If Hank were alive today

Barry Blackwood · Post by **Barry Blackwood** » 2 May 2010 8:51 am

Interesting article in my local paper today. Your thoughts?
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/05/02/271627 ... -were.html

Post by **Dave Mudgett** » 2 May 2010 9:03 am

The article isn't available without registering with the Sacramento Bee. Can you give give us the gist of what they're saying?

It has long been my sense that if the late-40s Hank appeared on the modern music scene now, he'd be playing bars and would be considered too unsophisticated for any modern mass-audience demographic. But of course, those times molded the man, and modern times would likely have molded him quite differently. My opinion, anyway.

Barry Blackwood · Post by **Barry Blackwood** » 2 May 2010 10:10 am

Sorry, Dave. I didn't realize that registration was required. Here's the article, cut & paste style.

Commentary: If Hank Williams were alive today, he'd be scorned by music industry despite his Pulitzer
dwalsh@sacbee.com
Published Sunday, May. 02, 2010

In April, Hank Williams was awarded a special Pulitzer Prize for music, and I didn't know what to think.

One Washington Post reader described it as "random," and for a while that seemed pretty apt.

Then there was a period when I was angry, seeing it as something of a cruel joke.

I'm over my anger. Now I'm just sad.

If Hank Williams had come along with his music in 2010 instead of 1947, it's likely he would have received no radio play, and no major recording company would have signed him. There would be no place now in Nashville for Williams. There's no place there and barely anywhere for his direct descendant Merle Haggard, and his music is not nearly as raw.

An industry that doesn't want to let go of the marketable Williams legend dresses up his music with strings, acoustics, big-name popular singers and other ornaments to make it palpable, even though there is persuasive evidence Williams himself would never have bought into that.

The Pulitzer was a stark reminder that music Williams loved – known as "hillbilly" music in the 1940s – is dying and being replaced by pure pop.

Williams had learned gospel, folk and original backwoods sounds from friends and neighbors. Blues he learned from a local African American street musician, Rufus "Teetot" Payne. A spinal affliction, now known as spina bifida, prevented him from working in the fields of Alabama, but he entered talent contests and sang on local radio. In 1947, Williams had a hit in "Move It On Over."

In urban areas teeming in response to World War II-era promises of big wages in defense work, the spare and haunting music of Williams and others carried hundreds of thousands of transplanted country folks back to their roots and framed their cares and woes in ways that touched their souls.

In 1948, I was 12 and just starting the eighth grade in a tiny town in rural northeast Kansas when I first heard "Lovesick Blues," a song derived from the minstrel era and one of the few Williams recorded but did not write. The pain in the man's voice made me shiver. It was as if he had seen it all, lived a lifetime – instead of 25 years – and was crying out for someone to understand. I still cry every time I hear it. It got Williams an invitation to join the Grand Ole Opry in Nashville.

Over six years, Williams recorded 66 songs under his own name as a solo; 37 were hits. But he became disillusioned. He confided in at least two friends that he was uncomfortable with the commercial glitz that even then had begun creeping into Nashville.

By August 1952 when Williams was kicked off the Opry for missing too many show dates, the word "hillbilly" was out of favor. While his records continued to sell, he was so unreliable that he was down to playing beer joints in Texas and Louisiana. To the end, on Jan. 1, 1953, he was unapologetically unable to make the compromises that Ray Price, for example, would make just a few years later.

In the years since his death, Nashville first packaged genuine country performers as crossover singers, and that sold well. Then it occurred to the moguls to have popular singers sing popular songs and just call it country. It has been a spectacular success.

Today, Hank Williams would be shown the door. He has less and less influence as time goes by. That doesn't keep the Grand Ole Opry, with a propaganda machine equal to the Marines, from falling all over itself about the Pulitzer.

I would like to think that somewhere Hank Williams is smiling. He deserves it.

© Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved.

Theresa Galbraith · Post by **Theresa Galbraith** » 2 May 2010 11:08 am

If???????

Post by **Dave Mudgett** » 2 May 2010 11:25 am

Obviously I agree with the author that Hank, as presented in 1947, would not stand much of a chance in the mainstream popular music world, with my earlier caveat that Hank of 2010 might not be the Hank of 1947. But I think he continues to have plenty of influence - and not just in what is called mainstream country music these days. Rock, rockabilly, punk, alt-country, folk, blues, western swing, what's left of traditional country music, and more bear the imprint of Hank. Mainstream country music still bears his imprint - although I get the sense that some (but clearly not all) in that world would like to permanently scrape that off the bottom of their shoes like it was something they stepped in.

But to be honest - it strikes me that even some in the 'traditional' country world can't bear the true sound of genuine 'rural hillbilly' music. I agree with the author that this started a long time ago. That's why I don't get particularly excited by this now. Great influence does not necessarily imply great commercial success, nothing new here. My opinion.

Kevin Hatton · Post by **Kevin Hatton** » 2 May 2010 11:30 am

If Hank Williams were alive today he would be Hank III. Screw pop country.

Theresa Galbraith · Post by **Theresa Galbraith** » 2 May 2010 11:43 am

That statement is a disgrace to Hank Williams. JMO

Kevin Hatton · Post by **Kevin Hatton** » 2 May 2010 4:05 pm

Theresa, do you think Hank III is a disgrace? I don't. Thats his BLOOD grandson.

Ken Lang · Post by **Ken Lang** » 2 May 2010 6:49 pm

I guess all three Hanks have followed their own directions. That's what makes them Hank Williams.

Theresa Galbraith · Post by **Theresa Galbraith** » 3 May 2010 5:09 am

Kevin,
I don't care for his kind of country or whatever it is.

Joachim Kettner · Post by **Joachim Kettner** » 3 May 2010 5:50 am

As a non- American, the first time I ever heard about him was on a record by Tim Hardin called Tribute To Hank Williams, then on records by singer,songwriters, on rock'n'roll and even on jazz records. I agree that he's more recognised today in the altenative music styles, than in contemporary country.

Charles Davidson · Post by **Charles Davidson** » 3 May 2010 11:10 am

Hank achieved MORE in his short life [and since] than ANY artist of today EVER will.

Wonder 60 years years after they are gone how many records cd's,or whatever Kenney,Garth,Cowboy Troy,RF's and all the pretty little screaming bimbos will be selling

Most of the large records shops have a Hank Williams section,Being in the retail business for years I KNOW [don't think] but KNOW his music still sells,if not he would'nt be getting that slotting space. NO IF'S ANDS OR BUTTS ABOUT IT.Retailers have NO freinds,you turn merchandise or you are GONE. Old Hank is still the man and ALLWAYS will be.

YOU BETCHA,DYK?BC.

Ron Whitfield · Post by **Ron Whitfield** » 3 May 2010 12:19 pm

If Hank were alive today, he'd be in his grandson III's punk band. They'd sell raisin' Hell.

Leroy Riggs · Post by **Leroy Riggs** » 3 May 2010 12:56 pm

Well written article and I agree with it in totalitity.

Bill McCloskey · Post by **Bill McCloskey** » 3 May 2010 1:04 pm

I doubt if there is ANY artist recording in 1947 that would be a hit today. Do you imagine Glen Miller would be a hit today?

Charles Davidson · Post by **Charles Davidson** » 3 May 2010 9:51 pm

I think he would be. I don't think as many people are as [BRAIN DEAD] to what music is as some of you think.

It's just that there is [ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ]being offered. Everynight there are hours of info mercials selling, Big band,40's and 50's classic country,50's rock and do-wop,70's soft rock ballards or the metal bands. If there was not a huge market for the REAL music of the past in every venue,These spots would NOT be on the air. You mentioned Glenn Miller,Bet he will still be remembered YEARS after McGraw,Chesney,Garth,Toby.etc are forgotten.

YOU BETCHA,DYK?BC.

Bill McCloskey · Post by **Bill McCloskey** » 4 May 2010 3:21 am

Charles,

I'm afraid I disagree. Yes, there is a market for selling music that doesn't cost anything to produce on infomercials, but this is not the same thing as being a hit. I'm talking Lady Gaga hit.

Do you honestly think that if Glen Miller were around today, and he was just trying to make it in the industry that he would be a hit along the lines of Lady Gaga? Beyonce, anyone?

No... sorry. I wish that were true, but that is wishful thinking.

Post by **Dave Mudgett** » 4 May 2010 6:07 am

I agree with Bill. There is also a ton of great music being made today - the diversity and excellence is staggering. Why the blazes are the same handful of songs battered over and over on the radio?

IMO, what's on the radio or in the mainstream is not mainly about music at all. I'm not saying there isn't any good music there, but I think it's presence has more to do with demographics than musical excellence. I think it's mainly about selling advertising aimed at desirable advertising demographics, and I believe that's mainly cultural, not musical.

If not, then why aren't the Time Jumpers and Dave Peterson being played on mainstream country radio? Country isn't dead. Blues isn't dead. Soul/R&B isn't dead. Jazz isn't dead. Real rock and roll isn't dead. Classical music isn't dead. They all have sizable audiences. I think we need to get out of the pattern of assuming that mainstream media and culture have a lock on music.

What has changed is major "stardom" in these styles - for the most part, that's gone elsewhere. I think that whole "starhood" thing and the tabloid (and semi-mythical) culture surrounding it are what attract a lot of people to music in the first place. I say good riddance - I want to be around musicians who are in music for the music. I guess I don't have enough patience to deal with 'star wannabees'. I guess that's when I realized that I would be better off going back into my technical work than try to persist making a living in the music world.

My take, as usual.

Ron Whitfield · Post by **Ron Whitfield** » 4 May 2010 10:39 am

To be a Glenn Miller in the first place took a decade of tough study, more years of working up thru the ranks of other fine talent hoping for the same chances, some breaks/luck, somebody to recognize your talent and have the pull to get you signed or on air/stage.
Try making it during the great depression and then WW2, when top talent was common, with no cell phones/lap top, rampant corruption in the industry, and hurdling way more obstructions than most can remember.

Today, you just take your talentless butt and stand in line for an 'Idol' type show audition and let the machinery do it's work. You don't even have to win anything, or be any good. This is notrhing new, other than it's now the norm instead of the exception.

Dave Hopping · Post by **Dave Hopping** » 4 May 2010 3:56 pm

If Hank Williams were alive today he'd be 86 years old.Les Paul,Bob Hope,and Eubie Blake were still active at that age,so maybe Hank would be a member of the Time Jumpers.

Theresa Galbraith · Post by **Theresa Galbraith** » 4 May 2010 5:45 pm

not bad company!

Charles Davidson · Post by **Charles Davidson** » 4 May 2010 9:54 pm

Some people put old Hank down,Is that the reason he NEVER made it

Seems it would be fair to post your own credentials first,THEN badmouth him.

YOU BETCHA,DYK?BC

Fred Shannon · Post by **Fred Shannon** » 4 May 2010 10:09 pm

"If not, then why aren't the Time Jumpers and Dave Peterson being played on mainstream country radio?"

Depends where you live and listen. In this part of the world they are, along with most of the classical artists in this music venue. It's the listener that makes that determination and just how vocal they are with the radio station ownership and commercial buyers.

phred

Mark Eaton · Post by **Mark Eaton** » 5 May 2010 1:28 am

I'm impressed that the author of the article, followed by the posters here so far, haven't used the dreaded moniker, Hank "Senior" or "Sr."

Joachim Kettner · Post by **Joachim Kettner** » 5 May 2010 5:15 am

I'm also fond of the author's words (who is 74) talking about the pain he heard in Williams' voice.
If you listen to 'I'm so lonesome I could cry' the pain comes across in the lyrics. I would not call the context depressed I think it is melancholic. There seems to be no more room in the world today for this kind of stuff.