More On "The Day The Music Died"

Read these posts.

Buddy Holly Tours

On Buddy Holly's Baptist Faith: In Memory of Buddy Holly: The Day the Music Still Lives:

February 3, 2009, marks the 50th anniversary of "the day the music died." A half-century ago, a 23-year-old Buddy Holly boarded a plane on a wintry Iowa night with fellow package show headliners the Big Bopper and adolescent Richie Valens. After a now legendary coin toss with band bass player Waylon Jennings, the three stars took their flight into rock and roll lore. In terms of rock history, the tragedy of that light aircraft crash in Iowa marked the end the era of 50's rock. It was a time and a place when innocence could still be truly innocent. While Elvis was out womanizing, Johnny Cash was popping pills and Jerry Lee Lewis was marrying his 13-year-old cousin, Buddy Holly was still sending 10% of his income to his Baptist church in Lubbock, Texas. Holly didn't womanize or do drugs, instead, he got married to a woman his own age. For Buddy Holly, the Christian ethic and world view were a given, without question. It was such a part of his life, he never thought to doubt the faith of his fathers as neatly woven into his career.

The Buddy Holly Story biopic falsely portrays his parents and his pastor disapproving of his rock and roll music. In reality, they were all thrilled with both his music and his success. While other small town Texas communities encouraged sports as the main point of achievement, for Lubbock, musicianship was of equal, if not superior value. After all, this was the land of Bob Wills and The Sons of the Pioneers. From my own amateur rock historian perspective, I often wonder what would have happened to rock and roll had Holly lived on. My innocence envisions him leading The Beatles to the Lord and ushering in an eternal age of youth and clear-eyed innocence. But, this is, I admit, at best naive. Its hard to say where Buddy Holly's musical journey would have led him. As it was, he was beginning to form partnerships with more pop driven artists like Paul Anka and using some pretty un-rock and roll sounding strings and arrangements on his latter day recordings. Listen to "True Love Ways." Its beautiful, yes, but not the raw, joyful sound of "That'll Be The Day."

An old girlfriend of Buddy's speaks on their relationship.

Buddy Holly's Church---a loony historical revisionist fundamentalist King James Only church/cult: Tabernacle Baptist Church Lubbock Texas.

Big Bopper exhumed and Big Bopper's casket a macabre marketable on eBay

Buddy Holly's Widow Speaks On "The Day The Music Died"

For those of you who missed it, Feb. 3rd was the 50th Anniversary of "the day the music died" when:

On February 3, 1959, a small-plane crash near Clear Lake, Iowa, United States killed three American rock and roll musicians: Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens, and J. P. "The Big Bopper" Richardson, as well as the pilot, Roger Peterson [1]. The day was later called The Day the Music Died by Don McLean in his 1971 song "American Pie".[2][3]

Buddy Holly's widow said this of the late Buddy Holly:

Buddy Holly Makes His Widow's Heart Go Boom 50 Years Later

The third of February marks the 50th anniversary of the plane crash that took the lives of Buddy Holly, the Big Bopper and Ritchie Valens -- an occasion immortalized in Don McLean's 'American Pie' as "the day the music died." However, for Holly's widow, Maria Elena, he has never been far from her side. She has spent the past half century keeping his music and legacy alive.

Best known for hits including 'That'll Be the Day,' 'Peggy Sue,' 'Maybe Baby' and 'Rave On,' Holly is one of rock 'n' roll's true pioneers, creating a larger, lasting body of work in two years than most artists build during a lifetime. Holly's music, alone and with the Crickets, is plumbed in two new compilations: the 60-cut 'Memorial Collection' and the 59-selection 'Down the Line: The Rarities,' both of which contain previously unreleased material.

To commemorate the tragic anniversary, Maria Holly will be in Clear Lake, Iowa, at the Surf Ballroom & Museum, the site of Holly's last show, for a Feb. 2 concert organized by the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. She talked with Spinner about her brief yet magical time with Holly, new directions he was exploring musically and culturally, and her enduring love for him in the years after his death.

You met Buddy when he came into Peer-Southern Music, the music publishing company in New York where you worked. Were you a fan?

I'd never seen a picture of him or even knew who he was in person, because when I met him he'd just come from a tour in the U.K. I knew of him because I used to mail the 45s to the disc jockeys, I knew the name and songs.

Did you think he was cute?

I thought he was sexy-looking. It was like, "Boom!" It was strange to me, since I'd never been on a date. And he felt the same way. It was, like they say, love at first sight. I didn't hear the bells, but I felt the boom, boom. I felt it in my heart.

Two months after meeting, you and Buddy married. You lived in New York's Greenwich Village surrounded by various folk and jazz clubs. How did that influence his music?

We were both night people. He'd get up in the middle of the night and start writing. He was a little restless; we'd roll up our pajamas and put our coats on. He enjoyed listening to the poetry. Sometimes people would play the guitar in some of the coffee houses. It was something to put his mind at ease because he was so involved in writing. He loved anything to do with poetry and music.

Did you ever play any music for him from artists that you liked?

Yes I did. As a matter of fact, he was planning with my aunt, who was one of the execs at Southern Music, to do an album [in Spanish]. [At the time of his death, he] was in the process of my aunt trying to get songs that he would be able to do. At the same time, I was trying to teach him how to pronounce the words correctly and with a person from Texas, that's not so easy [laughs]. But, you know what -- he was really learning.

'Rarities' includes undubbed versions of what are known as the 'Apartment Tapes.' They showcase Buddy's voice in its unadorned purity.

He had that little [Ampex tape recorder] there with that mic and it was just very raw. He would erase and come back while he was composing. He would come first sometimes with the music, and then he'd write lyrics, or vice versa. A lot of people ask, "What comes first?" and I say I saw it both ways.

The Apartment Tapes also include a snippet of a conversation you and Buddy had in your apartment in 1958. What runs through your head when you hear that?

Oh, dear, that was the most difficult one when I was listening. I had to stop and I went back and pictured myself in the apartment. I started visualizing where he was sitting. Where I was. The whole apartment. It was pretty hard for me to listen to this, but I wanted to hear. [In the conversation] I was trying to get him to take a break because he was constantly writing ... I did a lot of different things to bring him out of what he was doing and sometimes even to get him to eat something. He forgot about everything else when he was writing.

He was exploring different musical paths when he died at 22. What direction do you think he was going in?

He wasn't afraid to try things, so that was a plus for him. I think he would have gone into different ways. As a matter of fact, he also was very much interested in music like Mahalia Jackson and Ray Charles, gospel. We even went to California, looking for [Charles], but unfortunately he was on tour. [Buddy] wanted to do a duet with him and also with Mahalia. He said, "I'll get him sometime or another."

People talk about Buddy's voice, his songwriting and his glasses. What else do you wish people know about him?

Buddy was very, very generous. Even though he was the one closing the shows, he was not hesitating to sit for others. With the Everly Brothers, he sat down and played the drums because the drummer didn't show up. It never fazed him if he had to sit in for someone or do something for the others. He was sure of himself. He never contemplated the status; [it was] "If you need me, I'm here." I admire him for that. And love him more and more every day.

You've said you couldn't listen to his music for years after he died. What was it like the first time you finally heard it again?

I still have problems. I can hear it when I go on appearances when they have a special tribute because I see the fans being so energized, but here in the house, it's sometimes very difficult. I just can not handle it. So even after this day, after 50 years, it's something...People say time cures all and I say it does not, it does not cure that and especially the way I loved him. He was here one moment and he's gone the next day.

What do you remember about that last trip? You didn't go because you were pregnant.

I remember distinctly that I already had my suitcases done and I had them at the door and he said, "No, honey, I don't want you to go. Take care of my baby and I'll be back in two weeks. So don't worry, I' ll call you every night." [Maria Elena miscarried after Buddy's death. She later had three children with her second husband.] I still blame myself. If I had insisted on going and said, "No, I'm going," I'm sure ... OK, I was a little pushy when I needed to be, so, actually, this is the only regret that I have about what happened to him. I still remember constantly and I say, I wonder, if I had [gone], if he would still be [here] because I would not have let him get on that small plane. I didn't know he did that, absolutely not ... I still sometimes get upset.

Remembering Martin Luther King

Martin Luther King, Jr. was perhaps one of the best Baptist Preachers in history besides Harry Emerson Fosdick, so here are some links to Fosdick's influence on MLK:

Harry Emerson Fosdick's Influence On Martin luther king jr

"How to Use the Bible in Modern Theological Construction"

Martin Luther King, Jr.

And of course, Dr. King's "I Have A Dream" speech was influenced by Fosdick:

Unfortunately, King’s fame has obscured the contributions of James Farmer, Ella Baker, John Lewis, Fannie Lou Hamer, and others, who, like King, mastered Gandhian strategy in the quest for racial justice.

But King’s fiery yet magisterial language convinced whites to tear down the walls of legalized segregation. He triumphed by reviving the slaves’ vivid identification with the biblical Hebrews trapped in Egyptian bondage, a strategy especially evident in “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop.” Trained by African American folk preachers, he adopted their assumption that language is a shared treasure, not private property. King often borrowed sermons without acknowledgment from Harry Emerson Fosdick and other liberal preachers. This borrowed material appears in scores of King’s published and unpublished addresses and essays, including “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” “I Have a Dream,” the Nobel Prize Address, and “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop.” By synthesizing black and white pulpit traditions, King persuaded whites to hear the slaves’ cry, “Let my people go!”

---Martin Luther King, Jr.
(1929-1968)

Happy Thanksgiving With Homebrewed Christianity

Here is a prayer by Paul Rauschenbusch, great-grandson of the famed Walter Rauschenbusch, the father of the "social gospel"--- Walter Rauschenbusch is one of the best Baptist preachers besides Harry Emerson Fosdick--- that my friend Tripp posted on his Blog:

Rauschenbusch’s Thanksgiving Prayer
November 26, 2008

O God, we thank you for this earth, our home;
For the wide sky and the blessed sun,
For the salt sea and the running water,
For the everlasting hills
And the never-resting winds,
For trees and the common grass underfoot.
We thank you for our senses
By which we hear the songs of birds,
And see the splendor of the summer fields,
And taste of the autumn fruits,
And rejoice in the feel of the snow,
And smell the breath of the spring.
Grant us a heart wide open to all this beauty;
And save our souls from being so blind
That we pass unseeing
When even the common thornbush
Is aflame with your glory,
O God our creator,
Who lives and reigns for ever and ever.

HT: Paul Rauschenbusch

Posted in prayer, www stuff

Celebrate Billy Graham's 90th Birthday

Send him a message: here.

Send a Message| Read Messages| Video| Media Coverage

“On November 7, my father celebrated his 90th birthday. If you or someone in your family came to know Jesus Christ through his ministry, please share that with him. We want to continue to bless and encourage him in his 90th year.”
– Franklin Graham

“Dear Billy, I first heard you preach in San Diego in 1958. I went forward that day and began my walk with Jesus Christ. I actually ran down from the bleachers because I didn’t want to get there too late! Best decision I’ve ever made in my lifetime. Today, I would like to wish you a blessed birthday with the presence of our God being with you.”

—W.B.

Some Interesting Readings Of Fosdick's "Shall The Fundamentalists Win?"

For an Emerging/Emergent take see: Earl Barnett's Blog.


For a Unitarian Universalist take see: Paul Wilczynski's Observations.


For a progressive Presbyterian take see: The Presbyterian Outlook.


For an Evangelical take see: Christianity Today.


For another Presbyterian take see: First Presbyterian Church Kenosha.

Fundie Nuts Vs. Harry Emerson Fosdick

Steven J. said on Ray Comfort's Blog ...

(Shiver)Curtis quoted John MacArthur saying:

"The result is that over the past couple of decades, large numbers of evangelicals have shown a surprising willingness to take a completely non-evangelical approach to interpreting the early chapters of Genesis. More and more are embracing the view known as “old-earth creationism,” which blends some of the principles of biblical creationism with naturalistic and evolutionary theories, seeking to reconcile two opposing world-views. And in order to accomplish this, old-earth creationists end up explaining away rather than honestly exegeting the biblical creation account."-------Fundie Nut

Valid Response: Please note that an old Earth is not part of evolutionary theory: that the Earth was much older than 10,000 years was realized before evolutionary theory was proposed, and was not inspired by the need of evolution for large amounts of time to work with. Old-earth creationists are, after all, creationists.

The biblical creation account mentions the canopy of the sky, with "windows" in it (these are opened to let in the rain for Noah's Flood). This view of the sky as a solid artifact is repeated throughout the Old Testament, from further references to the "windows of heaven" in Malachi to Isaiah's reference to the sky being set up like a tent over the (presumably flat disk of the) Earth. John MacArthur, to be more consistent, should complain about all those ministers who explain away, rather than honestly exegete, the biblical passages that teach a geocentric, flat-earth cosmology. Or, conversely, he could take the approach of "Verandoug" and recognize that he has allowed his interpretation of the Bible to be shaped by scientific discoveries, and be less disdainful of those who carry this process further than he does, to acknowledge that the Earth is, in fact, immensely older than the human species (which is itself older than 10,000 or so years). I suppose it is too much to ask him to go so far as to allow his interpretation of Genesis 1 to be shaped by the evidence in favor of common ancestry of humans and other species, but he could make a start down the road to self-consistency and respect for evidence.

June 27, 2008 12:28 AM

---------------------------------------------------

Harry Emerson Fosdick long ago said:

The Real Situation

When, therefore, Mr. Bryan says, "Neither Darwin nor his supporters have been able to find a fact in the universe to support their hypothesis," it would be difficult to imagine a statement more obviously and demonstrably mistaken. The real situation is that every fact on which investigation has been able to lay its hands helps to confirm the hypothesis of evolution. There is no known fact which stands out against it. Each newly discovered fact fits into an appropriate place in it. So far as the general outlines of it are concerned, the Copernican astronomy itself is hardly established more solidly.

My reply, however, is particularly concerned with the theological aspects of Mr. Bryan's statement. There seems to be no doubt about what his position is. He proposes to take his science from the Bible. He proposes certainly, to take no science that is contradicted by the Bible. He says, "Is it not strange that a Christian will accept Darwinism as a substitute for the Bible when the Bible not only does not support Darwin's hypothesis, but directly and expressly contradicts it?" What other interpretation of such a statement is possible except this: that the Bible is for Mr. Bryan an authoritative textbook in biology--and if in biology, why not in astronomy, cosmogony, chemistry, or any other science, art, concern of man whatever? One who is acquainted with the history of theological thought gasps as he reads this. At the close of the sixteenth century a Protestant theologian set down the importance of the book of Genesis as he understood it. He said that the text of Genesis "must be received strictly"; that "it contains all knowledge, human and divine"; that "twenty-eight articles of the Augsburg Confession are to be found in it"; that "it is an arsenal of arguments against all sects and sorts of atheists, pagans, Jews, Turks, Tartars, Papists, Calvinists, Socinians, and Baptists"; that it is "the source of all science and arts, including law, medicine, philosophy, and rhetoric," "the source and essence of all histories and of all professions, trades, and works," "an exhibition of all virtues and vices," and "the origin of all consolation."

Luther and Bryan

One has supposed that the days when such wild anachronisms could pass muster as good theology were past, but Mr. Bryan is regalvanizing into life that same outmoded idea of what the Bible is, and proposes in the twentieth century that we shall use Genesis, which reflects the prescientific view of the Hebrew people centuries before Christ, as an authoritative textbook in science, beyond whose conclusions we dare not go.

Why, then, should Mr. Bryan complain because his attitude toward evolution is compared repeatedly, as he says it is, with the attitude of the theological opponents of Copernicus and Galileo? On his own statement, the parallelism is complete. Martin Luther attacked Copernicus with the same appeal which Mr. Bryan uses. He appealed to the Bible. He said: "People gave ear to an upstart astrology who strove to show that the earth revolves , not the heavens or the firmament, and the sun and the moon. Whoever wishes to appear clever must devise some new system, whic of all systems is, of course, the very best, This fool wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy,but sacred Scripture tells us that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth."

Nor was Martin Luther wrong if the Bible is indeed an authoritative textbook in science. The denial of the Copernican astronomy with its moving earth can unquestionable be found in the Bible if one starts out to use the Bible that way--"The world also is established, that in cannot be moved" (Psalm 91:I); "Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be moved forever" (Psalm 104:5). Moreover, in those bygone days, the people who were then using Mr. Bryan's method of argument did quote these passages as proof, and Father Inchofer felt so confident that he cried, "The opinion of the earth's motion is of all heresies the most abominable, the most pernicious, the most scandalous; the immovability of the earth is thrice sacred; argument against the immortality of the soul, the existence of God, and the incarnation should be tolerated sooner that the argument to prove that the earth moves."

The Hebrew Universe

Indeed, as everybody knows who has seriously studied the Bible, that book represents in its cosmology and cosmogony the view of the physical universe which everywhere obtained in the ancient Semitic world. The earth was flat and was founded on an underlying sea (Psalm 136:6; Psalm 24:1-2; Genesis 7:11); it was stationary; the heavens, like an upturned bowl, "strong as a molten mirror" (Job 37:18; Genesis I:6-8;Isaiah 40:22; Psalm 104:2), rested on the earth beneath (Amos 9:6); Job 26:11); the sun, moon, stars moved within this firmament of special purpose to illumine man (Genesis 1:14-19); there was a sea above the sky, "the waters which were above the firmament." (Genesis 1:7; Psalm 148:4) and through "the windows of heaven" the rain came down (Genesis 7:11; Psalm 78:23); beneath the earth was mysterious Sheol where dwelt the shadowy dead (Isaiah 14:9-11); and all this had been made in six days, each of which had had a morning and an evening, a short and measurable time before (Genesis I).

Are we to understand that this is Mr. Bryan's science, that we must teach this science in our schools, that we are stopped by divine revelation from ever going beyond this science? Yet this is exactly what Mr. Bryan would force us to do if with intellectualconsistency he should carry out the implications of his appeal to the Bible against the scientific hypothesis of evolution in biology.

---Courtesy of: http://www.geocities.com/lclane2/fosdick2.html