Quote:
Originally Posted by Janszoon
They surpassed their mentors by becoming popular in a different era? I'm not so sure I consider simply being born later as much of an accomplishment.
The Beatles didn't adapt to the 70s. According to your logic I guess that means The Clash were better than them.
|
Elvis and Chuck Berry were recording music when the Beatles were around weren't they? The Beatles weren't recording music in the 70's so your logic has no grounds. By your logic because the Beatles were recording later than Elvis or Chuck Berry or after the birth of rock and roll the Beatles couldn't surpass them. Please give me a break.
You can't dismiss the fact the Beatles had a long string of geat albums in which you could basically put anything on vinyl ranging from world music, avant garde, classical and anything else this was unheard of by previous standards of 50's rock and roll. They could have stayed the course and keep writing songs like "I Want To Hold Your Hand" but they progressed into something entirely different. Of course they surpassed their mentors in many ways but I wouldn't say in every facet though. The string of albums of Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt Peppers, The White Album and Abbey Road not only marks a clear progression from what they were influenced they in turned influenced thousands of musicians, songwriters and music producers. Neither Elvis and Chuck Berry had an album run like the Beatles and something that IMO is something you can't dismiss easily.