. Funny how non musicians have a problem with it as if it’s their music. Music brought people more together than anything. Bands like Living color, bad brains etc. did exactly the same with white punk/rock music and there is hardly any black music left without electronics
Most black people are not musicians. Most white people are not musicians. The fact that it's constantly considered black music when very few black people actually played it and that there are very few white musicians who also play it it should be credited to the PEOPLE and not the race. It's honestly ridiculous and disgusting at this part that we continue to call something white or black. Lastly, the guitar and the piano were both invented by white italians. The trumpet by a white German. The saxophone by a white Belgian. The harmonica by a white German as well. So if there's any appropriation it would be the blacks stealing the instrumentations of whites. How does that sound? It sounds pretty stupid doesn't it? Well that's what it sounds like about people talking about ANY type of appropriation. By the way I'm mixed race. My mother is from Europe and my father is from Africa and raised in the Middle East. So before anybody calls me some kind of racist you should know those things.
I have been trying to sort out my thoughts on this. Overall I think that this is a fine video and I really appreciated the inputs by Don from The Most Unruly and F.D. Signifier. However I do have a couple of issues, first is that while this is a black lens, it is also american. This matters because you are using Led Zeppelin as the example, Led Zeppelin are an English band and the USA is a massive exporter of culture. The bleaching of black music starts within the local environment by local government and businesses. By the time the music is exported globally significant damage is already done, if the example had have been someone like Elvis who was american the argument that it is cultural appropriation would be stronger as it is, and as you point out at the end, it may simply just be an evolution of the music. My second issue is the idea that great pain leads to great art. That is just bullshit, it doesn't hold up across the majority of cases and it further perpetrates the toxic idea of the tortured artist. The Irish people have undeniably faced a lot of hardship and persecution however you never see trad music in any top 100. Are people expecting a massive surge in popularity for middle eastern music given the recent tragic histories of many countries in that region? The cultural importance of black people within american can really only be viewed as being black in america. The horrors they went through and the continued oppression they face are not how they are able to make culturally relevant music. Its a more complicated relationship within America about american culture. I'm as white as hell so I won't quote it but Paul Mooney made a very particular quote about it that I think is always relevant. sorry if this is rambling and incoherent, just wanted to get some thoughts off my chest.
@@mat6114 but isn't sales numbers part of the discussion here. If black musicians had more sales numbers that would've meant that they weren't as oppressed in 1950s America
Although I agree with you the part about great pain leading to great art being bullshit, is in my opinion bullshit. It isn't a guarantee but it can be a very good foundation. The fact that Irish trad music isn't popular to the masses doesn't mean that it isn't any good. What you said about seeing it through a black and America centered lens is spot on though.
@@TheGhostOfFredZeppelin Having an experience to pull from can help but in the majority of cases it is an artists ease of access to training and their ability to prioritise their art over their economic self interest that allows them to advance and improve. This can be further seen with the increasing amount of songwriters on songs. The artist is a musical talent but more now than ever the emotional core, the lyrics, is being outsourced to others, who don't get the same recognition.
@@SkywardSpoon For sure, I was mostly objecting to the "great pain leads to great art being bullshit" part. There's a reason blues has so much feeling as it largely originates from the so called "Negro spirituals" or "Field Shouts". That might also just be my subjective opinion on it as a huge blues fan but the pain is there and their art is great. As far as music today with 10+ songwriters per song, I pretty much just see it as people using music as a vehicle towards fame as opposed to doing it for the love and creating something beautiful which was more common in the past.
1) Led Zeppelin are an English band, 50% of the writing force of the band (Robert Plant) having grown up in the Black Country - which in the post-war ear was a literally a slum where the ‘blues’ were a way of life and not cultural appropriation in the way condescending Americans like to believe 2) Led Zeppelin have a huge ‘Celtic’ and ‘folk’ interpolation in their sound. Their biggest hit ‘Stairway to Heaven’ is not ‘blues rock’ until the final 30 seconds. Every album had a different sound and only LZ 1&2 could be firmly attributed to their Blues roots. Listen to ‘Achilles Last Stand’ and please try to make the case that Jimmy Page was not a sonic creative more than capable of carving out sound niches of his own. I seriously resent this pathetic need to deconstruct all white art through the lens of racial oppression. In the UK we have a class system which creates an equal amount of misery for those at the bottom. Try to escape your inaccurate and inappropriate state of being brainwashed by Critical Race Theory and actually do something useful in this world you low IQ, condescending, miserable little loser.
Wow, this is what happens when a person sees race before the person. What a load of racist BS. It’s called “admiration.” Not theft. Page, Plant and thousands of musicians idolized and praised the “Black” men and women who they preceded. Music is not a race. Every musician has a different sound they like and imitate.
Bullshit! Whites have no problems with Italians, Scottish, Irish, Polish, Germans, Asians or any other non-black group claiming their cultural inventions or creations. That only happens when Black people do. Rock, jazz, blues, swing, disco, soul, funk, house, go go, techno, gospel, bebop, doo wop, and hip hop are ALL Black American invent genres. All can share in them, but they're our cultural creations.
As i mexican who grow up listening and playing all tipes of music (black , white , indigenous , spanish ,...etc) its a cultural shock that people in american and england decide what music likes in base of the race/etnicity of the person who plays
@Naikomi That's the thing the USA system have racially almost everything. From our body features to our hairs, from our culture to the our health (so many black women have been poorly treated for C Section operation and mostly not for a misunderstanding, but this fetish of black body being more resilient), from be labelled as thug simply because of how we dress or the freaking durag. And when you point the bs out there's always somebody saying don't mAkeE iT a RAcE ThiNg. The US system is fucked and hypocritical and lack accountability. It's exhausting
It's not so much that we (the consumer) made that decision, but that the decision was made for us by record companies, promoters, and advertisers. At least, that's how it used to be before the Internet democratized the distribution of music and caused an epic blow to the record industry.
@@iSkully99 We've been HEAVILY Americanised and copied most of the bad racial identity culture from the USA, the BBC even has a black radio station despite the fact black music is already extremely popular with the white majority.
I know I'm about a year late to this party, but I wanted to tell you how much I appreciated this video and the nuance with which your interviewees made their points. I'm a white blues guitarist, and have been more than half of my life. Over the years I have had the privilege of performing with most of the people whose records I loved growing up everybody from BB King, Buddy Guy, Otis Rush, Lonnie Baker Brooks, Hubert Sumlin (and all the surviving members of Howlin' Wolf's band), multiple artists that played with Muddy Waters, Clarence Gatemouth Brown, and many many more. I had the honor of being the backing band for Eddie Shaw, Otis Clay, and Redd Velvet as the first two were bejng inducted into the blues hall of fame and Redd was performing Bessie Smith as Bessie was inducted that night as well. I have always been a staunch anti-racist and have always done my best to make clear that as much as I love this music, it isn't mine. The black artists that were the architects of this music granted me the honor of sharing this music with me, and I always do my best to make sure that I tell my audiences where this music came from, why it came from the people, times and places that it did. I am extremely careful about the material I cover from other artists because there is nothing more distasteful to me than seeing a white artist perform blues songs that are about a part of the black American experience that is totally outside their understanding. Recently there has been a strong backlash against white blues artists and many people have blanketed all of us as thieves. While I absolutely understand that if it where not for the black men and women that created this music it wouldn't exist at all, I also know that Muddy Waters had many white musicians in his band, as have most of the post-war black blues artists, much in the same way that many black legends of Jazz have had white musicians in their bands. For awhile my band had a residency at the New Orleans location of BB King's blues club ( I am from New Orleans), towards the end of our run there I had begun performing an old blues song called "She Wants to Sell My Monkey" which has been performed by numerous artists but one of the best performances was by BB and it was kind of a way for me to attempt to honor him after his passing. One night after doing the song I noticed one of the cooks seem to take great objection to me performing that song and it absolutely crushed me. I went to talk to him at set break and we had a discussion about how in the context of the song the phrase "she wants to sell my monkey" being about a man troubled because his significant other has decided to become a prostitute, that the monkey he is upset about is between this woman's legs. We hashed it out and we were all good for the rest of my tenure there but it caused me to think really hard about what I was doing, to the point that I actually stopped performing completely for a couple of years because it occurred to me that however unintentionally I might have been hurting people just by playing music I love. Eventually I got to sit down and have a conversation with an artist named Corey Harris who in my opinion is one of the best musicians currently on the planet and I asked him what he, as a black man, thought about what I was doing. His reply was that if I was coming from a place of love and genuine appreciation, making sure that I was employing black artists, celebrating black artists, making sure that I used my platform, small as it may be, to try to elevate and promote black blues artists that are playing blues music currently, and essentially that I wasn't "doing more harm than good" that in his opinion I was doing just fine. It is still something I struggle with because the last thing I want to do is harm the people and culture that have given me so much, have invited me in and treated me with respect and have been generous in their friendship. Led Zeppelin absolutely plundered the Willie Dixon catalogue and had to be sued by him before they gave him the credit due to him, as well paying him for profiting off of his work. At the same time I know that when Hubert Sumlin died Keith Richards paid for his funeral, his headstone, his memorial concert, and Hubert told me many times how grateful he and Wolf were to some of the white rock and roll bands of the sixties and seventies for helping to bring their music to more young white people because that was the point at which they really started making money. I have had conversations with BB in which he expressed similar thoughts. I didn't have the chance to know Freddie or Albert King but the members of their bands said much the same. White people absolutely did build their careers on the foundation that those black men and women laid for them, and some most definitely did plunder it in the worst way, but many did not. I was also amazed at how many of the older performers absolutely loved old country and western music and would happily play Hank Williams, Ernest Tubb, Gene Autry, Hank Snow and many others. In some ways it seems to me that even though the struggle they endured and crimes committed against them by white people were unimaginably cruel, dehumanizing, often even murderous, in a way that we don't see now (this is not to say that these challenges don't still exist, just that they don't exist in the same way), they weren't as polarized about this as we are in modern times. Some of the stories they told me about the things they endured growing up in early twentieth century Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, and to an extent the entire country made my skin crawl and sometimes brought me to tears at the unimaginably cruel ways in which they were treated, and the way in which it was so accepted by the society of the day. This has turned into a rambling rant and I'll stop here, but once more, thank you, and thank you for calling attention to these two creators. I'll be listening to both of them from now on.
Thank you for this comment, as an aspiring practitioner of ragtime and blues (specifically Gary Davis) I have always felt deeply that the history and the music are bound up together and just because some artists chose to steal that music, it doesn't mean that wider culture doesn't need to hear those old voices and old songs. Really appreciated your perspective 🤠
@x2mars The nonsense is trying to claim a British person has as much of a cultural claim to a genre as a person who grew up in the culture of the people who invented it. Hendrix grew up on and played in the bands of greats like the Isley Brothers and Little Richard. These were actual inventors of the genre. Can Jimmy Page say that? Did he experience growing up in Black American culture like Hendrix did? Stop being foolish!
Wait , little richard was androgynus becouse he was gay, an that was actually his personality ? . Be carefull , erase black/colour people queernes to make them fit in your antiracist discurses is a pretty awfull thing
Elvis was not ‘safe’. He was hated by parents, filmed from the waist up, and was actually kept from recording far heavier black music. Like Robert, and so many other English artists, they genuinely loved that music, and it’s catharsis. It spoke to a deeper part of your Human. That groups like The Rolling Stones preferred to sing blues music had nothing to do with stardom in the beginning. It was genuine love and on many occasions, these Musicians were scholars of the Blues. Greg Allman would always say ‘ there is no such thing as British Blues. Theres only The Blues.” All that being said, countless Blues Pioneers saw little reward for what they gave to American Music. Most American Music has its origins in Black Music, save for the Elizabethan square rhythmic aspect that English Music recapitulated. Peter Gabriel loved Otis Redding and Sam & Dave, but you have to dig to find it. But it spoke to him in a deep way. Disco, arguably, was not a white phenomenon. It started as early as Barry White mid seventies era R&B when an engineer decided that 120BPM was the standard for radio dance beats. The Bee Gees had been searching for themselves for years in the wreckage of late 60’s early 70’s post psychedelia. They approached R&B in an honest way, and had no idea it would become such a monetary goldmine. Rarely did many classic albums come to be with an anticipation they were preordained for success. My Parents were great lovers of Soul, Motown and R&B / Dance Music. My Mom saw James Brown when I was still in her womb. My Dad auditioned for Stevie Wonder. It took years for them to like The Beatles :) Thank you for this work. It is stimulating and important discussion.
He can talk about Elvis or he would have to admit country had an impact on rock music which would destroy his point and I am pretty sure this dude doesnt even know the genre a thing by the way this video made
Cultural Appropriation it's a stupid new thing, you need other cultures to create new things, that help to create progress, since the ancient Rome. Excuse my grammar, i'm not a native speaker.
There is a difference between influence and outright theft of culture. Musical artists, Zeppelin among them, have been guilty of both. Admittedly, that nuance is often lost by both critics and proponents of appropriation.
Absolute bullshit. If it wasn’t for Zeppelin I wouldn’t have discovered the blues greats of old. Cultural appropriation is such a nothing burger of an issue. Most people are aware that rock and metal came from the blues. No one is “taking over” black music.
Wow, it’s called “admiration,” not appropriation. Music isn’t a race, isn’t a skin tone, isn’t theft. Everyone imitates what they admire. There’s absolutely no logic in this argument, Just more emotional dribble.
I believe that accusations of cultural appropriation, while indeed a real thing, is something that we need to be careful making in the context of music. Music does not exist in a vacuum. By it's very nature, musical genres influence and are influenced by each other, and no single culture is responsible for any modern popular genre of music. Yes, rock was heavily influence by so-called 'race' music, which had it's influence in blues and jazz, which themselves have their roots in black culture. However, blues itself draws it's roots not only from black gospel and spirituals, but from country and folk music that are considered to be 'white'. Jazz itself drew heavy influence from European classical music, as well as spirituals and traditional African music. The same is true for all genres of popular music. They all draw from and are influence by each other. That's the nature of music. So, barring some blatantly obvious example of outright stealing from another culture unchanged, which many artists have done (and Zeppelin themselves are not immune from that), I'm hesitant to accuse any genre of music as a whole of cultural appropriation. Individual artists however are another issue.
@@moistgooseberry I did watch the video, and largely agree with Polyphonic's take. Zeppelin has been guilty of outright theft in the past. That's different than the cross-cultural influencing that all music genres do, which is an area where I think accusations of cultural appropriation gets a bit more hazy.
That's very true and while I agree with the idea that music has to be a flower bed of cross-pollination, the issue more so lies with the institutions that monetize and appropriate the music we listen to without giving anything back. Let's not detract from that, because, while Zeppelin certainly made some ugly moves in that regard, this issue is much larger than just them
I agree, but even if that wasn't the case, I think the concept of cultural appropriation is very often treated in a ridiculous way, especially with music and art in general. Music shouldn't be closed off to people based on national or ethnic boundaries, I think. Even with music styles that are entirely (or almost entirely) from one place or culture, I don't think there is anything wrong with people from outside of that context enjoying it and wanting to take part. In much the same way that it's perfectly acceptable for non-europeans to play classical music and compose their own pieces in that style if they wanted to, I think it's perfectly acceptable with any other music style/genre and any ethnicity or nationality or whatever. I think as long as they don't take credit for things that have nothing to do with them, and they're not using it to harm people (especially the people that did originate that music) and as long as it's done in a respectful way, then it should be fine for anyone to play and write any type of music they want to.
Seems kinda stupid to me for a genre to be assigned to a race. I don't see any reason why a white artist should not be allowed to create music in a "black genre". The race of the person/people who made a piece of music would never dictate whether I liked it or not. I think the US a very race-conscious country so maybe this is a distinctly non-american perspective idk.
Only black people can play the blues? Only Indians can play Indian music? Only white people can play country music? What about Asian influences in music? What about middle eastern music? Why are only certain types of music only for certain types of people and to be played and only enjoyed by certain types of people? You're the racist. That is true racism at it's core. Music is universal and music is for everyone.
I don't remember VH1's Behind the Music being white centric. I checked the wikipedia page, and it looks like 54 of the 213 artists covered were black (~25%). I remember the biggest criticisms of that show being that it was overly dramatic and that they were covering recent artists whose careers still had many years in front of them (ex: there's no Elvis Behind the Music and the majority of the artists covered are from the 80's and 90's). I'm all for calling out racism, but this doesn't seem to be a fair target.
i haven't checked the list, but i assume there were multiple genres covered, not just rock. how i understood it, they were talking exclusively about the documentaries on rock acts (which were, at the time, white), and how they never mentioned the genres roots in black artists music.
@@higihagaa that's a fair point, though I was raised on those same docs and was well aware of rock's roots. Most artists are pretty open about who influenced them.
shall we accuse aa's way back in the old days of 'cultural appropriation' ? they used instruments invented by white people, and of course the western scale and chords /harmony after all. the stones and zep perfected rock n roll easily more and better than hendrix, or any other people of any race. black blues was a massive influence and inspiration, good / so what?
I am Jewish. If a Chinese guy was passionate about play klehzmer style, I would have no problem with it. Led Zeppelin respected the blues and were part of the tradition of borrowing and expressing as did all other blues musicians from others. These were human beings who grew up o. This form of music and learned how to express themselves through the voices of muddy waters, Howin Wolf and others. To say cultural appropriation is to separate people based on things they have no control over, their ethnicity or race. If you love music l then there is no bounds to what you can appreciate. Led Zeppelin began as a pure blues rock band, and the fact that rock n roll became more “white” as you say, is the just a product of the template if all humanity, when the majority of a population embraced a style they love, they crowded to it. If Black people were the majority than you would see mostly them. This is just a consequence of population statistics. I believe cultural appropriation is nonsense and that everyone is a human being, and as long as they are truly passionate, it really doesn’t matter. Bb King greatly respected Stevie Ray Vaughan, and he was white. Who gives a fuck? He played blues like no one had before and his race has no relevance whatsoever. He breathed and bled blues music, as did Elvis, and the fact that it took white musicians to make it mainstream, that is not exclusive to America. Any country where you have a majority, it will help if you look like them. It is not the fault of the artists that this is how society works universally.
I almost entirely agree with you, but I do still wish Led Zeppelin had given credit to the original artist when playing cover songs or reusing melodies/lyrics without changing them.
Well said. Thank you! Also this is reverse racism. Since when was music ever concerned with the colour of the epidermis. Like Duke Ellington said ( and this is paraphrased) “There’s two kinds of music. Good music and shit music”. The naivety of this piece, the virtue signalling. If this is accepted by the same generation as this ninkompoop, this narrative will emasculate all musical creators despite there skin colour and gender.
Rather than wade into the weeds of the comment section on this one, I'm just going to plug a black rock band that fucking rules: Death. Formed in Detroit in 1964, they were one of the best proto-punk bands the city ever produced. Check them out.
its funny, i looked them up and the first thing to pop up was an all white metal band from the 80's. seems appropriate to the content of this video lol
by the time Zeppelin came along, there had already been too many white artists who played blues rock and other black music. The Stones and other English bands from the 60s mostly started out as blues rock bands. So when we say Zeppelin stole music, we're only reemphasizing on the fact that most of rock music of the 60s and the 70s comes from Black influences like blues and jazz. The reason people felt the urge to reiterate it after Elvis, The Stones, Cream etc.. is because Zeppelin was that good. and authentic. Zeppelin should be the last music group to be blamed for stealing because they were the one's who transcended the genre by doing experiments with blues rock. They actually (in terms of Intellectual Property rights) transformed the style and the playing enough to be able to qualify for Fair Use. Same thing happened when Jimmy Page's Stairway to Heaven opening riff had been sued for copyright infringement with Taurus claiming that it sounds like their song Spirit. I don't remember what the court decided but listening to the two you could tell the similarities but Page's rendition does profoundly builds upon the Taurus song sufficiently and hence it is not Stealing. Zeppelin in fact should be credited as the one's who stood out transcendently, who did so much apart from just rock n roll by infusing Eastern influences in their music. So, in an ocean full of white artists who appropriated music from other cultures, Zeppelin, in my opinion, were the least complicit.
Too many people are missing the point here. This video is more about bringing light to the truth that rock music was created by black people and painted white to be more appealing to white folks. This is not about discrediting or even blaming many of these bands and musicians for preforming black inspired music but rather helping people understand the history and misuse at the roots of it all.
Does it matter that it was created by black people and then latter became a “white” thing. I feel like the fact that white people didn’t want to listen to black artists and visa versa is far more the legacy of what racism and segregation has done to society.
I see where you're coming from but if that was the case then maybe he should make videos about those black artists instead of making a video quite literally doing the things you say he's not doing, like blaming these bands for performing black inspired music. I am as you can tell from my name *completely* unbiased in this question lol. For real though, he should make videos about all the old blues greats like Robert Johnson, Elmore James, Blind Willie Johnson and Son House etc and about the transition into electric with Muddy Waters, John Lee Hooker and so on and so forth. There's so much to explore and show the world from that era and those artists and deserves more than just a mention in the background of how a white band are "cultural appropriators". In my opinion.
People. Before commenting: nobody is literally blaming Zeppelin for black music not being heard. The point is that Black music was "censored" by the music industry because it came from BLACK PEOPLE. Society as a whole consumed the music when the same songs were sung by WHITE PEOPLE. End of story. Zeppelin is just a prime example of this being the case. Everyone knows the band was inspired by american black music. Look at the broader picture. Macro. Not micro, man
You're creating issues where there are none. Rock artists from the 60s and 70s didn't "appropriate" anything, they were influenced by R&B and Rock n' Roll and made it their own; they took their influences and their own hardships and created the music of their generation. Yes, the genre was heavily influenced by black music but that doesn't automatically mean it's cultural appropriation. Led Zeppelin did not "exploit black struggle and black pain for white, monetary gain", you're holding them accountable for something that they (especially as a BRITISH band) had nothing whatsoever to do with. As for why the crowd is mainly white, rock music of the late 60s and 70s was mainly created and loved by the white working class, Jimi Hendrix was kind of an anomaly. Ironically, young white musicians of the time stayed a bit closer to blues origins, whereas young black musicians developed motown, funk and soul. In my opinion, saying that Led Zeppelin (or any British artist from the 70s) are guilty of cultural appropriation is a statement either poorly researched or deliberately made to appeal to the "woke" movement.
Cultural appropriation? A guitar is a European instrument. Rock is a mix of blues and country swing. It was a mix of black and white influences. You can hear country influences in Chuck Berry. I like blues. Whether its Robert Johnson or Son House or Muddy. But it is not what Led Zeppelin did which was a mixture of blues and English folk traditions. After LZ 2 the band was much more than blues based rock. Classic blues artists are and always will be a niche genre like Bebop jazz like Monk, Davis, and Coltrane. Kids just aren’t and weren’t gonna go crazy for Willie Dixon. Blues music is the equivalent of folk music. It was never going to be as popular with the kids as rock. Music that sounded like their Marshall and Orange amps were going to explode. Today? Black music and artists dominate the charts. That goes for all forms popular entertainment and commercials. . And black people are what 15-17% of the US population? Btw cultural appropriation is a term created to divide. We should all share and partake in culture as long as it is not mocking or making fun of it. We wouldn’t have culture without cultural appropriation.
Video quality slipping. Sociology courses on youtube about completely subjective conclusions, reached to confirm a narrative.. masking as an authoritative depiction of music history. Nobody denies the contributions of black people to music in general, and to rock music. Black people. People. We're all people. Music brings us together. Stop with this nonsense polyphonic.
Yes music brings folks together but we shouldn’t forget the context and history of the people who made it. The inequalities they faced and tables they were restricted from.
Racism isn’t a “black subject”... it is an old phenomenon and nobody claimed to solve it. A reply like above is unnecessarily hostile. You looking for enemies? Digging for hate, seeing where you can find it? You won’t find it with me. “Cultural appropriation” is something else altogether. Let’s leave it to sociologists to try and play semantical bullshit games to explain the differences between cultural tribute, cultural influence, and cultural appropriation. Hint: they who say there is only appropriation, and put limits on what culture is allowed to be experienced and experimented with, and say it should be insular to people of a specific skin color... they sound kind of like racists to me. They want Asian cultural hallmarks to only be engaged with by asians? Blacks by blacks? smh.... racists.
@@smillman437 sorry I was a sarcastic prick, I just found your issues with the video pretty irrelevant and the "we're all people" line always annoys me because self described colorblind people say it all the time. He's never declared himself an authority on anything, he's making an argument to support an opinion. Anyone can do that, address the actual arguments rather than saying "nuh uh, you're biased," like no shit? Anyone who makes an argument is, that's the point. As far as I can tell nobody needs to *deny* the contributions of black musicians, they just need to take their contributions and play them off as their own. Maybe if it weren't for the fact that white musicians were profiting off black musicians music, this wouldn't be as much of an issue as sociologist argue it is.
My opinion is that art taste has no race. Yes we can talk how there is less black people doing hard rock/metal which is the same proportion of white doing hip-hop/soul/funk, but if the other way is happening, that's totally ok! I'm not a fan of analyzes where people draw a line between what is white or a black culture. As said in the previous video, nothing is original, everything is intertwined. If you enjoy it, does it really matter? Now it belongs to all mankind. Thanks to all artist that made it happened.
Oscar Peterson was the greatest jazz pianist of all time. He played and instrument invented by Bartolomeo Cristofori, a white European. Jimmy Hendrix was the greatest guitar innovator of the 20th century. He played an instrument that largely originated in Spain, and can trace its roots back to the Arab Oud. The piano is a harp played by hammers, and the harp goes back to non-Whites in Egypt. The bagpipes are supposed to be native to white Scotland, but can also be found in ancient Egypt and some scholars believe they were brought to Britain by the Romans. Perhaps the greatest sax player of all time was John Coltrane, but the sax was invented by Adolphe Sax, who is decidedly white. The concept of cultural appropriation does not stand up to examination -are Peterson, Hendrix and Coltrane thieves? No! No culture has ever been able to successfully claim ownership of a tune, and the concept of being able to do so is an invention of white publishers in Britain. Did Zeppelin "appropriate"? The entire first album is a series of blues classics with a new set of lyrics. So, yes, they stole. Were black artists denied the revenue of their art? Yes, they were systematically oppressed by a racist industry. Is there any value in the concept of cultural appropriation? No. Its a doctrine that serves to perpetuate difference by preventing artistic co-operation between different ethnic groups, and this is entirely negative and damaging.
I have to say that I’m sick of the phrase and overuse of cultural appropriation. Who gives a shit? If music or a sport or a book or whatever has origins from a certain race, like literally everything we know, who cares if someone else is inspired by it to create their own. Who cares if someone else wants to play that sport. Basketball was invented by a white Canadian guy. Now it’s dominated by black Americans. Some of the best chefs in the world cook their best dishes from other cultures besides their own. I think people need start caring less about where things originated from and that it should remain within that culture, and start enjoying the variety of what different cultures and people bring to the table.
You’re sort of missing the point of why people have an issue with appropriation. Using music as an example to stay on topic. The issue isn’t that white musicians are playing black music, is that the systems that be used that to ERASE black musicians. Not so much the musicians and bands themselves, which this video points out, but it’s important to call out when something as simple as some musician paying tribute to another is used by the system to oppress and erase others of lower standing.
^ ^ Led Zep shamelessly ripped off "black" American African music but they also hid Scots Irish Celtic music within it because that was also fordidden music.......Listen to£ The rain song" Black mountain side or Stairway to Heaven very Celtic composed by James Patrick Page Foxy Pagan love fae Scotland VVxx
I think the suggestion that because Led Zeppelin existed other artists didn’t get heard is more than a little bit of a stretch. I would say curious listeners actually learned more about Black artists because of being exposed to the style through Led Zeppelin. I am not suggesting that they didn’t steal from some black artists, but the suggestion that that means that those artists got less opportunity as a result is questionable at best.
The problem with the point made by your first contributor is that he's talking about something subjective. Your video aligned with his narration seems to suggest Little Richard had 'soul', whereas Elvis was nothing but a tool with no 'soul'. There are millions of people who would disagree, so it's an opinion but presented as fact. I actually agree with him to an extent, as I'd rather listen to LR, but can anyone who knows anything about Elvis deny his genuine love for the music he sung? I understand the larger point about thr industry itself needing white people to lead the sales, and I agree with that. Just feel Elvis gets alot of hate for someone who was also very poor, and was a music lover at a young age Edit, just to summarise: points about the inherent racism in the industry during the 50s is a genuine fact, but you can't dictate who has 'soul' and who doesn't in an objective way. Does a black person playing Bach not have soul because it's not part of his heritage?
yet he didn’t even give Big Mama Thornton her credit nor was he interested in meeting her for a concert after exploiting her song Hound Dog. He deserves antagonism for not being an truly appreciative fan of black music and would rather exploit their music and not recognize their humanity
The central point that should have been argued it's the industry pushing these narratives to improve profit instead of blaming on the artist who might have been genuinely moved by making it big with their music.
I appreciate that you’re coming at these topics as a fan. A lot of people now throw out these accusations and hot takes and it comes across badly because they don’t understand what people like about the music they’re criticizing. This way, you’re able to get these important conversations out to fans without fans of the music getting into their defensive little bubbles. Nuance is key. I think there’s a lot to be said about how black music and black culture is perceived by those growing up in England vs in the US. That’s not to say that England doesn’t have racial issues but the music didn’t come with the same baggage over there. Blues and rock weren’t “race music” over there, it was American music and they wanted to emulate it as such. It’s cool that The Rolling Stones, who also appropriated blues very heavily, tried introducing their heroes, like Howlin Wolf, to their young white audiences, giving credit and spotlight and not letting anyone mistake them for originating the genre. Eric Clapton, for all the ire he gets nowadays (for good reason) also elevates his influences like BB King and Buddy Guy every chance he gets. It’s also interesting how the Beatles are rarely, if ever, accused of the same kind of appropriation, and I think that’s because their influences were equally black and white, equal parts Chet Atkins and Chuck Berry, country and rock and roll. They also wore their Little Richard and doo-wop vocal group influences on their sleeves and were proud of it, similarly to The Rolling Stones. Everybody gets their style from somebody else. The key seems to be accepting and recognizing where you get it from instead of pretending it’s all original. Zeppelin, coming at the end of the decade, probably felt like the genre had moved away from its roots enough to not warrant direct shoutouts. Who knows. There have been lots of great black artists in rock music since Jimi Hendrix and it’s unfortunate that the industry sidelined many of them for so long and made the genre monocultural.
That's the real problem: the recording and radio industries have historically (and sometimes currently) acted as gatekeeping institutions that favored musicians of certain races over others. If the leaders of the most influential record labels and radio stations had been more egalitarian in regard to who they gave exposure and opportunities to, the issue of "taking Black music and bleaching it to appeal to a white audience" might not've been so widespread. But unfortunately, the industries didn't really care about equal opportunity, and just did whatever would get them the most sales and profit.
Exactly we all gave inspirations even if some don't wanna admit it we all inspired by each other all races. But it's different when somebody makes something and get no love for it
A big beatles fan here. They were actually showing their love for little richard every chance they get, in every interview asking about what inspired them. You just dont know that, i am not judging you though. And what about eric clapton being recently accused?
It’s hard to listen to an opinion of someone who clearly did not live in the time period of the music of these great artists. It sounds like the same old pushed narrative that white man bad, black man no recognition. That was not like that in those times. To say things like, “why were there mostly white people at a Led Zeppelin concert?” You could ask the same question about black artists of the time having mostly black people at their shows. People like who they like, and that’s okay. Nobody has to like an artist if they do not connect with them. Today, most of the biggest artists are black. Is that wrong? No. I appreciate the work that you put into this video, but I could not watch the whole thing. I love the older blues like Robert Johnson, Howlin’ Wolf, etc. I loved the 60’s and 70’s bands like Led Zeppelin. But I could not continue to watch the pushed racism narrative. One day, all people will get beyond that, and the people who keep it alive. Have a good day.
By your own logic, youre not aloud to learn, grow, or improve your music or any aspect of yourself based off of what some black people did in the past if you are white. so this means that white people aren't allowed to learn from black people because its "cultural appropriation." why are people so obsessed with race. the color of your skin doesn't fucking matter. are you a musician? if yes, then it is your job to add to the collective knowledge of musicians as a whole. You get ahead by standing on the shoulders of giants and then taking a leap of faith.
Calling nirvana some of the whitest music ever doesnt help the video. Yes it was embraced by mad suburban teens. Cobain loved and respected the original folk blues artists and one of the most moving performances the band had was covering Leadbelly
ALL art is creative plagiarism. Music is never ex hihilo - it all evolves from something else. To say that any one race can only evolve music from their own race into something else is unbelievably ridiculous. An artist plays the music they want to, and it’s not their responsibility to point out and highlight their forebears and art progenitors all the time. Music should be music, not black music, white music, etc.
Led Zepplin put more money into the pockets of black bluesmen than virtue-signaling videos like this. In fact, you should donate your ad revenue to the people who you say have been appropriated
There seems to be a lot of blame directed at Led Zeppelin that belongs to larger societal forces at play. You acknowledge this at some point but I think you lose sight of it. Nothing is wrong with being creatively influenced by black artists. Of course if they use something specific they should credit those artists. And regarding the end, what did you want them to do, purposely not be successful?
@@Ntrinzc "Stealing" is a word that should recieve more careful thought, however. It carries with it a number of assumptions. All art carries a certain degree of imitation. All art takes inspiration from what precedes it, whether that inspiration is conscious and unconscious. It's inevitable, and normal. There is no completely original piece of art, unless you were born and raised in a desert island with no contact to any other human being. In fact, it can be argued that throughout History, art and culture was always much more a matter of tradition than innovation. It's easy to be deceived by the fast pace of our society, with demands of constant innovation and improvement, but things were not like that for the majority of human existence. Even today, a lot of more traditional music doesn't sound too different from one song to another. There is an expectation that things are going to sound relatively similar within any given musical tradition. Actually, people seem to accept much easier the fact when things sound familiar to what they already know than when things sound very different, new and original. So the question is: if familiarity is normal, if a degree of imitation is normal, and if we even appreciate it, how come we started to stigmatize it? How come we started to see it as stealing? Does that even make sense? Let's also keep in mind one very important thing: we live in a capitalistic society. The morals of our society are not absolute morals, they are the morals of our time, place and interests (often of priviliged groups). I would argue that there is no intrinsic moral flaw in replicating what was already done by someone else. I would also argue that society only sees it that way because that threatens our capitalistic way of living. When you presume yourself owner of a combination of musical notes, and call anyone who takes from that a "thief", what are you really doing? Are you really defending your creative rights from an outside attack, are you really interested in some creative code-of-ethics, or are you just defending your property rights? Are you operating on the assumption that it is imoral to copy, even when all points towards copying being part of human nature, and so, stigmatizing copying is akin to denying people their own human nature, or are you just operating on the precepts of capitalistic society, cynically trying to convince people that the moral extends anywhere beyond economical interest? And what would be of copyright laws if we lived in a non-capitalistic society? Would they still hold? Simply put, "stealing" in this context is a word that is very much politically charged, even if we are unaware of it. We should be careful how we use it, and question our most immediate assumptions to find out if it really makes that much sense to use it. Perhaps it does make sense, but perhaps it makes no sense at all.
@@Knightgil bruh we all watched the video u just wasted a ton of time. You completely missed my point, you cant call led zepplin racist oppressors if they do what they do to every group of people. Amateurs borrow, Great artists steal, im contempt with my word choice.
you could also make the argument that Zeppelin offered a gateway for a new audience for the original blues artists. I know when I first got into Zeppelin I dug deep into the roots of the songs and discovered a wide range of blues musicians and music that I was not aware of.
I wonder if there is anything that should NOT be analyzed from the perspective of race? Was it necessary and appropriate to throw the line (paraphrasing): "intentionally or not LZ contributed to stifling black music heritage, and we have to hold them accountable". Wait, what? Aren't we over-reaching here at least a tiny little bit? What happened to encouraging cross-pollination in between different cultures, out of which and to-date countless examples of the best art emerged? Or what happened to the line about imitation being the highest form of flattery? Saxophone was invented by a white Henri Selmer of France. Shouldn't we hurry up and hold all non-white sax players from Sidney Bechet, through Charlie Parker, Coleman Hawkins and John Coltrane , etc. who played, or play the instrument accountable for ugly appropriation? Should we not be asking what could have been if only white musicians played the saxophone?
First correction: The saxophone was invented by Adolphe Saxe, a Belgian, as a louder and more durable reed instrument for marching and military bands. Second correction: The use of the saxophone in "black" music came about primarily because it never caught on as an instrument in european music. The adoption by African American musicians was because it was cheap, available, and provided a voice that they could use and identify with. There was no cultural appropriation in its use because "white" culture had rejected it.
@@alistairmackintosh9412 Thank you for the correction on the inventor of the saxophone. My mistake, you are absolutely correct. As for the white culture rejecting the instrument, perhaps you should search for examples of use in European classical music. if I were you I would not mention this "rejection" to Rachmaninoff, Ravel, Bizet, Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Britten, Debussy, Penderecki, Milhaud, Glazunov, or George Gershwin. They may feel bad for stepping out of line. As for the greater point I was trying to make, would you care to address it, or are you here to mitpick only?
@@zawiszaczarnysulima3700 Both corrections I made addressed your essential point. As to the use of the saxophone in european music, the composers mentioned used it primarily as a novelty sound or explicitly imitating African american music.
Well Led Zeppelin made it way better so 🤣 that’s also like saying delta blues musicians shouldn’t have been guitars cause it was invented by a white man
Just finished the whole video and all I can say is I’m disappointed. I listen to an incredible amount of music each and every day that I can relate to and it’s what inspired me to learn to play guitar not because I wanted to “appropriate culture”. In all the music I listen too not once have I ever cared nor thought about what race the musician was I was there for the sound and that’s the beauty of music, music is it’s own language that can be understood by everyone universally no matter race or heritage. Led Zeppelin created their own music and people resonated with it, if Led Zeppelin were black we have no reason to assume they wouldn’t be just as well received and praised for their greatness. Stop trying to paint them out as “culture thief’s” simply for being inspired, people are allowed to play the music they feel and shouldn’t have to be told they’re evil systematic oppressors simply for the color of their skin by racists like polyphonic. TL:DR Be yourself, don’t let racists tell you what you can or can’t play because of the color of your skin.
Not thinking about your race is a privilege. I love rock music too. I started playing guitar 13 years ago. I was very conscious of my skin color the whole time. Because black rock artists done get the same space. Yeah, we do jave reason to believe that if LZ was Black they wouldn't be as popular. It happens to Black rockers all the time. Maybe you watched the whole video but I think you watched defensively, not constructively.
@@kahlilbt can you show me a black band that made a song as profound as stairway to heaven? Also if your conscious of your skin colour when just playing music especially in this day of age and at the comfort of ur own home, thats just personal insecurities. I know many black people who would never let the colour of their skin affect how they enjoy playing music. Anybody that does groundbreaking work will get the recognition they deserve, and yes white people have an easier time making it without having to be groundbreaking but theyll just fade into obscurity so they dont matter either in the grand scheme of things. As an artist it should be your goal to be groundbreaking and not just to be like others, otherwise ull never be much better than the artists u claim to just ride off the backs of blacks to get popular, i believe that’s how Hendrix would see it. Just focus on urself and greatness will follow g
@@kahlilbt okay maybe not all the recognition they deserve, but enough of it to live a happy, relatively worry free life. Ill obviously admit that if they did it + being white then their fame would be even greater, the world is unfair but bashing bands from the 70s doesnt help anything
@@Ntrinzc 1. Profundity is subjective, but I assure you that by any measure, there are Black musicians being just as "profound" as your white fave. 2. Don't speak for your Black acquaintances. You don't know their experiences or feelings and assuming you do when that assumption fits your own racial narrative is... Very White™. 3. Meritocracy isn't real. It should be but it's not. 4. You can look up howJimi felt about race instead of guessing?
The message i'm getting here is that it's wrong for anyone else other than black people to play and release rock music because black people invented it first. Isn't it a good thing that cultures merge and borrow things from each other and that way appreciate and celebrate each other? Or is the problem taking something from another culture and claiming it as your own? Which that of course is wrong in my mind
depends oh who it's being 'taken' from, and by who. in the same context that 'cultural appropriation' is just thrown around these days, how does it not also apply to black jazz musicians 'taking' from white classical and ragtime composers? you would need to instill some Marxian class context to accept there is really any discernable difference between the two. it's just influence feeding off influence, but these people have to overintellectualize it because that's what they've been taught in academia to do.
@@vaderchief So what? So fucking what? You must have a good life if this is a big issue to you. No thanks my favorite Marx brother is Groucho, way more fun than that Karl lunatic.
There is a number of major problems, as the video explains: Economic injustice: When the group that has created a "cultural thing" stays mostly marginalized and poor, while members of the majority culture who have adopted it become famous and rich by selling it. Historical injustice, Lack of recognition: When the creators of the "cultural thing" get written out of its history. Pushout of the orginal creators: When the group that has created a "cultural thing" is pushed out of it. Cultural bigotry: When members of the creator's group are looked down upon, or even openly despised and/or actively suppressed by members of the majority group who, at the same time, consume their creation. Misrepresentation: Often the consuming culture picks and chooses what to adapt. This is partly inevitable (evolution...), and is in itself not necessarily a "problem". But what is chosen are only the outward and superficial elements, with the deeper meaning and background beeing lost. This often leads to misrepresentation, which can feel like misuse to that people that have a deeper understanding. I write "cultural thing" because it does not only apply to music.
People only bring up "cultural appropriation" when it's white people adapting/being inspired by another culture. If Led Zeppelin were Latino or some other race, you would not be talking about it like this. Being inspired by other cultures isn't bad and to think so is utter cringe This is probably your worst take in a good while, I like your videos but unironically cope and seethe.
It's true. Being inspired isn't bad. No one said Zeppelin were wrong. There's proof that Page and the guys were massive fans of black artists. Look at the broader picture, that I honestly think you missed even though it's in your face; Black music was "censored" because it came from BLACK PEOPLE. Society as a whole consumed the music when the same songs were sung by WHITE PEOPLE. End of story. Zeppelin is just an example. And yes, if latinos or some other race, as you stated in your comment, did the same it would still be considered cultural appropriation. And everyone brings it up when it's white people because literally the face of rock n roll and modern music in general is white men.
Music transcends culture, race, religion, or nationality. It’s a universal force. The idea that it must belong to one race or another is ridiculous and evil. Music belongs to us all. The only people helped by divisions such as these are those who would like us to be divided. All fruitful endeavors grow through appropriation and change. “If I have ever achieved anything of significance in my life, it is because I stood on shoulders of giants,” said Isaac Newton. Just because Elvis is giant doesn’t mean Little Richard isn’t one too. We remember them both. Zeppelin built on Elvis and Buddy Holly, as well as Muddy Waters and Robert Johnson, so did Queen and others. In the same way, all human progress is built on previous progress. Einstein wouldn’t’ve figured out relativity without the Greeks, or the Persians. The only race we ought to care about is the human race, all else is trivial nonsense. We all feel pain, we all feel anguish, that’s not a uniquely black or white experience. I don’t need to go through slavery or Jim Crow to cry when I hear Strange Fruit. Through a black person may empathize more than me, that does not mean I do not empathize at all, I am human and therefore nothing human is alien to me.
And sorry no. Anyone who is more than a casual fan knows the incredible influence black music had on Led Zeppelin. This is common knowledge to any self respecting Zeppelin fan. That goes for Elvis, Beatles, Stones, and Clapton fans as well. Stop acting as if this is some revelation or something fans of these artists need to meditate on.
Nobody "owns" a culture or a genre of music. Black people do not own blues music or rap anymore than white English people own English Folk or Germans own the music of Beethoven. Once you release a piece of music into the world, you are adding to the cultural fabric of humanity. You can't then dictate who listens to it, who is inspired by it, or how they use this inspiration. If you consider art to be "black" or "white", then I'm sorry... but that's racist. Music is one of the most effective ways people from very different backgrounds can bond and overcome those differences. Why is everyone so eager to destroy that?
Music is music, is music, is music. I do not buy into your “stay in your lane” take on music. Blues, Bluegrass, rock, folk, country are rooted in America all pull from each other and all genres. I hear, America not color in the history of all the past greats. I hate that back in the early days of rock that race was very much injected into everything, America and they had to observe the racial divide or suffer the consequences of a racist country. Music is shared and is constantly evolving from each other. I believe that black artist were taking each evolution and creating some outstanding music that stands the test of time. Don’t hate white artist for loving black music and creating the rock interpretation of that great music. Howling wolf for example went electric which throughout history of blues had been acoustic without distortion. Jimmy Hendrix in reality took back, and shook up music and had many guitar gods playing follow the leader again. It’s evolving people! Not theft!
Criticizing cultural appropriation is stupid. Cultures have been inspiring and borrowing things from each other since the beginning of history. If Led Zeppelin are guilty of appropriating rock from black people, are black people guilty of appropriating guitars or jazz instruments?
The first said guitar was created by the Moors. The first known trumpets were by the Egyptians. There were trumpets buried with King Tut. The first keyed trumpet that could play all the notes was from Anton Weidinger who was white. The piano was created by a white man. Yes people appropriate styles from others. But instruments have been around for hundreds of years. Even when Europe was in the Dark Ages.
The problem here is that someone is creating something, but because of racism they aren’t allowed the same success doing that thing and that’s not fair. I don’t think the take away from this whole “cultural appropriation” debate should be “British boys shouldn’t be making black music.” It’s more “We shouldn’t _only_ like black music when it’s being sung by British boys.”
The fact is that "cultural appropriation" doesn't exist? What is it. It's just a term found by people defining themself progressists but thry don't understand they are very conservative actually
if you are whining about "cultural appropriation" then you don't understand how music is created. All music is inspired by other people's music, this is a process that transcends race, nationality, continents etc. These sorts of attitudes are an enemy of music, you're preventing the proper flow of the creative musical process.
Apparently I have lived under a rock or dremt 30 something yrs because I remember growing up and watching interviews of members of different bands and hearing them say what inspired the artists when they grew up also including black artists along with the rest of the melting pot. So I'm confused about the stealing rock from anyone? What about Prince.. Lenny Kravitz and..and. I mean I thought that music was everyone's? Yes there has been a progression in what is popular as a whole human race but the way things are today it's the "white man bad". Yes in some cases and especially back in the day but it's not culture against culture for the majority I feel. It's the rich against everyone else. I just wish more people seen it for what it really is. Just because the rich happens to be white means all wite people are bad? If that's the case then every race is bad because there are rich people in EVERY race.
Sad but predictable to find this entitled bland US cliché perspective once again being superimposed on a British band that started out simply loving a certain kind of music thereby somehow making them complicit in your guilt.
I have the impression that the British bands who got into the Blues - John Mayall, the Stones, Yardbirds, Clapton, even Led Zep - did so with a lot of respect, but also incorporated their own experiences. They may have rescued the Blues and kept it alive, and many of the old Blues musicians were grateful to them. But the question remains, why did it have to be English bands that got huge on the back of the Blues? Who knows, it may have been in the wake of the Beatles...
If you listen to any of the old blues greats talk they'll tell you the same thing, blues is pain and heartache and who hasn't felt that? It's 100% true that it originated within the black communities of America but it's just foolish to say that nobody but black people could feel the blues, and if you feel it you can play it as blues is all about feeling.
A great example a song by Zeppelin that discusses personal issues is What is and Should never be. The song is about Robert Plant's wife's sister who he dated. She is also the motivation for Black Country Woman.
@@TheGhostOfFredZeppelin absolutely, and to be fair, the video also acknowledges that. I guess the question remains why the industry decided to push these bands, rather than the originators. I think it's because they were English, and the Beatles created a market for English bands... even Jimi Hendrix made his breakthrough after he moved to London and was put in a British band
@@martinpaddle I guess it's about money as always, a young energetic artist/band is more marketable than some old man who maybe haven't even played his music in years. By that I mean the old pretty much retired bluesmen and and not the Little Richards and Chuck Berry's of the world
@@martinpaddle also, white English bands were seen as more "marketable" than black American bands, we can't erase the racial element from this discussion. Not saying that's something the Beatles or Zepellin or Clapton or the Stones were to blame for, they didn't make those decisions themselves, but it must be mentioned.
The ignorance in this comment section is appalling. The entire point is that this music was seen as more acceptable not because of the “spin” that Zepplin put on it, but solely because they were white. As a musician, I can also comfortably say that all of the members of Led Zepplin are overrated, save for John Bonham; he was a legend before he even joined the band. It wasn’t the differences between Zepplin and black blues musicians that put Zepplin on the map, it was the similarities. The fact is, it didn’t matter how much talent you put in front of most white audiences at that time if the talent was of colored skin. They rejected the merit and validity of black art, even if they enjoyed it. I really think Zepplin is a great example to view this issue through. Their first album is almost completely comprised of covered material. Fans could argue that they prefer later albums better, but you don’t get the later albums without the first one. At the end of the day, I think the main purpose of this topic is to help reveal how black culture is commodified and sold for profit by people who aren’t black, and how that can be and has been really problematic. If you are disputing that, you’re just flat out wrong. You can still like Led Zepplin guys, it’s okay. The past is the past and art is art; that doesn’t mean we cant have a nuanced conversation about how cultural appropriation has impacted art throughout history and how it adds up in today’s world.
I always thought cultural appropriation was bullshit, and this video reaffirmed that, at no time does anyone present an argument for "cultural appropriation" to be bad, just that racism is bad, when they say that white artists were more successful than blacks, this is not the fault of cultural appropriation but racism, if cultural appropriation is bad then racism is good, because it keeps cultures separate preventing any kind of "appropriation".
Dude you are doing the same thing!! Because Zeppellin became sooo popular you are trying to do the same thing with your video to seek the spotlight !!! Why are you trying to over think this … its only rock n roll and we like it!!! Besides Plant and Page have always said its all about the roots , of course it was in black music , da ! They never said it wasnt !!! Haters will always find a way to hate!!! Do yo think for one moment that music just falls from the heavens it all stems from those who come before us always has and always will !!!!!
Worth pointing out that "back in the day," you wouldn't get the life sued out of you for covering a song or doing a new version of something without writing "COVER" at the beginning of every heading. It was assumed that songs grew off of each other and developed over time, like "St. James Infirmary Blues" or "House of the Rising Sun."
Eliminate? No way. Appreciate and emulate. I don't understand why it's wrong to be inspired by someone elses culture. I grew up in love with rap music. And I wanted to learn everything I could about that culture. From music to movies to clothing, I just wanted to be part of it. And I was told I shouldn't rap because I wasn't from that lifestyle. I wasn't stealing... I was paying homage. I saw beauty, and I wanted to be that beautiful. And looking back it was silly to see a chubby urban white kid trying to be hard. Led Zeppelin helped bring a lot of culture across the ocean. People have picked up songs by so many artists they never would have heard of before, because Led Zeppelin (and others) introducted them to something they didn't know it was there. If you find something you love, and you embrace it, and you mix it with other things you love and you turn it into something creative and beautiful... thats art. The fact that the record labels stamped the blues as race music is disgusting and sad. It took people like Zep to convince the next generation that they were missing out, and should pay attention to this amazing music, and these amazing people.
This is quite possibly one of the most frustrating comment sections I've ever seen. No one is even giving the message of this video a chance. They immediately revert to defensiveness.
Nobody has anything against black rock musicians, nowadays we must include black people on everything we do. I say no, to each their own. My people suffered for a millennium from one empire to another,but you don’t see us asking reparations from the Turks. Ohhh i forgot,I’m privileged because i’m white. Doesn’t matter that i grew up in a country that was destroyed by war in the early 90’s.
Of course, this sort of discussion always makes me think: That there isn't really a reason why we should ultimately disallow British white people from playing the blues.
Sad but unsurprising that you have this many dislikes on the video. This was a ton of fun to contribute to. Thanks for letting me be a part of it.
R.i.p. dislikes
Really enjoyed what you said . Thank you for adding your voice and perspectives.
I totally binged all your content and ended finding more creators from watching your videos
How can you see the dislikes? Lol
your commentary really added a lot to the video, its sad to see how many people simply ignore and refuse to listen to the points made
@@byoutifulmonster that's good question... idk maybe cause I'm a creator🤷🏿♂️
This is a great video. However, I think it disregards the fact that Zeppelin, just like The Beatles, The Who and Rolling Stones, were British. Not to say the British society of the 50s and 60s were not racists towards Black peoples, but black music was more widely distributed to working class children. The Beatles did not cover little Richard or Chuck Berry because they wanted to white wash rock n' roll but because they, just like so many other great British rock bands, genuinely loved and admired those artists and they always made that very clear. It is how art evolves, you start by "stealing" from people you admire and with time you develop your own style. The foundations of The Rain Song, Stairway To Heaven and The Song Remains The Same can for sure be drawn from blues and jazz, but it is original nonetheless.
Finally, someone with common sense and no blind wokeness
This comment >>>>>
Yes britain was wayyyyy less racist. When lynching was still a thing in the US black amricanas where starting lives and having children with white people during ww2
Actually, the Beatles did cover a few Little Richard and Chuck Berry tunes...
yes, there is something in the creative world regarded as influence. A lot of the British bands basically took riffs, progressions, but that is the nature of the blues. Jimi also played blues based rock and had the same demographic in the audience. I think you'd find more white people at R&B shows. Why is this being discussed as a thing??
Jimi Hendrix's death was probably one of the biggest changes to rock history. Imagine if he hadn't died and joined the then forming ELP. I think progrock would've been an entirely different genre,
Hendrix was going to work with miles davis
Maybe u should listen to something from 70s that isn't prog,like kraut..
I can barely imagine Hendrix in ELP, but the live shows would be chaos. Burnt guitars and flying pianos.
Just a note...Hendrix was scheduled to record with John Mclaughlin, Miles Davis, Larry Young, Gil Evans, within a year of his untimely death. Considering the professional and artistic respect he received from fellow musicians and composers, music may have taken a much different journey had those projects come to fruition.
Zeppelin is held in account, more than most because they gave no artistic or $$ credit to the writers and performers they interpreted
@@bradrehn1007 well, I hear you, but they didn't actually owe anything to anyone for the amazing art they produced. What has been happening for.... damn... 20+ years is guys like Chuck Berry being welcomed on stage with the rest of the rockers, and others black artists, too, being treated like royalty. There has been monetary compensation paid to some black artists, but I don't know much about that. Even Albert Lee, the great and amazing guitarist from the C&W scene is welcome onstage with the likes of Eric Clapton, Tom Petty, Neil Young, Roger McGuinn, and more. I really don't care for the shoddy, negative view of rock and roll of those looking back from now with their cancelling eyes and critical theory ears. They know nothing.
Led Zeppelin, Cream, The Rolling Stones, The Beatles, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, The Who: all these bands that took The Blues and led to the evolution of Stadium Rock have one thing in common (other than being White) - They're British (I would say all English, but Cream's Jack Bruce ensured some Celtic representation, as did Rory Gallagher)
These British bands weren't taking Black music to sell to White people - they took American music to sell to British people. This happened quite literally with Jimi Hendrix - he was ignored in his native land until he was embraced here.
It would be churlish to claim that Britain didn't/doesn't have a problem with racism, but it's different from racism in the USA. In the 1960s, the UK wasn't a decade years from Jim Crow, or barely a century from a civil war over slavery. Furthermore, post-war UK (and Europe as a whole) was different from post-war USA. Even in the 60's there was many ruins from the war, with neighbourhoods destroyed and families enduring losses (I don't think it's a coincidence that Ginger Baker and Roger Waters are the two angriest men in British rock and both had lost their fathers in the war). 1950s and 1960 Britain was a bleak place, and the mood of Blues music fit the mood of the people here, even if the specifics of the lyrics are less applicable
I'm not trying to invalidate in any way the points made in this video. However, I feel this is very important context that was completely missed. I enjoyed he interviews in this video, but I feel it would very much have benefitted from hearing the voices of Black Brits in addition to Black Americans.
That is spot on.
Yeah, I think you tackled something very important. From a European perspective, many of the racial tensions and cultural differences in the USA are not that visible. In Europe it is not race, but rather ethnicity the main aspect of differentiating people (which may be discriminatory or not), and the exploitation of black people is rather addressed within the post-colonial rather than racial discourse. In result, we are not trained/sensitized to look at the USA in terms of race, so we do not do it. The culture that is coming from the USA to Europe is perceived as "American", and the intricacies of racial differentiations within the US-American cultural landscape are often invisible to us.
.
When I was a kid growing in a Central European province, I didn't know blues was black music. For me, it was American music. I did not know that country music was white. I thought it was simply rural/Southern type of American music. It took me years to even spot the curious whiteness of rock music (coming from a predominantly white country, it was likely that white was the default and therefore "invisible" skin colour to me), or that R&B was not simply part of pop music, but distinctively black genre of music in the USA. When I was a kid, Eminem was big, so I never realized that white rappers are an exception and rap is black music. I know these things now, but it took years of exposure and learning to even see it. Black American music is simply American music to many people outside of USA.
@@berlineczka that's the problem. The average music consumer does not know but the musicians knew. So they need to credit the culture of music they are influenced by. That what this is all about. Musicians taking music of other cultures and not crediting them is cultural appropriation.
@@berlineczka i guess as a born American who has lived in Scotland France and currently Germany, its a little confusing because i was always stereotyped as a black American. "You sing jazz well because you're black" " you dance well because you are black" "you do xyz well because you are black". So it was always confusing as to why these stereotypes were acknowledged but NOT the cultural importance and impact of certain black american cultural phenomenons/ achievements. Its not that any of these genres "belong" to black people specifically, they are free for anyone to partake in just like i enjoy indian music and have also participated in it but i acknowledge that indian music was born and developed through certain shared cultural experiences. I feel like with black american music, the world acknowledges the cultural experiences (i.e slavery, segregation) but wont acknowledge the actual byproducts (many genres of music that were developed as a direct reaction to what people were feeling during those times.) The Blues was developed as a way to cope with slavery but at the same time it has nothing to do with black people? It just confuses me a little. "You sing jazz well because you're black" but at the same time jazz isnt considered a "black" genre or apart of the black cultural experience to Europeans apparently. I guess what i dont get is why one would stereotype someone based on music but then also not understand how that same music has strong cultural ties to said person or their community. I get that racial tensions are not and have not been the same in Europe as I've lived in a few European countries as well as America. But from my perspective it seems many people will acknowledge one thing but choose to not accept the other. And i understand that to the outsiders perspective, there is only one culture of America, but that just isnt the case or else there wouldn't be such division, no? Culture is usually born out of experiences and clearly not everyone in America has the same history or experiences so cultural achievements will vary
Thank you! I tried to explain this, though less eloquently in another comment. The British aspect is crucial to this story.
Also missing is the fact that rock and roll was all but dead in America when the British version began taking shape. And that groups like the Stones and the Animals saw themselves as blues bands in the beginning. Theirs was a path of musical purity, misaligned with the pop aspirations of groups like the Beatles or Herman's Hermits.
As a huge fan of Little Richard, The cherry-picked points about him force me to reconsider how valid any argument in this video actually is. Not only a black artist in the 50s, Richard was Gay and struggled with acceptance (of his sexuality) -especially within his religious community and upbringing- throughout his entire life. To reduce that to “oh he had to dress androgynous because he was black” is an insult to the man and artist.
Obviously this is a good and thoughtful vid but that irked me so hard
Thank you! Same.
Agree, this video is heavily spun to make Zeppelin look like racist stealers of black music.
Anyone that knows anything about music knows this is flatly untrue.
It's not Led Zeppelins fault for being capable of being inspired by "black artists", the question that's always left unspoken concerning the subject of "cultural appropriation" is why the hell "black artists" feel obliged to reject anything and everything that may be considered "white". The source of this sort of racial segregation IS NOT coming from "white culture", it's coming the "black culture" that defines itself in primary opposition to "white culture". Fuck anyone who would presume to criticize Led Zeppelin for having the audacity to NOT be racially conscious. God damn, the racial baggage that continues to plague American culture is absolute cancer, if anything, that is the reason why the most successful musicians of the 20th century were British... because British artists have absolutely zero inclination to be so parochial and small-minded as to adopt artistic limitations predicated on such a ridiculously frivolous consideration as skin color.
Exactly.
He should bring that up! Thank you
I'll look into that a little more. It seems like there's lmore story still
this reminds me a lot of the discourse surrounding 'young Americans' by David Bowie. A lot of people argue about how he appropriated the Philadelphia soul sound at the time, but I think what a lot of people forget is that he described it as "plastic soul" - he knew he wasn't going to sound like all the other artists he was inspired by, but he created that record as a tribute to the sounds that he loved
Bowie's way of doing soul was very different to LZ's way of doing blues rock.
Bowie presented the YA era as a novelty, deeply understanding soul was more than just a way of making music.
On the other hand, LZ really never cared (or at least we don't know if they did/do)
Bowie also made a point of citing his sources. He wasn't always perfect at shouting out his influences, but he was sure better at it than most white pop stars who were using black music as part of their vocabulary.
Actually, that’s nothing like this. Bowie specifically acknowledged what he was doing, and this video is more about artists who DON’T do that.
Bowie didn't steal songs
@@jakethet3206 An artist doesn't have to do anything. People have a right not to buy the art lol
Just want to add what could be considered a layer into the discussion about Zep. These guys were born during World War II. Their country was being invaded and bombed (unlike the U.S). Post WWII in England was pretty bleak. They had a long recovery following the war full of economic strife and uncertainty. I wonder if this contributed to their youth becoming more aligned with American "black" music?
Keith RIchards has talked about this. Britain was still rationing its food to the public well up until the mid 1950's. all of the guys who came from the British invasion were either poor or impoverished at some point during their lives, and their comments on the subject of Black American music was that it was more meaningful to them and was depicting their experience. the fact you bring up is overlooked in this video
@@PhantomOutlaw its a combination of all those things. Britain was poor, destroyed and economically unstable as mentioned above, accessibility was another big factor thats why it was so significant when Bill Wyman had a bass and amp, which was VERY uncommon at that time. Most of these guys were rellegated to skiffle or busking
This is a really good point.
I have seen an interview with Roger Daltrey where he specifically states this. He and Keith Richards have also spoken of the shock they felt witnessing the treatment of black people in the States.
@@clinthosking6444 wow
Little Richard's pain was not only rooted that he was black man in the mid-20th Century American South, his pain also had to do with his being a poly-sexual being from an evangelical background. Led Zeppelin, and the Beatles, Rolling Stones etc. came from a very class structured society and the blues part of rock & roll/rhythm & blues spoke to their lower class status in that society (they were not American) - the celtic roots of country music, which fused with the blues to create these genres between Appalachia and Missippi Delta in the 20's, 30's and 40's to create American Rock & Roll - on their first American tours Zeppelin frequently covered Rock-A-Billy artist Johnny Burnette & the Rock & Roll Trio's "Train Kept A Rockin'" - I have never heard anyone accuse Johnny Burnette of cultural appropriation, although he appropriated an equal amount from race records as Louis Jordan appropriated from Country & Western artists like Bob Wills & his Texas Playboys. One of the big "threats" of Rock & Roll was that it brought the races together, which is something which the American elite viewed as a Socialist Plot. Sam Phillip's Sun Records stable did not just consist of Elvis Presley, Roy Orbison, Jerry Lee Lewis, Carl Perkins and Johnny Cash, he also signed Howlin' Wolf, Sonny Burgess, James Cotton and Junior Parker. The Beatles did not just cover the Isley Brothers and Smokey Robinson, they covered Buddy Holly and the Everly Brothers, too. One of the most interesting things about Led Zeppelin's 1973 Madison Square Garden concerts is that on the exact dates when they occured, 120 miles north in Watkin's Glen, NY, what was for a long time the largest amount of people to gather for an American Rock & Roll Festival were attending Summer Jam; featuring the Allman Brothers Band, the Grateful Dead and the Band, while photographs of that concert are just slightly more diverse than the Song Remains the Same it bears in mind to remember that with gate crashing Watkin's Glen was too many a "free" concert the cost of traveling deep into the Catskills during an OPEC embargo must be factored into that price, where as Zeppelin's last three American concerts of 1973 were able to be scalped at far greater prices than their $7.50 listed price; the lack of diversity at both of these shows could partially be blamed on ecoomics.
That's the thing, innit?
Economics.
Also the fact that so called White Rock and Roll sounded to much like, well, White Rock and Roll and therefore to Blacks it sounded like watered down Rock and Roll!
I guess this video got the full force of people just beeing sick of everything beeing viewed exclusively through an American lense.
Led Zeppelin instructed me about the Blues. They introduced me to Robert Johnson, Muddy Waters and Blind Willie Johnson. I have seen interviews when they give credit to these musicians but unfortunately, they didn’t on their albums initially. Nobody’s Fault But Mine, especially in the intro is Blind Willie’s but who can argue that second part is Led Zeppelin’s. Great content!
Nobody’s Fault But Mine was credited from the first pressing. Every cover that was recorded from LZ3+ was always credited. The only 4 instances where they did not initially credit we’re on the first two albums.
12:44 - Yeah, another black Nirvana fan!
To Kurt Cobain’s credit, his cover of Leadbelly’s “Where Did You Sleep Last Night?” shakes me to my bone marrow.
P. S. - I really think the Carpenters are “whiter” in terms of sound, but there is a ton of soul in Karen’s voice and she duetted with Ella Fitzgerald.
There was a time when the influence of artists upon the creativity of artists of other cultures was appreciated and even celebrated. These days it is called "cultural appropriation," and it is transparent bullshit created by people whose only goals are creating excuses to be offended and amplifying divisions between people.
Cultural appropriation is an interesting thing bc culture in itself wouldn't exist unless everyone was taking something from someone else. I mean human society is built on the idea of sharing ideas, technology and values
The interview subjects are more balanced than the narrator IMHO. Interesting stuff.
I never understood the concept of cultural appropriation since for me being a better human means to be in touch with other cultures than mine. Why is it really wrong to embed these cultural nuances in your own fabric of life?
@@juho7271 it’s not necessarily wrong when it comes to the interpersonal exchangement of cultural ideas and practices (done respectfully); the problem of appropriation arises when one community expressly makes a profit of some sort out of another’s practices, usually adding in the fact that the latter community’s cultural ideas and practices are looked down upon/undervalued.
like, in this instance of rock and roll, how many black artists were maligned and sectioned off from receiving their due credits only for white artists to gain influence from the same style, then become the faces of said style of music/receive all the praise. then in turn the music has been so far removed from its original context, it doesn’t really embed any differing ‘cultural nuances’ into your own understanding of art if you arent even made aware of its origins. it’s an issue that’s better understood structurally than interpersonally, imo
@@juho7271 Because people want a way to complain about "white people" when all this can be boiled down to "these people did something that was inspired by and made more money". The idea of "cultural appropriation" is just a politically charged term to make people sound bad when it's clearly inspiration instead, or just them liking something. Because at the end of the day, everything is inspired by something, music itself was most likely inspired by the sounds of nature, and rock isn't just at its soul from one group of people, it takes queues from many sources, but people just attribute it to "black music" to make them sound righteous and superior because "they know the history".
@@Gyropathic Could not have said it better myself.
I agree with some things, disagree with others. But I don’t understand why Led Zeppelin are the “focus” of this video.
Coz it's project about Led Zeppelin, containing some videos, telling about different topics.
Because the video is about led zepplelin...
Well they're not really, 90% of the video is about cultural appropriation.
This video name drops Zeppelin because this is “Zeppelin Month” and Polyphonic is releasing a variety of videos about Led Zeppelin. This is as much a part of their legacy as Stairway to Heaven.
Because Whitey didn't buy Little Richard's records.
10:51 “Cultural appropriation is when you try to be something that you’re not by hiding behind someone else’s culture. When there’s that lack of authenticity.”
As you rightly point out at 22:20 , by that definition, Led Zeppelin did not appropriate black culture. They did not hide behind anyone and they certainly didn’t lack authenticity.
19:22 “That’s what cultural appropriation is...its how the history books are written by the dominant class and the dominant class gets to choose who really made history.”
I really appreciated the way you sought out the voices and opinions of people of colour.
However your premise that Zeppelin’s success “Kept black communities from doing the same. Intentionally or not, Zeppelin played a big part in us missing out in two generations of potentially incredible black rock” is unfounded.
Of course, that isn’t your fault because you, like many other well intentioned individuals, operate within a misguided paradigm. The problem is that the very notion of cultural appropriation is fundamentally flawed.
Even if you record the exact same song, but make it your own, you aren’t stealing or diminishing the original. When Stevie Wonder covered the Beatles he arguably made “We Can Work it Out” a better song. Same goes for Jimmi Hendrix culturally appropriating Jewish American culture when he covered “All Along the Watchtower”. White people playing “black music” does not make Chuck Berry cease to exist, it does not erase African-American culture, it expands upon it.
Culture with a capital “C” does not spring out of the void, every culture is built on the influences of others. We would not have Led Zeppelin without Muddy Water and we wouldn't have Muddy Waters without Robert Johnson, but we wouldn’t have him without the guitar, which we wouldn’t have without the western traditions of the lute and chromatic scale influenced by the Moorish 4 string oud.
Unfortunately, the idea that rock music was stolen is therefore misguided. Culture, unlike many other things of value, is not a commodity with a single user. Culture can’t be stolen, it can only be propagated. It is the same lack of understanding which leads certain conservative mindsets to think that immigrants steal jobs. More people in an economy diversifiy economic potential. There aren’t a finite number of jobs just as there isn’t a finite amount of culture which only one ethnicity can monopolize at any given time. The more people participate, the more economies and cultures grow.
What cultural appropriation is trying to convey is systemic racism. Unfortunately the term is misleading and misguided and it makes it harder to understand the mechanism of repression. Culture, when disseminated openly, is not a tool of oppression, it is a means of liberation.
Fundamentally, Culture is not a zero-sum game. It cannot be stolen or appropriated.
An individual piece of art can be stolen. If Led Zeppelin had stolen a Son House tune and passed it off as their own, that would be intellectual property theft, not cultural appropriation.
What white societies did to Native Americans/First Nations or to Africans and blacks or to Jews and Arabs is irredeemably reprehensible. The depraved slaughter and enslaving of millions stole lives, not Culture. Thankfully, despite the horrors of racism and repression, Culture lives on.
Exactly. As long you give credit where credit is due… which Led Zeppelin did most of the time (and most artists in this media climate do nowadays… for fear of this sort of thing). Honestly… without the contributions of white musicians… blues (or any other form of BAM music) would’ve never expanded past its grassroots origins. That’s just simply a fact.
Fuckin’ well said homie.
What this comment misses is that while culture itself cannot be stolen, the cultural expression of a certain art certainly can be dominated and stolen. The colonization of jazz in particular is notable; the artists who made the most money off of the New Orleans sound in the 20s, 30s, and 40s were not its originators; they were the white adopters who were taken with jazz. The issue is not that white musicians were allowed to play jazz, it is that black musicians were largely not allowed to profit from it.
If you look at the black artists in those days they got the exposure and recognition through and loved to play with the white artists. Funny how non musicians have a problem with it as if it’s their music. Music brought people more together than anything. Bands like Living color, bad brains etc. did exactly the same with white punk/rock music and there is hardly any black music left without electronics
How did you write all this within an hour of the video being posted?
Most black people are not musicians. Most white people are not musicians. The fact that it's constantly considered black music when very few black people actually played it and that there are very few white musicians who also play it it should be credited to the PEOPLE and not the race. It's honestly ridiculous and disgusting at this part that we continue to call something white or black. Lastly, the guitar and the piano were both invented by white italians. The trumpet by a white German. The saxophone by a white Belgian. The harmonica by a white German as well.
So if there's any appropriation it would be the blacks stealing the instrumentations of whites.
How does that sound?
It sounds pretty stupid doesn't it? Well that's what it sounds like about people talking about ANY type of appropriation.
By the way I'm mixed race. My mother is from Europe and my father is from Africa and raised in the Middle East.
So before anybody calls me some kind of racist you should know those things.
I have been trying to sort out my thoughts on this. Overall I think that this is a fine video and I really appreciated the inputs by Don from The Most Unruly and F.D. Signifier. However I do have a couple of issues, first is that while this is a black lens, it is also american. This matters because you are using Led Zeppelin as the example, Led Zeppelin are an English band and the USA is a massive exporter of culture. The bleaching of black music starts within the local environment by local government and businesses. By the time the music is exported globally significant damage is already done, if the example had have been someone like Elvis who was american the argument that it is cultural appropriation would be stronger as it is, and as you point out at the end, it may simply just be an evolution of the music.
My second issue is the idea that great pain leads to great art. That is just bullshit, it doesn't hold up across the majority of cases and it further perpetrates the toxic idea of the tortured artist. The Irish people have undeniably faced a lot of hardship and persecution however you never see trad music in any top 100. Are people expecting a massive surge in popularity for middle eastern music given the recent tragic histories of many countries in that region? The cultural importance of black people within american can really only be viewed as being black in america. The horrors they went through and the continued oppression they face are not how they are able to make culturally relevant music. Its a more complicated relationship within America about american culture. I'm as white as hell so I won't quote it but Paul Mooney made a very particular quote about it that I think is always relevant.
sorry if this is rambling and incoherent, just wanted to get some thoughts off my chest.
You cannot judge if something is "great art" by comparing sales numbers, this should be pretty obvious.
@@mat6114 but isn't sales numbers part of the discussion here. If black musicians had more sales numbers that would've meant that they weren't as oppressed in 1950s America
Although I agree with you the part about great pain leading to great art being bullshit, is in my opinion bullshit. It isn't a guarantee but it can be a very good foundation. The fact that Irish trad music isn't popular to the masses doesn't mean that it isn't any good. What you said about seeing it through a black and America centered lens is spot on though.
@@TheGhostOfFredZeppelin Having an experience to pull from can help but in the majority of cases it is an artists ease of access to training and their ability to prioritise their art over their economic self interest that allows them to advance and improve. This can be further seen with the increasing amount of songwriters on songs. The artist is a musical talent but more now than ever the emotional core, the lyrics, is being outsourced to others, who don't get the same recognition.
@@SkywardSpoon For sure, I was mostly objecting to the "great pain leads to great art being bullshit" part. There's a reason blues has so much feeling as it largely originates from the so called "Negro spirituals" or "Field Shouts". That might also just be my subjective opinion on it as a huge blues fan but the pain is there and their art is great.
As far as music today with 10+ songwriters per song, I pretty much just see it as people using music as a vehicle towards fame as opposed to doing it for the love and creating something beautiful which was more common in the past.
1) Led Zeppelin are an English band, 50% of the writing force of the band (Robert Plant) having grown up in the Black Country - which in the post-war ear was a literally a slum where the ‘blues’ were a way of life and not cultural appropriation in the way condescending Americans like to believe 2) Led Zeppelin have a huge ‘Celtic’ and ‘folk’ interpolation in their sound. Their biggest hit ‘Stairway to Heaven’ is not ‘blues rock’ until the final 30 seconds. Every album had a different sound and only LZ 1&2 could be firmly attributed to their Blues roots. Listen to ‘Achilles Last Stand’ and please try to make the case that Jimmy Page was not a sonic creative more than capable of carving out sound niches of his own.
I seriously resent this pathetic need to deconstruct all white art through the lens of racial oppression. In the UK we have a class system which creates an equal amount of misery for those at the bottom. Try to escape your inaccurate and inappropriate state of being brainwashed by Critical Race Theory and actually do something useful in this world you low IQ, condescending, miserable little loser.
I was gonna comment that Polyphonic just did a great piece on Led Zepplin, but you're Polyphonic, and this is another piece.
Jk/ I thought this dude is ripping off Polyphonic
Wow, this is what happens when a person sees race before the person. What a load of racist BS. It’s called “admiration.” Not theft. Page, Plant and thousands of musicians idolized and praised the “Black” men and women who they preceded. Music is not a race. Every musician has a different sound they like and imitate.
Nobody owns the culture. Culture belongs to everyone so no, you can't appropriate culture. Stop segregating it.
The fact you are saying this shows that you are ignorant about the culture you are talking about
Bullshit! Whites have no problems with Italians, Scottish, Irish, Polish, Germans, Asians or any other non-black group claiming their cultural inventions or creations. That only happens when Black people do. Rock, jazz, blues, swing, disco, soul, funk, house, go go, techno, gospel, bebop, doo wop, and hip hop are ALL Black American invent genres. All can share in them, but they're our cultural creations.
Such a stupid take. Did you even watch the video?
As i mexican who grow up listening and playing all tipes of music (black , white , indigenous , spanish ,...etc) its a cultural shock that people in american and england decide what music likes in base of the race/etnicity of the person who plays
Not England. Black and white music were played alongside each other on the radio and entire generations adored all the black music made in america.
@Naikomi That's the thing the USA system have racially almost everything.
From our body features to our hairs, from our culture to the our health (so many black women have been poorly treated for C Section operation and mostly not for a misunderstanding, but this fetish of black body being more resilient), from be labelled as thug simply because of how we dress or the freaking durag. And when you point the bs out there's always somebody saying don't mAkeE iT a RAcE ThiNg.
The US system is fucked and hypocritical and lack accountability.
It's exhausting
It's not so much that we (the consumer) made that decision, but that the decision was made for us by record companies, promoters, and advertisers. At least, that's how it used to be before the Internet democratized the distribution of music and caused an epic blow to the record industry.
@Naikomi this just isnt the case you travel more you realise
@@iSkully99 We've been HEAVILY Americanised and copied most of the bad racial identity culture from the USA, the BBC even has a black radio station despite the fact black music is already extremely popular with the white majority.
I know I'm about a year late to this party, but I wanted to tell you how much I appreciated this video and the nuance with which your interviewees made their points. I'm a white blues guitarist, and have been more than half of my life. Over the years I have had the privilege of performing with most of the people whose records I loved growing up everybody from BB King, Buddy Guy, Otis Rush, Lonnie Baker Brooks, Hubert Sumlin (and all the surviving members of Howlin' Wolf's band), multiple artists that played with Muddy Waters, Clarence Gatemouth Brown, and many many more. I had the honor of being the backing band for Eddie Shaw, Otis Clay, and Redd Velvet as the first two were bejng inducted into the blues hall of fame and Redd was performing Bessie Smith as Bessie was inducted that night as well. I have always been a staunch anti-racist and have always done my best to make clear that as much as I love this music, it isn't mine. The black artists that were the architects of this music granted me the honor of sharing this music with me, and I always do my best to make sure that I tell my audiences where this music came from, why it came from the people, times and places that it did. I am extremely careful about the material I cover from other artists because there is nothing more distasteful to me than seeing a white artist perform blues songs that are about a part of the black American experience that is totally outside their understanding. Recently there has been a strong backlash against white blues artists and many people have blanketed all of us as thieves. While I absolutely understand that if it where not for the black men and women that created this music it wouldn't exist at all, I also know that Muddy Waters had many white musicians in his band, as have most of the post-war black blues artists, much in the same way that many black legends of Jazz have had white musicians in their bands. For awhile my band had a residency at the New Orleans location of BB King's blues club ( I am from New Orleans), towards the end of our run there I had begun performing an old blues song called "She Wants to Sell My Monkey" which has been performed by numerous artists but one of the best performances was by BB and it was kind of a way for me to attempt to honor him after his passing. One night after doing the song I noticed one of the cooks seem to take great objection to me performing that song and it absolutely crushed me. I went to talk to him at set break and we had a discussion about how in the context of the song the phrase "she wants to sell my monkey" being about a man troubled because his significant other has decided to become a prostitute, that the monkey he is upset about is between this woman's legs. We hashed it out and we were all good for the rest of my tenure there but it caused me to think really hard about what I was doing, to the point that I actually stopped performing completely for a couple of years because it occurred to me that however unintentionally I might have been hurting people just by playing music I love. Eventually I got to sit down and have a conversation with an artist named Corey Harris who in my opinion is one of the best musicians currently on the planet and I asked him what he, as a black man, thought about what I was doing. His reply was that if I was coming from a place of love and genuine appreciation, making sure that I was employing black artists, celebrating black artists, making sure that I used my platform, small as it may be, to try to elevate and promote black blues artists that are playing blues music currently, and essentially that I wasn't "doing more harm than good" that in his opinion I was doing just fine. It is still something I struggle with because the last thing I want to do is harm the people and culture that have given me so much, have invited me in and treated me with respect and have been generous in their friendship.
Led Zeppelin absolutely plundered the Willie Dixon catalogue and had to be sued by him before they gave him the credit due to him, as well paying him for profiting off of his work. At the same time I know that when Hubert Sumlin died Keith Richards paid for his funeral, his headstone, his memorial concert, and Hubert told me many times how grateful he and Wolf were to some of the white rock and roll bands of the sixties and seventies for helping to bring their music to more young white people because that was the point at which they really started making money. I have had conversations with BB in which he expressed similar thoughts. I didn't have the chance to know Freddie or Albert King but the members of their bands said much the same. White people absolutely did build their careers on the foundation that those black men and women laid for them, and some most definitely did plunder it in the worst way, but many did not. I was also amazed at how many of the older performers absolutely loved old country and western music and would happily play Hank Williams, Ernest Tubb, Gene Autry, Hank Snow and many others. In some ways it seems to me that even though the struggle they endured and crimes committed against them by white people were unimaginably cruel, dehumanizing, often even murderous, in a way that we don't see now (this is not to say that these challenges don't still exist, just that they don't exist in the same way), they weren't as polarized about this as we are in modern times. Some of the stories they told me about the things they endured growing up in early twentieth century Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Texas, and to an extent the entire country made my skin crawl and sometimes brought me to tears at the unimaginably cruel ways in which they were treated, and the way in which it was so accepted by the society of the day.
This has turned into a rambling rant and I'll stop here, but once more, thank you, and thank you for calling attention to these two creators. I'll be listening to both of them from now on.
Thank you for this comment, as an aspiring practitioner of ragtime and blues (specifically Gary Davis) I have always felt deeply that the history and the music are bound up together and just because some artists chose to steal that music, it doesn't mean that wider culture doesn't need to hear those old voices and old songs. Really appreciated your perspective 🤠
Crazy dude, rock on!
So, Hendrix was influenced by, and Page stole, the blues? Nonsense
Hendrix came from the culture that invented the genre, Page didn't!
@@TheGuest954 nonsense
@x2mars The nonsense is trying to claim a British person has as much of a cultural claim to a genre as a person who grew up in the culture of the people who invented it. Hendrix grew up on and played in the bands of greats like the Isley Brothers and Little Richard. These were actual inventors of the genre. Can Jimmy Page say that? Did he experience growing up in Black American culture like Hendrix did? Stop being foolish!
@@TheGuest954 wrong
So artists like Whitney Houston appropriated opera...and should be criticized as well?
Lmfao. How did she appropriate opera, genuinely curious.
Wait , little richard was androgynus becouse he was gay, an that was actually his personality ? .
Be carefull , erase black/colour people queernes to make them fit in your antiracist discurses is a pretty awfull thing
Elvis was not ‘safe’. He was hated by parents, filmed from the waist up, and was actually kept from recording far heavier black music. Like Robert, and so many other English artists, they genuinely loved that music, and it’s catharsis. It spoke to a deeper part of your Human.
That groups like The Rolling Stones preferred to sing blues music had nothing to do with stardom in the beginning. It was genuine love and on many occasions, these Musicians were scholars of the Blues. Greg Allman would always say ‘ there is no such thing as British Blues. Theres only The Blues.”
All that being said, countless Blues Pioneers saw little reward for what they gave to American Music. Most American Music has its origins in Black Music, save for the Elizabethan square rhythmic aspect that English Music recapitulated.
Peter Gabriel loved Otis Redding and Sam & Dave, but you have to dig to find it. But it spoke to him in a deep way. Disco, arguably, was not a white phenomenon. It started as early as Barry White mid seventies era R&B when an engineer decided that 120BPM was the standard for radio dance beats.
The Bee Gees had been searching for themselves for years in the wreckage of late 60’s early 70’s post psychedelia. They approached R&B in an honest way, and had no idea it would become such a monetary goldmine. Rarely did many classic albums come to be with an anticipation they were preordained for success.
My Parents were great lovers of Soul, Motown and R&B / Dance Music. My Mom saw James Brown when I was still in her womb. My Dad auditioned for Stevie Wonder. It took years for them to like The Beatles :) Thank you for this work. It is stimulating and important discussion.
Elvis, as John Trudell points out in "Baby Boom Che", may not have "exactly" been "white" either; ruclips.net/video/QXSHQzvDm7E/видео.html
I think when he speaks of safe “artists” he’s talking more-so the likes of Pat Boone than Elvis
He can talk about Elvis or he would have to admit country had an impact on rock music which would destroy his point and I am pretty sure this dude doesnt even know the genre a thing by the way this video made
Yes, completely agree
Elvis is white end of story
(white) people: makes rock because they like it
polyphonic: now thats racist
Millennials should never do music critique of any kind.
Cultural Appropriation it's a stupid new thing, you need other cultures to create new things, that help to create progress, since the ancient Rome. Excuse my grammar, i'm not a native speaker.
Definitely not new
There is a difference between influence and outright theft of culture. Musical artists, Zeppelin among them, have been guilty of both.
Admittedly, that nuance is often lost by both critics and proponents of appropriation.
This is beyond stupid. Do you have a problem with Jimi Hendrix playing to white audiences? Or white musicians bringing black music to white audiences?
Absolute bullshit. If it wasn’t for Zeppelin I wouldn’t have discovered the blues greats of old. Cultural appropriation is such a nothing burger of an issue. Most people are aware that rock and metal came from the blues. No one is “taking over” black music.
God this is cringe. Music develops through time, as long as it sounds good I don't care what the color of the musicians skin is.
Same
Well said!!
Wow, it’s called “admiration,” not appropriation. Music isn’t a race, isn’t a skin tone, isn’t theft. Everyone imitates what they admire. There’s absolutely no logic in this argument, Just more emotional dribble.
I believe that accusations of cultural appropriation, while indeed a real thing, is something that we need to be careful making in the context of music.
Music does not exist in a vacuum. By it's very nature, musical genres influence and are influenced by each other, and no single culture is responsible for any modern popular genre of music. Yes, rock was heavily influence by so-called 'race' music, which had it's influence in blues and jazz, which themselves have their roots in black culture. However, blues itself draws it's roots not only from black gospel and spirituals, but from country and folk music that are considered to be 'white'. Jazz itself drew heavy influence from European classical music, as well as spirituals and traditional African music.
The same is true for all genres of popular music. They all draw from and are influence by each other. That's the nature of music. So, barring some blatantly obvious example of outright stealing from another culture unchanged, which many artists have done (and Zeppelin themselves are not immune from that), I'm hesitant to accuse any genre of music as a whole of cultural appropriation.
Individual artists however are another issue.
@@moistgooseberry he did.
@@moistgooseberry I did watch the video, and largely agree with Polyphonic's take. Zeppelin has been guilty of outright theft in the past. That's different than the cross-cultural influencing that all music genres do, which is an area where I think accusations of cultural appropriation gets a bit more hazy.
@@ObsdnBlck ah i understand your point, that's fair yeah
That's very true and while I agree with the idea that music has to be a flower bed of cross-pollination, the issue more so lies with the institutions that monetize and appropriate the music we listen to without giving anything back. Let's not detract from that, because, while Zeppelin certainly made some ugly moves in that regard, this issue is much larger than just them
I agree, but even if that wasn't the case, I think the concept of cultural appropriation is very often treated in a ridiculous way, especially with music and art in general. Music shouldn't be closed off to people based on national or ethnic boundaries, I think. Even with music styles that are entirely (or almost entirely) from one place or culture, I don't think there is anything wrong with people from outside of that context enjoying it and wanting to take part.
In much the same way that it's perfectly acceptable for non-europeans to play classical music and compose their own pieces in that style if they wanted to, I think it's perfectly acceptable with any other music style/genre and any ethnicity or nationality or whatever.
I think as long as they don't take credit for things that have nothing to do with them, and they're not using it to harm people (especially the people that did originate that music) and as long as it's done in a respectful way, then it should be fine for anyone to play and write any type of music they want to.
Seems kinda stupid to me for a genre to be assigned to a race. I don't see any reason why a white artist should not be allowed to create music in a "black genre". The race of the person/people who made a piece of music would never dictate whether I liked it or not. I think the US a very race-conscious country so maybe this is a distinctly non-american perspective idk.
Thank you for your anti-woke comment
Credit where it's due ✔
Calling music/art either black or white ❌
British youth loved Jazz, Blues and gave us harder rock!
No racism!! Sad people play that card... sad.
Only black people can play the blues? Only Indians can play Indian music? Only white people can play country music? What about Asian influences in music? What about middle eastern music? Why are only certain types of music only for certain types of people and to be played and only enjoyed by certain types of people? You're the racist. That is true racism at it's core. Music is universal and music is for everyone.
If you look at any of Jimi Hendrix's crowds, they would also be a sea of white faces. This whole video (and concept) was flawed from the beginning.
Thank you.
Sad you've gone woke.
I don't remember VH1's Behind the Music being white centric. I checked the wikipedia page, and it looks like 54 of the 213 artists covered were black (~25%). I remember the biggest criticisms of that show being that it was overly dramatic and that they were covering recent artists whose careers still had many years in front of them (ex: there's no Elvis Behind the Music and the majority of the artists covered are from the 80's and 90's). I'm all for calling out racism, but this doesn't seem to be a fair target.
i haven't checked the list, but i assume there were multiple genres covered, not just rock. how i understood it, they were talking exclusively about the documentaries on rock acts (which were, at the time, white), and how they never mentioned the genres roots in black artists music.
@@higihagaa that's a fair point, though I was raised on those same docs and was well aware of rock's roots. Most artists are pretty open about who influenced them.
shall we accuse aa's way back in the old days of 'cultural appropriation' ? they used instruments invented by white people, and of course the western scale and chords /harmony after all.
the stones and zep perfected rock n roll easily more and better than hendrix, or any other people of any race. black blues was a massive influence and inspiration, good / so what?
I am Jewish. If a Chinese guy was passionate about play klehzmer style, I would have no problem with it. Led Zeppelin respected the blues and were part of the tradition of borrowing and expressing as did all other blues musicians from others.
These were human beings who grew up o. This form of music and learned how to express themselves through the voices of muddy waters, Howin Wolf and others.
To say cultural appropriation is to separate people based on things they have no control over, their ethnicity or race. If you love music l then there is no bounds to what you can appreciate. Led Zeppelin began as a pure blues rock band, and the fact that rock n roll became more “white” as you say, is the just a product of the template if all humanity, when the majority of a population embraced a style they love, they crowded to it. If Black people were the majority than you would see mostly them. This is just a consequence of population statistics.
I believe cultural appropriation is nonsense and that everyone is a human being, and as long as they are truly passionate, it really doesn’t matter. Bb King greatly respected Stevie Ray Vaughan, and he was white. Who gives a fuck? He played blues like no one had before and his race has no relevance whatsoever. He breathed and bled blues music, as did Elvis, and the fact that it took white musicians to make it mainstream, that is not exclusive to America. Any country where you have a majority, it will help if you look like them. It is not the fault of the artists that this is how society works universally.
I almost entirely agree with you, but I do still wish Led Zeppelin had given credit to the original artist when playing cover songs or reusing melodies/lyrics without changing them.
Well said. Thank you! Also this is reverse racism. Since when was music ever concerned with the colour of the epidermis. Like Duke Ellington said ( and this is paraphrased) “There’s two kinds of music. Good music and shit music”. The naivety of this piece, the virtue signalling. If this is accepted by the same generation as this ninkompoop, this narrative will emasculate all musical creators despite there skin colour and gender.
@@warp1176 reverse racism does not exist.
@@lilacsandobsidian yeah, racism is racism. No matter were it cames from
Rather than wade into the weeds of the comment section on this one, I'm just going to plug a black rock band that fucking rules: Death. Formed in Detroit in 1964, they were one of the best proto-punk bands the city ever produced. Check them out.
They suck and were simply a garage band
Bad Brains is better
its funny, i looked them up and the first thing to pop up was an all white metal band from the 80's. seems appropriate to the content of this video lol
Fucking great 👌👌👌
The Ramones took their sound from them….
by the time Zeppelin came along, there had already been too many white artists who played blues rock and other black music. The Stones and other English bands from the 60s mostly started out as blues rock bands. So when we say Zeppelin stole music, we're only reemphasizing on the fact that most of rock music of the 60s and the 70s comes from Black influences like blues and jazz. The reason people felt the urge to reiterate it after Elvis, The Stones, Cream etc.. is because Zeppelin was that good. and authentic. Zeppelin should be the last music group to be blamed for stealing because they were the one's who transcended the genre by doing experiments with blues rock. They actually (in terms of Intellectual Property rights) transformed the style and the playing enough to be able to qualify for Fair Use. Same thing happened when Jimmy Page's Stairway to Heaven opening riff had been sued for copyright infringement with Taurus claiming that it sounds like their song Spirit. I don't remember what the court decided but listening to the two you could tell the similarities but Page's rendition does profoundly builds upon the Taurus song sufficiently and hence it is not Stealing. Zeppelin in fact should be credited as the one's who stood out transcendently, who did so much apart from just rock n roll by infusing Eastern influences in their music. So, in an ocean full of white artists who appropriated music from other cultures, Zeppelin, in my opinion, were the least complicit.
Too many people are missing the point here. This video is more about bringing light to the truth that rock music was created by black people and painted white to be more appealing to white folks. This is not about discrediting or even blaming many of these bands and musicians for preforming black inspired music but rather helping people understand the history and misuse at the roots of it all.
Sorry but more that just black people created rock music.
yes absolutely right!!!
Does it matter that it was created by black people and then latter became a “white” thing. I feel like the fact that white people didn’t want to listen to black artists and visa versa is far more the legacy of what racism and segregation has done to society.
+
I see where you're coming from but if that was the case then maybe he should make videos about those black artists instead of making a video quite literally doing the things you say he's not doing, like blaming these bands for performing black inspired music.
I am as you can tell from my name *completely* unbiased in this question lol. For real though, he should make videos about all the old blues greats like Robert Johnson, Elmore James, Blind Willie Johnson and Son House etc and about the transition into electric with Muddy Waters, John Lee Hooker and so on and so forth. There's so much to explore and show the world from that era and those artists and deserves more than just a mention in the background of how a white band are "cultural appropriators". In my opinion.
People. Before commenting: nobody is literally blaming Zeppelin for black music not being heard. The point is that Black music was "censored" by the music industry because it came from BLACK PEOPLE. Society as a whole consumed the music when the same songs were sung by WHITE PEOPLE. End of story. Zeppelin is just a prime example of this being the case. Everyone knows the band was inspired by american black music. Look at the broader picture. Macro. Not micro, man
You're creating issues where there are none. Rock artists from the 60s and 70s didn't "appropriate" anything, they were influenced by R&B and Rock n' Roll and made it their own; they took their influences and their own hardships and created the music of their generation. Yes, the genre was heavily influenced by black music but that doesn't automatically mean it's cultural appropriation. Led Zeppelin did not "exploit black struggle and black pain for white, monetary gain", you're holding them accountable for something that they (especially as a BRITISH band) had nothing whatsoever to do with.
As for why the crowd is mainly white, rock music of the late 60s and 70s was mainly created and loved by the white working class, Jimi Hendrix was kind of an anomaly. Ironically, young white musicians of the time stayed a bit closer to blues origins, whereas young black musicians developed motown, funk and soul. In my opinion, saying that Led Zeppelin (or any British artist from the 70s) are guilty of cultural appropriation is a statement either poorly researched or deliberately made to appeal to the "woke" movement.
Best counter-argument in this comment section I’ve read thus far! 👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿
I wish I could thumbs up this more.👍🏿
@@better-dayz-r-ahead thanks sir ✌🏻
Race baiting RUclips channels don't do well in the long run
Cultural appropriation? A guitar is a European instrument. Rock is a mix of blues and country swing. It was a mix of black and white influences. You can hear country influences in Chuck Berry. I like blues. Whether its Robert Johnson or Son House or Muddy. But it is not what Led Zeppelin did which was a mixture of blues and English folk traditions. After LZ 2 the band was much more than blues based rock. Classic blues artists are and always will be a niche genre like Bebop jazz like Monk, Davis, and Coltrane. Kids just aren’t and weren’t gonna go crazy for Willie Dixon. Blues music is the equivalent of folk music. It was never going to be as popular with the kids as rock. Music that sounded like their Marshall and Orange amps were going to explode.
Today? Black music and artists dominate the charts. That goes for all forms popular entertainment and commercials. . And black people are what 15-17% of the US population?
Btw cultural appropriation is a term created to divide. We should all share and partake in culture as long as it is not mocking or making fun of it.
We wouldn’t have culture without cultural appropriation.
Couldn't have said it better myself. That was the first thing I thought, where did the guitar come from?
They're 13% of the population. I agree with you both.
Video quality slipping. Sociology courses on youtube about completely subjective conclusions, reached to confirm a narrative.. masking as an authoritative depiction of music history. Nobody denies the contributions of black people to music in general, and to rock music. Black people. People. We're all people. Music brings us together. Stop with this nonsense polyphonic.
Thank you, so true! What a bogus topic.
Black people are people? Cor blimey he's done it, he's fixed racism!
Yes music brings folks together but we shouldn’t forget the context and history of the people who made it. The inequalities they faced and tables they were restricted from.
Racism isn’t a “black subject”... it is an old phenomenon and nobody claimed to solve it. A reply like above is unnecessarily hostile. You looking for enemies? Digging for hate, seeing where you can find it? You won’t find it with me.
“Cultural appropriation” is something else altogether. Let’s leave it to sociologists to try and play semantical bullshit games to explain the differences between cultural tribute, cultural influence, and cultural appropriation.
Hint: they who say there is only appropriation, and put limits on what culture is allowed to be experienced and experimented with, and say it should be insular to people of a specific skin color... they sound kind of like racists to me. They want Asian cultural hallmarks to only be engaged with by asians? Blacks by blacks? smh.... racists.
@@smillman437 sorry I was a sarcastic prick, I just found your issues with the video pretty irrelevant and the "we're all people" line always annoys me because self described colorblind people say it all the time.
He's never declared himself an authority on anything, he's making an argument to support an opinion. Anyone can do that, address the actual arguments rather than saying "nuh uh, you're biased," like no shit? Anyone who makes an argument is, that's the point.
As far as I can tell nobody needs to *deny* the contributions of black musicians, they just need to take their contributions and play them off as their own. Maybe if it weren't for the fact that white musicians were profiting off black musicians music, this wouldn't be as much of an issue as sociologist argue it is.
My opinion is that art taste has no race. Yes we can talk how there is less black people doing hard rock/metal which is the same proportion of white doing hip-hop/soul/funk, but if the other way is happening, that's totally ok! I'm not a fan of analyzes where people draw a line between what is white or a black culture. As said in the previous video, nothing is original, everything is intertwined. If you enjoy it, does it really matter? Now it belongs to all mankind. Thanks to all artist that made it happened.
i dont really care about the skin colour of the bands and artists i listen to, i just like what sounds good
One clown I was debating about music said WHITE PEOPLE invented hip-hop/rap because someone white was talking over a song🤣
Oscar Peterson was the greatest jazz pianist of all time. He played and instrument invented by Bartolomeo Cristofori, a white European. Jimmy Hendrix was the greatest guitar innovator of the 20th century. He played an instrument that largely originated in Spain, and can trace its roots back to the Arab Oud. The piano is a harp played by hammers, and the harp goes back to non-Whites in Egypt. The bagpipes are supposed to be native to white Scotland, but can also be found in ancient Egypt and some scholars believe they were brought to Britain by the Romans. Perhaps the greatest sax player of all time was John Coltrane, but the sax was invented by Adolphe Sax, who is decidedly white. The concept of cultural appropriation does not stand up to examination -are Peterson, Hendrix and Coltrane thieves? No! No culture has ever been able to successfully claim ownership of a tune, and the concept of being able to do so is an invention of white publishers in Britain. Did Zeppelin "appropriate"? The entire first album is a series of blues classics with a new set of lyrics. So, yes, they stole. Were black artists denied the revenue of their art? Yes, they were systematically oppressed by a racist industry. Is there any value in the concept of cultural appropriation? No. Its a doctrine that serves to perpetuate difference by preventing artistic co-operation between different ethnic groups, and this is entirely negative and damaging.
I have to say that I’m sick of the phrase and overuse of cultural appropriation. Who gives a shit? If music or a sport or a book or whatever has origins from a certain race, like literally everything we know, who cares if someone else is inspired by it to create their own. Who cares if someone else wants to play that sport. Basketball was invented by a white Canadian guy. Now it’s dominated by black Americans. Some of the best chefs in the world cook their best dishes from other cultures besides their own. I think people need start caring less about where things originated from and that it should remain within that culture, and start enjoying the variety of what different cultures and people bring to the table.
You’re sort of missing the point of why people have an issue with appropriation. Using music as an example to stay on topic. The issue isn’t that white musicians are playing black music, is that the systems that be used that to ERASE black musicians. Not so much the musicians and bands themselves, which this video points out, but it’s important to call out when something as simple as some musician paying tribute to another is used by the system to oppress and erase others of lower standing.
^ ^ Led Zep shamelessly ripped off "black" American African music but they also hid Scots Irish Celtic music within it because that was also fordidden music.......Listen to£ The rain song" Black mountain side or Stairway to Heaven very Celtic composed by James Patrick Page Foxy Pagan love fae Scotland VVxx
I think the suggestion that because Led Zeppelin existed other artists didn’t get heard is more than a little bit of a stretch. I would say curious listeners actually learned more about Black artists because of being exposed to the style through Led Zeppelin. I am not suggesting that they didn’t steal from some black artists, but the suggestion that that means that those artists got less opportunity as a result is questionable at best.
"Cultural appropriation" is woke-speak for "Stay in your lane, bro."
Art doesn't have a lane. Profit certainly doesn't.
What does woke mean?
@@kittykittybangbang9367 It means aware socially or politically, nowadays it's almost become a pejorative term
The problem with the point made by your first contributor is that he's talking about something subjective. Your video aligned with his narration seems to suggest Little Richard had 'soul', whereas Elvis was nothing but a tool with no 'soul'. There are millions of people who would disagree, so it's an opinion but presented as fact. I actually agree with him to an extent, as I'd rather listen to LR, but can anyone who knows anything about Elvis deny his genuine love for the music he sung?
I understand the larger point about thr industry itself needing white people to lead the sales, and I agree with that. Just feel Elvis gets alot of hate for someone who was also very poor, and was a music lover at a young age
Edit, just to summarise: points about the inherent racism in the industry during the 50s is a genuine fact, but you can't dictate who has 'soul' and who doesn't in an objective way. Does a black person playing Bach not have soul because it's not part of his heritage?
yet he didn’t even give Big Mama Thornton her credit nor was he interested in meeting her for a concert after exploiting her song Hound Dog. He deserves antagonism for not being an truly appreciative fan of black music and would rather exploit their music and not recognize their humanity
The central point that should have been argued it's the industry pushing these narratives to improve profit instead of blaming on the artist who might have been genuinely moved by making it big with their music.
NOICE!!!
We wuz zepplin n shit
@@justinpaulino9228 Big Mama Thorton didn’t write hound dog it wasn’t exactly her song and he was truly an appreciative fan of black music
I appreciate that you’re coming at these topics as a fan. A lot of people now throw out these accusations and hot takes and it comes across badly because they don’t understand what people like about the music they’re criticizing. This way, you’re able to get these important conversations out to fans without fans of the music getting into their defensive little bubbles. Nuance is key.
I think there’s a lot to be said about how black music and black culture is perceived by those growing up in England vs in the US. That’s not to say that England doesn’t have racial issues but the music didn’t come with the same baggage over there. Blues and rock weren’t “race music” over there, it was American music and they wanted to emulate it as such. It’s cool that The Rolling Stones, who also appropriated blues very heavily, tried introducing their heroes, like Howlin Wolf, to their young white audiences, giving credit and spotlight and not letting anyone mistake them for originating the genre. Eric Clapton, for all the ire he gets nowadays (for good reason) also elevates his influences like BB King and Buddy Guy every chance he gets.
It’s also interesting how the Beatles are rarely, if ever, accused of the same kind of appropriation, and I think that’s because their influences were equally black and white, equal parts Chet Atkins and Chuck Berry, country and rock and roll. They also wore their Little Richard and doo-wop vocal group influences on their sleeves and were proud of it, similarly to The Rolling Stones. Everybody gets their style from somebody else. The key seems to be accepting and recognizing where you get it from instead of pretending it’s all original.
Zeppelin, coming at the end of the decade, probably felt like the genre had moved away from its roots enough to not warrant direct shoutouts. Who knows. There have been lots of great black artists in rock music since Jimi Hendrix and it’s unfortunate that the industry sidelined many of them for so long and made the genre monocultural.
That's the real problem: the recording and radio industries have historically (and sometimes currently) acted as gatekeeping institutions that favored musicians of certain races over others. If the leaders of the most influential record labels and radio stations had been more egalitarian in regard to who they gave exposure and opportunities to, the issue of "taking Black music and bleaching it to appeal to a white audience" might not've been so widespread. But unfortunately, the industries didn't really care about equal opportunity, and just did whatever would get them the most sales and profit.
Exactly we all gave inspirations even if some don't wanna admit it we all inspired by each other all races. But it's different when somebody makes something and get no love for it
A big beatles fan here.
They were actually showing their love for little richard every chance they get, in every interview asking about what inspired them. You just dont know that, i am not judging you though.
And what about eric clapton being recently accused?
It’s hard to listen to an opinion of someone who clearly did not live in the time period of the music of these great artists. It sounds like the same old pushed narrative that white man bad, black man no recognition. That was not like that in those times. To say things like, “why were there mostly white people at a Led Zeppelin concert?” You could ask the same question about black artists of the time having mostly black people at their shows.
People like who they like, and that’s okay. Nobody has to like an artist if they do not connect with them.
Today, most of the biggest artists are black. Is that wrong? No.
I appreciate the work that you put into this video, but I could not watch the whole thing. I love the older blues like Robert Johnson, Howlin’ Wolf, etc. I loved the 60’s and 70’s bands like Led Zeppelin. But I could not continue to watch the pushed racism narrative. One day, all people will get beyond that, and the people who keep it alive.
Have a good day.
By your own logic, youre not aloud to learn, grow, or improve your music or any aspect of yourself based off of what some black people did in the past if you are white. so this means that white people aren't allowed to learn from black people because its "cultural appropriation." why are people so obsessed with race. the color of your skin doesn't fucking matter. are you a musician? if yes, then it is your job to add to the collective knowledge of musicians as a whole. You get ahead by standing on the shoulders of giants and then taking a leap of faith.
Calling nirvana some of the whitest music ever doesnt help the video. Yes it was embraced by mad suburban teens. Cobain loved and respected the original folk blues artists and one of the most moving performances the band had was covering Leadbelly
The fact that his friend had no black jazz musicians on a jazz playlist is unfathomable to me. No Davis? No Adderly? How?
Because his musical preferences happened to allign with what white jazz musicians made?
I was thinking the same thing. No Miles Davis in a jazz collection? WTF??
i prefer music made by white people. is that o.k?
How do you not have Nina Simone….smh
like, i barely listen to any jazz, but if i were to listen to jazz, even i know you start with Kind of Blue.
Blues for life. If you read the lives of these musicians which inspired Led Zep, they aren’t even given the same respect (back then or now) as Led Zep
ALL art is creative plagiarism. Music is never ex hihilo - it all evolves from something else. To say that any one race can only evolve music from their own race into something else is unbelievably ridiculous. An artist plays the music they want to, and it’s not their responsibility to point out and highlight their forebears and art progenitors all the time. Music should be music, not black music, white music, etc.
Led Zepplin put more money into the pockets of black bluesmen than virtue-signaling videos like this. In fact, you should donate your ad revenue to the people who you say have been appropriated
There seems to be a lot of blame directed at Led Zeppelin that belongs to larger societal forces at play. You acknowledge this at some point but I think you lose sight of it. Nothing is wrong with being creatively influenced by black artists. Of course if they use something specific they should credit those artists. And regarding the end, what did you want them to do, purposely not be successful?
They also stole from and didnt credit white artists so you cant call them cultural appropriasts, just appropriasts lmao
@@Ntrinzc "Stealing" is a word that should recieve more careful thought, however. It carries with it a number of assumptions.
All art carries a certain degree of imitation. All art takes inspiration from what precedes it, whether that inspiration is conscious and unconscious. It's inevitable, and normal. There is no completely original piece of art, unless you were born and raised in a desert island with no contact to any other human being. In fact, it can be argued that throughout History, art and culture was always much more a matter of tradition than innovation. It's easy to be deceived by the fast pace of our society, with demands of constant innovation and improvement, but things were not like that for the majority of human existence. Even today, a lot of more traditional music doesn't sound too different from one song to another. There is an expectation that things are going to sound relatively similar within any given musical tradition. Actually, people seem to accept much easier the fact when things sound familiar to what they already know than when things sound very different, new and original. So the question is: if familiarity is normal, if a degree of imitation is normal, and if we even appreciate it, how come we started to stigmatize it? How come we started to see it as stealing? Does that even make sense?
Let's also keep in mind one very important thing: we live in a capitalistic society. The morals of our society are not absolute morals, they are the morals of our time, place and interests (often of priviliged groups). I would argue that there is no intrinsic moral flaw in replicating what was already done by someone else. I would also argue that society only sees it that way because that threatens our capitalistic way of living. When you presume yourself owner of a combination of musical notes, and call anyone who takes from that a "thief", what are you really doing? Are you really defending your creative rights from an outside attack, are you really interested in some creative code-of-ethics, or are you just defending your property rights? Are you operating on the assumption that it is imoral to copy, even when all points towards copying being part of human nature, and so, stigmatizing copying is akin to denying people their own human nature, or are you just operating on the precepts of capitalistic society, cynically trying to convince people that the moral extends anywhere beyond economical interest? And what would be of copyright laws if we lived in a non-capitalistic society? Would they still hold?
Simply put, "stealing" in this context is a word that is very much politically charged, even if we are unaware of it. We should be careful how we use it, and question our most immediate assumptions to find out if it really makes that much sense to use it. Perhaps it does make sense, but perhaps it makes no sense at all.
@@Knightgil bruh we all watched the video u just wasted a ton of time. You completely missed my point, you cant call led zepplin racist oppressors if they do what they do to every group of people. Amateurs borrow, Great artists steal, im contempt with my word choice.
you could also make the argument that Zeppelin offered a gateway for a new audience for the original blues artists. I know when I first got into Zeppelin I dug deep into the roots of the songs and discovered a wide range of blues musicians and music that I was not aware of.
I wonder if there is anything that should NOT be analyzed from the perspective of race? Was it necessary and appropriate to throw the line (paraphrasing): "intentionally or not LZ contributed to stifling black music heritage, and we have to hold them accountable". Wait, what? Aren't we over-reaching here at least a tiny little bit? What happened to encouraging cross-pollination in between different cultures, out of which and to-date countless examples of the best art emerged? Or what happened to the line about imitation being the highest form of flattery? Saxophone was invented by a white Henri Selmer of France. Shouldn't we hurry up and hold all non-white sax players from Sidney Bechet, through Charlie Parker, Coleman Hawkins and John Coltrane , etc. who played, or play the instrument accountable for ugly appropriation? Should we not be asking what could have been if only white musicians played the saxophone?
First correction: The saxophone was invented by Adolphe Saxe, a Belgian, as a louder and more durable reed instrument for marching and military bands.
Second correction: The use of the saxophone in "black" music came about primarily because it never caught on as an instrument in european music. The adoption by African American musicians was because it was cheap, available, and provided a voice that they could use and identify with. There was no cultural appropriation in its use because "white" culture had rejected it.
@@alistairmackintosh9412 Thank you for the correction on the inventor of the saxophone. My mistake, you are absolutely correct. As for the white culture rejecting the instrument, perhaps you should search for examples of use in European classical music. if I were you I would not mention this "rejection" to Rachmaninoff, Ravel, Bizet, Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Britten, Debussy, Penderecki, Milhaud, Glazunov, or George Gershwin. They may feel bad for stepping out of line.
As for the greater point I was trying to make, would you care to address it, or are you here to mitpick only?
@@zawiszaczarnysulima3700 Both corrections I made addressed your essential point. As to the use of the saxophone in european music, the composers mentioned used it primarily as a novelty sound or explicitly imitating African american music.
Well Led Zeppelin made it way better so 🤣 that’s also like saying delta blues musicians shouldn’t have been guitars cause it was invented by a white man
Just finished the whole video and all I can say is I’m disappointed. I listen to an incredible amount of music each and every day that I can relate to and it’s what inspired me to learn to play guitar not because I wanted to “appropriate culture”. In all the music I listen too not once have I ever cared nor thought about what race the musician was I was there for the sound and that’s the beauty of music, music is it’s own language that can be understood by everyone universally no matter race or heritage. Led Zeppelin created their own music and people resonated with it, if Led Zeppelin were black we have no reason to assume they wouldn’t be just as well received and praised for their greatness. Stop trying to paint them out as “culture thief’s” simply for being inspired, people are allowed to play the music they feel and shouldn’t have to be told they’re evil systematic oppressors simply for the color of their skin by racists like polyphonic.
TL:DR
Be yourself, don’t let racists tell you what you can or can’t play because of the color of your skin.
Not thinking about your race is a privilege. I love rock music too. I started playing guitar 13 years ago. I was very conscious of my skin color the whole time. Because black rock artists done get the same space. Yeah, we do jave reason to believe that if LZ was Black they wouldn't be as popular. It happens to Black rockers all the time. Maybe you watched the whole video but I think you watched defensively, not constructively.
@@kahlilbt can you show me a black band that made a song as profound as stairway to heaven? Also if your conscious of your skin colour when just playing music especially in this day of age and at the comfort of ur own home, thats just personal insecurities. I know many black people who would never let the colour of their skin affect how they enjoy playing music. Anybody that does groundbreaking work will get the recognition they deserve, and yes white people have an easier time making it without having to be groundbreaking but theyll just fade into obscurity so they dont matter either in the grand scheme of things. As an artist it should be your goal to be groundbreaking and not just to be like others, otherwise ull never be much better than the artists u claim to just ride off the backs of blacks to get popular, i believe that’s how Hendrix would see it. Just focus on urself and greatness will follow g
@@kahlilbt okay maybe not all the recognition they deserve, but enough of it to live a happy, relatively worry free life. Ill obviously admit that if they did it + being white then their fame would be even greater, the world is unfair but bashing bands from the 70s doesnt help anything
@@Ntrinzc 1. Profundity is subjective, but I assure you that by any measure, there are Black musicians being just as "profound" as your white fave.
2. Don't speak for your Black acquaintances. You don't know their experiences or feelings and assuming you do when that assumption fits your own racial narrative is... Very White™.
3. Meritocracy isn't real. It should be but it's not.
4. You can look up howJimi felt about race instead of guessing?
@@Ntrinzc who was bashing anyone?
FD Signifier sent me! Such an important conversation to have ✊🏿
The message i'm getting here is that it's wrong for anyone else other than black people to play and release rock music because black people invented it first. Isn't it a good thing that cultures merge and borrow things from each other and that way appreciate and celebrate each other? Or is the problem taking something from another culture and claiming it as your own? Which that of course is wrong in my mind
depends oh who it's being 'taken' from, and by who. in the same context that 'cultural appropriation' is just thrown around these days, how does it not also apply to black jazz musicians 'taking' from white classical and ragtime composers? you would need to instill some Marxian class context to accept there is really any discernable difference between the two. it's just influence feeding off influence, but these people have to overintellectualize it because that's what they've been taught in academia to do.
@@vaderchief So what? So fucking what? You must have a good life if this is a big issue to you. No thanks my favorite Marx brother is Groucho, way more fun than that Karl lunatic.
There is a number of major problems, as the video explains:
Economic injustice: When the group that has created a "cultural thing" stays mostly marginalized and poor, while members of the majority culture who have adopted it become famous and rich by selling it.
Historical injustice, Lack of recognition: When the creators of the "cultural thing" get written out of its history.
Pushout of the orginal creators: When the group that has created a "cultural thing" is pushed out of it.
Cultural bigotry: When members of the creator's group are looked down upon, or even openly despised and/or actively suppressed by members of the majority group who, at the same time, consume their creation.
Misrepresentation: Often the consuming culture picks and chooses what to adapt. This is partly inevitable (evolution...), and is in itself not necessarily a "problem". But what is chosen are only the outward and superficial elements, with the deeper meaning and background beeing lost. This often leads to misrepresentation, which can feel like misuse to that people that have a deeper understanding.
I write "cultural thing" because it does not only apply to music.
People only bring up "cultural appropriation" when it's white people adapting/being inspired by another culture. If Led Zeppelin were Latino or some other race, you would not be talking about it like this. Being inspired by other cultures isn't bad and to think so is utter cringe
This is probably your worst take in a good while, I like your videos but unironically cope and seethe.
Yeah, imagine that black hiphop groups would sample parts of white artists records. Oh wait..
It's true. Being inspired isn't bad. No one said Zeppelin were wrong. There's proof that Page and the guys were massive fans of black artists. Look at the broader picture, that I honestly think you missed even though it's in your face; Black music was "censored" because it came from BLACK PEOPLE. Society as a whole consumed the music when the same songs were sung by WHITE PEOPLE. End of story. Zeppelin is just an example. And yes, if latinos or some other race, as you stated in your comment, did the same it would still be considered cultural appropriation. And everyone brings it up when it's white people because literally the face of rock n roll and modern music in general is white men.
Led Zeppelin Was Blues And Hard Rock, Not HEAVY METAL. Black Sabbath Is HEAVY METAL!
Music transcends culture, race, religion, or nationality. It’s a universal force. The idea that it must belong to one race or another is ridiculous and evil. Music belongs to us all. The only people helped by divisions such as these are those who would like us to be divided. All fruitful endeavors grow through appropriation and change. “If I have ever achieved anything of significance in my life, it is because I stood on shoulders of giants,” said Isaac Newton. Just because Elvis is giant doesn’t mean Little Richard isn’t one too. We remember them both. Zeppelin built on Elvis and Buddy Holly, as well as Muddy Waters and Robert Johnson, so did Queen and others. In the same way, all human progress is built on previous progress. Einstein wouldn’t’ve figured out relativity without the Greeks, or the Persians. The only race we ought to care about is the human race, all else is trivial nonsense. We all feel pain, we all feel anguish, that’s not a uniquely black or white experience. I don’t need to go through slavery or Jim Crow to cry when I hear Strange Fruit. Through a black person may empathize more than me, that does not mean I do not empathize at all, I am human and therefore nothing human is alien to me.
And sorry no. Anyone who is more than a casual fan knows the incredible influence black music had on Led Zeppelin. This is common knowledge to any self respecting Zeppelin fan. That goes for Elvis, Beatles, Stones, and Clapton fans as well. Stop acting as if this is some revelation or something fans of these artists need to meditate on.
*sees the preview for the next video*
Oh, he's going "there"
I pray for your ad revenue
Nobody "owns" a culture or a genre of music. Black people do not own blues music or rap anymore than white English people own English Folk or Germans own the music of Beethoven. Once you release a piece of music into the world, you are adding to the cultural fabric of humanity. You can't then dictate who listens to it, who is inspired by it, or how they use this inspiration. If you consider art to be "black" or "white", then I'm sorry... but that's racist.
Music is one of the most effective ways people from very different backgrounds can bond and overcome those differences. Why is everyone so eager to destroy that?
@@choiboi09 nothing of substance was said
@@dubsideproductions2859 Ditto.
Music is music, is music, is music. I do not buy into your “stay in your lane” take on music.
Blues, Bluegrass, rock, folk, country are rooted in America all pull from each other and all genres. I hear, America not color in the history of all the past greats.
I hate that back in the early days of rock that race was very much injected into everything, America and they had to observe the racial divide or suffer the consequences of a racist country.
Music is shared and is constantly evolving from each other. I believe that black artist were taking each evolution and creating some outstanding music that stands the test of time.
Don’t hate white artist for loving black music and creating the rock interpretation of that great music.
Howling wolf for example went electric which throughout history of blues had been acoustic without distortion.
Jimmy Hendrix in reality took back, and shook up music and had many guitar gods playing follow the leader again.
It’s evolving people! Not theft!
Is it cultural appropriation, or is it just musicians being influenced by other musicians? Like they always have been.
Criticizing cultural appropriation is stupid. Cultures have been inspiring and borrowing things from each other since the beginning of history. If Led Zeppelin are guilty of appropriating rock from black people, are black people guilty of appropriating guitars or jazz instruments?
The first said guitar was created by the Moors. The first known trumpets were by the Egyptians. There were trumpets buried with King Tut. The first keyed trumpet that could play all the notes was from Anton Weidinger who was white. The piano was created by a white man.
Yes people appropriate styles from others. But instruments have been around for hundreds of years. Even when Europe was in the Dark Ages.
The problem here is that someone is creating something, but because of racism they aren’t allowed the same success doing that thing and that’s not fair.
I don’t think the take away from this whole “cultural appropriation” debate should be “British boys shouldn’t be making black music.” It’s more “We shouldn’t _only_ like black music when it’s being sung by British boys.”
The fact is that "cultural appropriation" doesn't exist? What is it. It's just a term found by people defining themself progressists but thry don't understand they are very conservative actually
What a dumb argument!
if you are whining about "cultural appropriation" then you don't understand how music is created. All music is inspired by other people's music, this is a process that transcends race, nationality, continents etc.
These sorts of attitudes are an enemy of music, you're preventing the proper flow of the creative musical process.
Apparently I have lived under a rock or dremt 30 something yrs because I remember growing up and watching interviews of members of different bands and hearing them say what inspired the artists when they grew up also including black artists along with the rest of the melting pot. So I'm confused about the stealing rock from anyone? What about Prince.. Lenny Kravitz and..and. I mean I thought that music was everyone's? Yes there has been a progression in what is popular as a whole human race but the way things are today it's the "white man bad". Yes in some cases and especially back in the day but it's not culture against culture for the majority I feel. It's the rich against everyone else. I just wish more people seen it for what it really is. Just because the rich happens to be white means all wite people are bad? If that's the case then every race is bad because there are rich people in EVERY race.
Sad but predictable to find this entitled bland US cliché perspective once again being superimposed on a British band that started out simply loving a certain kind of music thereby somehow making them complicit in your guilt.
I have the impression that the British bands who got into the Blues - John Mayall, the Stones, Yardbirds, Clapton, even Led Zep - did so with a lot of respect, but also incorporated their own experiences. They may have rescued the Blues and kept it alive, and many of the old Blues musicians were grateful to them. But the question remains, why did it have to be English bands that got huge on the back of the Blues? Who knows, it may have been in the wake of the Beatles...
If you listen to any of the old blues greats talk they'll tell you the same thing, blues is pain and heartache and who hasn't felt that? It's 100% true that it originated within the black communities of America but it's just foolish to say that nobody but black people could feel the blues, and if you feel it you can play it as blues is all about feeling.
A great example a song by Zeppelin that discusses personal issues is What is and Should never be. The song is about Robert Plant's wife's sister who he dated. She is also the motivation for Black Country Woman.
@@TheGhostOfFredZeppelin absolutely, and to be fair, the video also acknowledges that. I guess the question remains why the industry decided to push these bands, rather than the originators. I think it's because they were English, and the Beatles created a market for English bands... even Jimi Hendrix made his breakthrough after he moved to London and was put in a British band
@@martinpaddle I guess it's about money as always, a young energetic artist/band is more marketable than some old man who maybe haven't even played his music in years. By that I mean the old pretty much retired bluesmen and and not the Little Richards and Chuck Berry's of the world
@@martinpaddle also, white English bands were seen as more "marketable" than black American bands, we can't erase the racial element from this discussion. Not saying that's something the Beatles or Zepellin or Clapton or the Stones were to blame for, they didn't make those decisions themselves, but it must be mentioned.
The ignorance in this comment section is appalling. The entire point is that this music was seen as more acceptable not because of the “spin” that Zepplin put on it, but solely because they were white. As a musician, I can also comfortably say that all of the members of Led Zepplin are overrated, save for John Bonham; he was a legend before he even joined the band. It wasn’t the differences between Zepplin and black blues musicians that put Zepplin on the map, it was the similarities. The fact is, it didn’t matter how much talent you put in front of most white audiences at that time if the talent was of colored skin. They rejected the merit and validity of black art, even if they enjoyed it. I really think Zepplin is a great example to view this issue through. Their first album is almost completely comprised of covered material. Fans could argue that they prefer later albums better, but you don’t get the later albums without the first one. At the end of the day, I think the main purpose of this topic is to help reveal how black culture is commodified and sold for profit by people who aren’t black, and how that can be and has been really problematic. If you are disputing that, you’re just flat out wrong. You can still like Led Zepplin guys, it’s okay. The past is the past and art is art; that doesn’t mean we cant have a nuanced conversation about how cultural appropriation has impacted art throughout history and how it adds up in today’s world.
I always thought cultural appropriation was bullshit, and this video reaffirmed that, at no time does anyone present an argument for "cultural appropriation" to be bad, just that racism is bad, when they say that white artists were more successful than blacks, this is not the fault of cultural appropriation but racism, if cultural appropriation is bad then racism is good, because it keeps cultures separate preventing any kind of "appropriation".
very true
It’s always the people who cry for diversity that are the first to screech ‘cultural appropriation’ funnily enough
Very well said. No individual owns a culture.
Dude you are doing the same thing!! Because Zeppellin became sooo popular you are trying to do the same thing with your video to seek the spotlight !!! Why are you trying to over think this … its only rock n roll and we like it!!! Besides Plant and Page have always said its all about the roots , of course it was in black music , da ! They never said it wasnt !!! Haters will always find a way to hate!!! Do yo think for one moment that music just falls from the heavens it all stems from those who come before us always has and always will !!!!!
“Sea of white faces” … have you been to a rap concert the last 20 years?? 😂
Worth pointing out that "back in the day," you wouldn't get the life sued out of you for covering a song or doing a new version of something without writing "COVER" at the beginning of every heading. It was assumed that songs grew off of each other and developed over time, like "St. James Infirmary Blues" or "House of the Rising Sun."
Their last video explores this, but you're right that it might've been worth a mention in this discussion
Eliminate? No way. Appreciate and emulate. I don't understand why it's wrong to be inspired by someone elses culture. I grew up in love with rap music. And I wanted to learn everything I could about that culture. From music to movies to clothing, I just wanted to be part of it. And I was told I shouldn't rap because I wasn't from that lifestyle. I wasn't stealing... I was paying homage. I saw beauty, and I wanted to be that beautiful. And looking back it was silly to see a chubby urban white kid trying to be hard. Led Zeppelin helped bring a lot of culture across the ocean. People have picked up songs by so many artists they never would have heard of before, because Led Zeppelin (and others) introducted them to something they didn't know it was there. If you find something you love, and you embrace it, and you mix it with other things you love and you turn it into something creative and beautiful... thats art. The fact that the record labels stamped the blues as race music is disgusting and sad. It took people like Zep to convince the next generation that they were missing out, and should pay attention to this amazing music, and these amazing people.
At what point does tribute become appropriation? Led Zep knew the origins of their music but they were musicians not sociologists.
They had to be sued to credit songs that they borrowed heavily from. They certainly added to it and made it their own.
Yawn. All cultures borrow. Do you condemn the non-Neapolitan pizza joint?
You’re missing the point entirely…
This is quite possibly one of the most frustrating comment sections I've ever seen. No one is even giving the message of this video a chance. They immediately revert to defensiveness.
Because of the stupid woke title genius. It's pathetic.
@@spicecrop so you're saying you judged the video entirely on its title? That seems kind of immature.
@@breadpilled2587 it's pretty much the reaction the title was meant to create. it's clickbait.
@@Schmeatboy literally saying you're reactionary and didnt watch the video
Nobody has anything against black rock musicians, nowadays we must include black people on everything we do. I say no, to each their own. My people suffered for a millennium from one empire to another,but you don’t see us asking reparations from the Turks. Ohhh i forgot,I’m privileged because i’m white. Doesn’t matter that i grew up in a country that was destroyed by war in the early 90’s.
Of course, this sort of discussion always makes me think: That there isn't really a reason why we should ultimately disallow British white people from playing the blues.