headertext  
Calendar Music News Audio Movies Where to eat Where to drink Nightlife
E-mail story | Discuss story | iPod friendly version

Bigger than Jesus

September 26, 2007, 12:00 a.m. EST

photo
The gospel according to John, Paul, George, and Ringo...

When John Lennon said that The Beatles were “bigger than Jesus” over 40 years ago, he may have been onto something. With all the books written about the band — from their personal lives to what they ate and how often they showered — and the documentaries about them, and that Cirque de Soleil show that uses their music, you could say that The Beatles have “made it.” You may even have heard their music by this point.

The Beatles are a stalwart of the marketing that has taken place in the years since they broke up: their faces adorn t-shirts, coffee mugs, posters, mousepads, women’s hygiene products (“when Ringo turns blue, you’ll be pregnant too”) and various assorted knick-knacks. Their very omnipresence on the pop culture landscape dictates reverence, even if you don’t like The Beatles’ music. It’s a bit like a cult, which is fine so long as they don’t start giving out “Jim Jones’ Goodtime Kool-Aid.”

But what about the music, you say? Isn’t that what they’re known for? Yes and no, because while the Fab Four have a permanent place on many oldies radio stations’ playlists, a lot of people buy into the images of the Beatles more than they do what is actually on their records. Those images, of course, come from the early period (happy-go-lucky mop-tops) or the later one (spaced-out hippie refugees with a crazy woman coming between them). I’ll admit, when I first started listening to the group (in my anachronistic high school years), that was part of the appeal.

When a band makes it big, you often hear the label of “the new Beatles” being used to describe them. Which is a kiss of death tantamount to winning “Best New Artist” at the Grammys. Does anyone remember these groups? I think there was that one with the song about some girl named Sharona, but otherwise I’m drawing a blank.

My point (and I do have one) is that by virtue of their success, The Beatles are so unavoidable that you might be tempted to dismiss what got them there in the first place, some 40 years after it came out. But the music holds up, even some of the early “yeah-yeah-yeah” stuff. And it’s not that no other band or artist has emerged who makes better music than they did (you could make the argument for some of rock’s heavyweights over the years since, and I’d venture that some of the punk-era recordings are worthy of consideration). But the Beatles endure, long after whatever revival comes along every few years, because of all the strides they made. Thanks to them, Prince can hole up in a studio for three years and then not release whatever album he’s working on. The guys in Limp Bizkit can convince everyone that they can write lyrics themselves. And I can write a column about a band that hasn’t put out new music since 1970 in a magazine dedicated to what’s happening now in 2007.

Reading from the book of John and Paul, verse number nine: “all you need is love…and a nice beat that people can dance to, and ye shall inherit the Earth.”

Comments

Post a comment

Commenting requires free bootlegontheweb.com registration .

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment: