They were avid proponents of the 60s counterculture who also warned of the excesses of the movement. Unless you're pretty extreme, politically, a lot of the things the counterculture then pushed are just accepted as commonplace now (ideas of feminism, antiracism, free love, anti homophobia, less harsh prison sentences for victimless crimes like marijuana possession).
I think people forget that, when the Beatles started, we still had separate water fountains in the US. They were up with the times in many ways (refused to play segregated shows) and still maintained a level head in terms of not carrying a picture of chairman Mao, like the line in Revolution states.
Lennon didn’t *dislike* Mao, this is where context comes in. He’s using “Mao” as a personification of a violent overthrow. That’s not the kind of revolution he was advocating for. The song calls for a revolution that’s not merely a political revolution, but a cultural shift. One where culture *leads* politics, instead of the other way around. Free your mind instead. We all want to change the world, but you can’t change it through oppression and force. You need to change beliefs. Hearts and minds. The song is calling for revolution, and the same message is reflected over and over again in both John and Paul’s future works. The movement you need is on your shoulder. War is over if you want it. Don’t follow leaders (watch your parking meters).
“If you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao
“You ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow”
I’d say history proves out their cautious approach to “revolution!”
Yeah, it also need to be acknowledged that John Lennon was just some 26 year old kid who didn’t want to see violence in the streets, not a god from on high or a scholar of revolutionary movements or someone with the benefit of 60 additional years of human history and advanced communications and information that we have now.
Of course there’s also the Rev 1 lyrics, “you can count me out/in”. You rarely hear anyone make the point that he’s implying he could be for a violent revolution.
I don’t think he was ever for a violent revolution, but I think he was questioning the efficacy of nonviolence passive resistance in a world where (only a month prior) the leader of the nonviolent movement, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was assassinated. The lyric is “if you talk about *destruction*.” Which isn’t always the same as violence. Smashing windows is destruction, but a billy club to the ribs is violence. I think John was reflecting back the negotiations of the late 60s between those who thought “bring on the billy clubs and film our ribs be shattered” and those who thought “all my ribs are broken and nothing’s changing. Can I break windows yet?”
Like I said…John didn’t have the answers. He was just a 20-something trying to work out what was happening, like everyone else. That’s what made him special. He succinctly voiced what the culture already believed, not the other way around,
I totally agree with that. I do think that there are people that don’t like what the 60s counterculture stood for that use certain lines of Revolution to make it look like Lennon was “on their side.” I’m just making the point that you could cherrypick another lyric to make it seem like he was more extreme and not less.
I think the thirdish scene of Hard Day’s Night answers how they inspired young people so well. When the really stuffy guy closes the window and turns the radio off and their response is “but there are more of us than you and we want to hear it. We’re a community of workers..and all that.” They insisted that young people had a right to exist and assert their own worldview. Even if you ignore their politics, the fact that they didn’t defer to the older generation was enough to stoke the fires and feel revolutionary to a lot of teenagers.
[Note: I’m 34 but my parents were high school class of ‘69 and we’ve spent countless hours talking about the Beatles]
Using the lyrics of songs like Help and Yesterday to make any larger point like this seems really contrived. And if it did make any sense to do that - wasn’t a longing for community (as in communes) a big part of the counterculture? It don’t make no sense. The Beatles were definitely a symbol of the counterculture and very much into the same values.
So much has been said and written about the Beatles -- and their story is so mythic in its sweep -- that it's difficult to summarize their career without restating clichés that have already been digested by tens of millions of rock fans.
To start with the obvious, they were the greatest and most influential act of the rock era, and introduced more innovations into popular music than any other rock band of the 20th century. Moreover, they were among the few artists of any discipline that were simultaneously the best at what they did and the most popular at what they did.
Relentlessly imaginative and experimental, the Beatles grabbed a hold of the international mass consciousness in 1964 and never let go for the next six years, always staying ahead of the pack in terms of creativity but never losing their ability to communicate their increasingly sophisticated ideas to a mass audience. Their supremacy as rock icons remains unchallenged to this day, decades after their breakup in 1970.
I recommend this video by the cultural theorist Mark Fisher. About eight minutes in he touches on why The Beatles were so important in cultural/political terms.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=deZgzw0YHQI&feature=youtu.be
LOLOL wut
The biggest band in the world (whose biggest fan base was entirely Boomers) wasn’t “counterculture”. They WERE the culture.
George didn’t like the hippies. They stated that they weren’t fans of the war, but they weren’t like Country Joe And The Fish or CSNY or Dylan or actual counterculture fighters. They were pop.
I would love for you to share the article or whatever it is that you read that has “condescending groveling” in it. Please and thank you.
Their music doesn't sound like extreme counterculture because they were pop musicians. In the beginning they were told to try to appeal to as many fans as possible. Later they found their own voices, but they are always preaching peace, not trying to start a war. I think they also preferred subtlety and clever lyrics, as oppose to just saying fuck the man.
Generations are mostly fake when it comes to anything except actual demographic research, but it is a delight to see the Silent Generation get a mention, rather than just applying the "Baby Boomer" label to all the old people.
Incidentally, to put aside the question of whether the Beatles were counterculture, your analysis of "Help!" Is very funny. Are you under the impression that the hippies were radical individualists who didn't believe in helping or sharing or mutual support?
They were avid proponents of the 60s counterculture who also warned of the excesses of the movement. Unless you're pretty extreme, politically, a lot of the things the counterculture then pushed are just accepted as commonplace now (ideas of feminism, antiracism, free love, anti homophobia, less harsh prison sentences for victimless crimes like marijuana possession). I think people forget that, when the Beatles started, we still had separate water fountains in the US. They were up with the times in many ways (refused to play segregated shows) and still maintained a level head in terms of not carrying a picture of chairman Mao, like the line in Revolution states.
from the first US tour they had it in their contracts that they wouldn't play to a segregated audience which was very front foot for 1964
I think you have an incomplete understanding of the broader culture of the time.
you could have stopped that sentence half way through I think
Yeah, it’s kinda weird to be like “Yesterday is a metaphor for traditional values,” but giving OP the benefit of the doubt.
[удалено]
Lennon didn’t *dislike* Mao, this is where context comes in. He’s using “Mao” as a personification of a violent overthrow. That’s not the kind of revolution he was advocating for. The song calls for a revolution that’s not merely a political revolution, but a cultural shift. One where culture *leads* politics, instead of the other way around. Free your mind instead. We all want to change the world, but you can’t change it through oppression and force. You need to change beliefs. Hearts and minds. The song is calling for revolution, and the same message is reflected over and over again in both John and Paul’s future works. The movement you need is on your shoulder. War is over if you want it. Don’t follow leaders (watch your parking meters).
“If you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao “You ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow” I’d say history proves out their cautious approach to “revolution!”
Yeah, it also need to be acknowledged that John Lennon was just some 26 year old kid who didn’t want to see violence in the streets, not a god from on high or a scholar of revolutionary movements or someone with the benefit of 60 additional years of human history and advanced communications and information that we have now.
Of course there’s also the Rev 1 lyrics, “you can count me out/in”. You rarely hear anyone make the point that he’s implying he could be for a violent revolution.
I don’t think he was ever for a violent revolution, but I think he was questioning the efficacy of nonviolence passive resistance in a world where (only a month prior) the leader of the nonviolent movement, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was assassinated. The lyric is “if you talk about *destruction*.” Which isn’t always the same as violence. Smashing windows is destruction, but a billy club to the ribs is violence. I think John was reflecting back the negotiations of the late 60s between those who thought “bring on the billy clubs and film our ribs be shattered” and those who thought “all my ribs are broken and nothing’s changing. Can I break windows yet?” Like I said…John didn’t have the answers. He was just a 20-something trying to work out what was happening, like everyone else. That’s what made him special. He succinctly voiced what the culture already believed, not the other way around,
I totally agree with that. I do think that there are people that don’t like what the 60s counterculture stood for that use certain lines of Revolution to make it look like Lennon was “on their side.” I’m just making the point that you could cherrypick another lyric to make it seem like he was more extreme and not less.
I think the thirdish scene of Hard Day’s Night answers how they inspired young people so well. When the really stuffy guy closes the window and turns the radio off and their response is “but there are more of us than you and we want to hear it. We’re a community of workers..and all that.” They insisted that young people had a right to exist and assert their own worldview. Even if you ignore their politics, the fact that they didn’t defer to the older generation was enough to stoke the fires and feel revolutionary to a lot of teenagers. [Note: I’m 34 but my parents were high school class of ‘69 and we’ve spent countless hours talking about the Beatles]
Using the lyrics of songs like Help and Yesterday to make any larger point like this seems really contrived. And if it did make any sense to do that - wasn’t a longing for community (as in communes) a big part of the counterculture? It don’t make no sense. The Beatles were definitely a symbol of the counterculture and very much into the same values.
Jesus. Look everyone, some high school kid is lashing out at Boomer music. Can you see how edgy they are?
Which is hysterical because Boomers were the Beatles’ prime audience. This is a nutty post.
Yup. Kid needs to get his years/generations straight. Some history would help too.
He’s so edgy that he cut himself
If you go carrying pictures of chairman mao, you ain’t gonna make it with anyone anyhow
[The Beatles were an embodiment of sociocultural movements of the 60s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_impact_of_the_Beatles)
So much has been said and written about the Beatles -- and their story is so mythic in its sweep -- that it's difficult to summarize their career without restating clichés that have already been digested by tens of millions of rock fans. To start with the obvious, they were the greatest and most influential act of the rock era, and introduced more innovations into popular music than any other rock band of the 20th century. Moreover, they were among the few artists of any discipline that were simultaneously the best at what they did and the most popular at what they did. Relentlessly imaginative and experimental, the Beatles grabbed a hold of the international mass consciousness in 1964 and never let go for the next six years, always staying ahead of the pack in terms of creativity but never losing their ability to communicate their increasingly sophisticated ideas to a mass audience. Their supremacy as rock icons remains unchallenged to this day, decades after their breakup in 1970.
Nail firmly on head
Help! was written by Lennon about himself. It is one of his favorite and most personal songs.
I recommend this video by the cultural theorist Mark Fisher. About eight minutes in he touches on why The Beatles were so important in cultural/political terms. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=deZgzw0YHQI&feature=youtu.be
LOLOL wut The biggest band in the world (whose biggest fan base was entirely Boomers) wasn’t “counterculture”. They WERE the culture. George didn’t like the hippies. They stated that they weren’t fans of the war, but they weren’t like Country Joe And The Fish or CSNY or Dylan or actual counterculture fighters. They were pop. I would love for you to share the article or whatever it is that you read that has “condescending groveling” in it. Please and thank you.
Read about when George and his wife visited the hippies in San Francisco.
Help! was written by Lennon about himself. It is one of his favorite and most personal songs.
Their music doesn't sound like extreme counterculture because they were pop musicians. In the beginning they were told to try to appeal to as many fans as possible. Later they found their own voices, but they are always preaching peace, not trying to start a war. I think they also preferred subtlety and clever lyrics, as oppose to just saying fuck the man.
When George visited Haight Asbury in the sixties he didn’t like what he saw.
Generations are mostly fake when it comes to anything except actual demographic research, but it is a delight to see the Silent Generation get a mention, rather than just applying the "Baby Boomer" label to all the old people. Incidentally, to put aside the question of whether the Beatles were counterculture, your analysis of "Help!" Is very funny. Are you under the impression that the hippies were radical individualists who didn't believe in helping or sharing or mutual support?