Reading this, it is clear to me your love and appreciation of the Beatles' music and place in culture has not dimmed with the years—if anything, it has increased or at least developed further with the dramatic levels of cultural context, timelines, etc. you now have seemingly encyclopedic knowledge of. Though I don't comment on most of your pieces in the blog I skim or thoroughly read, I am increasingly familiar with your modern approach (which I take this opportunity to indeed comment on, though I get digressed from your specific subject here by doing so). It makes me feel bad that I ever treated your original-version Only Solitaire as the only influence you'd have on me as a reviewer, and your x/15 and x/10 ratings back then as necessities. You really do a service, and you are not only a historian, you make the old music timeless (or make obvious its timelessness or even modern value as a thing-of-its-era when it's 'dated'). I'd never seen that Paul live performance before, that was a real treat (I actually wrote away all pre-touring abstinence performances as scream-fests where the performers couldn't hear their own playing/singing and the music itself was donezo). The lesser-appreciated tracks on Help! getting such a focus also drew me to hear them more fully than I ever have. Cheers, Starostin!
Just dropping in to say that for me, Beatles for Sale leapfrogged Help in my own rankings...Beatles for Sale is the ideal light cocktail party album in their catalog...pleasant from start to finish, wonderful to play in an informal gathering...help had better hits but is kind of wonky and a bit more torn between the old and the new...love you George, been reading your stuff for decades!
Well, it's definitely true that Beatles for Sale has a more consistent tone to it, for better or worse, and that Help! is much more of a patchwork (maybe because time moved at a thousand miles per minute in 1965, so that June Beatles were already a deeply mutated brand compared to February Beatles). But as you can see, I found it easier to write a heap of a lot about Help! than about Beatles for Sale - precisely for that reason, I guess. Patchworks often provide more food for thought than consistent weaves.
I agree, Help is more interesting for a lot of reasons...Beatles for Sale is sort of an orphaned album in the greater Beatle story...(but most true Beatle nuts learn the value of the gold hidden in their less 'important' records...applies to Help as well)...
Since you just wrapped up the early Beatles here, I have been working on a theory that it can be strongly argued that the Beatles are exactly as great as they were in the early days as their mature days (I think the Get Back doc. really hammered this home for me). The traditional lazy argument is that they went from bubblegum to serious...but I don't know...I'm wondering if the only real difference between She Loves You and Don't Let Me Down is simply lyrical sophistication (although even THAT can be argued because She Loves You is a masterpiece in its own right).
When they sat down and played in a room, they sang great, played their instruments really well and had fantastic melodies...the only difference between A Hard Day's Night and the White Album starts to just feel more and more superficial...(clothes, haircuts, lyrics, throwing on arrangements...) Again, I know I'm stretching a bit but it has to do with the time factor...the Beatles are always praised for revolutionizing their own growth in such a short time...and everyone always asks with astonishment, 'how did they go from Another Girl to Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite in a year and a half?' Perhaps the secret is simply that they were just always the best of the best...it was no great feat for them to just slightly update their lyrics and presentation to keep up with what was considered cool...
Last thing I'll say along these lines to add context for my above rambling, in my own songwriting (which I now do simply for my own enjoyment), I have found it way more impossible to try to and write something as pure and earnest like She Love You vs. a knock off of a late era psychedelic song like Across the Universe...
Well, the Beatles probably wouldn't be able to write A Day In The Life back in 1963, even the basic melody of it without all the lyrics and arrangements. And Paul probably wouldn't have come up with the bass line for Come Together during the Hard Day's Night sessions. They clearly did mature as musicians and composers over the years, together with the rest of the musical world around them. But where I certainly agree is that the Beatles were "special" - outstanding against the background of most, if not all, their peers in the pop music business - right from the start of their career (at least, as soon as they teamed up with George Martin). And you may be right that there are some very special challenges associated with trying to write the likes of 'She Loves You' (in the same way that I believe it is far more difficult to, for instance, successfully emulate the Ramones than the Clash - theirs is a brand of genius simplicity that won't ever work if you don't have a sixth sense about it).
100% on all your pushback examples (my conclusions are probably just more drawn from my own evolved tastes of finding appreciation in the older stuff by consciously ignoring the superficial wrapping that makes people see it as lightweight)...
As to your other point, the harnessing of the 'special' by various bands or artists is a very fascinating conversation...your delineation of the Ramones vs. the Clash is a great example and there are clearly many more...
I’m sure I read somewhere that the reason the film is rather a mess is because the original screenplay had to be abandoned just before filming was due to begin as someone noticed that a film with an identical plot line was already in the making.
Regarding the album, I’ve never thought it “sounds” as good as the ones around it. I was listening to With The Beatles last week and from the start there’s a both a depth and punch to the way the music leaps out of the speakers. There’s generally a thinness to Help which masks the quality of much of what’s going on. George is spot on about the originality of the backing vocals, but they lose their effect as a result of this.
I prefer both Help! and Beatles for Sale to Rubber Soul, which to me is spoiled by artifice. It's hard to describe, but I think it sounds less authentic.
Reading this, it is clear to me your love and appreciation of the Beatles' music and place in culture has not dimmed with the years—if anything, it has increased or at least developed further with the dramatic levels of cultural context, timelines, etc. you now have seemingly encyclopedic knowledge of. Though I don't comment on most of your pieces in the blog I skim or thoroughly read, I am increasingly familiar with your modern approach (which I take this opportunity to indeed comment on, though I get digressed from your specific subject here by doing so). It makes me feel bad that I ever treated your original-version Only Solitaire as the only influence you'd have on me as a reviewer, and your x/15 and x/10 ratings back then as necessities. You really do a service, and you are not only a historian, you make the old music timeless (or make obvious its timelessness or even modern value as a thing-of-its-era when it's 'dated'). I'd never seen that Paul live performance before, that was a real treat (I actually wrote away all pre-touring abstinence performances as scream-fests where the performers couldn't hear their own playing/singing and the music itself was donezo). The lesser-appreciated tracks on Help! getting such a focus also drew me to hear them more fully than I ever have. Cheers, Starostin!
Just dropping in to say that for me, Beatles for Sale leapfrogged Help in my own rankings...Beatles for Sale is the ideal light cocktail party album in their catalog...pleasant from start to finish, wonderful to play in an informal gathering...help had better hits but is kind of wonky and a bit more torn between the old and the new...love you George, been reading your stuff for decades!
Well, it's definitely true that Beatles for Sale has a more consistent tone to it, for better or worse, and that Help! is much more of a patchwork (maybe because time moved at a thousand miles per minute in 1965, so that June Beatles were already a deeply mutated brand compared to February Beatles). But as you can see, I found it easier to write a heap of a lot about Help! than about Beatles for Sale - precisely for that reason, I guess. Patchworks often provide more food for thought than consistent weaves.
I agree, Help is more interesting for a lot of reasons...Beatles for Sale is sort of an orphaned album in the greater Beatle story...(but most true Beatle nuts learn the value of the gold hidden in their less 'important' records...applies to Help as well)...
Since you just wrapped up the early Beatles here, I have been working on a theory that it can be strongly argued that the Beatles are exactly as great as they were in the early days as their mature days (I think the Get Back doc. really hammered this home for me). The traditional lazy argument is that they went from bubblegum to serious...but I don't know...I'm wondering if the only real difference between She Loves You and Don't Let Me Down is simply lyrical sophistication (although even THAT can be argued because She Loves You is a masterpiece in its own right).
When they sat down and played in a room, they sang great, played their instruments really well and had fantastic melodies...the only difference between A Hard Day's Night and the White Album starts to just feel more and more superficial...(clothes, haircuts, lyrics, throwing on arrangements...) Again, I know I'm stretching a bit but it has to do with the time factor...the Beatles are always praised for revolutionizing their own growth in such a short time...and everyone always asks with astonishment, 'how did they go from Another Girl to Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite in a year and a half?' Perhaps the secret is simply that they were just always the best of the best...it was no great feat for them to just slightly update their lyrics and presentation to keep up with what was considered cool...
Last thing I'll say along these lines to add context for my above rambling, in my own songwriting (which I now do simply for my own enjoyment), I have found it way more impossible to try to and write something as pure and earnest like She Love You vs. a knock off of a late era psychedelic song like Across the Universe...
Well, the Beatles probably wouldn't be able to write A Day In The Life back in 1963, even the basic melody of it without all the lyrics and arrangements. And Paul probably wouldn't have come up with the bass line for Come Together during the Hard Day's Night sessions. They clearly did mature as musicians and composers over the years, together with the rest of the musical world around them. But where I certainly agree is that the Beatles were "special" - outstanding against the background of most, if not all, their peers in the pop music business - right from the start of their career (at least, as soon as they teamed up with George Martin). And you may be right that there are some very special challenges associated with trying to write the likes of 'She Loves You' (in the same way that I believe it is far more difficult to, for instance, successfully emulate the Ramones than the Clash - theirs is a brand of genius simplicity that won't ever work if you don't have a sixth sense about it).
100% on all your pushback examples (my conclusions are probably just more drawn from my own evolved tastes of finding appreciation in the older stuff by consciously ignoring the superficial wrapping that makes people see it as lightweight)...
As to your other point, the harnessing of the 'special' by various bands or artists is a very fascinating conversation...your delineation of the Ramones vs. the Clash is a great example and there are clearly many more...
I’m sure I read somewhere that the reason the film is rather a mess is because the original screenplay had to be abandoned just before filming was due to begin as someone noticed that a film with an identical plot line was already in the making.
Regarding the album, I’ve never thought it “sounds” as good as the ones around it. I was listening to With The Beatles last week and from the start there’s a both a depth and punch to the way the music leaps out of the speakers. There’s generally a thinness to Help which masks the quality of much of what’s going on. George is spot on about the originality of the backing vocals, but they lose their effect as a result of this.
I prefer both Help! and Beatles for Sale to Rubber Soul, which to me is spoiled by artifice. It's hard to describe, but I think it sounds less authentic.
Well it is 'rubber' soul, lol.
Indeed!
That’s basically my take on Help! the movie as well. It’s funny I think you’re right about Beatles for Sale, but I like Help! a bit more