May I recommend this highly detailed episode of "The Beatles Naked" podcast?
I'm not yet half way through, but I'm so impressed with the analysis. There's so much of it! With the music played, so you can judge for yourself.
I was interested, for example, in the discussion of the emotional effect of any slightly out-of-tune singing. Is it "soulful"? And has our experience of it changed over the years as present-day music is electronically tuned to perfection?
And is it the case that there is a song that only Paul McCartney can sing and that song is "Helter Skelter"? The Wikipedia article on the song cites a number of cover versions, but the only one mentioned in the podcast is Bono's. It is mentioned with a scoffing laugh (just before saying that if Kurt Cobain had tried, he might have succeeded). I just annoyed myself by listening to the Mötley Crüe version. I also sampled a little of the Marilyn Manson "Helter Skelter." Here's the awful Oasis version.
I'm no expert, but I'd say if you're just going to do it like Paul and just approach what he did, why do it at all? As an homage? But it's an homage with a song that got its reputation twisted up into the Manson murders. Bono said Charles Manson "stole" the song from The Beatles and he was "stealing it back."
Having just written about the connection between Trump's January 6th speech that — intentionally or unintentionally — seems to have inspired the storming of the U.S. Capitol, I'm interested to stumble so soon into this story of a vocal presentation that may have inspired murder. According to one Manson follower:When the Beatles' White Album came out, Charlie listened to it over and over and over and over again. He was quite certain that the Beatles had tapped in to his spirit, the truth—that everything was gonna come down and the black man was going to rise. It wasn't that Charlie listened to the White Album and started following what he thought the Beatles were saying. It was the other way around. He thought that the Beatles were talking about what he had been expounding for years. Every single song on the White Album, he felt that they were singing about us. The song 'Helter Skelter'—he was interpreting that to mean the blacks were gonna go up and the whites were gonna go down.
Of course, there's no way to hold The Beatles complicit in a murder scheme. At most, they could have thought that too many people are too attached to them and looking for messages and crazy connections and maybe they ought to stick to the peace-and-love songs so they don't accidentally inspire murder. It would be a different matter if The Beatles knew before they put out the White Album that there was a violent group set to rise up when The Beatles gave the signal "helter skelter."
Posts
52 comments:
Trust me. However it was in the Sixties, you really don't want to see Paul McCartney naked now.
A "helter skelter" is an amusement park ride where people get to the bottom and go back to the top of the slide where they stop and they turn and they go for a ride till they get to the bottom and they see you again.
A very slow version of Helter Skelter by the Beatles.
When the Beatles' White Album came out, Charlie listened to it over and over and over and over again. He was quite certain that the Beatles had tapped in to his spirit, the truth—that everything was gonna come down and the black man was going to rise.
Charlie, Charlie, if that were the case, why didn't they call it The Black Album?
Please don't forget Siouxsie and the Banshees' version
That's Robert Smith on guitar. I love it when her voice drops in. ..
"when I get to the bottom I go back... to the top of the slide... "
so great. Punk at its finest.
Bono gets the lyrics wrong. It's "You may be a lover, but you ain't no dancer," not "You ain't no lover, and you ain't no dancer."
Here's what Paul said about the song: "I was in Scotland and I read in Melody Maker that Pete Townshend had said: ‘We’ve just made the raunchiest, loudest, most ridiculous rock 'n’ roll record you’ve ever heard.‘ I never actually found out what track it was that The Who had made, but that got me going; just hearing him talk about it. So I said to the guys, 'I think we should do a song like that; something really wild.’ And I wrote Helter Skelter. You can hear the voices cracking, and we played it so long and so often that by the end of it you can hear Ringo saying,‘I’ve got blisters on my fingers’. We just tried to get it louder: ‘Can’t we make the drums sound louder?’ That was really all I wanted to do – to make a very loud, raunchy rock ‘n’ roll record with The Beatles. And I think it’s a pretty good one."
The Who song he's talking about was "I Can See For Miles."
“Helter Skelter” kind of proved to me that artist’s intention can sometimes be less important than the work itself. In some cases the intention might be almost irrelevant. There’s a tendency in the art world to pretend that the artist, his story, is the true “work of art.” But the works can speak on their own.
--- It would be a different matter if The Beatles knew before they put out the White Album that there was a violent group set to rise up when The Beatles gave the signal "helter skelter."
LOL. I hope that's intended for LOLs!
The boomers have never really wanted to face questions about the relationship of music to group behaviour and even, dramatic pause, the individual soul. This may have been the most controversial part of Allan Bloom's book, Closing of the American Mind.
Obviously it would be silly to say one song, even with a video like "We're Not Gonna Take It" (defenestrating parents) or even "You've Got the Music in You" (teens taking over a mall and putting the adults in pens) immediately triggers violence and crime. On the other hand, the ocean of pop rock has something to do with teachings like "indulge your feelings, the more passionate and resistant to reason, the better"; "become deeper and wiser by exploring the unconscious and the irrational"; not only are the elders full of shit (a safe bet) but the system is hopeless, it never delivers justice, there is always a strong case for violence.
Bloom says rock music is a problem, but he goes back to 50s TV: hip or clever adults, like the creators of Bugs Bunny cartoons, communicating directly with boomer children: never mind what your parents say.
We may now have a false choice between left-wing and right-wing boomers. The former insisting on diversity training, the latter not, neither really concerned about what the global corporations are up to, endless wars, or the daily lives of citizens who depend on laws.
Buskin ("Beatles Naked") is very good, and he has great co-hosts now, but he makes unnecessary innuendo comments regularly, as he did for years on "Something About The Beatles" podcast with Robert Rodriguez (which is still going and also excellent.) The two of them on SATB did a "Paul" album from "The White Album" which similarly highlighted the extent of his amazing vocal range that year.
"Producing the Beatles" is a stunning podcast on exactly what it implies, and the production and detail of every episode is amond the best of any podcast I've listened to.
"Nothing is Real" and "I am the Eggpod" round out the top five best Beatles podcast, IMHO.
It would be a different matter if Donavan knew before he put out Mellow Yellow that there was a violent group set to rise up when Donovan gave the signal "Electric Banana".
Because Electric Banana is about race war. Obviously.
I am Laslo.
If you listen to the range of various outtakes on the Beatles’ Anthology collection you realize Paul McCartney could sing anything.
Of course, there's no way to hold The Beatles complicit in a murder scheme.
But it’s still okay to hold Trump responsible for Ashli Babbitt’s cold-blooded murder? Just thought I’d check.
If Manson had listened to the album backwards, would he have started a soup kitchen or something?
Somewhere I read Paul talking about how they wrote the songs and he said they chose lyrics that sounded good - the way the words felt when sung - that the actual literal meaning wasn't as important. All of a sudden I understood why they were so "catchy".
According to today’s standards, Paul and Ringo should still be in a CA prison.
It would be a different matter if The Beatles knew before they put out the White Album that there was a violent group set to rise up when The Beatles gave the signal "helter skelter."
In trying to analogize, Althouse puts "helter skelter" in quotes like: (1) there was a known singular activation code, (2) the Beatles knowingly sent to Charles Manson anyway, and (3) Manson would not have acted but for inclusion of that one particular song on the White Album.
Fact is, Manson found messaging in the entire White Album, even the album title itself, along with multiple songs (e.g., Helter Skelter, Piggies and Blackbird, etc.).
At what point is the burden on those with knowledge of the Manson conspiracy to thwart the actual conspiracy, not censor whatever anodyne lyrics that in retrospect might be seen as having "triggered" it?
What , no “Desafinado” tag, or even reference?
Wait, hahaha. "I Can See For Miles" was the raunchy song? It's so melodic, so beautiful. "Helter Skelter" is barely listenable. What a wonderful comparison.
@Wince
"In trying to analogize, Althouse puts "helter skelter" in quotes like: (1) there was a known singular activation code, (2) the Beatles knowingly sent to Charles Manson anyway, and (3) Manson would not have acted but for inclusion of that one particular song on the White Album."
What I'm *trying* to do is create a hypothetical where it would become easy to hold The Beatles complicit, at least morally. I'm trying to identify the extreme end of a spectrum. You can make up less dire situations, but I do think that if The Beatles knew specifically that a crazy person had a plan to commit mass murders and looked to The Beatles for a tip off that The Beatles might have changed what they put out. If John Lennon had foreseen Mark Chapman, he might have refrained from singing "shoot me" repeatedly in "Come Together."
To liken it to the Trump situation, what happened was somewhere between the extremes, on a spectrum, and I can't say where without knowing a lot more about what the malefactors were thinking and saying and what Trump knew. But if I wanted to state the extreme hypothetical, I'd say if Trump knew there was a contingent plan to storm that Capitol and the contingency was that Trump would indicate that he wanted them to go ahead by saying "We will never give up, We will never concede, it doesn’t happen," and Trump did say those words.
So you are seriously trying to convince people that if Trump had said nothing at all, that those who caused havoc would not have done so? That they did not form their intent and desire before they even came to D.C.?
Favorite parler game is to do what George Martin wanted and make one awesome 14 song LP.
I've got several versions.
"So you are seriously trying to convince people that if Trump had said nothing at all, that those who caused havoc would not have done so?"
No. Why would you make that interpretation?
This shows how scary it is to speak and rely on other people to understand what you are saying!
Thanks for providing such a striking example of the problem.
Do you understand what I just wrote?!
First sign you're a moron?
Trying to cover a Beatles song.
Like you're going to do it better.
And is it the case that there is a song that only Paul McCartney can sing and that song is "Helter Skelter"?
That depends. Did Chris Cornell ever record it? Because him I could see knocking it out of the park!
Althouse replied...
What I'm *trying* to do is create a hypothetical where it would become easy to hold The Beatles complicit, at least morally.
Understood exactly, but my point was there's a point along that spectrum so attenuated where direct action to thwart a known risk supersedes any obligation to self-censor anodyne speech.
Wince said...
At what point is the burden on those with knowledge of the Manson conspiracy to thwart the actual conspiracy, not censor whatever anodyne lyrics that in retrospect might be seen as having "triggered" it?
Moreover, if people invoke a special significance or sacredness to government buildings like the Capitol, from a proper security standpoint, you have to assume that the risk is always there. Never mind when a contested election is being challenged and there are tens of thousands protesting. Never mind if you are in possession of actual knowledge of the plot itself.
Althouse further replied...
"We will never give up, We will never concede, it doesn’t happen," and Trump did say those words.
Really? I would have never picked that quote. I thought Trump was mocking what Hillary said to Biden.
Hillary Clinton said...
Joe Biden should not concede under any circumstances because I think this is going to drag out, and eventually I do believe he will win if we don't give an inch and if we are as focused and relentless as the other side is.
Honestly, I thought Althouse's 7th, "least... violent" quote had the greatest nexus with the actual Capitol incursion.
7. We’re going walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators, and congressmen and women. We’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.
Which is to say, not much.
Watch Tucker Carlson's brief, absolutely compelling interview of former FBI agent Coulson the day after the incursion to get an understanding of what I'm saying.
Coulson correctly says you didn't need to know of a specific plot to foresee the risk and to establish protocols in ways that just weren't done.
Wince said...
Moreover, if people invoke a special significance or sacredness to government buildings like the Capitol, from a proper security standpoint, you have to assume that the risk is always there. Never mind when a contested election is being challenged and there are tens of thousands protesting. Never mind if you are in possession of actual knowledge of the plot itself.
May I commend The Bobs version?
First sign you're a moron?
Trying to cover a Beatles song.
Like you're going to do it better.
Well, it depends on what "cover" means.
I think transforming a rocker into a ballad as The Carpenters did with "Ticket To Ride" is valid. It's not "better", but it is its own thing. The same for Sergio Mendes and Brasil's "Day Tripper" & "Fool On The Hill".
I think transforming a rocker into a ballad as The Carpenters did with "Ticket To Ride" is valid. It's not "better", but it is its own thing. The same for Sergio Mendes and Brasil's "Day Tripper" & "Fool On The Hill".
D'oh! It's not like it costs me something to link those!
Ticket To Ride",, Day Tripper, & The Fool On The Hill
I was going to say that the mistake the cover artists are making is that they're trying to cover a song whose dominant characteristic is dissonance but they slip back into familiar habits of harmony in the singing and guitar work.
But the Beatles Anthology version isn't bad, and it's a pretty standard Beatles arrangement.
So maybe there's something to the "only McCartney can sing it" theory.
It's probably hard to play a truly dissonant song live. All the musicians' training is to seek harmony. It took the Beatles 18 takes, at a point in their career where they weren't doing live performances any more.
Trying to cover a Beatles song.
Like you're going to do it better.
I think Joe Cocker succeeded with "A Little Help From My Friends", but I can't think of any other. Plus it was a Ringo sone.
"I think Joe Cocker succeeded with "A Little Help From My Friends", but I can't think of any other. Plus it was a Ringo sone."
Never a big Cocker fan...his take on that song was overboard.
And he should have been summarily executed for 'You are so beautiful.'
I think we can all agree on that : )
Paul felt peer pressure to go punk. I love it.
The Happy Hooker covers Michelle
Tiny Tim covers Nowhere Man
Seth Riggs, the vocal coach featured on this episode of the podcast, turned 90 a few months ago. This short video featuring several well-known singers wishing him a happy birthday is rather extraordinary: https://youtu.be/lm8IRlwLu8g
Now if McCartney had given a speech pleading with blacks not to rise up and kill whites, that would have been incitement of Charles Manson.
Speaking of Paul McCartney's voice, he has a new album out, and Amazon Music has been playing tracks for me. If I didn't know it was him, I wouldn't have been able to tell it was him from the voice. Then again, he's 78 years old.
I was all ready to get fired up to defend Oasis (I love Oasis), but then I listened to about a minute of their Helter Skelter cover and whew, what a stink bomb.
The gold standard of Beatles covers as far as I'm concerned: McLemore Avenue.
LSD is a helluva drug, and Manson used enough not just to change his mind, but to change his entire universal coordinate system. That he used Helter Skelter as a code for race war, after hearing the Beatles, is as insignificant as the specific breed of the dog that gave the Son of Sam his instructions. Manson could have called his race war plan "Daisy" and it would have been just the same murderous idiocy.
Only The Old Professor would make an analogy between Trump's post November 3rd actions and the Beatles writing the White album.
At worst these covers are interesting -
Taxman -- Doug Pinnick
Taxman -- Joe Bonamassa
Come Together -- Gary Clark
In My Life & Working Class Hero -- Ozzy
"Only The Old Professor would make an analogy between Trump's post November 3rd actions and the Beatles writing the White album."
Now you're just begging for an ass-kicking...
: )
I think anyone can any message that they want in anything, such as songs, paintings, photos, and speeches. Case in point, all the “clues” in The Beatles’ songs, photos, and album covers over the second half of the 1960’s that Paul was dead. The fact that Manson’s psychotic mind interpreted “Helter Skelter” to murder people was tragic to the victims and their families.
I have never thought that “I Can See for Miles” was the “as the loudest, rawest, dirtiest song the Who had ever recorded” (to that point of their career) I find amusing because I wouldn’t describe the song as even close to those adjectives. Hell, The Beatles “out-heavy metaled” the Heavy Metal bands who eventually covered “Helter Skelter” in a genre that wasn’t natural for The Beatles. I think McCartney also wanted to prove a point to his critics that he was a rocker and not just someone who wrote schmaltzy love songs.
I have never thought that “I Can See for Miles” was the “as the loudest, rawest, dirtiest song the Who had ever recorded”
When Paul did find out that the song was 'I can see for miles' he retaliated and came up with 'Blackbird.'
That showed Townshend what raw and dirty really is : )
For some reason YouTube just offered me a clip (I've been clicking on AC/DC because of their new album): a serial killer in California who was known as the Night Stalker claimed to have been inspired by the AC/DC song Night Prowler. Angus carefully explains that the words of the song were inspired by a guy who stole underwear off clothes lines. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNdcNLBTvNw
Fernandinande said...
“A very slow version of Helter Skelter by the Beatles.”
I am embarrassed to say that I have never heard this before now.
I think I am going to need to buy the Anthology discs.
Paul McCartney wrote jingles for biscuit commercials.
Joe Smith said...
First sign you're a moron?
Trying to cover a Beatles song.
Like you're going to do it better.
Stupid much?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj6qquRMfrs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLV4_xaYynY
Post a Comment