Jump to content

Why was Neil so polarizing among drummers?


Xanadoood
 Share

Recommended Posts

I can't wrap my head around this. The critics accept that Peart

+ Was a gifted composer and arranger, a rarity among drummers

+ Was superhuman in precision, power and career longevity

+ Inspired many people to pick up the sticks and gained the respect of countless peers

BUT the detractors say

- he didn't groove or improvise

- there were faster drummers

THEREFORE he doesn't count.

 

So if all that is true, I'll ask some questions:

1 Since classical musicians almost never improvise, does that mean they are hacks compared to their jazz counterparts? Some jazz musicians can't read music. Does that make them hacks compared to classical musician?

 

2 Do jazzy types foray into rock music or is it beneath their dignity (like Prince Charles at a pig roast)? If they do, how do they fare? If these guys are so good, presumably some top names should have trickled into rock for extra cash.

 

3 If speed is such an issue, then does Eric Clapton ("Slowhand") deserve no respect?

 

Judging musicians with little checkboxes is not the best way.

Edited by The400Boys
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's like this - and I say this regarding people who disparage the Beatles too.

 

 

The immense impact of NP is in arguable. Doesn't matter who was first, or faster, or had more chops.

 

NP is in EVERY drummers head - whether they want him there or not.

 

Anybody who tries to diminish or shrug off NP's influence simply doesn't understand popular music, or grasp its history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's so many things that made Neil great. I consider him the most influential drummer of all time, because he had the heart of a lion, never forgot where he came from, outworked those with more talent, and played at an impossibly high level for decades. He always challenged himself even when he didn't have to and always appreciated his good fortune. I miss him dearly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's so many things that made Neil great. I consider him the most influential drummer of all time, because he had the heart of a lion, never forgot where he came from, outworked those with more talent, and played at an impossibly high level for decades. He always challenged himself even when he didn't have to and always appreciated his good fortune. I miss him dearly.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was fun to read through this thread - I didn't see it when most the posts got written.

 

I have to say that I think Neil is a polarizing figure in the drumming community for a different reason than many have stated, essentially say that the "groove police" are the culprits.

 

I actually think that a lot of it has to do with the pedestal that the rabid fans puts him on. I think that the unique nature of Rush's music created a fan base that, in relative terms, was somewhat insular. Meaning, someone who loves something like Fleetwood Mac is likely going to love lots and lots of other things, but there is something in the specificity of Rush's music, the singular nature of it, that bred a fan base that was focused on them to the exclusion of other groups. This is a generalization - and I think it was far more true in the formative years of the band as opposed to the current, internet age we live in. I certainly knew Rush fans growing up who listened to little else.

 

This I think creates a distorted view, because they don't really care that there are other great drummers out there, if those drummers aren't playing Rush or Rush-like music. And when you add to that the fact that Neil's parts are busy, flashy and attention getting, and integral to the compositions themselves, you get a group of people who consider Neil to be an absolute GOD among drummers. But they don't all seem to have much of a frame of reference. And there are people in the drumming community who hear that hero worship stuff, and think "Have these people heard Vinnie Coliuta play? Simon Phillips? Billy Cobham? Mark Brzezicki? Benny Greb? Terry Bozzio? Etc Etc Etc...", and some of those rabid fans just don't seem interested in something that isn't Rush. Which is fine from a listening perspective...but distorts things when it comes to forming an opinion.

 

You can still see this today. I have watched a few "reaction" videos of people watching Peart's solos...and there are so many numbskulls who watch him do the 5 stroke crossover thing or do a big run down his toms and say crap like "He's not human!! He's an insane machine!!!!" It's embarrassing. And people who have some perspective on how many incredible players exist in the world - virtuosos behind the kit - they look at that and say "the whole Peart thing is just a bunch of bullshit - the fans all think he's good because he has 100 toms and does a dumb little marimba thing that a mallet player could play in the 9th grade."

 

And the irony, to me, is that if he hadn't been held up as some god of drums, his detractors I think would be more willing to just put him in the pantheon of great rock drummers, which is where he belongs. Of course we're talking about art, so the idea of a "best" is totally absurd...BUT...if there was such a thing - if there was ONE best drummer in the world - then EVERY other drummer has drummers who are better than them. From a technical standpoint, especially (but not only) now, there are players who are more skilled than Peart. I think Neil's greatest strength was as a composer of drum parts - he was powerful, inventive and unique - and he had a high level of skill to put his ideas across. If people had generally talked about him the way that people talk about Stewart Copeland or Phil Collins or Bill Bruford, I think there wouldn't be such a reactionary response in some circles.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

And the irony, to me, is that if he hadn't been held up as some god of drums, his detractors I think would be more willing to just put him in the pantheon of great rock drummers, which is where he belongs. Of course we're talking about art, so the idea of a "best" is totally absurd...BUT...if there was such a thing - if there was ONE best drummer in the world - then EVERY other drummer has drummers who are better than them. From a technical standpoint, especially (but not only) now, there are players who are more skilled than Peart.

 

I think the top-tier jazz drummers as Buddy Rich, Gene Krupa and Billy Cobham are regarded as technically superior drummers to Peart (and any other rock drummers).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I once read an article in which the author said Neil's drumming style was "robotic, lacking any feel or humanity".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Complaining that Neil lacked swing is like finishing a brilliant mystery novel and complaining it lacked romance.

An artist cannot be all things to all people.

 

...and when he learnt to 'swing' through the Freddy Gruber thing his drumming and Rush's music suffered.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Complaining that Neil lacked swing is like finishing a brilliant mystery novel and complaining it lacked romance.

An artist cannot be all things to all people.

 

...and when he learnt to 'swing' through the Freddy Gruber thing his drumming and Rush's music suffered.

Yeah, isn't there a story when they all reconvened after his lessons and tried to play together (maybe in the TFE sessions) but couldn't? Alex said, "I don't know what you're doing anymore," or something like that.

 

Personal note: I'm a novelist and writer, and sometimes the reviews of my books will directly contradict one another. It's like Goldilocks and the Three Bears: literally "This book moved too slow" vs "This book moved too fast".

In short, there is no satisfying everybody, so might as well just satisfy yourself, then see who likes it. Which is EXACTLY how Rush did it.

Edited by Weatherman
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Neil's greatest strength was as a composer of drum parts - he was powerful, inventive and unique - and he had a high level of skill to put his ideas across.

This.

Same reason why he loved writing books so much too. He basically loved designing things in private.

Not improvising, not "swinging", not "finding the pocket" onstage for a killer groove with Ged.

Just composing his ideas in private.

That's all he really wanted to do.

Edited by Weatherman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Complaining that Neil lacked swing is like finishing a brilliant mystery novel and complaining it lacked romance.

An artist cannot be all things to all people.

 

...and when he learnt to 'swing' through the Freddy Gruber thing his drumming and Rush's music suffered.

Yeah, isn't there a story when they all reconvened after his lessons and tried to play together (maybe in the TFE sessions) but couldn't? Alex said, "I don't know what you're doing anymore," or something like that.

 

Personal note: I'm a novelist and writer, and sometimes the reviews of my books will directly contradict one another. It's like Goldilocks and the Three Bears: literally "This book moved too slow" vs "This book moved too fast".

In short, there is no satisfying everybody, so might as well just satisfy yourself, then see who likes it. Which is EXACTLY how Rush did it.

 

I'm not sure about Alex but I know I did :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...