The difference between The Beatles and every one of those acts is how quickly they transformed into serious material (and none of the performers you mentioned ever did). They only reached the zenith of popularity in the US in 1964 and by 1965-1966 the were doing Rubber Soul and Revolver.
Don’t forget The Monkees. They were a major influence on The Beatles.
Crazy how quickly they evolved musically from “I want to hold your hand”, to Sargent Pepper and Magical Mystery Tour in a few short years.
Quote from the story, from an adult woman who was part of beatlemania in the 60s. Remember, in the early-mid 60s, the options for girls growing up were still pretty limited. Things began to change rapidly in the mid-late 60s and 70s.
"It didn`t feel sexual, as I would now define that. It felt more about wanting freedom. I didn`t want to grow up and be a wife, and it seemed to me that the Beatles had the kind of freedom I wanted: No rules, they could spend two days lying in bed; they ran around on motorbikes, ate from room service. . . . I didn`t want to sleep with Paul McCartney, I was too young. But I wanted to be like them, something larger than life."
You guys are all clueless. The girls screaming at the Beatles didn't know anything about WWII. It was a phenomenon that mostly affected only teenage girls. I was in 6th grade in 1963-64 and all of my classmates were 11 or 12. And the girls in the class absolutely did lose their minds and become different creatures with anything related to the Beatles. Most adults had no idea why and the boys in the class were completely clueless as well.
There was definitely a sexual component involved. The Baby Boomers were by far the largest cohort in the history of the world and many girls were all entering or had just entered puberty. The Beatles were a new sound, with different accents and hair styles and everything just coalesced to create a cultural spectacle. Also, the Beatles were cute without being overtly sexual in the was that someone like Elvis was, so less threatening to a 12-year-old girl.
Also, the media was not fragmented the way it became later. Everyone watched the same 3 channels and listened to the same radio stations with the same top-40 hits. For just about anyone who is my age the Beatles first appearance on Ed Sullivan was a cultural event that people still associate with a particular time and place in their life.
This is spot on. (I was in 8th grade.) All the boys were flummoxed. We had no idea why the girls acted like they did. Like when they started collecting the little hanger tags off the back of boys shirts--they'd sneak up and rip them off the shirt. Go figure.
The difference between The Beatles and every one of those acts is how quickly they transformed into serious material (and none of the performers you mentioned ever did). They only reached the zenith of popularity in the US in 1964 and by 1965-1966 the were doing Rubber Soul and Revolver.
Don’t forget The Monkees. They were a major influence on The Beatles.
Crazy how quickly they evolved musically from “I want to hold your hand”, to Sargent Pepper and Magical Mystery Tour in a few short years.
The Monkees were formed to capitalize on the Beatles popularity. By then the Beatles already had a dozen or so #1 hits and their hit movie "A Hard Day's Night" They were not even British, or even musicians for that matter.
Don’t forget The Monkees. They were a major influence on The Beatles.
Crazy how quickly they evolved musically from “I want to hold your hand”, to Sargent Pepper and Magical Mystery Tour in a few short years.
The Monkees were formed to capitalize on the Beatles popularity. By then the Beatles already had a dozen or so #1 hits and their hit movie "A Hard Day's Night" They were not even British, or even musicians for that matter.
Nesmith was a session musician and Tork was a folk musician (and good friend of Sills).
The Monkees were formed to capitalize on the Beatles popularity. By then the Beatles already had a dozen or so #1 hits and their hit movie "A Hard Day's Night" They were not even British, or even musicians for that matter.
Nesmith was a session musician and Tork was a folk musician (and good friend of Sills).
Fair enough about Nesmith. I should have stated they were not all musicians. But the group was never an band that was formed organically by a bunch of musicians getting together to play. They were formed to create a television show. And the idea that the Monkees were a major influence on the Beatles music is just silly.
Nesmith was a session musician and Tork was a folk musician (and good friend of Sills).
Fair enough about Nesmith. I should have stated they were not all musicians. But the group was never an band that was formed organically by a bunch of musicians getting together to play. They were formed to create a television show. And the idea that the Monkees were a major influence on the Beatles music is just silly.
Of course it's silly and it was the other way around. And I meant Steven Stills not Sills who wanted to be in the Monkees but wasn't chosen.
Man they did. The most popular guy with the girls in my school wore “ Beatle” boots too.
I had to listen to em underground because my WW2 dad would have smashed my record.
I can remember that pamphlet that came out from a church that said the Beatles promoted drug use in kids and used as proof what they said was a lyric: “ Roll up your sleeve, roll up your sleeve for the mystery tour”
Fair enough about Nesmith. I should have stated they were not all musicians. But the group was never an band that was formed organically by a bunch of musicians getting together to play. They were formed to create a television show. And the idea that the Monkees were a major influence on the Beatles music is just silly.
Of course it's silly and it was the other way around. And I meant Steven Stills not Sills who wanted to be in the Monkees but wasn't chosen.
Actually, I think your Beverly Sills theory holds water.
Met her once and she admitted her love of both The Beatles and The Monkees, though she kept calling them The Beatless.
great content here regarding probably the GOAT rock band. their sheer range from start to finish is incredible and we are lucky McCartney and Lennon tolerated each other as long as they did. related musings:
- Hey Jude is considered one of their best songs and it wasn't even on an album
- The Beatles recorded in the same studio as the Beach Boys, and responded to Pet Sounds with Sgt. Peppers, the mere existence of which was a key factor in driving Brian Wilson insane
- No shade on Motownphilly in this thread gents (na na na na na na na na)
- Also while the Beatles may outshine the Stones, Exile on Main Street and Sticky Fingers are absolute all-timers and nobody writes songs called "Moves like Macca"
- Ringo is the undisputable sex god and will be the last Beatle standing
Because they were very very rich. It isn’t that hard to figure out. Their music was quite boring/ stolen from black musicians, but teen girls react to that $$
If you have to ask why were the Beatles so big/culturally important, I think a big part of the answer is that WE'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT THEM 52 YEARS AFER THEY BROKE UP. Drops mic.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.
