smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Josh Chasin" <jchasin@nyc.rr.com> |
| Subject | Re: Another Bealtes? |
| Date | Tue, 3 Aug 2004 23:23:13 -0400 |
[Part 1 text/plain iso-8859-1 (3.1 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
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.