Go to Ask.com


enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
No dragons?
by st33ve
+1 Reply

"[T]here would have been no Dark Side of the Moon, and no dragons-and-warlocks-themed prog-rock epics, had the Beatles not decided to don epaulets for their lark of an album cover and impersonate a vaudeville band."

Well...no. The Beatles were innovators in various ways over the years, but if you're talking about the most significant stylistic "currents" that were flowing in early 1967 and ended up contributing to the evolution of "psychedelic" and "progressive" rock, the Sgt. Pepper album was more of a rider of existing currents than an album that redirected the flow.

As one example, the 2nd half of 1966 was a golden age of psychedelic "dance concerts" in San Francisco featuring LSD, trippy light shows and music by the likes of Jefferson Airplane, The Grateful Dead, Love and Quicksilver Messenger Service.

Because the Beatles were the high priests of pop music (and more popular than Jesus, as I understand it), their 1967 offering was heard by a wider audience than most others. But honestly, if the Beatles had broken up after Revolver, the further evolution of "psychedelic rock" (including the Dark Side of the Moon) and "progressive rock" (with and without dragons) would have been pretty much the same.

Re: No dragons?
by pcpaladin

I agree that once the train left the station, there was no stopping what I and my friends called Art Rock, so-called due to most of its founders being art school students first. It was pretentious and self-indulgent, and the ultimate descendant is Polyphonic Spree.

I have noticed that the Beatles are dying in order of musical importance. first the great John Lennon, then George Harrison. I expect Ringo to go next.

Re: No dragons?
by aconsul

Sadly st33ve is mistaking contrariness and Bay Area provincialism for insight. While Jefferson Airplane and the Greatful Dead certainly have their presence in musical history, they were and still remain outside the realm of cultural influence.

In the same fashion that Macintosh did not technically invent many of the concepts in modern computing (the GUI paradigm, use of the mouse as an interface - these were already implemented at Xerox PARC), the Beatles provided a melding and genius of execution that brought out of the fringes and into popular culture.

Every concept album since Sgt. Pepper's has been created under the shadow of its influence for better or worse. This simply cannot be said for anything produced by the bands mentioned above.

Re: No dragons?
by Richard Cummings
For a real and exciting view of what England in 1967 was reallly like, get the DVD of "The Rolling Stones Rock and Roll Circus." You will see a very different John Lennon. totally liberated from the Beatles, doing some of his best work. And see Mick Jagger when he was Mick Jagger. It's got Taj Mahal, Jethro Tull and the Who, and Lennon's pick-up band, "Dirty Mack." You will never forget Peter Townsend, sitting next to Jagger, in funny hats, starting up "The Salt of the Earth." This is the greatest homage to old England ever. It's the real deal Yoko Ono and all.
Re: No dragons?
by Thomas Paine
pcpaladin:

...I have noticed that the Beatles are dying in order of musical importance. first the great John Lennon, then George Harrison. I expect Ringo to go next.

Based on that analysis, we can expect Paul to outlive Methuselah!

View as RSS news feed in XML