the style of the White Album was cynically copied from Dylan's John Wesley Harding.
Woah, dude, I hope you don't believe that nonsense anymore.
Maybe the basic idea of doing a different kind of album after a revolutionary, popular-as-hell work was copied from Dylan's album (which I like very much, BTW), but the way they approached the style was COMPLETELY different. I don't want to write a long essay on it, but The White Album's achievement was also arguably greater than Dylan's. JWH is awesome, but The White Album is a very rare kind of album. By your standards, it would be the peak of Beatles' creativity, which is why I'm surprised people like you rate relatively mediocre albums like Abbey Road higher ("relatively" is the key word here, I happen to like Abbey Road very much). In fact, I have yet to see a good argument against The White Album. That's perhaps because the elements which would normally lower down the quality of many other albums, actually work here. It's a flawed work where the flaws feel like enhancements to the experience. It's filled with riddles and nonsensical fragments, and contradictions (it's feel of being relaxed AND filled with tension, for example). It's the very distortion of an album. It's self-destructing but never seems depressed/depressing. It revels in its quirkiness, and makes the whole experience uncompromising yet fun.
Sorry, but I have yet to see that anywhere else, except for Twin Infinitives, Trout Mask Replica, Metal Machine Music, 1/2 Gentlement/Not Beasts, and Parable of Arable Land.
Considering the other half of the album is instrumentals by George Martin that leaves only 4 original Beatles songs, not found anywhere else.
Also, nowhere have I found anything to do with The White Album having anything to do with John Wesley Harding. Stop bullshitting.
Then open up your ears and get a sense of perspective on rock history. JWH shifted the mood of rock music to something more simple and traditional, and the Beatles exploited this change by popularizing it. Unlike JWH, the White album lacks cohesion sounding like a collection made by 4 individuals.
Then open up your ears and get a sense of perspective on rock history. JWH shifted the mood of rock music to something more simple and traditional, and the Beatles exploited this change by popularizing it. Unlike JWH, the White album lacks cohesion sounding like a collection made by 4 individuals.
I STRONGLY disagree with you. On the surface, The Beatles may be more simple, but it is exactly the opposite of traditional. JWH was traditional and simple, with some creative touches.
And who cares about cohesion if something that lacks cohesion is more enjoyable?
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Facetious
alelsupreme
