Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Danny Myers

GET UPDATES FROM Danny Myers
 

Turn Off Your Mind and Float Upstream - 50 Years on From 'Love Me Do' Can We Listen to The Beatles Objectively?

Posted: 05/10/2012 00:00

50 years to the day after the release of their first single, 'Love Me Do', it may be high time to take a fresh look at The Beatles. Yes, the Fab Four: Britain's last and maybe final global conquerors, the dead cat bounce of a diminishing Empire, the fairy tale of working class boys made good and the composers of songs so ubiquitous that they almost have the quality of nursery rhymes (and I'm not just talking about Ringo's efforts).

But approaching the band with fresh ears is a tough task. To have even half a chance it is necessary to divorce what we know from what we hear. So try an experiment and for a few seconds - say the length of 'A Day in the Life's' closing note - contemplate The Beatles. Try it. Contemplate like you're George on an Indian mountain top.

You'll probably find your head filling with the images and sounds of established pop history. Your head might flit to the piano landing beginning of 'A Hard Day's Night'; or the carousel swirl of 'Strawberry Fields Forever'. You might picture four lads looking sharp in suits on the run from screaming girls or four men with beards and issues - divorces and death just behind and not far away.

But if you can clear your head, you'll hear that 'Love Me Do' is tight and tidy enough but unremarkable, maybe even a little dull. Of course, it's now associated with four sweating Beatles thrashing away in The Cavern, unaware of what was about to hit them. As such 'Love Me Do' is a great 'once upon a time' but it is not a great song. The harmonies work of course, but Maccas vocal at some points barely holds up, and, pauses aside, the song gathers no momentum. 50 years ago to this day was historically important but musically insignificant.

It captures the band at the last moment where they might have been forgotten with ease. From this point on the singles became far more remarkable. On 'She Loves You', 'I Want to Hold Your Hand' 'Twist & Shout' and 'A Hard Days Night', The Beatles' early exuberance and energy can barely be contained. We may laugh from 21st century Gaga Land at the innocence of wanting to hold a girl's hand, but Lennon's breaking point vocal of 'Twist & Shout' is visceral and overwhelming. In fact, it possesses an energy and verve rarely found on those later Beatles albums lauded as their true musical legacy.

Which brings us to where the narrative and music take on separate lives of their own.

The story runs something like this. The pre-enlightenment mop tops of 'A Hard Day's Night' and the Ed Sullivan show were a band on the churn. Hit after hit, quip after quip, the as yet unsatisfied genius of Lennon & McCartney was sculpted cannily by Martin in the music studio and presented perfectly by Epstein for the TV studio. The Beatles, before they took independent control of their facial hair, were essentially the world's best ever boy band.

They only became by popular wisdom the best band ever when curiosity lit a spark as well as a joint. The Beatles moved from 'Yesterday' to 'Tomorrow Never Knows'. Pop became (pinch your nose) 'high art'. In the drop of a key change, The Beatles became the intellectual property of a global avant garde. The matching suits were dispensed with. The songs got longer.

The freedom that a post-touring Beatles took into the studio was for the most part exploited to produce some astounding work. However, there is a reasonable case to be made that the Lennon testing the leash in the early years, and straining it on Rubber Soul and 'Revolver, wrote better songs than the Lennon immersed in free love and given a free rein on the White Album and Let It Be. Indeed, although the boy band Beatles produced by-numbers album fillers, the Beardy Beatles produced just as many self-indulgences or failed experiments.

I would take 'Twist and Shout' to my desert island; I would flee to said island, should I have to endure 'The Long and Winding Road' ever again. Sitar or harmonica? "A Hard Day's Night" or "Bungalow Bill"? " Can't Buy Me Love" or "Within You, Without You?". Which would you choose?

The Beatles is a great story and 50 years on, it may be time to let it slide comfortably into mythology. The Beatles were a great band but it would be a disservice to their music if we didn't at least try to seperate it from this myth. Turn off your mind and listen again.

 

Follow Danny Myers on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@poplifer

FOLLOW UK ENTERTAINMENT
50 years to the day after the release of their first single, 'Love Me Do', it may be high time to take a fresh look at The Beatles. Yes, the Fab Four: Britain's last and maybe final global conquerors,...
50 years to the day after the release of their first single, 'Love Me Do', it may be high time to take a fresh look at The Beatles. Yes, the Fab Four: Britain's last and maybe final global conquerors,...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 8
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:55 AM on 10/06/2012
They took huge leaps, both musically and personally, in a few short years. That's why it is, and yet it isn't, surprising that George at 28 already had the Beatles behind him. They had squeezed so much into it that each year might as well have been three.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Danny Myers
04:50 PM on 10/05/2012
Thanks for the comments.

The reference to a 'mythology’ is a compliment. Sorry to resort to definitions but a mythology is “a popular story that has become associated with an person, institution, occurrence, especially one considered to illustrate a cultural ideal.” The Beatles – story and ideal - slot into that definition.

There’s no question that between 67-69 produced astounding music; but just to reiterate I think there is as much to get from Beatles perfecting a format – 3 minute pop – as experimenting with new ones.

And The Beatles were a boy-band in the early years (no bad thing). They were scrupulously managed and carefully presented (John’s marriage to Cynthia teased out of them and off-message). George was 19 and the others were in the early 20’s. I still find it extraordinary to think that a 28 year old George had The Beatles behind him. Another footnote to an extraordinary story and one which informs and enriches listening to The Beatles.

It can also I think slightly distort how we appreciate the music they produced – hence the blog.

And yes, heroin – I think it did Blur a few favours as well. The price an artist pays to keep us entertained….. (shameless plug…. http://poplifer.com/category/blur/ )
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jessjesskk
Benevolent Zombie Power
08:22 AM on 10/05/2012
I have never done heroin, I would not recommend it to anyone... but it certainly hadn't hurt my records collection :)
12:23 AM on 10/05/2012
Boy band? These guys were 20 somethings. Justin Bieber or Donny Osmond would be boy band.

Go back 50 years for context to understand the Beatles commercial success. What change to pop music did they bring in 1962? What technology was available to them and what did they do in the studio to overcome it? There was no autotune in the 1960's. April 4, 1964 - the Beatles made history as the only act ever to monopolize the chart's top five positions. They started stadium concerts and had 27 number ones. They were the first recording artists to conquer the world. This is not mythology.

There were two groups called the Beatles. The group that recorded through 1966 and the one that recorded from 1967 through 1969. The music from the early years was the club band that went on tour. They played the 3 minute Buddy Holly style tunes.. The studio artists Beatles recorded from 1967 to 1969 made revolutionary, diverse, longer music. Lennon's "A Day In The Life" was breathtakingly revolutionary. It helped give birth to the commercial success of FM radio. His "Revolution" in 1968 holds up and has far more substance and texture than it's contemporary, "Street Fighting Man".

The Beatles is a great story and those listeners who weren't there should look for the story of what really happened from 1962 to 1969 and assess the music's impact on the times and the future of music. It's truly a great story, not a myth.
11:28 AM on 10/05/2012
That really hits the spot. I was going to write something here myself, but you've said it all.
10:40 PM on 10/04/2012
"Listen objectively"? Why on earth would anyone want to do that?
06:54 PM on 10/04/2012
As I get older, I have less patience for the experimental stuff. I can appreciate the originality and creativity of it (thank you George Martin), but I don't necessarily want to repeatedly hear those songs on my ipod. I find myself craving the tunes where they just rock -- like "Come Together" and "Get Back." After all, when you boil it all down, they were just a rock band.
06:03 PM on 10/04/2012
I'm a life long professional musician who was completely inspired by The Beatles, and I must respectfully disagree. Yes, there are some songs stronger than others (I rather agree about Bungalow Bill), but to go from I Want to Hold Your Hand to Strawberry Fields Forever in THREE YEARS is simply amazing - hype or no hype. My favorite Beatle records are the earlier ones, up through Revolver, I was 12 - 15 years old, so that only makes sense. That in no way diminishes the impact world-wide that Pepper, White Album, Get Back, Abbey Road...had (and, if you listen to popular bands today, continue to have). And, for the (ahem) record, Within You and Without You is a fabulous song and brilliant recording.