Whilst I can understand this is a generational thing to an extent and fair enough, the writer of the article's point seems to be that unless you are born when someone writes a piece of music you can't really LIKE it you can only APPRECIATE it's influence on the music that you grow up with. That is complete twaddle clearly. That's like saying you can't like Bach unless you are nearly 300 you can only appreciate his influence. The Beatles may well be something of a Holy Cow to many, but that said, to most musicians and punters they still did produce some great pop music. In 100 years time will people be listening to it, who knows, possibly only as part of a history of the times. A lot of music from the 60s up to now will be gone rightly or wrongly. Other musicians we have ignored may assume a greater historical importance than in their own time period, it happens. The Beatles have carved their own little niche in history because their music was hugely popular and accompanied/influenced a cultural shift.
That is a truely poor piece of writing regardless of whether you like the Beatles or not.
John Lennon once said that the music you grow up with is the most important to you. So to him it was rock and roll. To others on here it was the Beatles and 60s music. To me it was 70s punk and reggae but at the same time I was also listening to the 60s, 50s and earlier music that lead to it. Roots and culture took me back to ska and The Harder They Come. Lou Reed took me back to the Velvets, The Jam took me back to a lot of soul music, Punk to the MC5 and Nuggets, Dylan lead me to the Band (thank you, thank you) and via them a lot of country, soul and blues. Radio 1, TOTP and John Peel opened up a lot of other doors as well.
My dads blues 78s got me into a lot of old blues stuff like Robert Johnson which I then kept hearing in the Stones and the Animals and in the most distorted and stolen way in the terrible Led Zepp.
OK, I can hear and like new music but I know that nothing will be like hearing I wanna be me or Teenage Kicks for the first time or seeing the Jam when they were a support band in 76. But that doesn't mean you can't like music or get that emotional kick from hearing it. What does it matter if it is 25, 50 or 100 years old?
As for the Beatles my only problem is the sometimes over praising of them. They made great music and were innovative but others were also pushing boundaries at the same time and the Beatles were standing on the shoulders of giants like Chuck Berry or Elvis.
Not everything they did was good and some of their stuff is frankly embarrassing now. At least good old Ringo had the sense to say that going to see the Mararishi was like Butlins.
Wait a minute! I don't want to be read as AGREEING with that article! I just posted itfor discussion...the guy is a former mid-level college basketball player and music buff who's developed a bit of a following as an author. I'm not weighing in on this debate, as frankly I doubt that anyone who didn't live through the Beatles phenomenon can even pretend to understand how important (without even discussing talented) they were. Each generation thinks that they invented everything and that there was nothing of cultural value before (insert band here!) and previous generations tend to dismiss that which follows as crap that is, at best derivative of (insert band here). To me, these types of debates are just about as valuable as sports "could x have been as good a player now as he/she was in 19__?". Excellence in any field is inescapably partly a product of its time...
BTW Henry, I didn't read your post carefully before posting...it's obvious that you are an open-minded consumer of music (not just from this post, but from many before), but I'm not sure that all are prepared to try new things music-wise to the same extent as you!
Speaking of the Band, the city that I live in (Hamilton, Ontario) had the foresight to knock down a bunch of buildings to build a convention centre and a mall in the city centre (with predictable results), one of which was the bar where Ronnie Hawkins was the house musician, with his new back-up band, the Hawks, including a guy from the Six Nations Reserve a half hour out of town. Needless to say, Robbie Robertson, and as you know, the Hawks became the Band! Unless I'm mistaken, with the exception of Levon Helm (Arkansas), they were all from a stone's throw from here...
Hi Can -addick ..... I was not suggesting you were, your country has had many musicians who have contributed to popular music, starting with Oscar Peterson, Paul Anka. My personnal favourite was Joni Mitchell who I think put writing to a new level and Blue is one of my favourite albums. You also had Leonard Cohen and the great Neil Young at the times of the Beatles. Your first group No 1 as the 'guess who' Young girl, which stayed in our charts for what seemed weeks a bit like Byran Adams did years later. You also had Rush currently placed forth behind The Beatles, The Rolling Stones and Aerosmith for the most consecutive gold and platinum albums by a rock band. Although in this country there popularity was not as great.
I do agree that comparisons are always fraught with difficulty a bit like that of 'apples and pears' as the saying goes in the UK.
No one is saying that the Beatles did not make some poor records, and the Frog song by Macca is hardly something to cherish along with Lennons Live peace in Toronto,particularly Yoko's I will be kind...... singing. '' But then Elvis appeared in enough crap films to fill a library, and largely pissed his 'gospel' talent away to sing /perform for the colonel in Vegas . Even Hendrix performed 'three little bears, although that shows the length that record companies will go to to cash in on stars material. I hate to think what will happen to Michael Jackson in years to come, who of course valued the Beatles so much he bought the back catalogue which Macca tried to buy back!
As I stated the Beatles were not my favourite band, they were too 'pop' for me, but as others have stated they not only changed music, but the culture of the UK which no other music act has done. Without wishing to be patronising I guess you had to be there to remember it, some of us almost did!
Oh, I'd go so far as to say that they affected the culture of the western world as much if not more than any band ever has. And you're right...I'm always amazed at the music that comes out of the snowy north...all that you cited Ken (not all of which is my cup of tea, but is quality nonetheless) and continuing to date (Arcade Fire, etc.). I can't pretend to relate to what it was like in the early Beatles days, but I've certainly never seen even U2 get the airport swarms that the Beatles did in New York...
Comments
That is complete twaddle clearly. That's like saying you can't like Bach unless you are nearly 300 you can only appreciate his influence.
The Beatles may well be something of a Holy Cow to many, but that said, to most musicians and punters they still did produce some great pop music.
In 100 years time will people be listening to it, who knows, possibly only as part of a history of the times. A lot of music from the 60s up to now will be gone rightly or wrongly. Other musicians we have ignored may assume a greater historical importance than in their own time period, it happens.
The Beatles have carved their own little niche in history because their music was hugely popular and accompanied/influenced a cultural shift.
That is a truely poor piece of writing regardless of whether you like the Beatles or not.
John Lennon once said that the music you grow up with is the most important to you. So to him it was rock and roll. To others on here it was the Beatles and 60s music. To me it was 70s punk and reggae but at the same time I was also listening to the 60s, 50s and earlier music that lead to it. Roots and culture took me back to ska and The Harder They Come. Lou Reed took me back to the Velvets, The Jam took me back to a lot of soul music, Punk to the MC5 and Nuggets, Dylan lead me to the Band (thank you, thank you) and via them a lot of country, soul and blues. Radio 1, TOTP and John Peel opened up a lot of other doors as well.
My dads blues 78s got me into a lot of old blues stuff like Robert Johnson which I then kept hearing in the Stones and the Animals and in the most distorted and stolen way in the terrible Led Zepp.
OK, I can hear and like new music but I know that nothing will be like hearing I wanna be me or Teenage Kicks for the first time or seeing the Jam when they were a support band in 76. But that doesn't mean you can't like music or get that emotional kick from hearing it. What does it matter if it is 25, 50 or 100 years old?
As for the Beatles my only problem is the sometimes over praising of them. They made great music and were innovative but others were also pushing boundaries at the same time and the Beatles were standing on the shoulders of giants like Chuck Berry or Elvis.
Not everything they did was good and some of their stuff is frankly embarrassing now. At least good old Ringo had the sense to say that going to see the Mararishi was like Butlins.
Speaking of the Band, the city that I live in (Hamilton, Ontario) had the foresight to knock down a bunch of buildings to build a convention centre and a mall in the city centre (with predictable results), one of which was the bar where Ronnie Hawkins was the house musician, with his new back-up band, the Hawks, including a guy from the Six Nations Reserve a half hour out of town. Needless to say, Robbie Robertson, and as you know, the Hawks became the Band! Unless I'm mistaken, with the exception of Levon Helm (Arkansas), they were all from a stone's throw from here...
I do agree that comparisons are always fraught with difficulty a bit like that of 'apples and pears' as the saying goes in the UK.
No one is saying that the Beatles did not make some poor records, and the Frog song by Macca is hardly something to cherish along with Lennons Live peace in Toronto,particularly Yoko's I will be kind...... singing.
''
But then Elvis appeared in enough crap films to fill a library, and largely pissed his 'gospel' talent away to sing /perform for the colonel in Vegas . Even Hendrix performed 'three little bears, although that shows the length that record companies will go to to cash in on stars material. I hate to think what will happen to Michael Jackson in years to come, who of course valued the Beatles so much he bought the back catalogue which Macca tried to buy back!
As I stated the Beatles were not my favourite band, they were too 'pop' for me, but as others have stated they not only changed music, but the culture of the UK which no other music act has done. Without wishing to be patronising I guess you had to be there to remember it, some of us almost did!