Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Beatles: icon or con?
Sidney Morning Herald ^ | 12/22/04 | Greg Hassall and Charles Purcell

Posted on 12/22/2004 11:56:06 AM PST by qam1

Greg Hassall and Charles Purcell do battle over the fab four.

FOR

OK, Ob-la-di Ob-la-da is the most annoying song ever written. And you won't find Revolution No 9 on too many iPods. But how many bands' dud tracks can you count on one hand? The Beatles deserve their place in the pop pantheon. They revolutionised the way pop music was written, recorded and talked about. They were funny, charismatic, hungry to learn and unafraid of controversy. They matured spectacularly over seven tumultuous years, then quit on a high note with the peerless Abbey Road.

They were a genuine band, in that the whole was greater than the sum of its parts. The three writers spurred each other on and checked each other's excesses (McCartney's sentimentality, Lennon's bile and Harrison's cod mysticism). In one throwaway B-side, Rain, they created the template for psychedelic Britpop, a genre lesser bands spend an entire career mining. Their refusal to write the same song twice resulted in a catalogue of breathtaking diversity, while producer George Martin gave the recordings a unique, uncluttered sound that refuses to date. And, as the age of the drum solo dawned, Ringo kept it real, underpinning the Beatles' sound with undemonstrative precision.

Greg Hassall

AGAINST

Pretty much everyone in the '60s must have been on drugs - that's the only reason I can imagine why the Beatles were so popular. They had about three decent songs: Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds, Eleanor Rigby - and that other one, the one that doesn't suck. It's a riddle greater than the pyramids as to why a group of English fops with ridiculous hairstyles could make entire crowds of grown adults faint in awe. John Lennon? A prancing popinjay. Paul McCartney? A ponce. George Harrison? Vanity in the shape of a man. Ringo Starr?

A cool dude - the only one.

OK, so the Beatles recorded on top of a building. Big deal. OK, so they hung out with the Maharishi. Is that supposed to give their dire tunes spiritual worth?

"But they were a major influence in the history of rock'n'roll," some might bleat. Sure they were - but does that mean the baby boomers have to force their boring Beatlemania down our craws year after year, decade after decade?

I'm glad Yoko Ono helped split them up. She's the true heroine of this story. Too bad she's also a lousy artist.

And Wings. Don't get me started on McCartney's sad side project. That's another story.

- Charles Purcell


TOPICS: Music/Entertainment
KEYWORDS: 60s; babyboomers; beatlemania; beatles; christmastimeishere; genx; rock; rockandroll; rockmusic; the60s; thebeatles; thesixties
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 341-358 next last
To: qam1

I'm curious as to what sort of crappy music all these oh-so-contrarian "The Beatles sucked" posters listen to.


21 posted on 12/22/2004 12:05:37 PM PST by Junior_G
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: qam1

The writer must think RAP is the best thing that ever happened to the music industry.


22 posted on 12/22/2004 12:05:52 PM PST by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet

A "Beatles = Poo" Ping.


23 posted on 12/22/2004 12:05:57 PM PST by Chad Fairbanks ("Just because you were born stupid doesn't give you any right to be stupid!" - Paul Watson to Makahs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cogadh na Sith

Me too - barely! I have never understood the absolute frenzied obsession the Beatles engendered.


24 posted on 12/22/2004 12:06:09 PM PST by Xenalyte (Surf's up, space ponies! I'm making gravy without the lumps!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: qam1

Anyone who thinks the Beatles (including the 5th Beatle genius George Martin) weren't great and deserving of their fame is soft. End of story.

Not every song they ever did was great certainly, but as a whole their original song catalog is pure brilliance.

One Puckish thing I always wanted to do in my bar days though, was walk into a bar with a juke box that had the whole beatles White album on it, was pop a $5.00 bill in and play Revolution #9 ten times, and then walk out before it came on.


25 posted on 12/22/2004 12:06:09 PM PST by Maceman (Too nuanced for a bumper sticker)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: qam1

I think it's right on both counts. The Beatles mass produced the cheesy pop love song, that certainly makes them an icon of the industry as they did alter completely, but most of their songs are boring pap. They didn't start making listenable songs until they got into drugs and started doing wierd stuff, even then a lot of it is pap but it's at least moderately interesting pap.


26 posted on 12/22/2004 12:06:26 PM PST by discostu (mime is money)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: qam1

I object! "Wings Greatest" was one of my favorites as a teenager.

The McCartney I and II albums weren't half bad either. after that, well...


27 posted on 12/22/2004 12:06:37 PM PST by sinanju
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KJacob
eh this is crap. It's an attempt to defame the beatles as well as all the other 60's-mid 80's bands that actually wrote, sung, and performed their own music. Why you ask? Because by defaming the pioneers and revolutionaries of rock and roll you they can say: "see music today isn't really crap, it was bad then, but it's evolved into something better now" which of course is horse crap. the music industry today is nothing more then Hollywood on the radio. Its a feeble attempt to rewrite history in an impotent attempt to make the present better then it is. This of course we see happening all over the US today. Pilgrims weren't Christians ect ect ect...
Personally I have no idea who this "Author" is but if i had to guess I'd say either a College sophomore at some liberal arts school struggling through 5-6 years of "thoughts and ideas 101" or maybe a high school junior who's pissed cause her father won't let her listen to her Britney spears albums in the car.


"But they were a major influence in the history of rock'n'roll," some might bleat. Sure they were - but does that mean the baby boomers have to force their boring Beatlemania down our craws year after year, decade after decade?
what a$$ stupid thing to say. I've never heard anything like this before. This is equal to someone saying "i wish the Jews would stop bitching about that hole Holocaust thing, yeah it sucked and all but comon it was 60 years ago man"

Did i overact cause they made fun of the Beatles...probably ;) but my point still stands.
28 posted on 12/22/2004 12:06:53 PM PST by tfecw (dolphins are the spawn of evil)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: qam1

Anyone who has the gall to claim the Beatles sucked knows effin' zip about music.


29 posted on 12/22/2004 12:07:02 PM PST by Hemingway's Ghost (Spirit of '75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: qam1
CON
30 posted on 12/22/2004 12:07:06 PM PST by BenLurkin (Big government is still a big problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fierce Allegiance
I really enjoy listening to the classic rock stations. Kiss, AC/DC, Styx, Nuge, etc. Until they make the most egregious error possible, and that is playing anything by Led Zepplin. Fastest reaction time to the channel switch ever.
31 posted on 12/22/2004 12:07:09 PM PST by cspackler (There are 10 kinds of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: qam1
"While my Guitar Gently Weeped"

"Julia"

"Day in the Life"

"Norwegian Wood"

"Here Comes the Sun"

"Penny Lane"

"For No One"

Simple beautiful music, lyrically complex and many new recording techniques invented and used for the first time. If you can't enjoy their music it's only because you can't understand where Rock was and where they took it. To give you a hint, "Sugar Shack" was a hit on the charts shortly before The Beatles arrived.

32 posted on 12/22/2004 12:07:24 PM PST by muir_redwoods
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Yeah, but he shacked up with the unbelievably ugly Chrissy Hynde. UGH.


33 posted on 12/22/2004 12:07:28 PM PST by Xenalyte (Surf's up, space ponies! I'm making gravy without the lumps!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MisterRepublican
The Beatles, like most of what came of that generation, sucked are you serious? the baby boomers?
34 posted on 12/22/2004 12:07:50 PM PST by SF Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: qam1

The Beatles wer great. No comparison to the trash put out today. They were revolutionary in many ways....using orchestra music, mixing, on and on. Only a person with little knowledge of the evolution of music would not recognize their contributions. As far as songs..Yesterday, My Life, side 2 of Abbey Road, ER, etc. Pick up the CD that documents how these songs were put together. No one did these things before them.


35 posted on 12/22/2004 12:08:08 PM PST by arkfreepdom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase

The same can be said for AIDS, but that doesn't make it good.


36 posted on 12/22/2004 12:08:18 PM PST by Fierce Allegiance (Stay safe in the "sandbox" Greg!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: qam1

The Beatles were timeless. 100 years from now their music will still be listened to and discussed/studied, as will the whole "Beatlemania" era.

Sure, someone else would have come along eventually, but at the time they changed music completely. Music was stagnating, with artists like Pat Boone being at the top of the charts. The Beatles gave popular music a swift kick in the pants and started the ball rolling.

I can understand how some people (as is evidenced in this thread) don't like them, but to ignore their influence on popular music and culture is folly.

Personally, I love their music and always will.


37 posted on 12/22/2004 12:09:01 PM PST by TruBluKentuckian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost

"Anyone who has the gall to claim the Beatles sucked knows effin' zip about music."

Bears repeating.

They might as well wear signs around their necks declaring their stupidity.


38 posted on 12/22/2004 12:09:06 PM PST by Rebelbase (Who is General Chat?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: MisterRepublican
The Beatles, like most of what came of that generation, sucked.

My sentiments exactly. F*** the Beatles.

And for the guy who asked what we listen to....I enjoy classical music, jazz, older country & western, late 70s - early 80s rock.

39 posted on 12/22/2004 12:09:24 PM PST by RonPaulLives
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: qam1
People...music is the dumbest thing to argue about. What you don't like, someone else loves...It is as diverse as humanity...the whole debate just gets people angry. If you fell for this, your just spoiling for a fight! The Beatles, Stones, Hendrix, Cream, classical, jazz, big band...something for everyone.
40 posted on 12/22/2004 12:09:45 PM PST by Edgerunner (Don't pay attention to me, ..I haven't been here long enough to have any credibility...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 341-358 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson