Woodstock

[Robin Landseadel]

On Aug 16, 2009, at 9:46 AM, Carvill John wrote:

> The Beatles undoubtedly did have an effect on what happened to class  
> distinctions etc. But I don't think it's accurate to say that they  
> 'arose' out of class struggles. They certainly would not have seen  
> themselves in that light.

The Beatles cooked up the Art School shuffle, took scruffy low-class  
Rock & Roll by the neck, fed it latest psychotropics  and made self- 
consciously arty "Statements" like "Revolver" and "Sergeant Pepper's  
Lonely hearts Club Band."  One could say they destroyed "Rock & Roll"  
in the process but a musical infrastructure as flimsy as Rock & Roll  
could be blown away in a heavy downpour anyway. One just might look  
upon Woodstock as that downpour. By the time Woodstock rolled around I  
already turned my back on the new noises and turned toward the past  
and genuine musical revolutionaries like Berlioz & Beethoven.

A huge part of the Beatles Myth comes out of their early "interviews"  
with the New York press corps, where they displayed just as much  
cynicism and "cheek" as the ink-stained wretches of the press, circa  
1964. The Beatles were College students—"Art School" students, fer  
chrisakes—not factory workers, and it showed. Reminds me of Elvis  
Costello—the music critics loved him 'cause he looked just like 'em.

Chuck Berry—there's your factory worker. Helps to explain the assembly- 
line nature of his musical compositions.

Of course, Mick Jagger was on course for a MBA before he figured there  
was a bigger paycheck in playing "black" for teenagers too hormonally  
overwrought to know what hit 'em.