This strange effect they had on us all seemed to also be changing everything else. Hair styles, of course. The Beatles brought with them a cheerful Marxist anarchy (initially, Groucho – later, Karl) that infused itself into American youth, George brought The Beatles to the Maharishi, which singlehandedly popularized Eastern philosophy in America. Though never explicitly, The Beatles encouraged drug experimentation. They created controversy, were bigger than Jesus, became another band with "Sgt. Pepper," began to fray at the edges, got married, turned dysfunctional, and after the very short musical recording life span of eight years, broke up. The world shook at the news, but continued to turn.
Beyond all of this, beyond sociological discussions of their historical importance, there is the music. The music of the Beatles continues to be as vibrant today as when it first vibrated over airspace and touched eardrums. I told a friend I was writing this and he sent an email with a few of his thoughts.
“The Beatles cut across landscapes,” he said, “both then and now. My 80-year-old mom and my 16 year-old son know songs from the same group that I listen to – a group that actually stopped producing new music before I turned ten. Does Picasso hold that same appeal? Or Melville or Sinatra?” This is a very good point. No one denies Beethoven’s greatness, Mozart’s brilliance, but the vast reach of the Beatles to touch billions of people through their music – intimately, currently, daily – is unparalleled in human history. And after all, for music to have value, it must be heard. Their music stands comfortably beside the best ever created, the most timeless compositions, popular and classical, in invention and musical sophistication. On some scale, they would have to weigh in as the greatest musicians who have yet lived. I can already hear the stately, isolated classicalists groaning, the phalanxes of disgruntled jazzers grumbling, in between saxophone honks, while aping Parker Be-Bop.
Despite that and them, I believe the statement is, by any number of criteria, self evident.
I’ve been listening to their music all this week as I’ve been writing this, and as I’ve heard, for the thousandth time, again, this enormous quilt of sound that comprises their catalogue, I’m struck mostly by one common characteristic – this stuff sounds like it was recorded yesterday. It leaps up out of the speakers in 3-D, everywhere in it is this immediacy, this infectious throb of life, boundless joy and humor, unbridled creativity and irrepressible spirit. It would take a whole book to go into all the songs, what makes them each great. I don’t have the space for that here.
Article comments
1 - ostrova
I don't think they were millionaires for a long time. Sir Paul has most of his money from music publishing, I believe, and remember he doesn't own the Lennon and McCartney catalog!
2 - Will Brennan
Well, they were certainly pulling in millions as a group. Back in 1964, The Beatles were sent a check from EMI for three months record sales, which came to 6 million pounds. That's 24 million a year, just from records. I don't know what the pound/dollar exchange was at the time, but the pound has been double the dollar historically. Suffice it to say, they made a lot of money. It got taken away by the British tax system, used in bad business deals, their finances got very messy, but they did become millionaires.