There's an interesting thing about that 1976 version of the Rolling Stone Illustrated History of Rock and Roll. It includes an essay on Neil Young, written by Dave Marsh, that is not too laudatory and highly critical of Young's output at times. Unlike most (maybe all, I'm not sure) of the essays in that edition, Marsh's essay has been dropped from updated versions for a more positive Young piece from another writer. I don't agree with Marsh's assessment of Young, but it is worth a read. Also note the year: 1976, before Young's ascension to "60's vets who still matter" status with Rust Never Sleeps, et.al. You definitely get a timely perspective on Young not beholden to critical deification. (Though, as I said, I don't agree much with Marsh's conclusions).
― James, Wednesday, 1 February 2006 14:47 (eighteen years ago) link