Interesting Take on the Beatles
- Flex
- Mechano-Man of the Future
- Posts: 35979
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
- Location: The Information Superhighway!
Interesting Take on the Beatles
I don't particularly agree with this article's opinions, although I see an element of truth:
http://www.scaruffi.com/vol1/beatles.html
Thought some folks here might find it, uh, interesting at least.
http://www.scaruffi.com/vol1/beatles.html
Thought some folks here might find it, uh, interesting at least.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead
Pex Lives!
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead
Pex Lives!
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116680
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: Interesting Take on the Beatles
What a load of crap. That the writer relies on such dubious foundations as "real music" or "real musicians" reveals the inherent snobbery. Likewise the assertion that contemporary musicians didn't respect the Beatles as musicians. Okay, name them. Who were all these "real musicians" who thought the Beatles had no talent? Additionally, there's an implicit dismissal of the general public, that anything popular with large groups of people is immediately questionable.
"I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back in Whittier, they're not much bigger than two meters.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- Flex
- Mechano-Man of the Future
- Posts: 35979
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
- Location: The Information Superhighway!
Re: Interesting Take on the Beatles
Most of it is crap, I think the point that is more or less correct is that the Beatles weren't really forerunners in Rock n Roll innovation (from a structural standpoint). That they were a more conservative group musically than many like to admit rings true with me. Regardless, it's a weird thing to be critical of with the group, since those tendencies were what made it possible for most people to become aware of experimentation in rock n roll (cuz most people sure as shit weren't listening to early Pink Floyd and the like).Dr. Medulla wrote:What a load of crap. That the writer relies on such dubious foundations as "real music" or "real musicians" reveals the inherent snobbery. Likewise the assertion that contemporary musicians didn't respect the Beatles as musicians. Okay, name them. Who were all these "real musicians" who thought the Beatles had no talent? Additionally, there's an implicit dismissal of the general public, that anything popular with large groups of people is immediately questionable.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead
Pex Lives!
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead
Pex Lives!
- Rat Patrol
- Unknown Immortal
- Posts: 15431
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 9:23pm
- Location: A flat burning junkheap for twenty square miles
Re: Interesting Take on the Beatles
Real music is derivative of Pavement anyway.
- JoseUnidos
- Graffiti Bandit Pioneer
- Posts: 1524
- Joined: 16 Jun 2008, 8:52am
Re: Interesting Take on the Beatles
Interesting footnote that Pink Floyd were recording The Piper at the Gates of Dawn in the studio adjacent to the Beatles, who were recording Sgt. Peppers at the same time.Flex wrote:Regardless, it's a weird thing to be critical of with the group, since those tendencies were what made it possible for most people to become aware of experimentation in rock n roll (cuz most people sure as shit weren't listening to early Pink Floyd and the like).
In space no one can hear you clash!
https://www.rmillerthings.com/
https://www.rmillerthings.com/
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116680
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: Interesting Take on the Beatles
I can't really speak to stuff like structural innovation because I'm not a musician. But the author is seriously misreading—or selectively reading—history to dismiss their musical impact, how they advanced notions of how rock songs were to be written and presented, to suggest that they were somehow neutering something that was pure. Horseshit. They took it in a different direction, that's all. Obviously the direction blew a lot of people away. Some picked up on what the Beatles were doing and took that in a different direction. And so on. The band may have had very conservative goals—sell a lot of albums, tour the world, etc etc—but they went about it by pushing forward a medium that was still not fully accepted by the general public. Listening to early Beatles albums, I don't hear a bastardized form of rock n roll, I hear rock n roll. That the writer wants to argue some perversion of eden and conning of the public doesn't make it true.Flex wrote:Most of it is crap, I think the point that is more or less correct is that the Beatles weren't really forerunners in Rock n Roll innovation (from a structural standpoint). That they were a more conservative group musically than many like to admit rings true with me. Regardless, it's a weird thing to be critical of with the group, since those tendencies were what made it possible for most people to become aware of experimentation in rock n roll (cuz most people sure as shit weren't listening to early Pink Floyd and the like).Dr. Medulla wrote:What a load of crap. That the writer relies on such dubious foundations as "real music" or "real musicians" reveals the inherent snobbery. Likewise the assertion that contemporary musicians didn't respect the Beatles as musicians. Okay, name them. Who were all these "real musicians" who thought the Beatles had no talent? Additionally, there's an implicit dismissal of the general public, that anything popular with large groups of people is immediately questionable.
"I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back in Whittier, they're not much bigger than two meters.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- CorwoodRep
- Unknown Immortal
- Posts: 6365
- Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 2:39am
Re: Interesting Take on the Beatles
I liked that article a great deal, but only because I just can't fuckin' stand the Beatles.
"Put down the meth, boy." - TeddyB, 2013.
- MadModWorld
- Trashy Britpop Kid
- Posts: 717
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:51pm
- Location: Somewhere between Heaven & Woolworths...
Re: Interesting Take on the Beatles
Why not?DrugProwlingWolf wrote:I liked that article a great deal, but only because I just can't fuckin' stand the Beatles.
Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead...
- Flex
- Mechano-Man of the Future
- Posts: 35979
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
- Location: The Information Superhighway!
Re: Interesting Take on the Beatles
Well, I've gone as far as I'd like discussing an article neither of us believe. Mostly, I was hoping to illicit some sort of "without The Beatles there would be no beauty in rock" type response. That is an actual thing I have heard said.Dr. Medulla wrote:I can't really speak to stuff like structural innovation because I'm not a musician. But the author is seriously misreading—or selectively reading—history to dismiss their musical impact, how they advanced notions of how rock songs were to be written and presented, to suggest that they were somehow neutering something that was pure. Horseshit. They took it in a different direction, that's all. Obviously the direction blew a lot of people away. Some picked up on what the Beatles were doing and took that in a different direction. And so on. The band may have had very conservative goals—sell a lot of albums, tour the world, etc etc—but they went about it by pushing forward a medium that was still not fully accepted by the general public. Listening to early Beatles albums, I don't hear a bastardized form of rock n roll, I hear rock n roll. That the writer wants to argue some perversion of eden and conning of the public doesn't make it true.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead
Pex Lives!
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead
Pex Lives!
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116680
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: Interesting Take on the Beatles
I would deserve one of my feet washing ashore in B.C. if I ever said something like that.Flex wrote: I was hoping to illicit some sort of "without The Beatles there would be no beauty in rock" type response.
"I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back in Whittier, they're not much bigger than two meters.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- Flex
- Mechano-Man of the Future
- Posts: 35979
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
- Location: The Information Superhighway!
Re: Interesting Take on the Beatles
Well, not elicit from you obviously...Dr. Medulla wrote:I would deserve one of my feet washing ashore in B.C. if I ever said something like that.Flex wrote: I was hoping to illicit some sort of "without The Beatles there would be no beauty in rock" type response.
but from Inder.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead
Pex Lives!
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead
Pex Lives!
-
Howard Beale
- Bang Ice Geezer
- Posts: 172
- Joined: 16 Jun 2008, 1:51am
Re: Interesting Take on the Beatles
Their strength was perhaps being the epitome of mediocrity: never a flash of genius, never a revolutionary thought, never a step away from what was standard, accepting innovations only after they had been accepted by the establishment. And maybe it was that chronic mediocrity that made their fortune: whereas other bands tried to surpass their audiences, to keep two steps ahead of the myopia of their fans, traveling the hard and rocky road, the Beatles took their fans by the hand and walked them along a straight path devoid of curves and slopes.
- Wolter
- Half Foghorn Leghorn, Half Albert Brooks
- Posts: 55432
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 7:59pm
- Location: ¡HOLIDAY RO-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-OAD!
Re: Interesting Take on the Beatles
So, once again, the internet is a haven for idiots who say provocative things with no basis in fact.Howard Beale wrote:Their strength was perhaps being the epitome of mediocrity: never a flash of genius, never a revolutionary thought, never a step away from what was standard, accepting innovations only after they had been accepted by the establishment. And maybe it was that chronic mediocrity that made their fortune: whereas other bands tried to surpass their audiences, to keep two steps ahead of the myopia of their fans, traveling the hard and rocky road, the Beatles took their fans by the hand and walked them along a straight path devoid of curves and slopes.
Next thing you know, he'll say that Waking Up was the best Clash solo album.
”INDER LOCK THE THE KISS THREAD IVE REALISED IM A PRZE IDOOT” - Thomas Jefferson
"But the gorilla thinks otherwise!"
"But the gorilla thinks otherwise!"
Re: Interesting Take on the Beatles
This article:
- tepista
- Foul-Mouthed Werewolf
- Posts: 37917
- Joined: 16 Jun 2008, 11:25am
- Location: Livin on a fault line, Waiting on the big one
Re: Interesting Take on the Beatles
The road was long and winding, not hard and rocky. Rocky was the racoon.Howard Beale wrote:..............................to keep two steps ahead of the myopia of their fans, traveling the hard and rocky road, the Beatles took their fans by the hand and walked them along a straight path devoid of curves and slopes.
We reach the parts other combos cannot reach
We beach the beachheads other armies cannot beach
We speak the tongues other mouths cannot speak
We beach the beachheads other armies cannot beach
We speak the tongues other mouths cannot speak