Really? No Beatles yet? *Runs off to check archive*
OK, then. Wow.
What more could possibly be said about The Beatles that hasn't been written thousands of times over? I can't say that I liked them too much growing up, and I believe one reason for that is just obstinence because I was supposed to like them (and the fact that my parents loved them too).
Strangely enough, the first I probably remember about them is hearing The Beatles remix on "The Stars on 45" (you guys remember those?) and liking the songs pretty well. If you grow up and pay any attention at all to pop culture, the Beatles' hits somehow worm their way into your brain without you even knowing it.
So, like anyone else, I knew all the big hits, and I knew they were supposed to be great, but I never really appreciated them. Then in 1995, things began to change.
First of all, The Beatles Anthology movie and soundtrack set came out to huge fanfare that culminated with the release of "Free as a Bird", their first single in 30 years. The Beatles were back on the map and were everywhere again. Also, this was the year that I first heard "Revolver", at the late, great Engine Room in Athens, Ga.
A place like the ER carefully vetted the music it player for maximum hipster approval. In fact, it was also my introduction to Big Star, as mentioned in a previous post. So when I happened to hear "Taxman" cue up, followed by "Eleanor Rigby", I began to critically reexamine this group. Having never really been exposed to their albums, only their Fox 97 singles, I was pretty blown away by what I heard. I mean, a song like "She Said She Said" (and check out Ringo's drum fills in that one - wow!) or "Tomorrow Never Knows" sounded as fresh to my ears as anything that was being put out by Matador or Sub Pop at the time.
I went out not long after and bought Revolver, followed by "Abby Road", "The White Album", and "Rubber Soul". I finally "got" The Beatles, and was beginning to appreciate what everyone was crazy about all along. These guys were really a once-in-a-generation phenomenon, but are also able to speak to all subsequent generations. It's a trip to see the kids down the street (10 and 7) discuss with me their favorite Beatles songs and go crazy over the release of the movie "Across the Universe" last year.
(That being said - in the age old "Beatles versus Stones" argument....I'm a Stones guy. So there)
After reading the above, it may not surprise you to know that, for the longest time, I didn't know "Got To Get You Into My Life" was even a Beatles song. Indeed, I considered it an Earth, Wind and Fire song, as heard in that classic 70's movie flop, "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Heart's Club Band" (starring the BeeGees)
This song is a Paul song, and it's an ode to weed done in a Stax style, thus the incongruous sound of the Beatles with horns. Oh, and speaking of Paul, let me digress for a minute here. I've always thought Paul was never given due credit as a Beatle (and that goes for Wings and solo material also, for that matter).
When I think back on my favorite Beatles songs, usually they are the poppier "Paul" songs. This is especially true when you consider each person's solo work. I think Paul still had that great pop sound, full of hooks and melodies. Lennon, in my opinion, is very overrated. I think there are two reasons for this: the first is, of course, the tragedy of his death. The second is the inability of the Baby Boomers to cast a critical eye at any aspect of their youth and mythologize it to an unbearable degree.
Paul gets a lot of flack for producing formulaic, adult contemporary crap, like "Maybe I'm Amazed", but come on, think about "Woman" by Lennon. Why does he get a free pass? And what kind of music do you suppose Lennon would be making today, if he were still with us?
Anyway, although this isn't one of my favorites on "Revolver", it's a groovy, soulful little pop tune by the group that perfected pop.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Not a bad choice. My favorite from Revolver (which happens to be my favorite Beatles album) is "I Want to Tell You", the song preceding this one. That being said, I am so fucking sick of the Beatles and the people who go on and on about their greatness when they should realize they are mostly a product of their time and marketing.
They are not a bad band at all, but people should give more thought than to call them the "greatest band of all time", etc. Same goes for the Stones, who are a glorified English blues band. The best thing that ever happened to the Rolling Stones was Cream breaking up.
That all being said, Revolver and the White Album (mostly disc 2) are about all of the Beatles catalog I can stand nowadays (with the exception of "Things we Said Today," "She's a Woman", and some of the songs on HELP!.
+1 on the Solo McCartney. I love "Maybe I'm Amazed," "Take it Away," and "Say, Say, Say".
Good comments, Merk - a few things:
I thought I mentioned it in my post, but "Revolver" is my favorite album, too. And I know it's kind of a cliche to say, but I can't get enough of "Elenor Rigby". Simply brillant song.
As to being a product of thier time, I somewhat agree. See my comments about baby boomers mythologizing themselves and anything important to them. The "best band ever" tag has been given, and it's not going to fade over time; in fact, it will only grow.
P.S.: No "Abbey Road" love? I seem to remember some good times associated with that CD :)
I have a love/hate relationship with the Beatles. I love them and I hate people who dis on them. Bastards.
I still remember my parents buying me the record for the White Album one Christmas. They also bought a record for 1984 and Thriller.
The diversity is what attracts me to the Beatles. They used it to their advantage and didn't make the same album twice, yet somehow maintained the "Beatles" sound throughout. Neither Lennon nor McCartney were able to recreate it through solo work for my dollar. George Harrison seemed to in some of his later work. Maybe he was the hidden core of the band. Paul was cute, John was thoughtful, but George is my man. His guitar gently wept. Well, Clapton's guitar did at least.
Oh. Sorry. Forgot Ringo.
Abbey Road is good. Revolver is good. But for sentimental reasons, I have to go with the White Album as my favorite. Sexy Sadie, Rocky Raccoon, Bungalo Bill, Yer Blues. Great.
. . . sorry man.
I suppose I can make my peace with the entire Revolver and forward catalog, maybe even admitting to liking it. I can even stomach some restrained Beatle enthusiasm. The people (who are older than 16) who are fanatic about the Beatles are the ones that get to me.
I would agree to the "never making the same album twice" if you exclude Please Please Me, Meet the Beatles, With the BeatlesHard Day's Night, Yesterday and Today, and Beatles for Sale. Yes, they all had a little bit of thematic variation: Beatles for Sale (a little Blusey -- trying to be the Stones); With the Beatles (more Rockabilly; Please Please Me (straight up pop), etc. But they all sounded enough alike to be reshuffled and repackaged enough to sell different combinations in the U.S. and U.K.
Rubber Soul, in my opinion was when they started bringing more variety (I think that was also the time they started using drugs).
Good comments again, guys.
I agree with J's "variety" comment - it's something I've admired about them unconsciously, I suppose, but you really put your finger on it.
Likewise, when I think of the "greatness" of The Beatles, it always begins with Rubber Soul.
Everything before that was pretty unremarkable and sounded like every other dime a dozen 60's pop song
Paul couldn't hold Joey McIntyre's jock in the songwriting dept. Now back to my new kids dance.
Honestly, I don't listen to the Beatles anymore. The kid is really into them-- she is 9-- so I do hear them blaring through the house quite often. My more drug-fueled days found me sitting on the floor with my head inbetween two speakers pondering the majesty of Rubber Soul. Since those days, though, I have rarely returned. However, I do throw on All Things Must Pass every once in awhile. I agree with y'shua that George's music seemed more capable of translating the group's music to the solo arena. And, yes, it does make you wonder what that says about George's influence on Paul and John-- and vice versa.
I really doubt I will ever have another Beatlemania moment in my life-- although, I have returned to other artists from my youth. I just think they had their place. My wife and I were talking about the group once and both agreed that their music was so prevelant at times in our lives that the enjoyment that was once there got exhausted. I listened the shit out of the great "cool" albums (Revolver, Rubber Soul, Magical Mystery, Sgt. Pepper's, Abbey Road, Let it Be) and can not imagine being able to tolerate, much less engage in, listening to them again.
There has been word, however, that Paul will be releasing a "lost" track soon. It is supposedly a horrible experimentation in psychedelic noise. It has been referred to as proof that Paul was not just the creator of pop songs and actually experimented as much as John.
Post a Comment