[atari 2600]

Originally Posted by Washing Machine

 

Burzum! Another Icon of Love and Peace.....

Yeah really. The guy is despicable like all his other Black Metal Norwegian comrades. These idiots...let me stop right there...Has anyone besides myself ever seen any interviews with any of these idiots?
They sit around in a dark room with candles lit all dressed up in Dungeons & Dragons garb and mumble the stupidest shit imaginable. They seek to transform Norway to a time before Christianity (like that would really solve any of their mental problems) and sing (well, grunt) the praises of Viking culture. First of all, there wasn't much to Viking culture besides shipbuilding. The Viking people were nomadic barbarians that went around raping and plundering everything. But their mythology is their lasting cultural contribution. Led Zeppelin handled the subject matter quite well as opposed to these maniacs that thought they could effect change with self-styled satanist rituals like mutilating animals to scare people that found the remains and with terrorist acts like burning down historic churches.
It makes me wanna scream: Congratulations, Varg, you just made the building of worship into a martyr; you just gave a false symbol even more power, you fucking dumbass!
What we need is an advertising campaign for Peace (and this time we need one that expresses the vital idea of proposing a constitutonal amendment to restrict all elected positions of major office to one term). As we know, John & Yoko had the idea to use their fame to spread a mass-marketed message first.
Who's it gonna be next month or next year that's better than The Beatles? Who's your next flavor-of-the-moment, jackals?
Beatles haters suck more than words can possibly express.

[fishmonkey]

i had a beatles phase, lasted a whole 20 minutes, have to hand it to em "a day in the life" is some song, dont care much for them now though. my dad is a big beatles fan. i leave the old "beep beep beep beep YEAH" to him. much fun when he gets together with my aunt (who is Rolling Stones mad) and they have the old Beatles Vs The Stones argument.

[atari 2600]

Well, I probably haven't listened to any Beatles music in at least a couple of months. But that didn't make me feel the need to write some short spiel with imagined hipster appeal though.

[fishmonkey]

the beatles changed the face of music, you cant deny that.
a lot more than that hairy death metal dude with the big knife up there, if ever i needed a church to be burned down though i wouldnt be calling John Paul George or Ringo ...let me put it that way.

[atari 2600]

Yet curiously that part of the message didn't seem to figure into your little diatribe you made before...I suppose you were afraid of damage to your perceived image and that's exactly why you added the little smart-ass comment at the end.

Hey! Don't forget the animal mutilations and murder convictions!

[blue sunlover]

so oops again, make wrong choices today,i like the beatles especially the best album they ever made the 'white album'.i voted no not again, simply because of their popularity.i mean who would vote for sonic youth if nobody knows them?

[king_buzzo]

the beatles are cool. i can listen to them if i want to, but i dont have any records they are a good band

[Savage Clone]

The Beatles are not above criticism.
Because of their enormous influence, some people tend to treat this music like some sort of infallible holy scripture. Yes, a lot of it is of high quality, but they also made a whole lot of songs that are extremely annoying (especially Paul).
Plus, I get exposed to this stuff often enough in the world that I don't really ever need to spin it at home.

[atari 2600]

fence-straddler

The poll question is "yes" or "no."

If "a lot of it is high quality" then you have no real reason to vote "no," but something tells me that would be the way you would vote because you've got a stick up your ass, axe to grind, etc...

"spin it at home"...you people are the biggest fucking poseurs...

[Glice]

Originally Posted by atari 2600

...Has anyone besides myself ever seen any interviews with any of these idiots?

Of course, it's deplorable nonsense. The standard defence is that it was only Varg, but it's a weak defence as if most of them aren't murderous racists, then they are all of incredibly dubious political providence. But, throw a stone in the annals of rock and you'll probably find some politics which are not to your taste. I'm a big dancehall fan, but you can rest assured the current flavour for Bobo Ashanti is not to my taste, regardless of any PC liberal cultural relativism one might care to throw at the debate.

Regards the Beatles, I entirely concur with Drone. They aren't above criticism. And, for my money, if you want to talk about aesthetics in terms of cultural relevance, then fine, the Beatles are incredibly important. An aesthetics which admits of ridiculous matters like how cute a bunch of scallies' smiles were strikes me as a non-sequiter, but whatever. You wanna talk about musical content, for my money, the Beatles are merely another (probably very good) pop group. What gets my goat is that nearly everyone you could hope to meet will tell you they're probably more important than yr man Beethoven (&c). Which is, patently, utter cack.

I don't like the Beatles. I really have tried. This is not hipster posturing, or if it is, then it's buried far too deep into my subconscious for me to access it. I do not like the Beatles. I don't like a great many things, but there is something about the my dislike of the Beatles (well, probably something about the Beatles' music itself) that annoys people more than any other band. I really, really resent the implication that I am missing something, and I find the implication that I'm being obtuse to be frankly risible.

But then, I expect nothing less from yourself Atari 'provocation' 2600ivision.

[atari 2600]

It's disturbing that people that claim to love music love to find fault with the greatest band in rock and roll.
And Bach is more important to the history of western music than Beethoven.

[Glice]

Originally Posted by atari 2600

It's disturbing that people that claim to love music love to find fault with the greatest band in rock and roll.
And Bach is more important to the history of western music than Beethoven.

Bach's superiority over Beethoven, I would assert, is a moot point. It's not insofar as I trust the opinions of every composer/ professional musician I've had the good fortune to meet, but in terms of protagonists of varying, not terribly high-level awareness of the qualia of counterpoint, it is a moot point.

The Beatles being the most important band (note: I say 'band' very deliberately) to Western music, to the entireity of rock n' roll is not in question. Much as I'd like to debate it, I would be a fool to do so.

I don't find fault, particularly. They don't appeal to me. I don't find anything which I, personally, can like about that band. In terms of the musical level upon which they operate, I find very little which is exceptional, except within the narrow context of rock n' roll. Okay, so narrow is probably a misnomer, rock n' roll is an incredibly expansive form. I don't find anything terribly exciting about them. And, again, I've tried numerous times, probably twice a year, to understand what the fuss is. I don't hear it. I don't hear the fuss about a number of rock n' roll bands, but it doesn't particularly bother me. I'm confident enough in my opinions to not worry about it. What I take exception to is the various implications imputed upon people who don't like them.

[atari 2600]

That's very reasonably worded and all that, but it cannot change the fact haha that The Beatles rule.

Most of the musicians that you do love (this is assuming that you actually do love music which is still a point of contention haha) would probably put The Beatles up at or near the top.

Therefore, it sounds like a personal problem to me.

It raises no qualm with me if someone truly feels that Elvis Presley (like yourself probably) or The Kinks, The Rolling Stones, The Velvet Underground, Jimi Hendrix Experience, or even Sonic Youth are a tad better than The Beatles. But, let's say, Led Zeppelin better than The Beatles? Hell, no. The Grateful Dead, Pink Floyd? Close, but no cigar. To reject The Beatles categorically out of one side of your mouth while still declaring their importance with the other (just to not seem as passive-aggressive & as confrontational as you really are) is a sure sign of a cheese-head in my well-travelled experience.

The proof is in the pudding. Here's an example. When there's a topic by an artist that I don't particularly like a lot, but that I still respect and like a little, like The Ex... ?????, I just keep my two cents out of the discussion. Since my opining would be of the lukewarm variety, I hardly see the purpose of posting in that case. I believe that most people who are not out to start trouble follow this general rule-of-thumb.

[Glice]

All fair enough. This isn't to pick holes in your argument, but my favourite rock n' roll/ pop artist is Mark E Smith, someone well know for his vituperation against the Beatles (and, for that matter, nearly everyone in the 20th Century). But generally speaking, yes, nearly everyone I respect and admire likes the Beatles. I do happen to be quite fond of most of their sources, particlarly Lonnie Donegan.

It is a personal problem, but only if it's likely to affect my life in the slightest not liking the Beatles. Thus far, no problems as a direct result of that. I have quite poor body odour, but I suspect that's more to do with factors outside of my taste in music. You never know though.

I likewise usually keep myself out of banal arguments about bands I consider to be shit, unless there's any entertainment to be sired from pissing people off. Often there is, but only insofar as I stand entirely by my signature.

With this particular thread though, I happen to know what Messr Marras' opinion is of the Beatles. Cliquey bollocks, probably, but one has to keep oneself in a constant stasis of self-hatred/ xenophobia somehow, and what better place to do it than on the internet?

[fishmonkey]

Originally Posted by atari 2600

Yet curiously that part of the message didn't seem to figure into your little diatribe you made before...I suppose you were afraid of damage to your perceived image and that's exactly why you added the little smart-ass comment at the end.

Hey! Don't forget the animal mutilations and murder convictions!

Atari2600...... you have to be fuckin shittin me....

really.....

sorry about the previous message, what i ment to actually say...

The Beatles.... thats the Fab 4 for those of you who dont know....... no... thats the band that stopped every woman in the US been raped the night they played Ed Sullivan cuz all the rapist's were at home watching them, can actually collectively put their lips (now thats all four of em, not just one) round the ring of my hole and suck a fart outa my ass for all i care. i hate the bastards.
think about this Mr Atari 2600 (before you go around de-repping people) if everyone in the world were caught up in "phony beatlemania" we'd all be going round with stupid fuckin haircuts...
different folks different strokes.


what a load of shit.


oh and by the way...

i must spread some of Heather Mills gammy leg around the place before giving it to Glice again.

[fishmonkey]

Originally Posted by atari 2600

Elvis Presley (like yourself probably) or The Kinks, The Rolling Stones, The Velvet Underground, Jimi Hendrix Experience, or even Sonic Youth are a tad better than The Beatles. But, let's say, Led Zeppelin better than The Beatles? Hell, no. The Grateful Dead, Pink Floyd? Close, but no cigar.

insert yawn here ->_______________________


isnt public opinion great.

[Onani Nic]

Originally Posted by fishmonkey

the beatles changed the face of music, you cant deny that.
a lot more than that hairy death metal dude with the big knife up there, if ever i needed a church to be burned down though i wouldnt be calling John Paul George or Ringo ...let me put it that way.

.....Black metal dude, totally different to death metal. Personally I think the Beatles would be far less competent at burning down a church. They do write better love songs though.

[cryptowonderdruginvogue]

love em

[gmku]

Yes. Mostly the white album and Revolver. The rest hasn't aged well with me.

I'm a fan of George's post-Beatles stuff, especially All Things Must Pass and Living in the Material World. I find those two especially soothing when I'm stressed out.

Also really dig the Plastic Ono Band albums, both John's and Yoko's.

I even like Ram and Band on the Run.

[Cantankerous]

http://www.concertzender.nl/cgi/medi...=235&width=207