What a great pleasure to see and hear this interview. Thank you Dr. Rosanne Welch and thank you JoeR for having great guests. Let's keep the Monkees alive!!!
Joe - Another great interview! I always appreciate how you ask a question and let your guests answer without interrupting. For those of us who enjoy your channel and grew up with The Monkees (as the 4 guys and the TV show), we all appreciate every little nugget of information you've mined from these individuals, some of who are/were legends. Thank you !
@@TheMonkeesPadPODCAST . Already have !! Thank you again, sir, for doing this GREAT work you do !! Dr. Welch was an INCREDIBLY interesting guest !! 🙂 .
I can tell you why the Monkees matter, then and now. Because they were fun. The TV show was about four kids who played musicians in a band on TV. (Yes, they became a real band and were excellent, but their original portrayal as members of a documentary band came first.) Each in his own way, the four boys presented a fun and funny show each week with music videos and light hearted skits. They created this illusion of alternative lifestyle musicians while being fairly wholesome. This very real accomplishment is often apologized for because the fans confused fiction with television. They unfairly blamed the four actors for not being able to write, direct, choreograph, etc. without help. Of course, during the production they formed a separate music group that went on to produce great music and belongs in the hall of fame both in TV and music.
J.R. Wow! This episode really clicked for me. I thoroughly enjoyed listening to Ms. Welch describing her take on The Monkees show. Innovative and entertaining, and like esch episode you do, I always learn a few things on my fave group that I didn't know. Also, The Monkees show was a first for that time period with not having an adult figure guiding them! Peter often mentioned this fact in so many interviews as well. I am getting Smoke Filled Dreams and kudos to you and Andrew for making that happen.
I've been looking forward to this interview. I have Dr. Welch's book and she hits points in her analysis that help make sense of the fast-moving train to Clarksville from '65 - '69. I appreciate her comparison to vaudeville. In her book may have been the first place I saw a comparison between "Monkees in Manhattan" with a Marx Brothers plot.
Rosanne might not know that in Andrew’s book he mentions that the two screenwriters, David Gordon and David Yarnell, claimed in court, so I’m assuming under oath, that their meetings with Screen Gems included Ward Sylvester, Don Kirshner and Bert Schneider in attendance. And that Screen Gems was very interested in “Liverpool, USA” as being a vehicle for one David Jones, who was under contract to the studio. So I don’t blame the writers for thinking this was a little more than parallel development, which I’m aware happens all the time. And therefore they thought they had a case to sue.
@@TheMonkeesPadPODCAST oops sorry! LoL I'll watch my fingers on the key bad better so you don't have to change your name! 😉 Thanks again for all of your hard work!
I think a book could be put together that discusses their show from the standpoint of the search for AUTHENTICITY in culture that has many "rules", blindnesses and unexamined stereotyping prejudices. The Monkees were/are a story, truly, about freeing ourselves from our dug-in takes on things. about evolving (very appropriately here) our views on things for the sake of growth. Culture/people often like to put things in hard and fast categories and put those things on a shelf as "that's the way it is", when, in fact, life and people is/are a PROCESS, one of discovery and change. Keeping open minded, to see things anew is a virtue, I think. One that is overlooked/ignored. In general. There is something very smart and to the point in what Micky (or was it Mike?) summing up the phenomenon, likening it to the story of a piece of art, or creativity/creation taking on a life of its own and becoming real, ie Pinochio doll becoming a real person. Thanks for the video. Very good interview, with good visuals.
The Monkees still matter because they had some of the greatest songwriters in popular music at the time writing for them as well as their own considerable talents as singers, performers and songwriters (especially Michael Nesmith). Combine that with comedic and acting ability and you have something that lasts. They had great writers for the show too. Both the TV show and the music still resonates because as Dr. Rosanne says, "they were a real band and a timeless TV show."
All of the ducks were in a row for a variety type show: The groundwork had been laid with SHINDIG and HULLABALOO, and the industry talk about doing such shows as LAUGH-IN and the SMOTHERS BROTHERS. A more thoughtful comedy show THAT WAS THE WEEK THAT WAS which was oriented to youth audiences around that time would seem to have hlped nudge producers and networks that this WAS a time to try something like a variety show with those guys..even if variety shows, in general, were starting to be considered old fashioned and "square" by then. THE SMOTHERS BROTHERS did wind up reeling in a pretty hip audience, in spite of that, showing that the form HAD potential to evolve into something hip instead of Ed Sullivn'y. I'm just glad that they elected to do HEAD, ie something that was NOT of the moment, but had the potential to give them some real legitimacy over time above and beyond the show.
I'm the only person in the world who LOVES the reunion show "Hey, Hey, It's the Monkees". It's my favorite Monkees 'show' other than "Head". I truly don't get why no one likes it. I like "Justus" too.
It’s so funny how people in the 60’s could be so prejudice against long hair..Especially,since the Monkees hair never seemed that long to me anyway..It’s like in 64, when the Beatles 1st landed in NY and during the press conference they were immediately asked if they were gonna get haircuts,while their hair was already so trimmed and neat
We really don't need any more psuedo-intellectual "analysis" of pop music from so-called "professionals" or self-styled "experts". The music was made to make $$$$. A lot of people enjoyed it and continue to and that's all well and good, but stop trying to make this a bigger deal than it actually was. Enough with grifters trying to make money off of people's nostalgia and yearning for a time that is gone for good.
So you don't think anything Rosanne Welch points out in this conversation has any validity? It was all about money and none of her cultural and creative analysis actually applied?
What a great pleasure to see and hear this interview. Thank you Dr. Rosanne Welch and thank you JoeR for having great guests. Let's keep the Monkees alive!!!
yes, let's! thank you
Joe - Another great interview! I always appreciate how you ask a question and let your guests answer without interrupting. For those of us who enjoy your channel and grew up with The Monkees (as the 4 guys and the TV show), we all appreciate every little nugget of information you've mined from these individuals, some of who are/were legends. Thank you !
very much appreciated, thank you...please promote the show to others
She vwas fantastic! I hope you have her on again!
.
Thank you for this EXCELLENT 'exploration' of Monkees lore, Mr Russo and Dr Welch !! 🙂
.
very much appreciated, thank you...please share the show with others
@@TheMonkeesPadPODCAST
.
Already have !! Thank you again, sir, for doing this GREAT work you do !! Dr. Welch was an INCREDIBLY interesting guest !! 🙂
.
@@sdne1959 I thought so too, very impressive
I can tell you why the Monkees matter, then and now. Because they were fun.
The TV show was about four kids who played musicians in a band on TV. (Yes, they became a real band and were excellent, but their original portrayal as members of a documentary band came first.)
Each in his own way, the four boys presented a fun and funny show each week with music videos and light hearted skits. They created this illusion of alternative lifestyle musicians while being fairly wholesome. This very real accomplishment is often apologized for because the fans confused fiction with television. They unfairly blamed the four actors for not being able to write, direct, choreograph, etc. without help. Of course, during the production they formed a separate music group that went on to produce great music and belongs in the hall of fame both in TV and music.
well said....are you actually Rosanne Welch? LOL
One more great show!!!
Much love to you for your work writing this great book, and for spreading the word on this always fascinating phenomenon!
Back then,we didn't"t have the woke movement,things were more innocent,and laid back. "Shades Of Grey" sums it all up.
J.R. Wow! This episode really clicked for me. I thoroughly enjoyed listening to Ms. Welch describing her take on The Monkees show. Innovative and entertaining, and like esch episode you do, I always learn a few things on my fave group that I didn't know. Also, The Monkees show was a first for that time period with not having an adult figure guiding them! Peter often mentioned this fact in so many interviews as well.
I am getting Smoke Filled Dreams and kudos to you and Andrew for making that happen.
I agree that this episode is very engaging on a level unique to most of the other shows-thank you for your support!
The Monkees were my favorite !
Thanks Joe for this episode!
I've been looking forward to this interview. I have Dr. Welch's book and she hits points in her analysis that help make sense of the fast-moving train to Clarksville from '65 - '69. I appreciate her comparison to vaudeville. In her book may have been the first place I saw a comparison between "Monkees in Manhattan" with a Marx Brothers plot.
not a Monkees fan but this was very interesting
thank you for watching~
At last someone suggesting the Monkees’ show could have become something like ‘’Laugh-In’’ which was also broadcast by NBC.
That's really cool to show students the audition tapes to kids who have no idea who the Monkees are. Interesting to hear Micky was the most popular.
She said Micky was her favorite.
Rosanne might not know that in Andrew’s book he mentions that the two screenwriters, David Gordon and David Yarnell, claimed in court, so I’m assuming under oath, that their meetings with Screen Gems included Ward Sylvester, Don Kirshner and Bert Schneider in attendance. And that Screen Gems was very interested in “Liverpool, USA” as being a vehicle for one David Jones, who was under contract to the studio. So I don’t blame the writers for thinking this was a little more than parallel development, which I’m aware happens all the time. And therefore they thought they had a case to sue.
Great show. Will have to get the book! Thank you JT!
I think you mean JR? lol
@@TheMonkeesPadPODCAST typo....lol
@@brendajones7111 I can always change my name to John Taffer!
@@TheMonkeesPadPODCAST oops sorry! LoL I'll watch my fingers on the key bad better so you don't have to change your name! 😉 Thanks again for all of your hard work!
I think a book could be put together that discusses their show from the standpoint of the search for AUTHENTICITY in culture that has many "rules", blindnesses and unexamined stereotyping prejudices. The Monkees were/are a story, truly, about freeing ourselves from our dug-in takes on things. about evolving (very appropriately here) our views on things for the sake of growth.
Culture/people often like to put things in hard and fast categories and put those things on a shelf as "that's the way it is", when, in fact, life and people is/are a PROCESS, one of discovery and change. Keeping open minded, to see things anew is a virtue, I think. One that is overlooked/ignored. In general.
There is something very smart and to the point in what Micky (or was it Mike?) summing up the phenomenon, likening it to the story of a piece of art, or creativity/creation taking on a life of its own and becoming real, ie Pinochio doll becoming a real person.
Thanks for the video. Very good interview, with good visuals.
The Monkees still matter because they had some of the greatest songwriters in popular music at the time writing for them as well as their own considerable talents as singers, performers and songwriters (especially Michael Nesmith). Combine that with comedic and acting ability and you have something that lasts. They had great writers for the show too. Both the TV show and the music still resonates because as Dr. Rosanne says, "they were a real band and a timeless TV show."
I though it was Schneider whose father was a part of the Columbia Studios ownership/management.
In the fog of our enthusiastic exchange, I misspoke and Rosanne failed to catch it. Luckily we have folks like you to point stuff like this out.
All of the ducks were in a row for a variety type show: The groundwork had been laid with SHINDIG and HULLABALOO, and the industry talk about doing such shows as LAUGH-IN and the SMOTHERS BROTHERS. A more thoughtful comedy show THAT WAS THE WEEK THAT WAS which was oriented to youth audiences around that time would seem to have hlped nudge producers and networks that this WAS a time to try something like a variety show with those guys..even if variety shows, in general, were starting to be considered old fashioned and "square" by then. THE SMOTHERS BROTHERS did wind up reeling in a pretty hip audience, in spite of that, showing that the form HAD potential to evolve into something hip instead of Ed Sullivn'y.
I'm just glad that they elected to do HEAD, ie something that was NOT of the moment, but had the potential to give them some real legitimacy over time above and beyond the show.
I'm the only person in the world who LOVES the reunion show "Hey, Hey, It's the Monkees". It's my favorite Monkees 'show' other than "Head". I truly don't get why no one likes it. I like "Justus" too.
It’s so funny how people in the 60’s could be so prejudice against long hair..Especially,since the Monkees hair never seemed that long to me anyway..It’s like in 64, when the Beatles 1st landed in NY and during the press conference they were immediately asked if they were gonna get haircuts,while their hair was already so trimmed and neat
How could Mike be too old? He's younger than Peter.
We really don't need any more psuedo-intellectual "analysis" of pop music from so-called "professionals" or self-styled "experts". The music was made to make $$$$. A lot of people enjoyed it and continue to and that's all well and good, but stop trying to make this a bigger deal than it actually was. Enough with grifters trying to make money off of people's nostalgia and yearning for a time that is gone for good.
So you don't think anything Rosanne Welch points out in this conversation has any validity? It was all about money and none of her cultural and creative analysis actually applied?
Speak for yourself. It's not "we", it's you.
@@jamesage24 good point, sir
You make some good points but I do believe art and commerce can coexist..Even though The Monkees were defiantly created for commerce