words@brothersgibb.com message digest 09/01/2015 15:01 (#2015-756)

2 messages included in this issue

1Rolling Stone 100-greatest-songwriterscompoccia@aol.com
2Rolling Stone 100-greatest-songwritersbrennan@columbia.edu

Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 14:11:35 -0400 From: Salvatore Compoccia <compoccia@aol.com> Subject: Re: Rolling Stone 100-greatest-songwriters Given that's a Rolling Stone poll, I'm guess the Bee Gees lack of "rock credentials" has resulted in RS consistently marginalizing or ignoring them. This is pretty much par for the course, I would say. Sal Salvatore Compoccia compoccia@aol.com Back to top
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2015 14:41:48 -0400 From: Joseph Brennan <brennan@columbia.edu> Subject: Re: Rolling Stone 100-greatest-songwriters Anne Simpson wrote: > But Taylor Swift didn’t beat the Bee Gees – they just beat her > by two positions near the bottom of the list. Whoop de doo. Hey, what's wrong with Taylor Swift? Surprisingly we don't see Stephen Foster or Irving Berlin there, and it's greatest songwriters "of All Time", right? What are they, chopped liver? Foster, 1826-1864, the first professional songwriter, is especially notable because people are still singing and recording some of his sings more than 150 years later. Oh! Susannah, Camptown Races, Old Folks at Home (Swanee River), My Old Kentucky Home, Jeanie with the Light Brown Hair, Hard Times Come Again No More, Beautiful Dreamer. Joe Brennan Back to top
End words@brothersgibb.com message digest 09/01/2015 15:01 (#2015-756)