Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Soup Nazi
Just "matched"? I'll take The Kinks Are The Village Green Preservation Society over any Beatles album. But that's me — in addition to genuinely love that record, I have an allergy to the school of thought that says The Beatles are the alpha & omega of this whole shit. Not that you necessarily implied that, though...
|
Honestly I go back and forth on it. I just fucking LOVE the Kinks. The Davies brothers made some of the most beautiful and ass-kicking music of that — or any other — era. And if I had to choose between "Victoria" and any Beatles or Stones song ever, I'd choose "Victoria" (studio version) every morherfucking time.
I do — from a kind of pop culture scholar standpoint — tend to view the Beatles as the "alpha and omega" of pop music in general. But from a more personal perspective, I see it a little differently. The Beatles never wrote anything quite like what the Kinks produced during their peak period.
As a whole, yes, the Beatles had a more fruitful and consistent discography, but they also quit at their peak. The Kinks went on to put out so-so records in the '70s and '80s, but also made some great records in those years. I used to just straight up prefer the Kinks. But now I look at it differently. Like, the Beatles were the Beatles. Whether you're a fan or not, it would be silly to argue that anyone has ever had a bigger influence on music. The Kinks were the runt of that particular litter, and as a result made some crazy awesome, weird as fuck, gloriously goofy yet jarringly poignant music that the Beatles were simply too big to make.
So, y'know, I wasn't really implying that the Beatles were the alpha/omega, but the general consensus in pop culture is that they were and are. I still love those late '60s/early '70s Kinks records as much as most of the Beatles' output.
In other words, I'm not one of those "Beatles or bust" nazis. There were times when they were a step behind the Kinks, the Stones, and definitely the Velvets (though that's getting into another topic entirely, one that would require mention of Dylan, and others, so let's steer clear of that for the purposes of this conversation.)
Beatles never wrote anything with the thunderous momentum of "Powerman" (nope... Not even "Helter Skelter." It may have been heavier and more frenetic, but it doesn't have the same energy). Neither did Zeppelin for that matter (
... but yeah, it's true).
And they never wrote anything as wonderfully silly as "Apeman." The Beatles never wrote anything quite as emotionally poignant in that achingly beautiful, proto-Replacements, heart-on-sleeve kind of way as "Strangers," which makes me cry on the reg, for realzies.
But catalog vs. catalog, the Beatles do pretty much own everyone, mostly because they didn't keep at it long enough to embarrass the living shit out of themselves, as the Who, Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, the Stones... even Dylan, most certainly did.
Have I answered the question you never asked with my lengthy, completely unprompted, all-over-the-goddamn-place reply? Good. Cheers.