Berry Chuck: Rock’s Genius or Shared Creation Story?

In the wake of Chuck Berry’s death, the accolades poured in, cementing his title as the “Father of Rock and Roll,” the music’s definitive lodestone and mastermind. Commentators celebrated his songs not just for their wit, influence, and danceability, but often under the assumption they were the singular work of Berry Chuck Berry himself. While some reports briefly mentioned a lawsuit by Berry’s longtime piano player, Johnnie Johnson, who claimed co-authorship but was dismissed for filing too late, the story usually ended there. This piece delves deeper, exploring whether there’s more to the narrative than a procedural dismissal, examining the search for truth within the legend surrounding rock and roll’s origins, prompted by accessing the previously unstudied case file of Johnson v. Berry. The investigation, initially for exploring copyright authorship, now gains significance in reflecting on Chuck Berry’s complex legacy.

The Deposition: A Moment of Truth

On August 21, 2002, inside a plain St. Louis law firm conference room, Chuck Berry faced a question challenging his monumental legacy and the very history of rock and roll. Two years earlier, Johnnie Johnson had initiated legal action against Berry. Johnson’s lawsuit contended that he had co-created, via his piano work, a vast number of Berry’s iconic hits from the 1950s and ’60s – including classics like “Roll Over Beethoven,” “Back in the U.S.A.,” and “Nadine.” These were songs that ignited a global musical and cultural transformation.

Johnnie Johnson playing piano, photographed in 1997

Johnson, having received neither credit nor any share of the substantial royalties these songs generated, sought judicial intervention nearly half a century later to amend the historical record. After initial legal skirmishes, the deposition on that August day provided Johnson’s attorney the opportunity to directly question Chuck Berry, under oath, about the core issue:

“Do you believe as you sit here today, that Johnnie Johnson had any, played any part in creating the songs that we’ve said he did?”

Berry Chuck’s Ambiguous Answer

A simple “No” would have been the expected, and legally advantageous, reply for Berry. Instead, his answer was strikingly equivocal:

“In a roundabout sense, I suppose he did. I don’t know, but I suppose he did; but in a legal sense, no, because I consider myself having written any songs that is out now with Chuck Berry on it, because that’s the way it went, I composed it and I did it.”

This statement – acknowledging Johnson’s contribution “in a roundabout sense” while denying it “in a legal sense” – could have been powerful evidence before a jury. One can imagine the closing argument: “Mr. Berry admits Johnnie Johnson helped create these songs… just not legally. But you, ladies and gentlemen, decide the law’s application, not Mr. Berry.”

However, a jury never got the chance. On October 21, 2002, mere weeks before the scheduled trial, the judge dismissed Johnson’s case. The ruling cited the statute of limitations: Johnson had waited too long to sue. Legally, the case was closed. But did it settle the question of creation?

Voices from the Record: Berry and Johnson on Collaboration

During their sworn depositions – Berry’s in August 2002 and Johnson’s two months prior – both men spoke more candidly about their role in rock and roll’s genesis than ever before or since. Tellingly, they were most articulate when describing their collaborative process.

Johnson explained their synergy:

“[T]hat’s the way our teamwork came in together, whoever come up with the idea, it was tried by the both, he would try it, my piano part, which mostly I would do, I would try his guitar part, and together we collaborated on it…and [would] find out which part worked the best, and that’s the one that would be used.”

Berry described their musical understanding:

“[T]here was a harmonious understanding after a few recordings, that when I stop singing, Johnnie played this riff, or that riff, or that riff, and there are certain ones that I can name…he played it and played the da-da-da-da riff, I could implicate the rhythm and he would remember the thing that I liked so much, and the same thing would happen, turned around, when I would play the riff, that I’d ask him to play a certain thing, seemed like to me, he would just fall in….”

Undated photo of Johnnie Johnson and Chuck Berry side-by-side

Both men even demonstrated their contributions on their instruments during the depositions. While neither yielded on their legal stance regarding co-authorship – a complex distinction – their openness about the creative process itself, fueled by their musical interplay, offers invaluable insight.

Beyond the Myth of the Lone Genius

Popular perception often paints Berry as the solitary genius, the self-sufficient father of rock and roll crafting masterpieces alone. Conversely, some argue Johnson was the overlooked composer whose music gave life to Berry’s lyrics. Yet, reading their own sworn testimony suggests a more nuanced reality: a powerful collaboration, an unspoken musical bond, was central to the birth of these revolutionary songs.

Society often elevates narratives of individual genius, finding collaboration – whether with past influences or present partners – less compelling. But this collaborative spirit is frequently the engine behind great creative works. From the songcraft of Leiber and Stoller and Holland-Dozier-Holland to the screenplay of “Casablanca” and the literature of Raymond Carver, shared creativity has yielded many cultural treasures, often unacknowledged. Perhaps even a singular talent like Chuck Berry found a partner in Johnnie Johnson who helped him reach creative heights unattainable alone.

Acknowledging this possibility, illuminated by their own words in the Johnson v. Berry case file, doesn’t diminish Chuck Berry’s legacy; rather, it honors it more completely by seeking the truth he himself claimed to value. Near the conclusion of the documentary “Hail! Hail! Rock ‘n’ Roll,” Berry was asked how he wished to be remembered. His reply: “Whatever it be, I just hope it’s real and it’s a fact, which will be the truth. That’s it. I hope they’ll just speak the truth be it pro, con, bad, good.” Amen to that pursuit of truth.