Oct 04

Anti-Beatles Prejudice

FT + New York London Paris Munich4 comments • 916 views

Anti-Beatles Prejudice

It can be hard to disentangle judgement and prejudice at times (actually it’s always impossible, but you can do a fairly decent job most of the time). I occasionally wonder whether my dislike for and low opinion of the Beatles is merely a reaction to what I perceive as insane and unquestioning overvaluing in so many quarters – I certainly do react against it when someone is given an apparently unassailable status way above everyone else in their area; I’m aware of it also with Elvis, for instance, and since visiting Jamaica with Bob Marley too, both terrific stars within their territories, but I resent their being placed so far above Jerry Lee Lewis, Little Richard, Jimmy Cliff, Culture and so on. But the Beatles are the biggest, still guaranteed a place at the top of any all-time musical lists, and I know I have a knee-jerk anti reaction. Were they really the great songwriters everyone says (I can’t imagine I’ll ever think they were especially good performers), and is it just my prejudices preventing me seeing this? Fortunately the HMV sale always seems to sort me out.

I bought another pile of Trojan box sets this time (among other things), and I am presently listening to the Reggae Sisters one (i.e. all female singers), and enjoying it greatly. On the subject of Elvis, track 17 was maybe the best cover of ‘In The Ghetto’ I’ve heard, by Susan Cadogan; then the next track is a good version of ‘Son Of A Preacher Man’. Then the next started, and I was playing pinball on my PC and thinking ‘what is this clumsy drivel?’ Marcia Griffiths’ singing was fine, but the song was clearly terrible, hamfisted nonsense. Then I realised it was ‘Don’t Let Me Down’. Marcia had managed perfectly well with a gender-switched cover of the Impressions’ ‘Gypsy Woman’, despite the ‘man’ replacement losing a syllable, but she couldn’t make this flow at all.

It occurred to me the last time I had that same “this is rubbish – oh, it’s a Beatles song” moment. It was when I had bought Aretha’s first several Atlantic albums in a previous HMV sale. This Girl’s In Love With You starts magnificently – ‘Son Of A Preacher Man’ again, as it happens, ‘Share Your Love With Me’ then one of my all-time favourite songs, ‘Dark End Of The Street’. Then there is ‘Let It Be’ and ‘Eleanor Rigby’*, and it feels to me that the standard drops hugely. She did ‘The Long And Winding Road’ on a later album, and that feels like its lowest point too. It’s not because she’s choosing material from outside her style/genre either, in that she makes a much better fist of ‘Satisfaction’ and even the highly unlikely ’96 Tears’. I could go on to rant about Beatles covers by other singers among my all-time favourites (Otis, Al Green, Tammy Wynette, the Temptations), which strike me the same way. I have learnt that I regularly find that Beatles songs, performed by the singers I rate the highest, singers who are magnificent interpreters of so much material, almost without exception shock me, feel awkward and third-rate, before I recognise that they are songs by the most revered songwriters in popular music’s history.

* the Four Tops or Ray Charles couldn’t make this sound anything but amateurish and clumsy either. Given how well Levi Stubbs, for instance, sells an awful, mawkish song like Bobby Goldsboro’s ‘Honey’, we know he isn’t easily defeated.


  1. 1
    David on 18 May 2008 #

    I know what you mean…I get the same thing while listening to them as well and when performers cover their songs. However I’ve noticed Laibach released a Let It Be cover album and while I haven’t listened to it all I have heard their version of Across The Universe and when you see it along with the video it’s quite creepy with its fascistic tones. It seems to certainly sum up people’s feelings towards The Beatles in ways I don’t think I could describe coherently. I think when it boils down to it, when you listen to any band, good or bad, you can hear the passion that they have for making music. With The Beatles, it’s almost like you have the musical equivalent of antiseptic – no real sting and there’s a funny smell off it! That or I could compare them to antiques……old crap that’s gained significance due to its age. It’s a bit harsh perhaps but it’s the only way I can see it.

  2. 2
    vinylscot on 19 May 2008 #

    Maybe you should try reading Gary Hall’s “Living Life Without Loving the Beatles: A Survivors Guide” which covers this quite well. It’s an interesting premise, and the guy writes quite well.

    Don’t pay over the odds for it though, as once you’ve got the joke, the chapters tend to just become rehashes of each other.

    He also makes quite a big mistake in writing a book like this, in that every alternative he offers is also a “media darling”-type, often over-hyped and dismissed by many, e.g. Nick Drake.

    It’s not a bad way to spend an hour, albeit not a literary masterpiece.

  3. 3
    David McIntosh on 26 Aug 2009 #

    I am a Beatle fan, but agree that their songs do not travel well. A kinder view would be that peformance and recording are as important as composition. In other words, why bother covering Strawberry Fields Forever; the original nailed it.

  4. 4
    Provocateur on 11 Feb 2010 #

    I’m sorry you all don’t hear music properly.

Add your comment

(Register to guarantee your comments don't get marked as spam.)


Required (Your email address will not be published)

Top of page