Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Feb, 2014 12:41 pm
@panzade,
"Rememberable?" Had that joker never heard of the word memorable? With that standard of journalism, i'd say such comments can be ignored. He reminds of the dunce at Decca records who said that guitar bands are on the way out, and that "the Beatles have no future in show business."
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Feb, 2014 12:56 pm
@Setanta,
It gets worse...
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Feb, 2014 03:29 pm
When you go watch the interview videos it's clear just how many people didn't get it. In one of the vids that Lordy posted earlier, there are comments by a journalist who accompanied them on one of their North American tours (she's the one who did the infamous "bigger than Jesus" interview with Lennon). She says that pop bands were expected to have no opinions unless the record company told them what those opinions would be, that they were to smile for the cameras, to be grateful for the opportunity and buy their mum a new house and keep their mouths shut. But these boys were pros already, they weren't something that just crawled out of the woodwork and were getting some media attention. I am reminded of George Martin telling them how they should be grateful, that he didn't have a lot of hope for them, but he would do what he could, and did they have any comments. No one said anything for a moment, then George stood up, leaned over the desk and said: "Yeah . . . i don't like your tie." They were hard working and no nonsense, and they would do what it took. When the Decca audition didn't pan out, Brian Epstein was despondent, so they told not him to worry, just go out and get us another audition.

People in interviews asked stupid question, so they gave them stupid answers. Two of them are enshrined in A Hard Day's Night. They ask George what he calls his hairdo (as though the hair really mattered), so he said: "George." They asked him how he found America--"Turn left at Greenland." When they were asked a serious question, they gave serious answers. Several times they were asked about the screaming. John once did say that sometimes they couldn't hear themselves well enough to know if they were in tune, but he always said that these people had paid the price of admission, and if they wanted to scream, that was their right. The "bigger than Jesus" interview was a case of John trying to give serious answer to the serious questions he was being asked. So much of the interview material was just fluff, and got the kind of answers that were merited.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Feb, 2014 03:36 pm
@panzade,
This comment from Newsweek, while snotty and condescending, is interesting because the writer actually seems to have given some thought to what he would write:

Quote:
It is also hard to imagine any other field in which they could apply their talents, and so the odds are that they will fade away, as most adults confidently predict. But the odds in show business have a way of being broken, and the Beatles have more showmanship than any group in years; they might just think up a new field for themselves. After all, they have done it already.


Note that the reviewers were not remotely in touch with the generation to which the Beatles appealed. It's like that joker from Decca records who waited for over an hour in the rain to get into the Cavern Club, and then left in disgust. He said, in retrospect: "That should have told me something right there."
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Feb, 2014 03:44 pm
There seems to have been an unaccountable resentment against them. If you watch the remarks by Mick Jagger when the Beatles were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, there's a lot of sneering in there, about a band from Liverpool, how they all dressed alike (showmanship!), and other assorted petty remarks. He only grudgingly admits that they paved the way for everyone else. I really can't fathom what the source of that resentment is. Richie, though, in true Beatles form, steps up to the microphone and says: "Rock and roll? I though we were a pop band."
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Feb, 2014 05:13 pm
Now a tribute to the world's greatest pop band . . .

ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Feb, 2014 05:14 pm
@ehBeth,
oops that would appear to be something Set had saved before I logged in
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Feb, 2014 03:51 am
Sorry, i don't know how i did that.
Lordyaswas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Feb, 2014 05:22 am
@Setanta,
<sticks hand up at the back of class>

Ooh....I do, I do.....

I did it just the other day. I set up a youtube link and pressed send, and because I wasn't logged in a hamster let me know in a little message that I shouldn't worry, that they'd saved the link (in Jespah's bottom drawer, apparently) and if I logged in they would carry on with the post.

The doorbell rang and it was a man and lorry, delivering my new soffits and guttering.

After stashing said gubbins round the back of the house, I came back go my cold coffee and a log in page. I logged in and hey presto....I'd forgotten all about my youtube doodah thingummy.

I bet ebeth jumped in after you were distracted mid way.

I know that past sentsnce sounded rude, but I meant it in a seriously non innuendo-ish way, believe me.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Feb, 2014 05:26 am
@Lordyaswas,
S'OK . . . you'll have to deal with the wrath of Girl, not me . . .
0 Replies
 
Lordyaswas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Feb, 2014 05:55 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

There seems to have been an unaccountable resentment against them. If you watch the remarks by Mick Jagger when the Beatles were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, there's a lot of sneering in there, about a band from Liverpool, how they all dressed alike (showmanship!), and other assorted petty remarks. He only grudgingly admits that they paved the way for everyone else. I really can't fathom what the source of that resentment is. Richie, though, in true Beatles form, steps up to the microphone and says: "Rock and roll? I though we were a pop band."


Yes, Mick and Keef were always seen as the real down and dirty "proper" rock band in the early days, whereas The Beatles were regarded as the more showbiz and pop of the two. There were many around who, to this day, say that The Beatles (especially Paul) had sold out to commercialism even before they hit the big time. Swapping the leather look (bad guy, serious rocker image) for matching suits and haircuts ( clean cut mummy's boy image)
Meanwhile, The Stones, who started out around the same time, maybe a year later with their first 'hit', took a much more raw approach to their music, drawing on old American blues numbers and taking their lead from Black American Blues artists, like Howling Wolf.
Both bands hit the big time and were almost equally influential in their own way, but it was nearly always the Stones who got the negative press, while the Beatles won the awards from the 'pop' end of the industry.

This battle between the good guys and bad guys of British music was seized upon by the Press, and it generated story after story during the sixties and early seventies.
Therefore, whenever a journalist ever stuck a microphone in front of either Mick or Keef, it was usually an attempt to goad a comment from them as to why they were not as good/nice/succesful/popular as The Beatles.
Sort of "So tell me Mick, do you think that if you wrote better songs, you would start getting awards like the Beatles?"

One, if I remember correctly, went along the line of...."You've just been voted the ugliest rock band in the world. Don't you think it's about time you smartened yourselves up like The Beatles?"

Later on, and in private, they all pretty much mixed in the same circles (London, big houses, Rolls Royces, plenty of exotic tobacco, LSD and willing girls) but in the early days, this light and dark good guy/bad guy pantomime was played out to the full.

Like ticket agents say ...."As long as it puts bums on seats."
0 Replies
 
Lordyaswas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Feb, 2014 06:10 am
And THIS is a classic example........

Note the negative slant by the interviewer, as soon as he gets to Keith and Mick.
Remember, this was back in 1964, right at the very beginning of everything, and they're already trying to get a headline comment from them.
This type of thing went on for year after year after year. It's no surprise that they eventually got the odd headline grabber from The Stones members now and then.

Lordyaswas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Feb, 2014 06:31 am
And.....

0 Replies
 
Lordyaswas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Feb, 2014 06:39 am
I remember John (I think) having a serious go about Mick Jagger in an interview, after Mick had opened his gob to a journalist re. The Beatles break-up. There was a lot of bad feeling around at the time between the actual Beatles, so anything said by an outsider was bound to get jumped on.

I remember avidly reading the interview in the NME I believe, and gawping at all the blanked out words he used when talking about Jagger.
If I remember rightly, Mick had intimated that a glorious band had been split by a talentless Ono. Of course John was going to retaliate.

Pound to a penny that it was a clever sneak of a journo who got the slanging match stoked up in the first place though.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Feb, 2014 09:50 am
@Lordyaswas,
A good point about media manipulation. I liked that Keith and Mick basically answered that it's not something they think about. Very obviously a media manufactured controversy. Thanks Your Lordyship.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Feb, 2014 09:58 am
@Lordyaswas,
From everything i've been able to put together, and it has been strengthened by vids i've watched while posting here, and the vids you've posted, it was George Harrison who was responsible for the break-up, although not in any antagonistic way. After the 1966 show in San Francisco--the last tour date--he told a member of the back-up band "Well, i'm not a Beatle any more." He hated air travel, too. It seems to me that after 1966, they all increasingly went their own way. I don't care for that blaming Yoko shite.
panzade
 
  3  
Reply Wed 12 Feb, 2014 09:58 am
I always thought the rivalry was a press thing too.
I Wanna Be Your Man was given to the Stones; not something you'd do if you were rivals.
WIKI
Quote:
Mick Jagger recalled the song in 1968:
“ We knew (the Beatles) by then and we were rehearsing and Andrew brought Paul and John down to the rehearsal. They said they had this tune, they were really hustlers then. I mean the way they used to hustle tunes was great: 'Hey Mick, we've got this great song.' So they played it and we thought it sounded pretty commercial, which is what we were looking for, so we did it like Elmore James or something. I haven't heard it for ages but it must be pretty freaky 'cause nobody really produced it. It was completely crackers, but it was a hit and sounded great onstage. ”

Bill Wyman noted how the Rolling Stones adapted the song to their style:
“ We kind of learned it pretty quickly 'cause there wasn't that much to learn. Then Brian got his slide out, his steel (guitar) out and dadaw... dadaw... and we said, Yeah, that's better, dirty it up a bit and bash it out, and we kind of completely turned the song around and made it much more tough, Stones- and Elmore James-like.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Feb, 2014 10:01 am
People around here are nutty. Someone voted down Pan's post (? ! ? ! ?)--so i voted it back up. If you're not here about the music and the times, feck off.
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Feb, 2014 10:11 am
Allen Klein also had a hand in the breakup.
Quote:
On learning of the royalty deal that Klein had arranged for the Stones with Decca records, Lennon decided, following the death of The Beatles' manager Brian Epstein, that Klein was the man for him.

Unfortunately, McCartney wanted his father-in-law, Lee Eastman, also a New York lawyer, to manage them. Battlelines between Lennon and McCartney, who were already disagreeing over Yoko Ono, were deepened.

For his part, it has to be acknowledged that Klein played Lennon perfectly, being as knowledgeable as any fan about every Beatles recording and then stressing that Yoko's music was just as relevant as theirs. He and Lennon, he reminded him, even shared the loss of a mother.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Feb, 2014 10:12 am
@Setanta,
I'm amazed. And thrilled!
I've never had a post voted down before...that I know of.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Rockhead's Music Thread - Discussion by Rockhead
What are you listening to right now? - Discussion by Craven de Kere
WA2K Radio is now on the air - Discussion by Letty
Just another music thread. - Discussion by msolga
Classical anyone? - Discussion by JPB
Ship Ahoy: The O'Jays - Discussion by edgarblythe
Evolutionary purpose of music. - Discussion by jackattack
An a2k experiment: What is our favorite song? - Discussion by Robert Gentel
THE DAY THE MUSIC DIED . . . - Discussion by Setanta
Has a Song Ever Made You Cry? - Discussion by Diest TKO
 
  1. Forums
  2. » YOU CAN'T DO THAT
  3. » Page 14
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 08/09/2020 at 05:46:21