Why the Beatles

I’ve spent a lot of time in Mexico lately, and some of my younger friends there have asked why there is such a mystique surrounding the Beatles. So here are my thoughts, especially for my younger friends who know something big was happening at the time but crave more context on the Beatlemania that swept the world in the 1960s.

They only released 12 studio albums over 7 years, but in shaping the modern (post-Elvis) era of music, no other band comes close. 11 of those 12 albums reached #1 on the charts (and the 12th peaked at #2). Nearly every song on every album was a hit. When I look today at Rolling Stone magazine’s list of top 100 Beatles songs, I can sing at least 85 of them right now off the top of my head, and so can many people without even realizing it. No other band has seeped into the popular imagination in quite that way. As an indication of their dominance, even the last song on the Rolling Stone list, #100, reached #1 on the singles charts. During some years, they were releasing hit songs so fast that they were taking up all the spots (e.g., there was at least one week in the mid-1960s when Beatles songs held all of the five top spots on the Billboard singles chart). Keith Richards, who was there at the 1960s epicenter as lead guitarist for the Rolling Stones, once said that there would be no Rolling Stones without the Beatles, because “they kicked the door in” for the Stones and everyone else to follow. (You can see Keith, Mick Jagger, and others in a couple of the later Beatles clips below, as they were usually hanging around for the taping.)

Ozzy Osbourne, whose Satanic antics with his late 60s proto-metal band, Black Sabbath, earned him the nickname “The Prince of Darkness,” was once talking to one of the Sex Pistols in the mid-70s London punk scene. The Sex Pistol (I forget which one) said he didn’t like the Beatles. Ozzy’s response was typical Ozzy: “There’s something fucking wrong with you,” was all he said. But he later added: “For a musician in 1970s London, saying you don’t like the Beatles is like saying you don’t like oxygen.”

The revolutionary work of the Beatles – culturally and musically – is less clear now than it was then, partly (1) because they shaped the sound of music so much to their own image that they now sound like just “one of those 1960s bands,” and (2) their own evolution from beautiful pop love songs to psychedelic rock and experimental sounds, though rapid, was steady enough that no one point seems revolutionary (although some would focus on the 1967 release of the Sgt Pepper’s album as that point). So yes, there were many great bands in the mid-60s to mid-70s reshaping the sonic universe of music, and some of them you might like more than the Beatles, but most of them looked back at the Beatles as the groundbreakers.

Here are a few songs in historical order:

(If it helps measure historical impact, note that even what I’ve listed as “late” Beatles came before the emergence of Pink Floyd or Led Zeppelin or the Woodstock festival.)

Early Beatles (1964) https://vimeo.com/241059239
Middle Beatles (1966) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYvkICbTZIQ
Late Beatles (1967): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usNsCeOV4GM

And bonus songs/videos from 1967-68:
Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds (1967) https://vimeo.com/249451145
All You Need Is Love (1967) https://vimeo.com/214047758
Revolution (1968) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFckPkukF7g

Click covers below for links.

BookCoverImage    year-bfly-cover        

21 thoughts on “Why the Beatles

  1. starting with John Lennon’s adaptation of chords in every song, along with the rhythmic changes, the great bass lines, and the seamless drumming there was always a freshness and still is – and seeing them live – and hearing some of it – was something else entirely even better…..

    Liked by 4 people

      • Related, that made me chuckle – over at WEIT JezGrove commented: “I just finished reading Craig Brown’s new book about the Beatles (One Two Three Four:The Beatles in Time). On the last page he quotes the philosopher and politician Bryan Magee from February 1967: “Does anyone seriously believe that Beatles music will be an unthinkingly accepted part of daily life in the 2000s?” So much for Magee’s prescience!!

        Liked by 1 person

  2. My son is twenty and when he and his friends were 11 and 12 they liked the Beatles, Who, Joplin, Dylan, and Hendrix. I didn’t push my son…I know that is the best way to have a kid to hate something.

    Not only their music but their story. This sounds so corny but it was destiny that they met, stayed together, and then made it huge.

    Between 2000-2010 they were the top-selling band…I mean 30 years after they broke up…not bad. I grew up in the 80s as a teenager…and I knew then…man this music doesn’t equal Beatles.

    Their music, sense of humor, being unafraid to take chances, and talent that won. George Martin would say that when 4 of them were in a room you could feel the difference.

    I think when we are long gone they will still be around.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. I just read your post over again and it is excellent. I wonder if people who were young when the Sgt Pepper’s album was released could have any idea of the impact of that album. Late 60s and early 70s I imagine was much like the Roaring 20s.

    Liked by 2 people

    • I was just a kid then, William, too young for the Summer of Love but old enough to see TV news clips of Woodstock 2 years later. My reaction to your question is mixed. I (like everyone of age in those days) was very enthusiastic about the music and cultural dynamics of the day. They are still defining aspects of my character. However, did I realize how large Sgt Pepper’s/1967 would loom in the large scope of cultural history? Probably not 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Pingback: Deeper into the rabbit hole | shakemyheadhollow

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.