Sly Witt
|
2/18/2009 8:35:07 PM
What if?
I got to thinking today. What if Brian Epstein never decided to manage a band and the Beatles never made it past the popular local band playing at the Cavern. Life's realities being what they are, Lennon and McCartney had to get regular "day" jobs. Do you think that they were so inherently good that they would have 'made' it, or would they be a couple of the old indie guys here trying to get their songs heard?
Could Sgt. Pepper have ever happened?
You can carry it further. The Stones, The Who, and all the myriad of bands that were recorded because of the popularity of the Beatles..... would Mr. Townsend ...oh, never mind, he IS here.
|
|
_REDDISH__11-27-11_001.jpg)
Steve April
|
2/18/2009 8:56:36 PM
---- Updated 2/18/2009 9:39:49 PM
john's 1st solo albums were cathartic and less artful than anything before or since by any of them...all that stuff like "mother," "cold turkey" etc. but he put it out there, so good for him, and his development.
paul's 1st solo efforts were lyrical and charming. though "maybe i'm amazed" (an early version) was very good from the get go.
george's 1st solo efforts were more impressive, prob'ly cause george's tunes spanned the beatles years, though didn't make it onto the beatles albums.
anyway, fun to wonder...
very generally, there are three main motifs or motivations artistically;
1. catharsis (or exorcising the repression) e.g. john's song "mother"
2. sharing with friends e.g. "alittle help from my friends," yellow submarine"
3. touch on the glory e.g. "lucy in the sky with diamonds," or combinations of all three.
(the beatles up there with bach, my humble view)
but where would they be if they didn't get their big break? IAC?
|
|