smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "bob" <segarini@sympatico.ca> |
| Subject | Re: Another Bealtes? |
| Date | Wed, 4 Aug 2004 04:18:24 -0400 |
[Part 1 text/plain iso-8859-1 (5.5 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
Here's what you have to do to ever have another Beatles...
1. Destroy the Internet so that you can only hear music on Terrestrial radio
stations, thereby eliminating most of the fragmentation of the audience.
2. Wait several generations so that everyone's source of music is the same
again...i.e...a handful of radio stations.
3. Eliminate video games, computer games, cable telivision, MTV, MuchMusic,
and all image driven musical delivery systems, and Hollywood blockbusters so
that everyone re-embraces music as the touchstone of their lives.
4. Wait.
5.Wait some more.
6. Musical entity will eventually emerge and garner front page press in it's
home country thanks to the Government wanting a scandal off the front pages
of the newspapers. The entity must have odd hair and clothes, be witty, and
able to appeal to both girls, boys, mums, dads, and grandparents.
7. A beloved, young, American President must be assasinated or a city nuked,
or some other National tragedy that stays in the public psyche so long that
any light, positive distraction interesting enough to publicize can change
the mood of the most powerful country on Earth.
8. At least four previous releases spanning a few years must be available on
different labels so the entity can, when discovered by the masses, have 14
or more songs in the National charts simultaeneously.
9. The entity will spawn a bunch of people to continue this conversation
well into the next century
Music is no longer shared, important, or respected. There will be many
"Micro-Beatles", but diversity in tastes, and the thousands of different
ways to access music precludes any chance of anything other than Britany's
and N'Syncs...acts whose lifespan is 2 years or so and will disappear or not
be allowed to grow into what the Beatles grew into between the first album
and Rubber Soul, and be replaced everytime a generation of 11 year old girls
shows up. There are very few careers anymore...and The Beatles, God Bless
them, probably wouldn't even be able to get a deal these days. It would be
the haircuts and fashion that they'd leave...the music never would have
progressed past yeah, yeah, yeah.
bob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Josh Chasin" <jchasin@nyc.rr.com>
To: <audities@smoe.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 11:23 PM
Subject: Re: Another Bealtes?
> I haven't listened to a Beatles album in years not counting Let It Be
Naked.
> The whole point is that it isn't about music at all; its about the
> confluence of a set of unique environmental and cultural factors that
cannot
> be replicated. Doesn't matter about CDs, doesn't matter about MP3s,
doesn't
> matter about any of that stuff. I know 15-year-old kids who are learning
> Beatle songs on guitar, because they love them. Will 15-year-old kids be
> learning Nirvana songs on guitar in 2018? The Beatles already HAVE
endured
> long enough to stand the test of time. Its 40 years since "She Loves
You;"
> FORTY YEARS. Walk down the street, sing a few bars, ask people to
identify
> the artist. Hell, ask Lou Reed; he always hated them. But he'll get it.
> And don't just ask boomers; ask kids, old ladies, everyone. Black, white,
> Latino, everyone. Can we really say with a straight face that 40 years
on,
> "Anarchy in the UK" or "Smells Like Teen Spirit" will be as enduring? In
> fact, I'd put "She Loves You" up against either of these songs 40 years
from
> today in an awareness test.
>
> The question was, will there ever be another Beatles? And the answer
> remains, no. Because it is impossible. The question, "Are other bands
from
> subsequent years better than the Beatles?" is a fascinating one deserving
> much deliberation. But its a different question.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jaimie Vernon" <bullseyecanada@hotmail.com>
> > Yowza. Sounds like the rant of someone who believes that music begins
and
> > ends with this band. I know musicians who HATE the Beatles....their
frame
> of
> > reference evolved out of Stones, or Zeppelin, or Chuck Berry.
> >
> > The Beatles are only as big as those who care about such things. Talk to
> my
> > father. The Beatles were a bunch of street punks who got lucky screaming
> > "Yeah Yeah Yeah" for three albums before McCartney wrote "Yesterday" and
> > made them respectible to my grandma's generation. If that's the
influence
> > that changed the world then you make a valid point. But for diehard fans
> of
> > other bands, the Beatles are merely the enemy....not the progenitors.
> >
> > Three points to keep in mind about The Beatles:
> > 1) It was Pink Floyd's "Dark Side Of The Moon" that was sent up in the
> > Voyager explorer to the other side of the galaxy....NOT the Beatles.
It's
> > all about frame of reference.
> >
> > 2) With the exception of Queen and The Dave Clark Five, The Beatles were
> > nearly the last hold out to join the CD revolution.
> >
> > 3) The Beatles "template" will not survive the Internet.....as they've
> > balked at the idea of MP3 downloads on any website other than Apple
> Records.
> >
> > In 100 years the Beatles will be but a footnote. There will have been
more
> > names and more FIRSTS to have overshadowed everything they did for those
> > brief 8 years. Just as Wayne Gretzky overshadowed Rocket Richard and
> Gordie
> > Howe...so too shall someone overshadow him.
> >
> >
> > Jaimie Vernon,
> > President, Bullseye Records
> > http://www.bullseyecanada.com
> > Author, Canadian Pop Music Encyclopedia
> > http://www.canoe.ca/JamMusicPopEncycloPages
> >
> >
>
>
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.