Legendary Canadian rock band The Guess Who are finally in the pages of Rolling Stone again. While the band went through several lineup changes in the 1960s and 70s, The Guess Who is most well-known for the songs they recorded while Burton Cummings was lead singer. From “American Woman” and “These Eyes” to “No Time” and “Share the Land”, with Cummings behind the mic, the band became the first Canadian rock band to find significant success in the United States, producing 3 gold albums and 13 Top 40 hits on the Billboard charts. Randy Bachman, too, was a major contributor to the band’s success as guitarist and songwriter, before leaving the group in 1970 and eventually forming Bachman Turner Overdrive. The Guess Who carried on until 1975 when Cummings left the band to start a solo career which produced hits such as “I’m Scared”, “You Saved My Soul”, and most notably “Stand Tall”.
Thus the story of The Guess Who ended in 1975. Or so one might think. However, several years after the breakup, former bassist Jim Kale discovered the band’s name had never been trademarked … and proceeded to trademark the name for himself. Since then, a band calling itself The Guess Who has regularly performed on the classic rock nostalgia circuit, primarily in the United States where audiences might not notice the lineup changes. Jim Kale himself has not performed with the band for some time and drummer Gary Peterson is the only member left from the “American Woman”-era lineup. Sometimes, when Peterson is indisposed, the band even performs without any classic-era members at all. This is why Cummings and Bachman, I think correctly, refer to the current Guess Who as a “cover band.”
And this is why the band is back in the pages of Rolling Stone. Recently, Burton Cummings and Randy Bachman initiated a lawsuit against Kale/Peterson. They are not challenging the use of the name The Guess Who, which is legally owned by Kale and Peterson, but instead accuse the group of misleading the public. In other words, false advertising. Just this week, Cummings took a further step by cancelling his performance license agreements, thus giving him control over where and by whom the songs he’s written can be performed. This step, as far as I know, is unprecedented in rock history and demonstrates just how passionate Cummings is about this issue. It isn’t about money (he stands to lose money by revoking the performance license), but about preserving the art and integrity of the music.
My admittedly unscientific perusal of comments on social media suggest that many music fans are supporting Cummings on this matter, but there are a few notable exceptions, such as music journalist Dean Baldwin or Winnipeg-based music historian John Einarson, who have come to the defence of the current Guess Who. I was not too familiar with Baldwin until recently, but I have great respect for Einarson and have even taken his Winnipeg rock history tour. I also highly recommend getting a copy of his books, such as the excellent Heart of Gold: The History of Winnipeg Music. However, on this matter, I must say I disagree. Obviously I’m not a lawyer, so I won’t comment on the lawsuit. My comments here are as a writer (who has had my own issues in the past with people misusing my writing without permission) and, more importantly, as a music fan.
While I do enjoy many current artists, even during my teen years of the 1990s, I was drawn to the sounds of the 1960s and 70s. If you exclude the “church rock” concerts I was compelled to attend as a pastor’s son in the 1990s, one of the first real concerts I attended was a version of classic rock act CCR called Creedence Clearwater Revisited. Not Revival, mind you, Revisited. This was a version of the band without lead singer and primary songwriter John Fogerty. It did have the original bassist and drummer, but for all intents and purposes, it was a cover band. Without John Fogerty it was hardly an authentic experience and since that time I’ve avoided attending these types of concerts.
While no one expects a classic rock act to have a fully intact lineup 50 or 60 years later, in general I think audiences have a right to expect that the lineup on stage has a significant connection to the creative force of the band in their prime. This varies by situation, but I didn’t feel “ripped off” when I saw the Rolling Stones with the lineup of Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, Ronnie Wood, and Charlie Watts. Or when I saw The Zombies with Rod Argent and Colin Blunstone or The Who with only Roger Daltrey and Pete Townshend. Unlike in the aforementioned CCR situation, these lineups still have enough contribution from the creative force behind the original groups that I didn’t feel like I was being deceived or that I wasn’t seeing the “real band.”
However, the current Guess Who lineup is so far removed from the band who wrote and performed the hits, that it really stretches the boundaries of artistic integrity. I’m not denying that they have the legal right to use that name. Nor am I denying that there are countless other bands out there with less-than-ideal lineups. Yes, there are classic rock acts with similar lineup issues, but the current Guess Who is among the most egregious with only drummer Gary Peterson (sometimes) performing.
And this is no slag on drummers, in general, or on the skills of drummer Gary Peterson, in particular. Drummers are important, no doubt. However, I imagine there would be quite the uproar if Ringo started performing as The Beatles. And this Guess Who situation is worse, because unlike Peterson, Ringo Starr is an iconic musician with a distinctive style, who sang lead vocals on several of the Beatles most famous songs.
One can criticize Burton Cummings, as some have, by questioning his motivations or saying he should “get over it.” Some have questioned his legal tactics and strategies. But, to me, those are not the important questions. Even if, in some strange alternate universe, Bachman and Cummings gave their blessing for the current use of the name, even then I still would find it problematic.
My point simply is that this current lineup should not be using The Guess Who name. Period. Never mind their legal right to do so. Never mind what you think of Cummings’s attitude or tactics. The band needs to stand on its own merit. If they have the talent, if their new music is truly any good, then surely they can draw an audience under their own name. Just as Burton Cummings is standing tall in defence of his music, the new band, too, should stand tall rather than hiding behind a name they haven’t earned. Strike out on your own. Find an audience that enjoys your music. Stand tall.
To me, this version of the band will never be “The Guess Who” … even if a piece of paper says they are.
(photo credit: Kenneth Harasym/CC)