RE: Beatles Who and Scooby Doo

["O'Neal, Kevin W." <Kevin.ONeal@vtmednet.org>]

>From: "L. Bird" <pkeets@hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: The Who Mailing List Digest V8 #234
>
>The Beatles definitely have a broader appeal--Who music has too much of a 
>discordant edge to it for some folks.  BUT, much of Who music still sounds 
>contemporary for that same reason.  The dissonance cuts across styles, as 
>well, and makes it serious rather than pop.

Most intelligent thing written on this list in a long time.
Yea!  Keets and I agreeing again!
The *above* is the difference between The Beatles and The Who.
What made the Beatles so "important" though, was that they were literally
guiding society through a change.  They were changing more than just music.
They were changing societies outlook.  They were letting us know that it was
ok to think differently.  It was ok to do acid.  It was ok to share love.
It was ok to let your hair down.  To be different.  To think different.  And
it's this that caused sooooooooo many people, people from all walks and
talks of life to like them.  The Beatles were a unifying band of great
importance to the changing of social values of that time.
They weren't popular like Brittney Bitch, etc.  They were popular because
people like their message, and cared about the message and about them.
Have you ever, EVER, seen an outpouring of emotion like when John was
murdered???
It was like a saint was killed.  I cried.  You know, they *were* more
popular than Jesus.  :-O

>From: Oshangrl@aol.com
>Subject: Re: The Who Mailing List Digest V8 #234
>You obviously have no taste  in music except for liking The Who. :)
>Deni

Deni, statements like that are gonna get folk pissed off at you.  
Just a friendly warning.

>From: StarShaped105@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Brit rockers have unfair advantage
>
>I am American and I love Brits!!!!  I am a freshman at Kent State and I got

>so happy today when my roomate told me there is some hot guy from London
who 
>is helping to teach an english class here!!!!! and I guess a bunch of
British 
>guys came over here to play soccer for Kent!!! I need to go find them!!!!!

What will you do with them once you find them???
Can we all watch???
We now expect a "button by button" description of what happens.

>From: "Nigel Morton" <nigel@adastey.demon.co.uk>
>Subject: Rudeness
>
>>O'Neal, Kevin W.
>>Subject: RE: Fish Hooks and Beatles
>>
>>>From: "Nigel Morton" <nigel@adastey.demon.co.uk>
>>>EErrrrrrr, 'scuse me but look at the photo more carefully, and read the
>>>article beside it!  She's not intending to eliminate John Entwhistle Band
>>>she's aiming to eliminate Gov. Jeb Bush!
>>
>>Do you two need any help getting the fish hooks out of your mouths?
>>Oooop, I mean the hooks, lines *AND* sinkers????
>
>Hey folk's, let's stop getting so personal!

Nigel, Dude, my buddy. While I fully support your statement of "let's stop
getting so personal", I have to say that stating that as a result of my post
isn't fair.  I was just laughing at you because you bought into Jeff's joke
"hook, line, and sinker".
I don't see it as "Rude" at all, and I'm pretty sensitive to that sort of
thing.
Take a deep breath, and stop *taking* things so personal.

This may be a good time to point out to all the new folk who have joined us
that this list (correct me if I'm wrong) goes under the assumption that
nothing is meant to offend (obvious derogatory comments being the exception
of course).

>From: "Mark R. Leaman" <mleaman@sccoast.net>
>Subject: Re: Who/Beatles/and more
>
>Kevin:

Yes.

>OK...what does today's Rock (not Pop) sound more like, The Who or the
>Beatles?

The Who.  But, there are many songs that can sound all love-y dove-y too,
like The Beatles.

>How about that of the `90's?

The who.
 
>And so on, and so forth.

Never met him.

>The Who were more influential than any other band (so far), and that makes
them more
>important.

Regarding musical influence, perhaps.  Don't really care to venture into
that abyss of a debate.  But regarding importance to society and social
change???????  See comments above.

>Even the Beatles admitted they were influenced by The Who.

I think they were influenced much more by The Beach Boys.  Actually, I think
Pete was influenced by The Beatles, rather than the other way around.
Wasn't it John who got Pete to think more socially and politically??

>Sure, the Beatles were more popular. So is Michael Jackson, Garth Brooks,
>all lightweights.

Now you're pulling a "Keets".  You don't believe that The Beatles can be
compared to Michael Jackson or GB.  Do you??  What kind of CD store are you
runnin' down there???  Is it the heat??

To be honest, I'm not too into this whole Beatles vs. Who debate.  To me,
The Beatles are a "not so close" (as apposed to close) second as far as my
favorite music.  But, 3rd favorite is way, WAY, *WAY* far back from The
Beatles.
Anyone want to ask me where the greatest Who imitation band Zep falls?????
;-)
Mark, we can agree on *that*, right?

Oh, and Bjorn:  To say GW is "important" is like saying changing your
underwear is important too.  It's just there, and needs to be done.

Kevin in VT.