The Beatles question - Page 2

**Just John** · 02-23-2009, 07:34 PM

Similarities between I am the Walrus and I wanna hold your hand. (I'm going to be brief here because I had things to do today and was going to leave it, but I didn't want to keep you waiting)

-Same era and same genre: Let's not forget that there wasn't the diversity in music there is now as there was in the 60s. You had The Stones, The Kinks and The Beatles. None of these bands are anything new to me in the slightest and I've heard them regularly since I was as young as I can remember. It's only natural that after a while you hear the same vocalist and it just goes in one ear and out of the other. Look at modern pop music now, I couldn't tell the difference between the pussycat dolls, atomic kitten, the spice girls etc. It all sounds the same to me because I've heard it so often that I tune it out.

You're forgetting that my original statement. I said that it conjured up the same imagery.

Maybe in America The Beatles are still some kind of exotic import, but over here there is only so many times you can hear a Liverpudlian vocalist without thinking 'Oh The Beatles' and promptly losing all interest. They may seem like individual pieces of musical art to you, but in England, we hear it all the time and simply don't give a toss.

So once again I direct you to my original post:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just John

Everytime I hear the beatles I keep thinking I'm in some kind of nutcase dream where everything is trying to be overly pleasant and I'm never going to escape. Seriously agitates me to listen to them.

What exactly is wrong with this statement? It just seems to me like you can't stand the idea that someone might think differently about The Beatles and therefore jumped to conclusions and assumed I must obviously be listening to something totally different

So once again I will ask you; what is wrong with my original post now that you realise that I have listened to a variety of their work and it still conjures up the same imagery?

**Boondock Saint** · 02-23-2009, 07:39 PM

lol Peggy Lane

**Just John** · 02-23-2009, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boondock Saint

lol Peggy Lane

OH I've just realised I mean PENNY Lane. Not sure where I got PEGGY from. Maybe from Twiggy, also being associated with the 60s and all.

**RottingFreak** · 02-23-2009, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just John

They may seem like individual pieces of musical art to you, but in England, we hear it all the time and simply don't give a toss.

It must suck for England to have you speaking for all of them.

**Just John** · 02-23-2009, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RottingFreak

It must suck for England to have you speaking for all of them.

I didn't say I was speaking for everybody, I do think I'm speaking for the majority though. Many of us are not fans. I will try to find sales figures as of 2008 to prove this.

**Bad Company** · 02-23-2009, 08:55 PM

Can we please let this die.

**Cooler Tom Schuler** · 02-23-2009, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just John

Similarities between I am the Walrus and I wanna hold your hand. (I'm going to be brief here because I had things to do today and was going to leave it, but I didn't want to keep you waiting)

-Same era and same genre: Let's not forget that there wasn't the diversity in music there is now as there was in the 60s. You had The Stones, The Kinks and The Beatles. None of these bands are anything new to me in the slightest and I've heard them regularly since I was as young as I can remember. It's only natural that after a while you hear the same vocalist and it just goes in one ear and out of the other. Look at modern pop music now, I couldn't tell the difference between the pussycat dolls, atomic kitten, the spice girls etc. It all sounds the same to me because I've heard it so often that I tune it out.

You're forgetting that my original statement. I said that it conjured up the same imagery.

Maybe in America The Beatles are still some kind of exotic import, but over here there is only so many times you can hear a Liverpudlian vocalist without thinking 'Oh The Beatles' and promptly losing all interest. They may seem like individual pieces of musical art to you, but in England, we hear it all the time and simply don't give a toss.

So once again I direct you to my original post:

What exactly is wrong with this statement? It just seems to me like you can't stand the idea that someone might think differently about The Beatles and therefore jumped to conclusions and assumed I must obviously be listening to something totally different

So once again I will ask you; what is wrong with my original post now that you realise that I have listened to a variety of their work and it still conjures up the same imagery?

Era and genre? Those are not musically significant. You did not name one real similarity. You're basically saying you don't like the songs simply because of who performed them.

I don't care if you don't like them, that's fine. But your reasons are nonsense.

**Cooler Tom Schuler** · 02-23-2009, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bad Company

Can we please let this die.

Certainly. Just head on over to any other page on the internet and we'll be happy to disregard our entire conversation.

**Matchbox** · 02-24-2009, 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just John

Similarities between I am the Walrus and I wanna hold your hand. (I'm going to be brief here because I had things to do today and was going to leave it, but I didn't want to keep you waiting)

-Same era and same genre: Let's not forget that there wasn't the diversity in music there is now as there was in the 60s. You had The Stones, The Kinks and The Beatles. None of these bands are anything new to me in the slightest and I've heard them regularly since I was as young as I can remember. It's only natural that after a while you hear the same vocalist and it just goes in one ear and out of the other. Look at modern pop music now, I couldn't tell the difference between the pussycat dolls, atomic kitten, the spice girls etc. It all sounds the same to me because I've heard it so often that I tune it out.

You're forgetting that my original statement. I said that it conjured up the same imagery.

Maybe in America The Beatles are still some kind of exotic import, but over here there is only so many times you can hear a Liverpudlian vocalist without thinking 'Oh The Beatles' and promptly losing all interest. They may seem like individual pieces of musical art to you, but in England, we hear it all the time and simply don't give a toss.

So once again I direct you to my original post:

What exactly is wrong with this statement? It just seems to me like you can't stand the idea that someone might think differently about The Beatles and therefore jumped to conclusions and assumed I must obviously be listening to something totally different

So once again I will ask you; what is wrong with my original post now that you realise that I have listened to a variety of their work and it still conjures up the same imagery?

May I take over?
Apparently you are comparing "I want to hold your hand and I Am the Walrus (Both Sic)

Let's compare and contrast
1) I Want To Hold Your Hand, 1963, an adolescent love song written by Lennon and McCartney, extremely innocent and naieve. It appealed to the young croud that adolized the Beatles in the beginning.
2)I Am the Walrus, 1967, a wordplay epic by Lennon influenced by LSD and the works of Lewis Carrol. IT was orchestral and revolutionary in it's use of multi tracking.
There is no comparison between the two works. Other than the fact that the two songs feature the same people there is no similarity.

**Bad Company** · 02-24-2009, 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cooler Tom Schuler

Certainly. Just head on over to any other page on the internet and we'll be happy to disregard our entire conversation.

I can't, it's like watching a car crash. Except your argument is a Mack truck.

**Just John** · 02-24-2009, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cooler Tom Schuler

Era and genre? Those are not musically significant. You did not name one real similarity. You're basically saying you don't like the songs simply because of who performed them.

I don't care if you don't like them, that's fine. But your reasons are nonsense.

The ERA and GENRE are not musically significant? Are you fucking mental? I can't think of a way that the genre CAN'T be musically significant. And Era is most certainly significant.

Also, once again you are misinterpreting the original post and blowing the whole thing out of proportion. Remember that you are the one who started this argument, and you've basically ruined the thread. I had no idea someone was going to reply to my comment, I thought it was pretty offhand personally.

"You're basically saying you don't like the songs simply because of who performed them."

I never said anything like this. Do not put words into my mouth. You're also forgetting that while I'm sick of hearing The Beatles, it's not like I can't appreciate what they did for music. Much in the same way that Mozart was an excellent composer with music that was very mathematically precise, however it's definitely not to my taste.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matchbox

May I take over?
Apparently you are comparing "I want to hold your hand and I Am the Walrus (Both Sic)

Let's compare and contrast
1) I Want To Hold Your Hand, 1963, an adolescent love song written by Lennon and McCartney, extremely innocent and naieve. It appealed to the young croud that adolized the Beatles in the beginning.
2)I Am the Walrus, 1967, a wordplay epic by Lennon influenced by LSD and the works of Lewis Carrol. IT was orchestral and revolutionary in it's use of multi tracking.
There is no comparison between the two works. Other than the fact that the two songs feature the same people there is no similarity.

The genre is pop, the era is the same and it comes from the same band. That is most certainly similar enough, especially when you consider the sheer weight of records The Beatles have produced as it is, it's only natural that one who is not a fan of their work will have a tendency to forget the smaller details and instead just see the bigger picture. In fact that is very acceptable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bad Company

I can't, it's like watching a car crash. Except your argument is a Mack truck.

I thought you were better than that Bad Company. Firstly, while I'm not asking you to agree with me, you've delivered nothing to the debate and thrown in a careless (and inaccurate) remark. Are you really so blind as to not be able to see things from another viewpoint?

**ron the dial** · 02-24-2009, 04:14 PM

lol just john you just don't get it

also lol at hearing the beatles so much because you are british. where do you think they became a worlwide phenomenon? the us? yeah pretty sure we've heard them just as much as you, bud.

**Jeritron** · 02-24-2009, 04:20 PM

lol

**Just John** · 02-24-2009, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Weapon X

lol just john you just don't get it

also lol at hearing the beatles so much because you are british. where do you think they became a worlwide phenomenon? the us? yeah pretty sure we've heard them just as much as you, bud.

Just don't get what? You obviously have nothing to say you stupid piece of shit, otherwise you would have given a logical argument, so think before you open your mouth next time, fag.

I don't recall saying 'I have listened to The Beatles more because I am British'. So clearly you have no base to your points here. Stick to casual forum where you can talk about 'GETTIN HIGH LOLZ' you fucking failure.

**ron the dial** · 02-24-2009, 05:03 PM

lol because i talk about that all of the time

the fact that you are so dumb that you stand by your assessment that those two songs sound anything alike reminds me that i shouldn't have said anything in the first place. you are a joke.

and don't get too bent out of shape, guy!

**RottingFreak** · 02-24-2009, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeritron

lol

Summarization of the whole thread right there.

**Just John** · 02-24-2009, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Weapon X

lol because i talk about that all of the time

the fact that you are so dumb that you stand by your assessment that those two songs sound anything alike reminds me that i shouldn't have said anything in the first place. you are a joke.

and don't get too bent out of shape, guy!

LOL

This:

Is telling me I am a joke. Pot? Kettle? Black?

**ron the dial** · 02-24-2009, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just John

lol come on, I live in the UK of course I know The Beatles' popular songs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just John

Maybe in America The Beatles are still some kind of exotic import, but over here there is only so many times you can hear a Liverpudlian vocalist without thinking 'Oh The Beatles' and promptly losing all interest. They may seem like individual pieces of musical art to you, but in England, we hear it all the time and simply don't give a toss.

**ron the dial** · 02-24-2009, 05:08 PM

that picture is most definitely a representation of any and all moments in my life and not just a drunken good time

way to make the argument about something that is isn't

**Just John** · 02-24-2009, 05:16 PM

I don't recall actually SAYING that I had listened to them more though. Maybe you should actually read before you post, if you can read that is, because clearly you cannot type.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Weapon X

that picture is most definitely a representation of any and all moments in my life and not just a drunken good time

way to make the argument about something that is isn't

DERP DERP I HAVE TO DRINK, SMOKE AND SHOW A PICTURE OF A FEMALE ALL IN THE SAME THREAD TO PROVE MY MANLINESS. I'M SO COOL.

**loopydate** · 02-24-2009, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just John

OH I've just realised I mean PENNY Lane. Not sure where I got PEGGY from.

Probably the same place you got

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just John

That'll be the day

Buddy Holly. Not The Beatles.

**ron the dial** · 02-24-2009, 05:17 PM

lol you got me dude i have been reduced to rubble

**Just John** · 02-24-2009, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loopydate

Probably the same place you got

Buddy Holly. Not The Beatles.

But The Beatles covered it.

And Weapon-X, there is nothing to reduce to rubble. By the looks of things you did that to yourself years ago. Go and fail elsewhere.

**Just John** · 02-24-2009, 05:32 PM

Picture's gone now :/

**ron the dial** · 02-24-2009, 05:35 PM

you are very clever, just john!

**Hanso Amore** · 02-24-2009, 05:36 PM

Man, Just John, just tap out and give up.

**Hanso Amore** · 02-24-2009, 05:37 PM

"we hear it all the time in England, Im sure We know"

" I dont speak for All English people"

Then dont use we

**Just John** · 02-24-2009, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hanso

Man, Just John, just tap out and give up.

Seriously though, what am I supposed to give up over? I genuinely don't understand what was wrong with the first comment in the thread. So without dodging the question with some kind of cop-out answer (Such as: "If you really don't get it then you are just stupid") tell me straight, what was wrong with the original comment?

**Cooler Tom Schuler** · 02-25-2009, 02:11 AM

You're original comment sounds like an absurd generalization of a large variety of widely differing music. Though I will admit my original assessment of "retarded" was quite premature and uncalled for, I stand by the spirit of my comment.

Anyway, I've grown weary of arguing about this. If you're unwilling to make any concessions to your platform (concessions that are obviously necessary at this point), you never will. You've decided what you think, and your willed ignorance is too strong to allow any enlightenment.

That being said, I wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors.

**The Mask** · 02-25-2009, 02:24 AM

you don't hear that much of the beatles in the uk. you don't hear that much of any kind of rock music really. radio sucks. i don't think i'd ever get tired of listening to them. some of their earlier stuff doesn't work for me but one trick ponies they ain't. i am a way bigger fan of the lennon songs though.

02-24-2009, 05:32 PM	#64
Just John Kiss the blade Posts: 8,284	Picture's gone now :/ Last edited by Just John; 02-25-2009 at 01:20 PM.

02-23-2009, 07:39 PM	#42
Boondock Saint Posts: 8,795	lol Peggy Lane

02-23-2009, 08:55 PM	#46
Bad Company Mad Posts: 26,228	Can we please let this die.

02-24-2009, 04:14 PM	#52
ron the dial the heartbreak king Posts: 48,457	lol just john you just don't get it also lol at hearing the beatles so much because you are british. where do you think they became a worlwide phenomenon? the us? yeah pretty sure we've heard them just as much as you, bud.

02-24-2009, 04:20 PM	#53
Jeritron Get a poke on Posts: 35,234	lol

02-24-2009, 05:03 PM	#55
ron the dial the heartbreak king Posts: 48,457	lol because i talk about that all of the time the fact that you are so dumb that you stand by your assessment that those two songs sound anything alike reminds me that i shouldn't have said anything in the first place. you are a joke. and don't get too bent out of shape, guy!

02-24-2009, 05:08 PM	#59
ron the dial the heartbreak king Posts: 48,457	that picture is most definitely a representation of any and all moments in my life and not just a drunken good time way to make the argument about something that is isn't

02-24-2009, 05:17 PM	#62
ron the dial the heartbreak king Posts: 48,457	lol you got me dude i have been reduced to rubble

02-24-2009, 05:35 PM	#65
ron the dial the heartbreak king Posts: 48,457	you are very clever, just john!

02-24-2009, 05:36 PM	#66
Hanso Amore You can't teach that Posts: 19,337	Man, Just John, just tap out and give up.

02-24-2009, 05:37 PM	#67
Hanso Amore You can't teach that Posts: 19,337	"we hear it all the time in England, Im sure We know" " I dont speak for All English people" Then dont use we

02-25-2009, 02:11 AM	#69
Cooler Tom Schuler Sleepy Bitch Posts: 6,336	You're original comment sounds like an absurd generalization of a large variety of widely differing music. Though I will admit my original assessment of "retarded" was quite premature and uncalled for, I stand by the spirit of my comment. Anyway, I've grown weary of arguing about this. If you're unwilling to make any concessions to your platform (concessions that are obviously necessary at this point), you never will. You've decided what you think, and your willed ignorance is too strong to allow any enlightenment. That being said, I wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors.

02-25-2009, 02:24 AM	#70
The Mask That Entenbrot, The Mask Posts: 56,852	you don't hear that much of the beatles in the uk. you don't hear that much of any kind of rock music really. radio sucks. i don't think i'd ever get tired of listening to them. some of their earlier stuff doesn't work for me but one trick ponies they ain't. i am a way bigger fan of the lennon songs though.