Powderfinger Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Not sure how many new insights are delivered, if any, but thought I should share: http://ultimateclassicrock.com/rush-john-rutsey/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x1yyz Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Good article. I think it highlights how crucial Rutsey was to the early stages of Rush, and how the band wouldn't have gone anywhere if he stayed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorraine Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Why don't they just let the guy rest in peace? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narps Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 The debut doesn't get near the respect it deserves.... 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorraine Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 That is because it has been overshadowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tx_rush Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 After reading this article, it doesnt seem there is really any new information or insight. I feel like I could have written a similar article, and I probably know less about Rush history than the majority of people in TRF 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goose Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 The debut is awesome. :rush: :haz: 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CygnusGal Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Nice article. Thanks, Powderfinger. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rutlefan Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 I don't know that I agree with the common wisdom that Rush wouldn't have gone anywhere if not for Neil. The debut showed that they could write well-crafted, hook-laden songs from the beginning, and I don't know why they would have stopped. Look at Fly by Night; great album for its time (still very good), but not because of Neil's contribution particularly. For my tastes, In the End is the best track and that was Alex's (as I recall). After FBN it's hard to say what they might have been without Neil. They would have been a less "serious" band no doubt, but still great. I think "Lessons" gives a good glimpse of how they might have evolved. I'm glad they took the route they did, but I expect I would have liked them the other way as well. Still, I I don't doubt that adding Neil to the mix resulted in a one of a kind history-making band that wouldn't have been otherwise. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMCXII Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Why don't they just let the guy rest in peace? I think he is. they're just remembering him un less I missed something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powderfinger Posted July 25, 2014 Author Share Posted July 25, 2014 I think Rush would have at least enjoyed a respectable career as a middling rock band. Alex and Geddy still would have evolved into the recognized, outstanding musicians that they became. Although, Neil's expert playing has perhaps pushed them slightly further than they necessarily would have progressed with Rutsey occupying the drummer's throne. For my money, Neil's lyrics and drumming facilitated a future as an iconic rock band, but they likely would have done well without him. Then again, 2112 secured their future in the business, and that wouldn't have occurred without Neil's involvement. But at the same time, their career was in jeopardy because of Caress of Steel, which of course is a product of Neil's involvement. I think most of us make the mistake of simply judging Rutsey's talents according to the debut album. But Geddy and Alex subsequently improved as musicians. Why don't we grant Rutsey the same potential? Geddy and Alex weren't exactly the same guys who would eventually produce albums as sophisticated as Hemispheres or Moving Pictures. Perhaps John would have grown alongside them. Okay, I'm just spinning my wheels here... I suppose in the early 70s, Cream/The Who/Zeppelin-inspired rock bands were a dime a dozen. History simply doesn't preserve much in the way of pale imitations, thus producing nostalgia. How can we know if Rush would have been a mere also-ran, or evolved into a revered rock trio? Whatever the answer, it doesn't entirely depend on John Rutsey. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now