Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Robert Elms - "Why I hate The Beatles"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 12:51 PM
Original message
Robert Elms - "Why I hate The Beatles"
I don't hate the Beatles, but he does bring up some good points.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/insideldn/radio/robertelms_beatles.shtml

I don't think a music critic has ever written a piece this long about Oasis, saying that they hate the Gallagher brothers.

Score one for Oasis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mr blur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. Well, most of us here
have hated Robert Elms since the 80s. He summed up the vacuous '80s perfectly for me - all "style" and no substance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lenidog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. No one would waste that much time and ink to say that they hate
Oasis and if they did no one would notice. Because everyone else hates Oasis. But if you say you hate the Beatles then people sit up and take notice because unlike Oasis the Beatles are important to music history. In other words Oasis loses its one point and then loses another.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vi5 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
3. I agree 110% with everything in that article except...
...the bit about George Harrison being the only one to not embarrass himself post-Beatles. Has he ever heard "Got My Mind Set on You"?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. He wrote two songs about the Beatles, too.
"All Those Years Ago" and "When We Was Fab"

I think that's even worse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
norml Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
4. What he hates about them, I love about them.
Dare to be silly! All you need is love.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bookman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
5. Music is subjective
Looking 40 years back to comment on the Beatles may be a bit unfair. However I'd take an all Beatles radio station to some the junk passing for music today.

Can music be good without a social message? Sure it can. Is it ok for a mainstream rock band to appeal across ages. Why not?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
7. You know...
I used to be more or less indifferent to Oasis. But I have to say, you've made me loathe them with a burning passion. Congratulations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. hehe
At least all his efforts haven't been in vain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lenidog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. You know the same thing kinda happened to me
Though he isn't the only one to blame. I used to never think about Oasis till I started hanging out around here again. Then I began to realized after the many Oasis thread how truly the band sucked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deutsey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
10. I'll be surprised if anyone has anything to say about Oasis forty years
from now other than, "Who?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skygazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Frankly, I'm saying "who?" right now
I have no idea who the hell they are or what they play but all the threads that have been posted here have certainly made me less receptive to hearing them. I'm nearly as sick of the word "Oasis" as I am "Schiavo".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HalfManHalfBiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
12. I guess I wouldn't say that I hate the Beatles
Because some people can't help it if they are drug addicts. Still, the Beatles should not have recruited so many young children into their dope lifestyle by writing songs like Octopuses Garden and OblaDiBaDa. And their porn songs like Norwegian Wood and Yellow Submarine would get them in trouble today, just ask Michael Jackson.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone Pawn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
13. Idiot attention-seeking whore.
Everyone loves the Beatles--so saying 'the Beatles suck' gets attention. It's like if I were to write a long piece about how Van Gogh was a crappy artist, I'd get much more attention than if I were to write a long piece about how black-velvet Elvis paintings suck. He's just an attention whore.

But just for fun,

Truly great bands don't make terrible records.

The Beatles haven't made so much as an *average* LP, and I challenge you to find ONE band that has not made a sub-par record. Hell, some of the other bands he listed made unlistenable LPs--Rolling Stones and "Their Satanic Majesties' Request" springs to mind.

none of The Beatles were ever particularly good vocalists or great musicians.

Oh. I see. Merely writing and performing the most successful, listened-to songs of all time has no impact on whether or not you're a good musician.

took all the sex and the passion and the dirt out of raw rock and roll.

How dare they make art! I want my sex and I want my effeminate rich guys pretending to be poor toughs! I want base theatre, and if you don't give me base theatre, *you're* the tasteless one!



And how can a truly great songwriter come up with something as ingratiatingly simplistic and syrupy as the awful 'All You Need Is Love'?


Yes, when you consider that they released one, two, or sometimes three LPs of consistantly good music every year for 8 years, certainly if there's a single song you don't like in the mix--despite it being quite well-loved, judging from sales and radio play over 40 years--they're bad artists.

Perhaps the most annoying bit of the whole overblown Beatles myth is when people harp on about how 'Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band' is the greatest, most profound, most important album of all time. No it isn't. Have you actually listened to it all the way through lately? It's a dated, soulless, overblown exercise in studio trickery and trite musical tourism.

What an argument. "Sgt. Pepper is the greatest album of all time." "No, it isn't."
"Why?"
"It sucks."
"Why?"
"Because it's bad."
That's not music criticism, that's just random insulting.

Compare that to say Dylan's majestic 'Blonde On Blonde' or Marvin Gaye's achingly Heartfelt 'What's Going On', both records from roughly the same era and tell me which is the masterpiece.

The man complains about triteness and then references Dylan, who just made shit up as he sang it as a counter? And thinks that Gaye's 'Mother, mother, there's too many of you crying, brother, brother, there's too many of you dying" is deep by comparison? Dear God.


Paul McCartney croaked his way through the Frog Song, Rupert the Bear and Rudolph The Red Nosed Reggae.


And Ram and Band on the Run. But hey, if you can find a few bad songs in the mix, you can conclusively prove that the other band sucks.

The guy's entire argument is just to find a few songs he doesn't like, and then use a combination of those songs and general insults to 'prove' the band sucks.

What a hack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone Pawn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
14. Speaking of reviewers, let's look at what Rolling Stone says about Oasis..
(culled from various reviews of albums on RollingStone.com

...the kind of earnest "Wind Beneath My Wings" crap even Bryan Adams would know to edit...

...he's still not above using the old tried-and-true devices, the stuff that worked for Jerry Lee Lewis and the Beatles, to get his point across...

...One day we may look back, in wonder if not in anger, at the collective hallucination that heralded Oasis as the new Beatles...

... Bored ballads about "how you saved my life," leaden rockers about it being "all too much for me to take": You want listless clichés, Noel Gallagher's got 'em...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalpragmatist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. That's one view - here's another
Edited on Thu Mar-31-05 05:33 PM by liberalpragmatist
Definitely Maybe *****

Definitely Maybe manages to encapsulate much of the best of British rock & roll — from the Beatles to the Stone Roses — in the space of 11 songs. Oasis' sound is louder and more guitar-oriented than any British band since the Sex Pistols, and the band is blessed with the excellent songwriting of Noel Gallagher. Gallagher writes perfect pop songs, offering a platform for his brother Liam's brash, snarling vocals. Not only does the band have melodies, but they have the capability to work a groove with more dexterity than most post-punk groups. But what makes Definitely Maybe so intoxicating is that it already resembles a greatest-hits album. From the swirling rush of "Rock 'n' Roll Star," through the sinewy "Shakermaker," to the heartbreaking "Live Forever," each song sounds like an instant classic.


And...

(What's the Story) Morning Glory? ****1/2
If Definitely Maybe was an unintentional concept album about wanting to be a rock & roll star, (What's the Story) Morning Glory? is what happens after the dreams come true. Oasis turns in a relatively introspective second record, filled with big, gorgeous ballads instead of ripping rockers. Unlike Definitely Maybe, the production on Morning Glory is varied enough to handle the range in emotions; instead of drowning everything with amplifiers turned up to 12, there are strings, keyboards, and harmonicas. This expanded production helps give Noel Gallagher's sweeping melodies an emotional resonance that he occasionally can't convey lyrically. However, that is far from a fatal flaw; Gallagher's lyrics work best in fragments, where the images catch in your mind and grow, thanks to the music. Gallagher may be guilty of some borrowing, or even plagiarism, but he uses the familiar riffs as building blocks. This is where his genius lies: He's a thief and doesn't have many original thoughts, but as a pop/rock melodicist he's pretty much without peer. Likewise, as musicians, Oasis are hardly innovators, yet they have a majestic grandeur in their sound that makes ballads like "Wonderwall" or rockers like "Some Might Say" positively transcendent. Alan White does add authority to the rhythm section, but the most noticeable change is in Liam Gallagher. His voice sneered throughout Definitely Maybe, but on Morning Glory his singing has become more textured and skillful. He gives the lyric in the raging title track a hint of regret, is sympathetic on "Wonderwall," defiant on "Some Might Say," and humorous on "She's Electric," a bawdy rewrite of "Digsy's Diner." It might not have the immediate impact of Definitely Maybe, but Morning Glory is just as exciting and compulsively listenable.

And...

(What's the Story) Morning Glory? Singles Box Set ****1/2
Many of the songs on Oasis' second album, (What's the Story) Morning Glory?, illustrated that Noel Gallagher's songwriting skills had deepened considerably, but the depth of his talent becomes evident when the B-sides of the album's singles are also considered. Almost every song from those four singles — which Creation conveniently packaged in one box set in the wake of Morning Glory's success — is at least the equal of what was on the actual album, and several are actually far better than a few songs on the official record. The three flip sides for Some Might Say all were worthy of inclusion on the album. "Acquiesce," which Oasis used as the opener on their 1996 tour, is an astonishing hard rocker, where Liam and Noel trade the verse and chorus in a song about their notorious love-hate relationship. The throttling "Headshrinker" is fine, but "Talk Tonight" is the other gem, a spare Noel showcase that finds him disarmingly letting down his emotional guard. The two keepers from Roll With It are a little less assuming, but the rolling acoustics of "It's Better People" are charming, and "Rockin' Chair," with its haunting melody and Liam's nuanced vocal, is an overlooked gem. While the full-length instrumental "The Swamp Song" on Wonderwall is a bit tedious, "Round Are Way" is fantastic, sounding like Definitely Maybe crossed with Madness, and the string-drenched "The Master Plan" is as effective an epic as "Champagne Supernova." Oasis begin to run out of steam on Don't Look Back in Anger, resorting to a cover of Slade's "Cum on Feel the Noize" to round out the three B-sides. While that is actually heavier than Quiet Riot's hit cover, the hyperactive "Step Out" — which was pulled from Morning Glory at the last minute — totally demolishes it, and the neo-psychedelic "Underneath the Sky" is a lovely change of pace. There's an album's worth of fresh material scattered throughout these singles, and it's no exaggeration to say that those songs form an album as good as (What's the Story) Morning Glory?, which makes you wish Noel showed a little more control in deciding what went on the album and what was reserved for the B-sides.

http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&token=ADFEAEE4781FDD4BAF7320C5992C4C9DEC25D200D047E3C00C320456D3B82D10D9552EB908A295CEAEF974AB7BAFFF2BE85F05D0CAE453F8CC0640&uid=MIW040503311730&sql=11:3zzyxdgbjolg~T2

From All Music Guide - a much better source than Rolling Stone.

***

Not saying that Oasis hasn't produced some crap. And yeah, the statement that nobody has ever criticized Oasis is asinine.

And yes, the Beatles were great. This coming from a 19-year-old.

But next time, don't reference Rolling Stone. They're the biggest trend-whores in the business and their reviews are entirely predictable - breathless 4-star reviews when someone is hot, two-star dismissals when they're not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elperromagico Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-31-05 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
15. Keep posting Oasis threads, and I'm sure such an article will appear.
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC