Beatle-ology Degree, not accredited

In three notes, I can name that Beatle song, what album it's on, what album side it's on (for those under 15, there are two sides to an album, The Beatles were truly an album band-not just singles producers that throw songs willy-nilly into a group and release it to a gullible public, but I digress badly), what song came before and goes after that song, or if it was a single, what year it was put out and what is on the other side of the single. I can also give you a background on what inspired the song and/or what it meant, who sang it, who wrote it, etc. This smacks of pathetic creepiness, and I do exaggerate a little, but for at least two years I did a weekly "Brunch with the Beatles" show on KWVA, 88.1 FM. Two hours every week. And if you know anything about me, you should know this.

I read every book, watched every movie and was generally scouring the universe for Beatle trivia. This all in the age before any real use of the internet or cell phones-yes, kids, we had things called libraries and record stores back then. Remember how grandpa used to talk about no phones or inside toilets and he would sound kind of happy and smug about it, and you thought, no phones or toilets, impossible! That's how I feel about the internet and cell phones. Yes, I am grandpa.

I had loyal listeners who requested the same song every week (Penny Lane guy, I hate you still), people who bought me lunch, people correcting my trivia. The greatest compliment I ever got was someone said she didn't even like the Beatles, she just liked my voiceovers, and called often just to say so (thanks mom-rim shot please). There were even places around town that only played our station when my show was on. Not really a compliment to me, it was college radio and much of that is absolutely unlistenable anyway-god love it!

I would frequently get into philosophical debates with people, because I had a loose and flexible approach to the show. I would play a song from a Beatle, solo Beatle, someone who had collaborated with the Beatles, a Beatle tribute (the Elton John tribute to Lennon, for example), even Yoko, Sean or any other close relation. I probably would have played a vegan meal from Linda on the turntable if I would have thought of it at the time. Some thought this was impure, a sacrilege, even.

But what I would not do, could not do, was play a Beatles cover (nor play the Rutles for some reason, though I would now since George was involved-probably didn't know it at the time). Not Joe Cocher's "Little Help From My Friends," not Elton John's or William Shatner's (that sonofabitch!) version of Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds, not Tiffany (add insult here), etc. ad nauseum. To me, this was a monstrous crime against music simply because the version that the Beatles created was the first and last statement. If Bach or Mozart would have recorded their music, I probably would feel the same way about them. I realize some people like these covers and I can live with this, just as I live with the knowledge that there are those who enjoy conjugal visits with...well, whatever, I just don't want to hear about it, that's all.

I would, however, play a song written by the Beatles for another artist, like "How Do You Do It" or "I Wanna Be Your Man," which the Rolling Stones scored their first top twenty with. 

During my glory Beatle days, when I would go out of town, people would volunteer to fill in for me. On one occasion, the station pranksters took over the show and played only Beatle covers. When I returned, one of the gentleman ran out of the room because he seriously thought I was going to pound him-just for playing a few Beatles covers. Was I really so crazy? That's when I realized I was perhaps a little too militant. And if I ever catch that little weasel...Radar, you will pay for your insolence!

I realize people think there are many fantastic interpretations of Beatles songs out there, but I always hear the original in my head and I think "they'll never hit that note just right," and they never do, "they won't get the fuzz on the guitar right," and they don't or  "there should be a little George Martin on harpsichord here", and my heart sinks when it's not there, and if you listen to this one closely after the line "she feels good" you can hear Ringo say "she effing does,"and so on and on. Just magical stuff. To me, someone covering the Beatles is like someone trying to steal the magic. It's not right. Even Ringo's wooden, sad rendition of "Little Help" puts Joe Cocher's heartfelt, spastic version to shame, in my opinion. 

So when "Across The Universe" came out who knows when, I'd avoided seeing it. It sounded like a neat idea, but then recollections of George Burns' (if he's in hell, this is the reason) narration for "Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" movie with the Bee Gees would enter my head and I would become physically nauseous. On principle alone I didn't see how I could watch this movie.

But it was bloody hot today, we were just finishing up a good bike ride (this is how this post is tri-related), we'd watched all of our DVR recordings, and it was really about the only decent looking thing to rent. 

You know, if it wasn't such a sacrilegious concept to begin with, it was pretty much the type of movie every Beatle nut could only dream of making. I'd say the main criticism I have of the singing was they never hit the highs that Paul hit, nor did they shred their vocals quite the way Paul and John both did, specifically "Oh, Darling," and "Revolution" come immediately to mind. And thank god they didn't do a version of "Maxwell's Silver Hammer," which, if any other band had knocked this second rate children's song off, I'd say, fine, cute song. But Paul, really, even after all these years, shame on you.

This movie could have really been trite, derivative and a form of star sodomization, but a key moment was when they chose to do an instrumental version of "A Day in the Life," the Beatle magnum opus, when they could have been very clumsy and lazy. The writers and director were clearly Beatle PhD's and I actually stopped paying attention to the plot in anticipation of which song they would use to carry the story forward and how they would interpret it. They borrowed heavily from Abbey Road (my favorite Beatle album), the White Album, Magical Mystery Tour and Sgt. Pepper's, while also including some good older stuff. They managed to leave off the tired though no doubt tempting "Yesterday," "Twist and Shout" and others.  I would have enjoyed hearing "Sexy Sadie" and "Dr. Robert", but I respected both the references and the restraint.

I eventually suffered from Beatle burnout, got tired of the silly, petty debates (does it really freaking matter whether or not the Beatles got American music from merchant marines passing through Liverpool-this is a myth, btw-and let the hostile disputations begin anew), even got tired of some of the songs. I got rid of all my Beatle-related materials, even my Yellow Dog studio bootlegs (IDIOTIDIOTIDIOT!!!!!!) I left right around the time the Anthology came out and I felt I had nothing much more to say about the Beatles, nor was there really much more to to be said about them by anyone.

But this movie made me want to go back and at least buy back all the albums (fine, dvds) and begin anew picking which album side I was going to listen to, and then re-order the songs and descend into a sort of harmless psychosis that engulfed me for so many hours of my life. And that is about as good a tribute I can make to a movie. 

Still, if you have any positive opinion about me whatsoever, promise me that after this movie you will never listen to another Beatle cover again.