Am I a Lousy Beatle Fan?

[2 of 3]

I was having a chat with Merv the other night, and he pointed out what he called my "scathing" review of Double Fantasy. I read it back and thought...ok..I can see how somebody reading that would think of it as scathing.  I never did really like the album and never bought it..but liked what I heard on the radio. I suggested to Merv that maybe I just didn't relate to the material ....the whole family life thing. I know my favourite song on the album is Beautiful Boy. I think that my indifference to it can be attributed to Paul and George though. I kept buying their albums and was almost always disappointed in what I heard. Like Double Fantasy...I liked some of the songs sure...but...did I want another album that I rarely listened too? So I guess my last Lennon album was Walls and Bridges. I stopped buying Paul's albums after Pipes Of Peace...ok, that is a lie...I took a chance and bought Press...it probably hasn't been played right through since 2 months after I got it. I never listen to Pipes. I know what you are saying OMG you don't have Tug of War? Nope. I think I only bought Flowers because Costello was on it...and that interested me. I really like Flowers I must say. Never bought Off The Ground either...heard it a few times and again thought...I will never listen to it. I bought Flaming Pie...never listen to it. Driving Rain...never listen to it... Chaos and Creation in the Backyard..bought it....liked it...but never listen to it. Memory Almost Full...quite like that one...but never listen to it. Firemen....bought it...dont listen to it...though, I was glad to see Macca going some place else for a change. The same can be said of George Harrison...after a while I just couldn't get into his stuff any more. Finally, Cloud Nine came out and I loved it. Really liked the first Wilburys too...the 3rd....cant even get past the first couple of tunes. Brainwashed.....I love it....but rarely listen to it. I don't know, maybe I just moved on.  So...my question is.....is it just me?

[mervap]

yes

[mervap]

Just kidding, dude! I would consider myself a fan of the Beatles and their solo work, but I don't listen to it daily......or weekly for that matter. In fact, I try to limit it sometimes to prevent burning out...I did burn out on the Wilburys stuff, though. When I hear it, I certainly enjoy it, but it rarely gets played intentionally.

Anyway, I don't try to qualify what makes a fan good or bad....the fact that you have asked the question means you care, so don't worry! 

[Greg]

Wow 2 of 3 we are very similar in our opinions as far as your post goes.  I mean, wow, I could have written that post almost word for word, including the Costello comment.  ...and I am an avid Beatles fan...I hope.

I don't mind any Beatle criticism.  It makes it fun, and it's honest. 

Double Fantasy:  I like Kiss x 3 and Woman.  I don't like Beautiful Boy because it always makes me think of what Julian must have thought when he checked out the album as a seventeen year old kid.

[Paperback Writer]

There is no "right" way to be a Beatle/solo fan.  It just is.  It actually makes one a better Beatle /solo fan , if they listen and like other acts with passion, too, shows the praise for Beatle/solo is in  context and not dogma or brainwashing, doubt this?  Read some of the posts on Macca web sights.

My experience, is, I go in cycles - and at the end of the day (cliche') - Beatles/solo are tops - but when you go through the Dead, Van Morrison, Stones, Who, Petty, Pyrds, CSNY, Wonder, your personal under-recognized favorite artists,  etc X1,000,000 - then that is being a fan by choice and an informed opinion.

Excepting singles, here's my take:

Lennon: Big on at first, skipped to 1/2 of DF, M+H, then enjoyed exploring catalogue, love about one half.
George: Big on first 2, then skipped around catalogue, lightly, saving most of catalogue for later.
Ringo: Big on RINGO debut album, enjoyed some live recordings, probably will skip the rest, excepting a cut here, there.
Macca: Big through V+M, dis-liked a lot of the rest of Wings, xcept BTTE, Flowers, so-so, Off the Ground is under-rated, really like/love the rest to current, except Chaos - respect it, but not played.

This will lead to a poll-post question in a day or two - excellent post/comments!

[gettingbetter]

Here's my take - like PW said there's no right or wrong way to be a fan.  I'm always rooting for my favorite artists to release strong new material.  The reason is when I see them in concert I hate to see them relegated to merely being an "oldies" act.  That's part of the reason I didn't see the Rolling Stones on the Licks tour - no new album.  I know some folks are perfectly content to just hear the old songs but I like to see a mix - I think it keeps the artist on their toes and makes it interesting for them.  I guess what I'm saying is that I like new material mainly for the live performance aspect.

[Kylenz]

Haha.. admission is the first step! :))))))))

I've got a slightly different experience. Loved EVERY Macca solo album, every Wings album.. including Pipes, Broad Street, Press.. Flowers.. everything (hey I was only an impressionable kid buying records with my pocket money!), the first time I felt discontent was with 'Off The Ground'.. by then I was into raw grunge music like Nirvana and Pearl Jam.. Flaming Pie felt lightweight to me and so did Driving Rain.. my tastes had become more into the nu-metal bands such as System of a Down, Korn, Disturbed and Slipknot.. in other words, my tastes became heavier and heavier as Macca got older..

... but in time I have come to appreciate those albums. As far as John goes, Double Fantasy is fine and LOVE Yoko's songs on Milk and Honey - an album I bought for only 'Nobody Told Me' - it's almost a stronger album than DF because Yoko is holding her own against John quite nicely - and may even have the songwriting edge on that album!

With George, ATMP is a classic, but nothing else really does it for me apart from Cloud 9 and Somewhere In England. Being a heavy rock dude by the time Brainwashed came out, it completely passed me by at the time.

As for Ringo, he's had his moments in recent times. Choose Love is cool.. but his backing band often suffers from the sound of a really bad Beatles covers band, one that would play at a wedding party.

None of the solo Beatle albums are 100% perfect, but there is usually something to enjoy on every one of them! :)

[2 of 3]

Now you have me wondering what a BEST OF THE SOLO BEATLES  album would be like. I smell a new thread

[Kylenz]

Tis a great thread idea Brian..... but we should make one rule... NONE of the tracks are allowed to be 'hit singles'! That would throw the cat among the pigeons.

[acebackwords]

I don't know.  I think there's always been a love/hate undercurrent with Beatles fans.  They don't call us fanatics for nothing.  A lot of the Beatles solo stuff is disappointing for sure.  Maybe because they set the bar so high.  We keep wanting another hit of that magic.  I remember listening to a Harrison album, I forget which one but it was pretty banal from start to finish.  Only song I remember is real clunker about motor racing with lines like "he's the master/ of going faster" or something like that.  Then I found a cassette of "Off the Ground."  First couple of listens were pretty boring.  It was like looking backstage and seeing McCartney trying for all the "Beatle-esque" tricks but it was kind of like formula without inspiration.  But after repeated listens the songs stared getting under my skin a little.  "C'mon People Now" is a classic Beatles cut, as well as "Cosmically Conscious"  -- a little psychedelic throw-away.  If I'm not mistaken that was the last Mac album produced by George Martin.

I don't know.  I wonder if the Beatles themselves spent much time listening to a lot of the solo albums they cranked out.

[mervap]

You're right on the money about them having set the bar very high....the George Harrison album of which you speak is 1979's "George Harrison", btw.

"Off the Ground was produced by Macca himself along with Julian Mendelsohn...I remember mentioning somewhere that Paul seems to find something that works well, then repeat it a couple of times, with diminishing results. "Off the Ground" was like a "Flowers In the Dirt II"...indeed, a number of the songs that made "Off" had been begun during the "Flowers" period. "Off" is not without its charms, though, as you pointed out a few good ones.

[acebackwords]

I stand corrected.  I double-checked and only the song "C'mon People" was arranged and orchestrated by George Martin.  But to me thats the one real stand-out on the album. A really big sounding song with the most Beatle-esque kind of feel to it.

[acebackwords]

As for the broader topic of this thread, I have mixed feelings about being a Beatles fan myself.  Love their music.  And I've always been fascinated by just about everything about John Lennon.  But I have mixed feelings about their effect on society.  My latest book, "ACID HEROES" is sort of a critical look at the pychedelic '60s and the possibly negative effect the Beatles might have had on the drug epidemic that sprouted from the '60s. 

Personally, I think Lennon was an artistic genius, but as a person he was pretty whacked. My take on Lennon in my book is pretty much along the lines of Albert Godman, Fred Seaman and May Pang's bios.

Is it strange to love the Beatles music but have mixed feelings about the Beatles as human beings?

[mervap]

Is it strange to love the Beatles music but have mixed feelings about the Beatles as human beings?

Absolutely not! Many of the people we hold in high regard have some personal pecadillos they'd rather the public (you) not know. I'd be worried if I had seen someone who appeared perfect in almost every way.....I certainly couldn't identify with them! To use a recent example: Tiger Woods seemed too good to be true. Great golfer, seemed humble but confident...but it turned out he was (allegedly) a philanderer of the worst kind.

So, all of the Beatles experimented with drugs...Lennon was a dead-beat Dad to Julian...Paul was busted in Japan....George was busted for drugs and had, at times, a mean streak....Lennon was cutting and mean at times....Ringo told people to stop sending him mail...the list is long. In the grand scheme of things, that matters not one whit: We love the music and that is enough, eh? 

[mervap]

And I've always been fascinated by just about everything about John Lennon.  But I have mixed feelings about their effect on society.  My latest book, "ACID HEROES" is sort of a critical look at the pychedelic '60s and the possibly negative effect the Beatles might have had on the drug epidemic that sprouted from the '60s. 

I've heard some folks have that take before and there's certainly some truth to it...my own feelings are that the Beatles were simply in that place at that time and if it had not been the Beatles at the center of those movements, it would have been someone else. The Lads were experiencing the same things many teens and twenty-somethings were at that time: A disatisfaction with the straight-laced world as it was, an unpopular war, AND the free time to do something about it. 

You're an author? Awesome!