It's hard to remember now that there used to be a time without 200 cable channels and the internet and smart phones. Fifty years ago today, 70 million Americans crowded around their black and white TV's to watch four kids from Liverpool on the Ed Sullivan Show. The world literally changed that night. I'm working on the Beatles' chapter of my Sound Mind book right now and it's entitled "Beatles Exceptionalism". The Beatles were the perfect storm of talent, looks and personality to popularize rock music. They created the template for future rock bands. After a few years of playing covers and internalizing their influences, many of whom were American, they began writing their own songs. Prior to The Beatles, Chuck Berry and Buddy Holly were among the few artists who wrote their own songs, but they didn't make teenage girls scream and pass out. Before The Beatles, bands like the Crickets, the Comets and the Buckaroos were backups to a featured artist. The Beatles were an actual band with three (and sometimes four) singers who wrote their own songs. They popularized the band configuration of lead guitar, rhythm guitar, bass and drums. After The Beatles' appearance on Ed Sullivan, kids began growing their hair and went to the garage to figure out the chords to "I Wanna Hold Your Hand". Sometimes I wish I'd been a teenager in 1964, but it would be a month after Beatlemania hit America before I was conceived.
In all the hype about the 50th anniversary of The Beatles' Ed Sullivan appearance, I found something preposterous and shockingly it was from Fox News. They put out a list of 11 bands better than The Beatles. I shit you not. I was only aware of this list because Rush is on it and it was featured on the Rushisaband site. Anyhow, I thought I'd share the list and comment on it's absurdity since that's how I roll. Peace.
1) Led Zeppelin- Great band, but they spawned Whitesnake, Kingdom Come and Bonham.
2) The Rolling Stones- While I've come around to The Stones, I'll remind you of my "I Wanna Be Your Man" argument. The Beatles' version was vastly superior and they even let Ringo do it.
3) Velvet Underground- Many bands I love cite them as an influence or are compared to them, but I don't get it. I can't stand VU or Lou Reed. I'd rather listen to a bag full of cats.
4) U2- Are they serious?! I love U2, but c'mon.
5) Radiohead- See my Radiohead post, but not better than The Beatles.
6) Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers- I love the Heartbreakers and on any given day I might argue they are the best American band, but not better than The Beatles.
7) Rush- You all know how much I love Rush, but this is laughable.
8) The Band- I couldn't even name you a song by The Band. Didn't they do something with Zimmerman?
9) The Clash- I mentioned The Clash in my post on Wire. I don't get the big deal.
10) Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band- This is straight up New Jersey bias.
11) The Replacements- Great band and very influential, but I could argue GbV is better than The Beatles before The Replacements. And none of these bands, other than The Stones, would have existed without The Beatles. Can't something be done about Fox News?
A Living Will For My Music Collection