You sir are an irredeemable putz, squared. I don’t know your age, but I’m reasonably sure you did not experience these songs contemporaneously. The time period, the songs that were popular prior to the Beatles coming out and the songs that followed had to be experienced as they unfolded to understand their astonishing success. They wrote the songs and played the instruments, something that didn’t happen regularly then. In my time their scope, record sales and influence were unmatched. You don’t have to like them, but you have to give them their due.
I can easily imagine the author replying something to the effect of "I'm sure the songs were considered perfectly listenable in the 60s, but why couldn't they stay there? Why do we have to keep digging them back up?"
Telemann was considered one of the greatest composers of all time in his day, and I respect that--but I don't want to hear his music constantly. Give me some Mozart, Scott Joplin, or Data Romance. They wrote the songs and played the instruments too.
I guess you either get it or you don’t with the Beatles. In some ways looking at individual songs will underestimate their achievement. The variety and freshness of their work is best appreciated in total. Also, there probably needs to be some appreciation of the historical context. Compared to what was passing as popular music at the time, the Beatles’ music was little short of revolutionary. At some level, these things are generational. Although many young people today, including my 15 year old granddaughter, have discovered Beatles’ music for themselves and love much of it. Anyway, everyone is entitled to their opinion (however misguided or mistaken).
Who could resist reading this? I grew up with the Beatles. One of those Boomers who remember seeing them on Ed Sullivan. At 13 when someone played me the just-released "Eleanor Rigby" it was the most profound thing I'd ever heard. But there's no reason these songs or this group should be treated with sanctimony. I rarely listen to Beatles now because I listened them constantly in the 60s, had every lyric to almost every song memorized. Too much. Once in a while I hear a "standard" performed by a jazz group (Jaco Pastorius, Herbie Hancock, Marc Copland) and I savor the melody and ancient memories. You have no appreciation - and that made me chuckle throughout.
Well done. The Beatles were a total fraud from start to finish. One of those mocking jokes played on the public by the advertising industry.
You can just imagine the likes of Edward Bernays and Theo Adorno hanging out at the Tavistock Canteen having a good laugh over plotting how to come up with that trite crap and persuade the gullible rubes that they were listening to some kind of authentic home grown geniuses. And it work.
I thought this was hilarious, and I also thought: this writer clearly doesn’t like happiness. Judging by your comparisons, the very idea of happiness is suspicious to you.
The reason so much of the Beatles sounds cliche is because it is—now. At the time, those cliches were all innovations, but now they’ve been copied so often by so many bands that they seem like the least creative solution to the musical problems they set out to solve.
FJ Haydn suffers from the same problem: his music is often seen as bland, too plain, especially compared to Mozart or Beethoven. But he basically invented the symphony, the string quartet, and the whole classical style, which those composers took and expanded.
Modern music owes much to the Beatles, including black metal.
The “B side” of “Let It Be” was “You Know My Name (Look Up the Number)”. Absolutely awful.
I’ve always felt the Beatles were overrated. It was their brand (the hair, the suits, their cheeky disposition) that initially broke them out, not their song writing. That said, they were arguably the hardest working band in the 60’s. It’s remarkable that they stayed together as long as they did.
This gets even worse for musicians, especially drummers. Ringo Star can just barely adequately play the Beatles songs, yet there are a million boomer hagiographies about how he is one of the greatest ever. With his current All Star Band, he only plays on the Beatles covers, and hires an actual drummer (who was born after the Beatles broke up) to play all the other songs. Not in a million years could he play even the easiest non-Beatles song on their set list. Playing the drums is the only job he's ever had in his adult life and he's perpetually sounds like someone who has had their drumset for less than a year and no lessons. He famously cant play a roll or change/tune his own drum heads.
" I guess because if Jesus existed and came down to earth he would probably listen to cheeky pop-dad bullshit like the Beatles."
My friend went to a very religious camp and the only music they were allowed to listen to was the Beatles (Be-At-Lee's) and The Violent Femmes. At least the Violent Femmes can jam. And I loathe when people say, "but the Beatles invented so many new recording techniques." Of course they did, they had endless budget to futz around in the studio. Praise be Ninjastyle12!
They had to earn that endless budget. The first album was famously recorded in one day. Not a song, the whole album is basically a live performance to 2-track tape.
Blake, I don't know you personally but I absolutely love your mind and writing. :)
Perhaps it's generational but I did love Abbey Road and the Beatles in general (though that video you posted to Here Comes the Sun is bloody awful). Not really their early pop stuff, could take it or leave it. That said, I like a lot of different music and bands from different eras.
This piece is hilarious! As the old folks would say, "Let your freak flag fly!" ;D
You sir are an irredeemable putz, squared. I don’t know your age, but I’m reasonably sure you did not experience these songs contemporaneously. The time period, the songs that were popular prior to the Beatles coming out and the songs that followed had to be experienced as they unfolded to understand their astonishing success. They wrote the songs and played the instruments, something that didn’t happen regularly then. In my time their scope, record sales and influence were unmatched. You don’t have to like them, but you have to give them their due.
I can easily imagine the author replying something to the effect of "I'm sure the songs were considered perfectly listenable in the 60s, but why couldn't they stay there? Why do we have to keep digging them back up?"
Telemann was considered one of the greatest composers of all time in his day, and I respect that--but I don't want to hear his music constantly. Give me some Mozart, Scott Joplin, or Data Romance. They wrote the songs and played the instruments too.
Shaking your fist at a cloud
No non-instrumental song ever should be more than seven minutes long unless it is black metal
Spot on
I guess you either get it or you don’t with the Beatles. In some ways looking at individual songs will underestimate their achievement. The variety and freshness of their work is best appreciated in total. Also, there probably needs to be some appreciation of the historical context. Compared to what was passing as popular music at the time, the Beatles’ music was little short of revolutionary. At some level, these things are generational. Although many young people today, including my 15 year old granddaughter, have discovered Beatles’ music for themselves and love much of it. Anyway, everyone is entitled to their opinion (however misguided or mistaken).
revolutionary for things that suck
I feel like you hate the sun as much as you hate The Beatles.
"Yellow Submarine" is the dumbest song that I love unreservedly.
the sun is too hot!
Oh, I hate the sun, too. I'm right there with you.
Also, Blake--I don't think you are an irredeemable putz, squared or otherwise. I think you are perfectly redeemable.
You said so much about "The Fool On The Hill" with few words; absolutely brutal
EDIT: Originally said "The Foot On The Hill", which might be a better title for the song
I might be into this song if it were actually called “The Foot on the Hill.” Alas, we’re struck with some twee bullshit instead…
Oops - my dumbass moment of the day (but yeah, agree with you)
No, you improved it enormously! “The Foot on the Hill” is metal as fuck
Another very bad song. That fool needs to put a Revolver to his head 😆
Did you know Björk covered The Fool on the Hill in 1977 when she was 12?? Álfur Út Úr Hól. :D
Absolute fucking bollox
Who could resist reading this? I grew up with the Beatles. One of those Boomers who remember seeing them on Ed Sullivan. At 13 when someone played me the just-released "Eleanor Rigby" it was the most profound thing I'd ever heard. But there's no reason these songs or this group should be treated with sanctimony. I rarely listen to Beatles now because I listened them constantly in the 60s, had every lyric to almost every song memorized. Too much. Once in a while I hear a "standard" performed by a jazz group (Jaco Pastorius, Herbie Hancock, Marc Copland) and I savor the melody and ancient memories. You have no appreciation - and that made me chuckle throughout.
i like chuckles
Well done. The Beatles were a total fraud from start to finish. One of those mocking jokes played on the public by the advertising industry.
You can just imagine the likes of Edward Bernays and Theo Adorno hanging out at the Tavistock Canteen having a good laugh over plotting how to come up with that trite crap and persuade the gullible rubes that they were listening to some kind of authentic home grown geniuses. And it work.
Ohblahdih, ohblahdah ohbloodybuggeroff!
haha nice i like that canteen scene
Wow the public is so stupid it doesn't understand a joke. Or can't tell what's good and what's bad. Or both. Who knew? Only you.
I thought this was hilarious, and I also thought: this writer clearly doesn’t like happiness. Judging by your comparisons, the very idea of happiness is suspicious to you.
The reason so much of the Beatles sounds cliche is because it is—now. At the time, those cliches were all innovations, but now they’ve been copied so often by so many bands that they seem like the least creative solution to the musical problems they set out to solve.
FJ Haydn suffers from the same problem: his music is often seen as bland, too plain, especially compared to Mozart or Beethoven. But he basically invented the symphony, the string quartet, and the whole classical style, which those composers took and expanded.
Modern music owes much to the Beatles, including black metal.
yes they changed the world by making dogshit for dogs and then smoking marijuana a lot
Hah, I remember this one. It's a classic. Glad to see the unedited version.
The “B side” of “Let It Be” was “You Know My Name (Look Up the Number)”. Absolutely awful.
I’ve always felt the Beatles were overrated. It was their brand (the hair, the suits, their cheeky disposition) that initially broke them out, not their song writing. That said, they were arguably the hardest working band in the 60’s. It’s remarkable that they stayed together as long as they did.
You Know My Name is surprisingly sophisticated for a silly novelty song. Hey Bulldog is godawful.
Yellow submarine should sink to the bottom of the ocean 😆
This gets even worse for musicians, especially drummers. Ringo Star can just barely adequately play the Beatles songs, yet there are a million boomer hagiographies about how he is one of the greatest ever. With his current All Star Band, he only plays on the Beatles covers, and hires an actual drummer (who was born after the Beatles broke up) to play all the other songs. Not in a million years could he play even the easiest non-Beatles song on their set list. Playing the drums is the only job he's ever had in his adult life and he's perpetually sounds like someone who has had their drumset for less than a year and no lessons. He famously cant play a roll or change/tune his own drum heads.
To be fair, John Lennon did once say that Ringo ‘wasn’t even the best drummer in The Beatles’.
" I guess because if Jesus existed and came down to earth he would probably listen to cheeky pop-dad bullshit like the Beatles."
My friend went to a very religious camp and the only music they were allowed to listen to was the Beatles (Be-At-Lee's) and The Violent Femmes. At least the Violent Femmes can jam. And I loathe when people say, "but the Beatles invented so many new recording techniques." Of course they did, they had endless budget to futz around in the studio. Praise be Ninjastyle12!
And of course, most of the invention wasn't them, it was their producer.
They had to earn that endless budget. The first album was famously recorded in one day. Not a song, the whole album is basically a live performance to 2-track tape.
I love this so much! Thank you for doing this work!
Blake, I don't know you personally but I absolutely love your mind and writing. :)
Perhaps it's generational but I did love Abbey Road and the Beatles in general (though that video you posted to Here Comes the Sun is bloody awful). Not really their early pop stuff, could take it or leave it. That said, I like a lot of different music and bands from different eras.
This piece is hilarious! As the old folks would say, "Let your freak flag fly!" ;D
hahah ty TR - hear hear!