I’ve been reading about the Beatles of late and I’m curious to know what everyone found interesting about them at the time. I just don’t understand the phenomenon and a number of folks from my generation don’t either. In fact, most would look back to Led Zeppelin or the Rolling Stones. Their lyrics were nothing to write home about (I want to hold your hand; she loves you; twist and shout; can’t buy me love?). I have to wonder if they aren’t just a boomer creation in that they hit the U.S. when most boomers (1943-1960) were at most 20. Nothing new had appeared on the scene since Elvis in the 1950s so nothing was really going on in music. Pop radio was really just in its infancy. Songs were still mainly under three minutes. More modern recording technology was just emerging (Sgt. Peppers’s was a sonic first on many levels in terms of what they did in the recording process – echo, reverb/feedback, double-tracking, reverse tape effects, sampling, the eight-track recording, etc.) The music press didn’t exist yet in the U.S. and was only in its formative years in the UK. There were still only three networks. They brought ideas into the mainstream that were on the fringes previously (drug use, meditation, Eastern religion).
I’m just left with the feeling that they just happened to come along in the midst of a perfect storm and they were able to ride a wave of technological advances across a relatively empty landscape at time when one of the largest generations was hitting their teen years.
Thoughts/comments?
4 comments:
To understand the affinity of boomers for the Beatles – or any other pop culture trend, for that matter – requires an understanding of the spiritual crisis that has plagued us since the tumultuous birth of the Church through the lazy-hazy days of Church politicization in Christendom.
Desperate to bring the Church into line with all things Biblical, the Reformers accomplished tremendous things but the groundwork for extreme cynicism was already laid amongst much of the intellectual community of that day via religious wars, aristocratic tyranny, inquisition, etc.
This produced new and dangerous levels of intellectual disdain towards Biblical teachings and the Body of Christ.
Despite the efforts of the Reformers, the Western mind was severely damaged by the Enlightenment, spiritually tone-deaf by the end of the Modernity (1960), and completely unhinged in Post-modernity (current).
Culture comes from the Latin root, cultus, which means to work and worship in conjunction. The slightest of glimpses at our current state reveals that the West lives for work and entertainment. Therefore, the replacement of worship with entertainment in the West has led to “culture” being replaced with “popular culture,” which simply cannot sustain the Western or any other mind.
Unfortunately, the utterly ignorant Western elite and much of the Church sits in stunned disbelief, as the absurdity of their pop culture produces an extraordinary number of murderous monsters who kill without conscience. (i.e.: Columbine, Virginia Tech, etc.) Unaware of their contributions to such atrocities, they merely report on these events, shrug their shoulders, cite simplistic psychological reasons as a rationale for the mayhem, and go about their business of producing and consuming more mind-numbing, psychopath producing, God insulting, worldview-food for their absurd popular culture.
It is this spiritual/intellectual suicide-slide that the Beatles represent so magnificently.
The members of the Beatles who are still living continue to publicly pursue pop culture royalty, while privately struggling with the angst and spiritual destruction derived from that which they have made such bold contributions: popular culture.
And all the while, the West burns and people die apart from Christ, while most of the Western Church giggles in a pop culture induced spiritual/intellectual stupor.
As a confessing Christian and having not done my best to pursue and contribute understanding to this matter, I am complicit and stand guilty as charged...
My apologies. As a Boomer who hasn't posted before, I neglected to answer the question.
I might add that the Postmodern era is a rejection of the Modern lie that all things can be explained empirically. In short, young people didn't buy the lie but, unfortunately, the truth had already been destroyed in the Western mind and they had nothing to grasp. Therefore, they embrace the relativism of Post-modernity.
The Beatles were reflective of where Boomers were and continue to be spiritually. This, I believe, at least partially explains the Boomer affection for the simpleton Beatles. Not much was there from a spiritual or intellectual basis, so not much was required.
Unfortunately, the idiotic idolatry of Beatle-mania was a precursor to future idiocies such as I want my MTV, American Idol, etc.
The Beatles first appeared to a mass U.S. audience in Feb. 1964. I think their first song in the U.S. was "I wanna hold your hand" and it appeared on rock stations in December of 1963. I remember vividly that they hit right at the end of the month-long period of mourning for President Kennedy. I believe the key to their instant success was the fact that for millions of us then 18-year olds, we had just seen "our" President killed and did not think we would be happy. There was a widely quoted line at that time: "We'll laugh again, but we'll never be young again. The baby boom (1946-1964) just happened to end in that year, too. Hmmm. The oldest of the boomers were in their senior year of high school when the Beatles landed here.
Yes, the Beatles obviously benefitted from being at the right place at the right time. But to appreciate their greatness you need to look at three things that separate them from all others (including the Stones, the Who, and Led Zeppelin -- all of whom belong in the first tier of great bands along with, dare I say it, U2):
1. The Beatles were incredibly prolific. No band has produced as much quality work in as short a period of time (1962-1970). Indeed, they typically put out two or three high quality albums each year, especially during their "studio" years after they ceased performing live.
2. The Beatles were extremely versatile. They could never be accused of producing songs that "all sound the same." Yes, The Stones may have done rock better. Led Zeppelin certainly did metal better. The Who probably did "concept albums" better. But each of these bands is much easier to pigeon-hole than the Beatles who produced killer ballads (Yesterday), killer rock songs (Hey Jude) and everything in between -- including good songs in almost every category imaginable (lullabies, country, blues, big band, etc.). In this respect, U2 (dare I say it) probably comes closer to matching the Beatles than the others, since U2 is known for producing both hard rock songs and soft ballads.
3. The Beatles had better "B-sides" than anyone. It's one thing to be able to produce "Satisfaction," "Stairway to Heaven," or "We Won't Be Fooled Again," But part of what separates the Beatles from all others is that the quality of their "B-sides" is considerably higher than that of other bands. People buying other albums often had to skip most tracks other than the hits; people buying the Beatles typically got good songs from start to finish.
Repent and quit dissing the Fab Four. They deserve to be regarded as the U2 of their generation.
Bill
Post a Comment