Hysterical review of The Beatles on The Ed Sullivan Show
-
-
NJR wrote:
That is funny but that opinion was shared by many "grownups" in 1964. I was in Catholic school at the time and my teacher was a Dominican nun who told the class the Beatles were a "fad" any we would never hear from them again in 6 months -lol. I will give my Mom credit, she really liked the Beatles that night and the other two Ed Sullivan appearances.
-
^ I grew up liberal and Protestant. They even let me play guitar and sing Nowhere Man during church service! My mom was also a fan and my "enabler."
-
Yankeefan2 wrote:
NJR wrote:
That is funny but that opinion was shared by many "grownups" in 1964. I was in Catholic school at the time and my teacher was a Dominican nun who told the class the Beatles were a "fad" any we would never hear from them again in 6 months -lol. I will give my Mom credit, she really liked the Beatles that night and the other two Ed Sullivan appearances.
I'm now 73 and I clearly remember what the older generation in general felt about the lack of talent of the Beatles. I was a sophmore in high school in 1963 and the Fab 4 were like a breath of fresh air when it came to new Pop Music. In fact up until 1964 I didn't pay any attention to the Top 40 charts until the Beatles. It was the early Fall of 1963 that I began to hear about this group strangely called the Beatles (with an A!). I remember the early songs I was hearing on the radio...."Love Me Do", I Saw Her Standing There, All My Loving, "Twist and Shout" etc and then as the School Year progressed that Fall, you started hearing "I Want to Hold Your Hand" and "She Loves You". The songs coming out of Great Britain by this basically unknown group were so different and exciting. In retrospect they were so much better than the Top 40 (in general) that was being released in the US in 1962 and 1963.
Yankeefan is so right. At the time, people in their 40's and older (again I'm talking in general like this Mr. Jones who wrote this article) didn't get it. They did think they were strictly a fad and had little talent. They were stuck in the past with the Big Band sounds like Frank Sinatra etc. Not that Sinatra was bad but the older generation in 1964 weren't "open" to the new music. Elvis had gone into the Army and wasn't around, Chuck Berry was having his own personal problems, Buddy Holly had died in a plane crash so much of the inovation was gone in Pop Music in the early 60's.
As I continued my Sophmore year in 1963-1964 and into the Winter, the buzz (even though England seemed so far away from Philly and NYC) continued to swell. It was basically what you were hearing on the AM Radio dial. The next thing that all my friends in High School were hearing and talking about was the Beatles appearing live on the Ed Sullivan Show around January and February of 1964.
When that date finally occured on February 11, 1964, my family including my Mom and Sister were gathered around the small Black and White TV. The first thing I noticed was that these 4 young lads with the strange haircuts actually played their own instruments. They were a rock and roll group totally unlike the big US artists at the time (e.g. Bobby Rydell, Fabian etc coming out of Philadelphia). The big names in Pop Music had the good looks but were strictly singers. The Beatles were so different than the other Top 40 artists (again in general). They were writing and singing happy and cheerful songs with great melodic hooks. During that year in High School the new music in the radio sounded so exciting. My favorites at this time were probably "All My Loving" and "I Want to Hold Your Hand" but I loved all of these songs from the Beatles and watching them "live" on stage and playing their own insturments just made me an instant fan.
What the older people didn't realize was that Paul and John were just beginning. They had so many more songs ready to go as the year progressed and new singles were being released the rest of 1964 and into 1965. The older folks didn't realize that this machine couldn't be stopped. Yankeefan is so right and I was there at the time (15 and 16 years old) witnessing it.
I remember my Mom had written the "lyrics" to another new song from the Beatles called "Yesterday". My Mom had gotten me into groups like the Everly Brothers, Buddy Holly etc. in the late 50's so as an older person (but not too old) she had become a fan like my Sister and me.
-
^ B J, sorry but I have to revoke your "Beatles Fan Club" card for getting the date wrong that they first played on The Ed Sullivan Show!
It was Feb. 9th! On the 11th they played at the Washington Coliseum in D.C. -
NJR wrote:
^ B J, sorry but I have to revoke your "Beatles Fan Club" card for getting the date wrong that they first played on The Ed Sullivan Show!
It was Feb. 9th! On the 11th they played at the Washington Coliseum in D.C.Thanks NJR...I was just going by the date on the bottom of the article. I should have looked it up.
I did buy the DVD of "The Beatles on the Ed Sullivan Show" and every now and then I will play it when I'm in the mood for early Beatles.
-
B J Conlee wrote:
NJR wrote:
^ B J, sorry but I have to revoke your "Beatles Fan Club" card for getting the date wrong that they first played on The Ed Sullivan Show!
It was Feb. 9th! On the 11th they played at the Washington Coliseum in D.C.Thanks NJR...I was just going by the date on the bottom of the article. I should have looked it up.
I did buy the DVD of "The Beatles on the Ed Sullivan Show" and every now and then I will play it when I'm in the mood for early Beatles.
Now I KNOW I'm revoking your card if you have to look it up!
-
NJR wrote:
That is hysterically funny. Newspapers' music critics were only capable of writing about classical music and such. That's what they were employed to do. If what they listened to or watched wasn't any of that, it was just terrible and a total waste of time. There were no such things as rock music critics. Yet. After the Beatles, there were. What's even funnier is that the nonsense this guy and others like him wrote was totally ignored by those who mattered.....millions of kids.
