Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
5.15pm
15 February 2010
Offline
Do you think the Beatles would have remained popular / relevant in the '70's up to now if they hadn't broken up or perhaps gotten back together? Do you think they would be so iconic now if they didn't break up or if Lennon hadn't been killed?
I wonder about these things sometimes. I'm curious what you guys think!
6.07pm
31 March 2008
Offline
I'm kind of glad they split up when they did. Music was fragmenting hugely by the end of the 1960s, and it continued to do so in the 1970s. The Beatles would have been hopelessly irrelevant among funk, disco, glam rock and 70s heavy rock – you can see them trying to fit in with some of those styles in the 70s and 80s as solo artists, and normally they didn't do it well.
John Lennon admitted as much, that he couldn't find a way to be relevant amid all the young people coming through (this was around the Mind Games era when he dabbled a bit with trying to be glam in his image, before giving it up).
Although I'd love to know what else they could have come up with had they stayed together, if they'd made a truly duff album it would have destroyed the dream. As it is, they owned the 1960s. They'd never have done the same for another decade.
Yes, they'd be iconic now if Lennon hadn't died.
6.37pm
27 April 2010
Offline
What if The Beatles had summer of 1964 to do over? Would they still have begun their Eurasia tour without Ringo, or would they refuse and postpone it a couple weeks? I know George Harrison had commented once or twice on how he resented being told they could not cancel their scheduled tour even though Ringo had been suddenly hospitalized with tonsillitis. I think in general he was upset over how often they could not (or were not very effective at) make decisions for themselves at that early point in their careers. Jimmy Nicol didn't do too bad though. If you like, have a listen to Jimmy with John, Paul & George playing in Holland.
http://www.thebeatlesrarity.co…..mmy-nicol/
6.40pm
27 April 2010
Offline
Joe said:
I'm kind of glad they split up when they did. Music was fragmenting hugely by the end of the 1960s, and it continued to do so in the 1970s. The Beatles would have been hopelessly irrelevant among funk, disco, glam rock and 70s heavy rock – you can see them trying to fit in with some of those styles in the 70s and 80s as solo artists, and normally they didn't do it well.
John Lennon admitted as much, that he couldn't find a way to be relevant amid all the young people coming through (this was around the Mind Games era when he dabbled a bit with trying to be glam in his image, before giving it up).
Although I'd love to know what else they could have come up with had they stayed together, if they'd made a truly duff album it would have destroyed the dream. As it is, they owned the 1960s. They'd never have done the same for another decade.
Yes, they'd be iconic now if Lennon hadn't died.
I think they are iconic anyway.
11.34am
13 November 2009
Offline
I think The Beatles would be just as iconic but Lennon wouldn't be because he wouldn't be the martyr he is today if he hadn't died (by definition obviously, but hopefully you know what I mean). I think John would have eventually got over the whole peace thing, he would have kept wanting peace of course but he would've got over telling everyone about it all the time. I think he was just starting a new point in his life when he died. I think there definitely would have been a Beatles reunion which would have changed The Beatles and John's legacies completely, perhaps for the worse. But saying that, that doesn't mean I'm glad John died – quite the opposite.
8.26pm
14 April 2010
Offline
Joe said:
I'm kind of glad they split up when they did. Music was fragmenting hugely by the end of the 1960s, and it continued to do so in the 1970s. The Beatles would have been hopelessly irrelevant among funk, disco, glam rock and 70s heavy rock – you can see them trying to fit in with some of those styles in the 70s and 80s as solo artists, and normally they didn't do it well.
As it is, they owned the 1960s. They'd never have done the same for another decade.
While I am sad to this day that they split up (I was 7 years old and crushed!!), I agree that the break up was well timed. As far as iconic, consider this. Here in the US, The Beatles outsold every act, past or present in the decade of 2000 through 2009 except for Eminem (go figure).
That said, do you think there will be a video game 40 years from now calld "Rock Band: Eminem"? Doubt it.
To the fountain of perpetual mirth, Let it roll for all its worth.
2295 6972
Most Users Ever Online: 597
Currently Online: Inner Light, Ralphrennick
4 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
mr. Sun king coming together: 6972
meanmistermustard: 3438
MeanMrsMustard: 2794
Egroeg Evoli: 1540
vonbontee: 1427
Von Bontee: 1378
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 87
Members: 1685
Moderators: 5
Admins: 1
Forum Stats:
Groups: 3
Forums: 33
Topics: 2400
Posts: 73456
Newest Members: BrettB, Ralphrennick, fartoons, RIGBY, WilliamCampbell
Moderators: Joe (2702), skye (2295), Ellie (1), Zig (2752), mithveaen (4675)
Administrators: Joe (2702)
