smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Michael Bennett" <mrhonorama@hotmail.com> |
| Subject | Re: Another Beatles? |
| Date | Tue, 03 Aug 2004 23:33:08 -0500 |
[Part 1 text/plain (4.8 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
I have to agree with Jason, that this has been an thought provoking and
entertaining thread. Kudos to Josh for his comments, which got at what I
was trying to get at -- splendidly articulated.
Likewise, a lot of Jason's comments are typically astute, but there are a
few that I will respond to:
>From: DanAbnrml9@aol.com
And again, as
>I've aged and explored music more on my own, I realize that Nirvana just
>won
>the equivalent of a musical lottery, combined with creating the right
>thing at
>the right time, but it DID influence a lot of people because we wound up
>realizing that there were far broader horizons than we'd realized up to
>that
>point.
Most of this I agree with, but I'm not sold on the 'musical lottery' part --
some have made similar comments about Elvis -- that is, someone else would
have come along and done what Elvis/Nirvana did. There was a time that I
would have agreed about Elvis. Now I don't, because I have a greater
appreciation for what he brought to the table. Rock and roll still would
have happened, it was happening already, but it's impact would have come
later, been more diffuse, etc. He had the right combo of talent, vision,
charisma and so forth. Likewise Nirvana, who don't get nearly enough credit
for how effectively they summed up a lot of strands of the
underground/college radio sounds that preceded them. In some ways, it is
analogous to how the Beatles built on their influences. They had the right
combo of vision, talent and charisma to galvanize the relevant audience in a
way no other act of the time could have.
But go to the
>hip-hop world, and the perspective changes drastically. That isn't to say
>that
>those guys don't like the Beatles (check out the brilliant-as-it-sounds
>"Grey
>Album", where DJ Dangermouse mixed the acapella versions of Jay-Z's "Black
>Album" with sonic bits--and I do mean BITS--of the Beatles "White Album"),
>but
>the root of influence lies more in a variety of sources from disco to
>strains
>of international music, hard rock, and dance music.
-- The Grey Album didn't do much for me -- I thought that Danger Mouse's
samples and technique were rather limited, though I gained more respect for
Jay-Z's talent. Maybe the hype overwhelmed me.
>
><< Because the Beatles were the first, and no
>one can ever be the first again.>>
>
>See above. If the lessons were forgotten (as they were for many of us in
>the
>late '80s/early '90s), they need to be taught again. And speaking as
>someone
>who is firmly part of generation X (if not Y, scholars disagree), Stewart's
>right in that the whole "spokesmen of a generation" crud flung at the
>Beatles
>has done far more to harm their reputation amongst people in my age group
>than to help it. Everyone wants to find their own way, not to have things
>crammed down their throats, especially when it carries the undercurrent of
>"mine is
> better than yours". I would argue that that very attitude is sort of a
>generational "correction" that undoes a lot of the influence the Beatles
>had in
>the first place. I don't disagree with a lot of the rest of your
>sentiment--that the Beatles had a cultural influence unlike no other rock
>band--but I think
>that even voicing that attitude has a way of diminishing that influence.
>Does that make any sense?
--Yes and no -- compare this to how people react to Citizen Kane -- granted,
not the same 'stands for a generation' appeal, but it's been called the
greatest movie ever for so long, that I know a lot of people who have found
that to be a turn off. Yet, for that very reason, it is why so many new
viewers gravitate towards it.
The other thing is, how do you get around it? Part of what makes the
Beatles such a touchstone is that they arrived at a critical time in mass
media convergence -- millions saw Chaplin's films, but they didn't see The
Circus or The Gold Rush at the exact same time, like everyone sitting in
their living rooms watching The Beatles on Sullivan. There was a real power
that was unleashed on that night that has been exceeded, yet somehow never
duplicated.
Then again, just because everyone says it's so, doesn't make it right.
After all, after Ronald Reagan died, many reporters stated that he was the
most popular modern president -- which was, according to poll data, not true
(which isn't to say he was unpopular...I'm not trying to make a political
point).
I dunno -- more food for thought, I guess
Mike
Record reviews and more at http://fufkin.com
Find out about Chicago shows:
http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/chicagopopshowreport/
_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee®
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.