The funny thing is that The Beatles were on drugs almost from day one. By 1963, they had been playing the red light district in Hamburg on speed for years. "I Want to Hold Your Hand," "She Loves You" -- this was a sound and energy that had been honed by amphetamines.
the beatles burst on the scene with i like girls girls like me lyrics and five years later they were all f-d up on drugs in india, writing like they're f-ing yoda. it was great.
Yes, The Beatles tried some new things and were very influential, but they were never the vanguard of avant-garde music; by the late 60s, experimentation was happening everywhere. But the early stuff was revolutionary, indebted as it was to Chuck Berry et al. An atom bomb.
bsky.app/profile/jody...
the revolutionary thing about The Beatles (besides just their crazy consistent and prolific output) was to do with the shift of mass popular culture. but like people were doing crazy shit with electronic music in the '50s.
you see it a lot in the film space, where people confuse certain movies that have experimental features or push the boundaries of the mainstream with actual experimental work
Yes, that’s correct version of theory. It was unbelievably impressive who they could keep up with in classic/psychedelic rock and did some great stuff, but they were never tops. People just so instinctively opposed to middlebrow they’d can’t accept Love Me Do et al as absolute perfection they are
And yeah, I get people not wanting to give them too much credit for Chuck stuff but other way, you’re doing same thing to the later artists. (And no, I don’t know right album cut off.)
Yeah, it’s more that they were able get their mainstream audience to follow them when they changed and adopted the modest experimental stuff they did. It actually probably made them more successful - before they branched out they were seen as music for girls and therefore not serious.
I think what they managed to do is combine some avant garde elements with catchy melodies that are marketable. Which is a skill that can be appreciated.
I'm also a passionate early-Beatles defender but I am wondering here - are you comparing them to, like, Stockhausen or Pierre Henry or other academic avant-gardists? Or to like Syd Barrett or such far-out pop guys
It’s not the most varied record but I don’t think anything else comes close to the number of pop hooks per minute on the Hard Day’s Night record. It’s catchy for the entire running time of the album.
Interviews with George Martin ended up being hilarious
George, is Got To Get You Into My Life about marijuana? "No of course not, no." Paul? "Yeah, I wrote it after I smoked pot. I love pot."
George, is Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds about LSD? "No that's silly." Paul? "John tried it, he liked it."
