Reason #497 – You say you want a Financial Revolution?


“Groups like The Beatles were basically capitalists interested in enriching themselves through the music industry. They did about as much to represent the interests of the nation’s young people as The Spice Girls did in the 1990s.”

Tabloids and gossip aside, its a rare occurrence when any news source prints even a partial truth about the FF. Anything less than blind praise is frowned upon. Complete, unconditional moptop worship is preferred. To say something negative about the beatles music in the press is a clever way of asking for your walking papers, along with a guarantee that you’ll never write for money again in this lifetime, at least not for any creditable organization.

This is why the following article comes as such a surprise. That AFP could let this story slip through the cracks is incredible! The author even had enough foresight to not include his name, its merely credited to a British academic. We’ve reprinted it in its entirety as well as providing a link, just in case beatlemart strikes again. Do you remember the video of McCartney calling a reporter a ‘fat little schoolgirl?’ Try and find it now, search for the phrase “Paul McCartney Is A Nasty Piece Of Work!”

Although this story could have gone much deeper, its hard to criticize such groundbreaking journalism. Instead, to help support its claims we’re contributing some rare photos of the FF

The Early Days, Paul rehearsing for the next big marketing recording session.

Paul McCartney playing the code piano

John Lennon post beatles, summoning lawyers to his estate with the code piano.

John Lennon Playing the Code Piano

Rejected Abbey Road Album Cover

Rejected Abbey Road Album Cover Alternative

Jagger and Lennon wanted money not revolution: study
Thu Oct 9, 9:40 AM
lennon sitting and looking at stuffLONDON (AFP) – Pop culture icons John Lennon and Mick Jagger were clever capitalists who cashed in on the mood of the 1960s, not spokesmen for a generation seeking revolution, a British academic said Thursday.

Cambridge University historian David Fowler said that so-called “Swinging London” was in fact beyond most normal people, “less a golden age for the nation’s young than a celebration of wealth by its social elite.”

“The 1960s are often viewed as the point at which youth culture in this country exploded, but in many ways they were the years in which the idea began to fall apart,” said Fowler.

“Groups like The Beatles were basically capitalists interested in enriching themselves through the music industry. They did about as much to represent the interests of the nation’s young people as The Spice Girls did in the 1990s.”

Fowler notes that Rolling Stones frontman Jagger himself, when asked by an interviewer whether he was a spokesman for a generation, replied that he was just a musician.

The academic, who teaches modern British history in Cambridge, said more authentically revolutionary youth movements can be found in the period between World War I and World War II.

He singled out a little-known Cambridge student Rolf Gardiner, who was fascinated by the concept of Jugendkultur in Germany as a way that young people could express themselves more freely and challenge their elders.

Gardiner’s cult championed physical labour and rural reconstruction, Fowler said, recounting also how he organised naked bathing sessions along the Cam river, as an expression of “back to nature” values.

“People forget that real youth movements are about a lot more than spending and consumerism — they are a way of life,” added the academic from Clare Hall college, Cambridge, author of “Youth Culture In Modern Britain, c.1920-c.1970.”

“People like Rolf Gardiner were true cultural subversives, pop stars before pop even existed. In terms of the influence he had on giving Britain’s young people a sense of identity … he is just as important as Mick Jagger.”

The reason the 1960s is perceived as the dawn of youth culture is because of a “break in chronology” due to World War II, which left a state of “collective amnesia,” the academic said.

Groups like the Beatles and the Rolling Stones took advantage of this — but their separation from real fans’ lives was reflected in the way they installed themselves in grand country houses, while the London “scene” was equally beyond most people’s purses.

“The world of Swinging London may be viewed as an emblem of youth culture now, but it was really for the Michael Caines of this world; an elite who could afford it,” Fowler said.

Here is a link to the original article.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (2 votes, average: 3.00 out of 5)
Loading...

4 thoughts on “Reason #497 – You say you want a Financial Revolution?

  1. jp

    so..what you are saying is that the beatles weren’t the greatest group on the earf and were merely money grubbing neo liberal assholes?

    hmm..I think you may be on to something..

  2. Jim

    Well, if Ringo doesn’t want to be harassed by obsessive fanatics who probably have memorized the names of his pets and the styles of his rings and other non-musical trivia, then so be it. That’s his right. He’s a senior citizen you know, and his rockstar days are long past. This stalking of celebs is really a very pathetic sickness.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *