Log In
Register
2.39am
6 December 2012
Offline
1) Do you consider yourselves in any way “different” from your peers your age, because of your special love of the Beatles, while they seem to be indifferent to the Beatles or only casually like them so-so?
I am very different from a lot of my peers because of my love of The Beatles. Hardly anyone likes them, and the few who do are some of my good friends, although there may be some people I haven’t met that like The Beatles. However, I don’t consider myself different from my non-Beatle-loving peers just because we have different musical tastes; I’d say I’m very different from a lot of my peers in general. I won’t get into that, though. But yes, one of the reasons that I consider myself different is because I love The Beatles and they don’t.
2) If yes to 1, why do you think some people, like you, were so deeply touched by the Beatles, yet others (maybe the slim majority?) seem untouched? Why this difference? I realize this second question is kind of philosophical and maybe asking for sociological or psychological speculation, but I’d be interested in your thoughts anyway.
(My answer to 2 if I were to speculate is that there are two types of people: one type for some reason is relatively immune from peer pressure and can think & feel more independently; while others just go along with the herd mentality and feel it’s more important to be “in” (60s slang) and to be part of the cool crowd, than it is to think outside the box. Here’s the punch line: Any time you find a young person under 20 or even under 30 who loves the Beatles, you have proof positive they are an open-minded, independent thinker for whom creative quality is more important than mere fashion and conformity. So kudos to Apple, Egroeg, Mrs.Mustard, unknown, sky, Holsety, Gerell, and fabfouremily and the other “youngsters” here!)
Um… It’s just preference. There’s no real explanation… maybe “Ew, they’re old, and this music is fun and poppy!” Something like that. And I agree with your answer as well.
Also known as Egg-Rock, Egg-Roll, E-George, Eggy, Ravioli, Eggroll Eggrolli...
~witty quote~
2.41am
6 December 2012
Offline Funny Paper said
Just one thought for now: Do you all agree with me that before the Internet (let’s say, prior to the late 1990s, since I mean the Internet as it has become in the last 15 years or so, as it’s constantly evolving and progressing), kids probably had less of a chance to find exposure to the Beatles. So we may be seeing a resurgence in the last 15 years of more younger fans rediscovering the Beatles, than we had from 1980-2000….? — when (for example) radio stations were no longer playing them; MTV was not featuring them much; and the only other place was from one’s lame/corny parents once in a blue moon putting on Abbey Road for their lame friends on a Friday night when you’re impatient to get out of the house and be with your friends.
Yes, I agree. The Internet is how a lot of modern stars became famous, and it worked the same way for The Beatles… except THE BEATLES WERE ALREADY IN EXISTENCE 50 YEARS AGO!!! 
And then they were rediscovered via the Internet, and the modern generation of Beatles fans was born… 
Also known as Egg-Rock, Egg-Roll, E-George, Eggy, Ravioli, Eggroll Eggrolli...
~witty quote~
3.14am
14 January 2013
Offline Egroeg Evoli said
Funny Paper said
Just one thought for now: Do you all agree with me that before the Internet (let’s say, prior to the late 1990s, since I mean the Internet as it has become in the last 15 years or so, as it’s constantly evolving and progressing), kids probably had less of a chance to find exposure to the Beatles. So we may be seeing a resurgence in the last 15 years of more younger fans rediscovering the Beatles, than we had from 1980-2000….? — when (for example) radio stations were no longer playing them; MTV was not featuring them much; and the only other place was from one’s lame/corny parents once in a blue moon putting on Abbey Road for their lame friends on a Friday night when you’re impatient to get out of the house and be with your friends.Yes, I agree. The Internet is how a lot of modern stars became famous, and it worked the same way for The Beatles… except THE BEATLES WERE ALREADY IN EXISTENCE 50 YEARS AGO!!!
And then they were rediscovered via the Internet, and the modern generation of Beatles fans was born…
This
We have so much more easy excess to things. Plus, I believe other technology has helped to such as remastering the albums or making video games like Rock Band.
3.16am
6 December 2012
Offline Yeah, Rock Band, that could be another reason.
Also known as Egg-Rock, Egg-Roll, E-George, Eggy, Ravioli, Eggroll Eggrolli...
~witty quote~
4.14am
8 November 2012
Offline Funny Paper said
Just one thought for now: Do you all agree with me that before the Internet (let’s say, prior to the late 1990s, since I mean the Internet as it has become in the last 15 years or so, as it’s constantly evolving and progressing), kids probably had less of a chance to find exposure to the Beatles. So we may be seeing a resurgence in the last 15 years of more younger fans rediscovering the Beatles, than we had from 1980-2000….? — when (for example) radio stations were no longer playing them; MTV was not featuring them much; and the only other place was from one’s lame/corny parents once in a blue moon putting on Abbey Road for their lame friends on a Friday night when you’re impatient to get out of the house and be with your friends.
I think the opposite. I feel like radio stations were more diverse, less stratified in their formats when I was growing up (70s/80s), so I actually was more likely to hear The Beatles than I am now unless I specifically seek them out on an “oldies” station. Alternately, before cable there were UHF channels playing the cartoon, and then MTV was airing it for awhile so that was another way they could have been discovered. They also used to play the scene for “Can’t Buy Me Love ” as a music video on the shows I used to watch… “Friday Night Videos,” I think.
There may be more avenues to find them via the Internet if you know who they are, but unless you’ve been already exposed, I think you’re less likely to stumble upon them than before.
parlance
The following people thank parlance for this post:
vonbontee6.04am
27 December 2012
Offline 1) Do you consider yourselves in any way “different” from your peers your age, because of your special love of the Beatles, while they seem to be indifferent to the Beatles or only casually like them so-so?
Aside from the Beatles, I consider myself very “different” from others by a huge margin. I have very unique and exquisite tastes along with my mindset. It only occurred to me when I was studying Behavioural Psychology for children of my age a few months ago. I seem to think differently when not talking about academic stuff, usually everybody sounds like a robot, but during certain times when the moment is right, some unorthodox or bizarre by the school’s standards seem to happen and come out from my mouth. My thoughts have always been different from others. I see the world in a different light from others, I don’t like hanging out with people of my age (no offence) where they talk about nonsense usually about what’s hip and happening, they never reflect about the past and the history. I had a very different sense of humour, somewhat dry, and believe me it made other people laugh but not from kids of my age. I have to admit that I had a personal fable (e.g king of the world) back then, but it eventually died out. I had passion for a lot of things, I never became the jack of all trades, at least I tried to master everything. I always have long-term plans and solutions, whilst others think about now. It never really occurred to me about a life with someone else, while everybody else is going crazy about it, right now I am not planning for it, but I am still look forward to it, I’m just enjoying my youth. I enjoy poetry, and literature for that matter, I am a self-confessed book worm, our population at school is very meagre, and slowly dwindling as the next generation of students come. I have a never-ending thirst for knowledge, I always want to learn more about everything.
Now what makes me really different is the music. People always say that they have the passion for music, but I don’t feel the music that they hear on certain tracks which I deem to be dumb and pointless. I have a huge library of music files spanning from years to years. I never listen to music casually, I listen seriously.
2) If yes to 1, why do you think some people, like you, were so deeply touched by the Beatles, yet others (maybe the slim majority?) seem untouched? Why this difference? I realize this second question is kind of philosophical and maybe asking for sociological or psychological speculation, but I’d be interested in your thoughts anyway.
In my opinion people like me are not brain-washed by the waves of pop music which grow rampant nowadays. I have been exposed to good music at a young age and some of the ones released nowadays pale in comparison to what I used to hear. People believe that old is always junk. They don’t realise that some of the songs being released nowadays are actually remakes of what was released in the past. (e.g “Don’t listen to that, it’s old”, I reply with “so is your mum”). I love the Beatles, their message to the world as well as their impact.
That’s all I can say for now. And I like to add that I like to write essays, oral speeches are not really my thing.
11.04am
1 November 2012
Offline Gerell said
1) Do you consider yourselves in any way “different” from your peers your age, because of your special love of the Beatles, while they seem to be indifferent to the Beatles or only casually like them so-so?Aside from the Beatles, I consider myself very “different” from others by a huge margin. I have very unique and exquisite tastes along with my mindset. It only occurred to me when I was studying Behavioural Psychology for children of my age a few months ago. I seem to think differently when not talking about academic stuff, usually everybody sounds like a robot, but during certain times when the moment is right, some unorthodox or bizarre by the school’s standards seem to happen and come out from my mouth. My thoughts have always been different from others. I see the world in a different light from others, I don’t like hanging out with people of my age (no offence) where they talk about nonsense usually about what’s hip and happening, they never reflect about the past and the history. I had a very different sense of humour, somewhat dry, and believe me it made other people laugh but not from kids of my age. I have to admit that I had a personal fable (e.g king of the world) back then, but it eventually died out. I had passion for a lot of things, I never became the jack of all trades, at least I tried to master everything. I always have long-term plans and solutions, whilst others think about now. It never really occurred to me about a life with someone else, while everybody else is going crazy about it, right now I am not planning for it, but I am still look forward to it, I’m just enjoying my youth. I enjoy poetry, and literature for that matter, I am a self-confessed book worm, our population at school is very meagre, and slowly dwindling as the next generation of students come. I have a never-ending thirst for knowledge, I always want to learn more about everything.
Now what makes me really different is the music. People always say that they have the passion for music, but I don’t feel the music that they hear on certain tracks which I deem to be dumb and pointless. I have a huge library of music files spanning from years to years. I never listen to music casually, I listen seriously.
2) If yes to 1, why do you think some people, like you, were so deeply touched by the Beatles, yet others (maybe the slim majority?) seem untouched? Why this difference? I realize this second question is kind of philosophical and maybe asking for sociological or psychological speculation, but I’d be interested in your thoughts anyway.
In my opinion people like me are not brain-washed by the waves of pop music which grow rampant nowadays. I have been exposed to good music at a young age and some of the ones released nowadays pale in comparison to what I used to hear. People believe that old is always junk. They don’t realise that some of the songs being released nowadays are actually remakes of what was released in the past. (e.g “Don’t listen to that, it’s old”, I reply with “so is your mum”). I love the Beatles, their message to the world as well as their impact.
That’s all I can say for now. And I like to add that I like to write essays, oral speeches are not really my thing.
Thanks Gerrell — but the question becomes: how many people your age would sympathize with you and understand you? Just a tiny minority, or many?
I think the bottom line is: Can the Beatles *Myth* sustain itself as “cool” or not? That’s the bottom line. Teenagers are ruthless. More vicious than tigers or lions when it comes to fashion. All they give a f**k about, pardon my Arabic, is whether something is “cool” or not. So why are the Beatles cool — or not?
Faded flowers, wait in a jar, till the evening is complete... complete... complete... complete...
11.53am
15 January 2013
Offline I am 15 years of age and have been a beatles fan since the age of 6. My mum and dad bought 1 album and hooked ever since then. I had only ever to the song on the one album and then i found that The Beatles had done a film, I was shocked and amazed, It was A Hard Days Night. I watched sinipts of the film and bought on DVD. And the rest went from there.
I dont know why the The Beatles are so popular with me. I could be a mix of anything, Great Guys with great personalitys but the main thing is just brilliant music. The rest comes with the package.
Hope this helps
1.54pm
27 December 2012
Offline Funny Paper said
Gerell said
1) Do you consider yourselves in any way “different” from your peers your age, because of your special love of the Beatles, while they seem to be indifferent to the Beatles or only casually like them so-so?Aside from the Beatles, I consider myself very “different” from others by a huge margin. I have very unique and exquisite tastes along with my mindset. It only occurred to me when I was studying Behavioural Psychology for children of my age a few months ago. I seem to think differently when not talking about academic stuff, usually everybody sounds like a robot, but during certain times when the moment is right, some unorthodox or bizarre by the school’s standards seem to happen and come out from my mouth. My thoughts have always been different from others. I see the world in a different light from others, I don’t like hanging out with people of my age (no offence) where they talk about nonsense usually about what’s hip and happening, they never reflect about the past and the history. I had a very different sense of humour, somewhat dry, and believe me it made other people laugh but not from kids of my age. I have to admit that I had a personal fable (e.g king of the world) back then, but it eventually died out. I had passion for a lot of things, I never became the jack of all trades, at least I tried to master everything. I always have long-term plans and solutions, whilst others think about now. It never really occurred to me about a life with someone else, while everybody else is going crazy about it, right now I am not planning for it, but I am still look forward to it, I’m just enjoying my youth. I enjoy poetry, and literature for that matter, I am a self-confessed book worm, our population at school is very meagre, and slowly dwindling as the next generation of students come. I have a never-ending thirst for knowledge, I always want to learn more about everything.
Now what makes me really different is the music. People always say that they have the passion for music, but I don’t feel the music that they hear on certain tracks which I deem to be dumb and pointless. I have a huge library of music files spanning from years to years. I never listen to music casually, I listen seriously.
2) If yes to 1, why do you think some people, like you, were so deeply touched by the Beatles, yet others (maybe the slim majority?) seem untouched? Why this difference? I realize this second question is kind of philosophical and maybe asking for sociological or psychological speculation, but I’d be interested in your thoughts anyway.
In my opinion people like me are not brain-washed by the waves of pop music which grow rampant nowadays. I have been exposed to good music at a young age and some of the ones released nowadays pale in comparison to what I used to hear. People believe that old is always junk. They don’t realise that some of the songs being released nowadays are actually remakes of what was released in the past. (e.g “Don’t listen to that, it’s old”, I reply with “so is your mum”). I love the Beatles, their message to the world as well as their impact.
That’s all I can say for now. And I like to add that I like to write essays, oral speeches are not really my thing.
Thanks Gerrell — but the question becomes: how many people your age would sympathize with you and understand you? Just a tiny minority, or many?
I think the bottom line is: Can the Beatles *Myth* sustain itself as “cool” or not? That’s the bottom line. Teenagers are ruthless. More vicious than tigers or lions when it comes to fashion. All they give a f**k about, pardon my Arabic, is whether something is “cool” or not. So why are the Beatles cool — or not?
People would only sympathise with me and that’s as far as it could go. They would understand me as someone different a hipster per se.
1.54am
1 November 2012
Offline Then there’s this whole cultural phenomenon of “retro” — where certain things from a past era become cool partly by being from a past era. You’ll find some kids who have re-discovered James Dean, for example, or even Elvis (Of course, you don’t see groups of kids dressing up like the 1920s and listening to ragtime jazz…)
Even if the Internet has opened up the archives so to speak of past eras, it wouldn’t explain why today you don’t see t groups of teenage Dylan fans, or teenage Stones fans or teenage Buddy Holly fans — or maybe you do?
Faded flowers, wait in a jar, till the evening is complete... complete... complete... complete...
3.55am
6 December 2012
Offline Only one explanation for that- The Beatles are better than all of them!
The following people thank Egroeg Evoli for this post:
BeatlebugAlso known as Egg-Rock, Egg-Roll, E-George, Eggy, Ravioli, Eggroll Eggrolli...
~witty quote~
4.13am
14 January 2013
Offline I do see teens into the Stones, Aerosmith, Led Zep, Black Sabbath, and Pink Floyd. Maybe not as much as The Beatles.
5.54am
1 November 2012
Offline Egroeg Evoli said
Only one explanation for that- The Beatles are better than all of them!
I actually think that’s seriously the only reasonable explanation!
Faded flowers, wait in a jar, till the evening is complete... complete... complete... complete...
6.00am
1 November 2012
Offline sky090909 said
I do see teens into the Stones, Aerosmith, Led Zep, Black Sabbath, and Pink Floyd. Maybe not as much as The Beatles.
There’s a sense where some things old suffer from an unavoidable “corny” factor — like old movies, old TV shows, etc. seem incapable of coming off as current to a person’s modern sensibility and taste. But then, there’s the opposite phenomenon where bands like the ones you named rarely sound out of date or corny when the teenager of today first hears them. Their initial reaction can’t be “oh that sounds so old fashioned” — simply because the music of bands like that is just too powerfully cool. And I would think this applies even more so to the Beatles (though the Beatles often took musical dares that will put off some new people listening to them for the first time, depending on what song is chosen).
Faded flowers, wait in a jar, till the evening is complete... complete... complete... complete...
8.04am
27 December 2012
Offline Pink Floyd has a really huge following, since some of their culture relates to some people nowadays. I haven’t encountered any actual devotees to a single group, mostly they pick some songs off their discography but not everything.
6.25pm
3 May 2012
Offline Funny Paper said
Then there’s this whole cultural phenomenon of “retro” — where certain things from a past era become cool partly by being from a past era. You’ll find some kids who have re-discovered James Dean, for example, or even Elvis (Of course, you don’t see groups of kids dressing up like the 1920s and listening to ragtime jazz…)Even if the Internet has opened up the archives so to speak of past eras, it wouldn’t explain why today you don’t see t groups of teenage Dylan fans, or teenage Stones fans or teenage Buddy Holly fans — or maybe you do?
I agree with what you say about ”retro” suddenly being ”cool”, not only because there seems to be a new generation of Beatles fans but also because of average daily things that were made with a certain decade in mind. Fashions from previous decades come and go, as well (not sure if you meant this exactly).
As for the new fans, I see a lot of people with Stones and Led Zepp tops on. Whether that means they are actually fans or not though, I don’t know. The Beatles certainly seem to reach all generations of people more than anybody else can.
Gerell said
Pink Floyd has a really huge following, since some of their culture relates to some people nowadays. I haven’t encountered any actual devotees to a single group, mostly they pick some songs off their discography but not everything.
Never knew this. I thought I was quite alone being such a big, young PF fan, nice to know there are more people out there like me
Moving along in our God given ways, safety is sat by the fire/Sanctuary from these feverish smiles, left with a mark on the door.
(Passover - I. Curtis)
8.10pm
1 November 2012
Offline I don’t know if you guys knew this, but it came as a surprise to me when I first heard it about 20 years ago — but it makes sense. It’s about popular music history, and it’s a fascinating glimpse into sociology.
Basically and supposedly, During the 1930s, 40s and into the early 50s, parents and teenagers both liked pretty much the same music.
Only as the 50s unfolded, then exploded into the 60s, did a split occur between the tastes of parents and teens — a chasm between them.
In certain small and subtle ways, however, it seems that “generation gap” has being narrowing in the past 10 to 20 years, in the sense that the very same Parents of say 1990-2000 grew up liking music that isn’t as far in distance from what kids are listening to today, than the distance between what music their parents liked compared with theirs. (Not sure of my math here, and I may be off a bit, but you get the idea…)
Faded flowers, wait in a jar, till the evening is complete... complete... complete... complete...
8.47pm
14 January 2013
Offline I think in some sense thats true and also it depends on the relationship between the parents and kids. Not always.
6.36am
27 December 2012
Offline I get what you mean. Paul would even bother to listen to his dad’s songs, whereas we do not see this as often today.
7.19am
1 November 2012
Offline Gerell said
I get what you mean. Paul would even bother to listen to his dad’s songs, whereas we do not see this as often today.
That’s ironic because as a young lad of say 12 or 13, he had no problem listening to his dad’s songs, and probably other music around that was old hat — but within 5 years or so he would be one major contributor in the world of creating that generation gap! (Of course, he had the good sense of keeping the flame alive of the old music)
Faded flowers, wait in a jar, till the evening is complete... complete... complete... complete...
1 Guest(s)