November 25, 2004
Ianam
Michele has admitted to not particularly caring for the music of the Beatles, and in doing so has opened up the floodgates. Chaz has a nice response in which he puts forward that the Beatles were more significant culturally than musically.
It so happens that one of Milwaukee's radio stations did "Beatles - A to Z" last weekend. That particular barrel is deep enough that they didn't have to scrape the bottom of it, but for some of the letters they had to dig up some songs which were decididly less than great. I was thinking back to when they burst upon the scene, and was trying to remember what made them so great. Then Dean brought this to my attention, and it all came back to me. The biggest hit, the year before the Beatles started being heard in the United States, was Sherry by the Four Seasons. Once you have that for context, the success of the Fab Four seems to have been inevitable.
Posted by triticale at November 25, 2004 09:25 PMMusic seems to go throuh phases where it's exciting, then boring, then exciting again.
I mean, Elvis and Little Richard and Buddy Holly were exciting. But by the early 1960s it was getting kind of old and stale, Chubby Checker style stuff. Then Boom, the Beatles hit, and the Stones, and it got exciting again. It got boring by the late 70s, but then, punk rock came along and it got interesting again.
Posted by: Dean Esmay at November 27, 2004 12:47 AM