13 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent, concise resource for the social history of rock, July 4, 1999
I have read and re-read this book many times since I first picked up the 3rd edition in 1996. I am a high school social studies teacher and I use this book as a resource constantly when I am teaching contempory history. Well thought out, concise yet complete, easily readable. I applaud Mr. Szatmary for his effort, the book has inspired me to research the sociolgical implications of rock and roll and not merely the "pop history" currently offered. Further, I was so inspired by this book that it prompted me to author a website dedicated to the sociology of rock and roll history.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
18 of 23 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Incredibly poor, inaccurate work., April 29, 2005
This review is from: Rockin' in Time: A Social History of Rock-and-Roll, Fifth Edition (Paperback)
I originally had to read this book for a History of Rock and Roll class at the University of Cincinatti. I found the subject interesting, and the professor gave wonderful lectures. I had good expectations about this book going in, but those quickly soured as I read it.
It seems correct, at least, about the social problems of the different eras and their relation to rock. Not that such is a particularly daunting feet.
However, it is rife with laughable fallacies. For instance, it calls David Bowie, amongst other glam rock bands of the era, metal. It futher goes on to call many pop bands of the 60s and 70s rock, when they have no guitar work and no bass line at all, such as the Carpenters.
I really had a good laugh when they called Bad Religion hardcore. Bad Religion is about as hardcore as Elvis is rap. Further massive genre confusion consisted throughout the entire book.
I also noted several drastic misinterpretations of songs. For instance, it claims 'Thunder Rolls' by Garth Brooks is about domestic violence. Its about infedility, not focusing on violence at all, but rather the emotional ramificationsof being cheated on.
The writing is also rather dry. Many times it is merely a citing of the names of band members as well as constantly describing minor changes in bands lineups which are of no true consequence. It also tends to list off songs which have no impact on any giving band's successes or failures.
After reading the book in completetion, I really had to question the earlier passages about older rock and blues (50s to 60s) that I had thought were true. In the end, I felt that it wasted my time and money and possibly misinformed me more than anything.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No