Originally posted by moonbusI disagree if what you are saying is that someone's use of the music as muzak has has transformed the music itself. But anyway, the decision of a department store owner does not have any bearing on the degree to which the Beatles' music has been inducted into the collective consciousness and what it means to people. I've heard Dylan's music in elevators too. It has no effect on what Dylan's music is.
Elevator muzak is the collective unconscious.
29 Oct 15
Originally posted by moonbusThis is all true.
Many of Dylan's songs have been covered by other people, so much so that several generations of music lovers have grown up not knowing that the covers are covers and that Dylan wrote them. "Knock knocking on Heaven's Door," "Blowin in The Wind," "Mr. Tambourine Man" -- and don't forget where the Rolling Stones got their name.
29 Oct 15
Originally posted by st dominics previewHow many protest songs did the Beats write? Think about 'Masters of War', Gates of Eden, Blowing in the wind, Bob Dylan's dream and the like. I think that is what they mean by collective consciousness.
really, which Dylan songs ?
and Beatles songs haven't?
posted as a lover of both
29 Oct 15
Originally posted by sonhousewell, from those 4, I would say that only 'Blowin' In The Wind' is in the 'collective consciousness', and most music fans in UK would struggle to recognise the others!!
How many protest songs did the Beats write? Think about 'Masters of War', Gates of Eden, Blowing in the wind, Bob Dylan's dream and the like. I think that is what they mean by collective consciousness.
'Hard Rain's a Gonna Fall'. Totally brilliant anti war song
30 Oct 15
Originally posted by moonbusTo put my 'Beatles fan' head on, that is an extremely simplistic view! The Beatles and Dylan had totally different beginnings.
As a lyricist Dylan knocks Lennon/McCarney into a cocked hat: "I wanna Hold Your Hand" is bubble gum music, written for 13-yr old girls. I will say that Lennon and McCartney could sing harmony; whereas no one can't sing the way Dylan can't sing.
Yes, 'I Wanna Hold Your Hand', 'She Loves You' etc were 'bubblegum pop'. Within 2/3 years The Beatles had morphed into songwriters who could turn out yearly albums of the quality of Rubber Soul/Revolver/Sgt Pepper/The White Album. The middle 2 of these regularly top 'the best album of all time' polls, certainly over here. I have never seen a poll that puts any of Bob's top albums (I would say Highway 61, B on B, Blood On The Tracks) ABOVE Revolver and Sgt P.
The intrinsic difference is that Dylan wrote strong songs, agreed with brilliant, breath taking lyrics. The Beatles explored and introduced diverse musical directions, again with awesome results. I guess you pays your money and takes your choice.
But to dismiss The Beatles as a group who could just.sing quite well is really not to look at the full picture.
I appreciate both artists, and on listening to 'Blood On The Tracks' I may decide THAT is the best album ever. Then it changes to 'Revolver' or even 'Veedon Fleece'. The beauty of music.