The Beatles are 50. They started in 1960. And all the papers and magazines have dedicated scores of articles on them, Beatlemania, how influential they were, and how they changed the world. I was brought up with no great exposure to pop music of the 60s and 70s. All my hearing and understanding of pop music was acquired quite late in life. And to tell you the truth, I'm not and have never been too impressed with The Beatles. That, I can tell you, is blasphemous, to say the least.
I remember a time about 10 years back, when some of my friends, one evening, were discussing about how great The Beatles were. And I certainly wasn't contributing to that view. They mistook that I hadn't heard them, or had no clue of what they were talking about. I confess I haven't had a great understanding of their music. All that I have is a basic hearing. And, I reiterate, they aren't too great. They certainly don't deserve the hype that surrounds them.
But my friends took it personally, and attacked me. They couldn't defend their point for too long, but they still won because of a simple majority. At the end of the argument I realised that they had a lesser understanding of their music.
I beg to add a point, a disclaimer. John Lennon, individually, a few of his songs, were okay. He wrote well, but all of that was his solo attempt. Not the Beatles as a group.
I scoured the net to find if there was anyone who held the same view as I had, I'm sure there are. But I couldn't find much on this, just a few blogs, here and there. Why are people afraid to confront long-held beliefs? Why is it blasphemous to say the truth. That the Beatles were not great.
Listen to their greatest hit, 'Love Me Do'. Its not very impressive. In fact its quite unimpressive. Or 'Hey Jude'. Except the interlude and close, there is nothing very great about the song. 'A Hard Day's Night' was immature and insipid. And 'Yellow submarine' is utter crap, sheer nonsense.
Talk about 'U2' or John Denver and you have my attention. But that can be the subject of another discussion, another day.
Let me present my case:
1. Their music is not revolutionary, not engaging. It doesn't move you, doesn't affect you. Its just some words and music thrown in to average effect. Their music is over-rated.
2. They were around only for about 7-8 years, I understand. And they did not perform many live shows. They were more of a studio group. So if you haven't been a 'live' band, I wonder how they could engage so many in so little time.
3. They may satisfy the definition of cult, but not the spirit. Having teenage girls who don't understand life going around is not 'cool', and certainly not mass appeal.
4. Just because there are a million or billion fans who faint when they hear you, doesn't make you great. Its merely a reflection of the large-scale mediocrity that is prevalent in the world.
5. What about their songs was about world peace or love? Nothing at all. They couldn't stay together as a group for long, despite being love gurus. And they conveniently sidelined George Martin.
6. They won Grammies, 7 of them I think. But since when did winning Grammies make you great?
7. Most of all, their music is not timeless. Like Bob Dylan or John Denver whom you can listen to even today.
To all those false Beatlemania victims, I say 'Move on'
