Lou Reed: “I thought The Beatles were garbage”

In another portion of the interview (which includes the Beatles comment, but not some of the others), he compliments Dylan, the Stones and Lennon solo.

 

I don't take his comments seriously. And it's not because he says he has complete contempt for The Beatles. As many have pointed out, it's okay to not like a band or certain types of music. And it's perfectly okay to dismiss it.

In Reed's case, I just don't believe he means much by his flippant remarks. He's looking for press coverage and he gets it.

 

Do you remember the outrage that Dylan caused on this very forum for this? 2015.

"Now some might say Tom was a great songwriter, and I’m not going to doubt that. At the time, during his interview, I was actually listening to a song of his on the radio in the recording studio. It was called “I Love.” And it was talking about all the things he loves. An everyman song. Trying to connect with people. Trying to make you think he’s just like you and you’re just like him. We all love the same things. We’re all in this together.

Tom loves little baby ducks. Slow-moving trains and rain. He loves big pickup trucks and little country streams. Sleep without dreams. Bourbon in a glass. Coffee in a cup. Tomatoes on a vine and onions.

Now listen, I’m not every going to disparage another songwriter. I’m not gonna do that. I’m not saying that’s a bad song, I’m just saying it might be a little over-cooked."

 

The quote in the thread title is extracted from a dialogue about lyrics. His comments about the Doors, Dylan, and Lennon's "Mother" were also about lyrics. I mostly agree with him (except again, only about 1/2 of Beatles' lyrics are garbage, IMO). I must be stupid.

Or maybe I'm not, because I actually listened to the interview and didn't criticize an artist because of a quote of which I didn't know the full context.

 

This is in the OP, the starting point of this entire thread:

Maybe you should direct your criticism at the OP?

 

There are more than a few people who have said some unflattering things about The Beatles. Though in my opinion some of it is utter jealousy. However, The Velvet Underground a band who had no hit singles, one decent album, who couldn't sing and could barely play their instruments and compare them to The Beatles is laughable.

 

Lou telling it like it is!!!

 

Well, I did mention the thread title, so I'm not sure what you're getting at. And the OP never says the quote was about lyrics. So again...what's your point?

 

i find your post quite ironic.

 

Yeah, The Velvet Underground had no hit singles. So what? That does not make them less important. Music is not going to be judged by sales, but by integrity and importance on future generations. The band did not have a hugh following when they were active, but all of their 4 studio albums are today considered as defining rock and roll albums, each of them pushing the borders of what could be allowed to do in music and lyrics. The point of the band was not to be beautiful, but to explore the grim, the bad and the vulgar in music. In other words the exact opposite of The Beatles and what they stood for. Without The Velvet Underground there would be no David Bowie, Kraftwerk, Brian Eno, Joy Division, Talking Heads or even S** Pistols. They changed the game and invented the monotone and thundering motoric beat in rock music. What lacked in technical brilliance, was compensated for in inventiveness and creative forces. In other words, The Velvet Underground changed the game just as much as The Beatles did. It can't be "She Loves You", "Yesterday" or well-produced music all the time. The opposite has just as much importance.

 

Are they really censoring the word sex now?

EDIT: Nope.

 

Nope. But I don't want any trouble.

 

He wasn't making that comparison, just stating an opinion. You don't have to be as good as The Beatles in order to have an opinion on The Beatles.

 

Really you do know that David Bowie, Brian Eno, Kraftwerk and thousands of other bands were influenced by The Beatles also. The Velvet Underground had some influence but it was limited. The Beatles influenced about every rock band that came after them.

I mean even there is a quote where The Velvet Undeground mention The Beatles as their main inspiration.

 

For what it's worth, I'm a lifelong Beatles fan. I can say without hesitation that they've always been my favorite, long before receiving my first single (Slow Down) or LP (Beatles '65) of theirs. No one band is better, or even close, in my opinion.

The thing is, I can totally see how their music could be seen as mediocre - even irritating - to people who's musical inclinations lean otherwise.

It would not surprise me one bit that someone of that era with a sharp literary mind, or perhaps with formal classical training (like Cale and/or Reed) would find the pretty, listener friendly, rudimentary musicianship and greeting card lyrics of a '60s Pop phenomenon to be "garbage". Not just The Beatles, but that whole scene. I get that. I know and have collaborated with musicians who think that way. And they're not wrong to think that.

I'm pretty sure I'm being clear headed about this. Not in denial in any way.

 

Oh. So now it's "The Beatles Invented Everything"-time again, right?
I have never questioned The Beatles' importance, but they were not the sole most important group on earth.
I have no doubt in believing the bands I mentioned also were inspired by The Beatles. Even The Velvet Underground were, as you say, but The Beatles were not the centre of the universe and certainly the music changed direction after 1966, with music and sounds so far away from The Beatles as one can't even imagine. There are zero connection between anything The Beatles did and what VU achieved on songs like Venus In Furs or Sister Ray. If you call what VU did for alternative music "limited", then I think you are totally unaware of progressive music in the seventies, eighties and even the nineties.

 

Please tell me where did I state or even tried to argue "The Beatles Invented Everything".

In grew up with alternative music which again The Beatles has a pretty significant presence in that sub-genre. However, The Beatles influence ranges to singer-songwriter, electronic, progressive, folk, metal, power pop, country and pop music.

 

People put too much importance on Lou Reed's opinion of anything. The guy was a contrarian! I use to hear him mock David Bowie as well. Who cares what he said.

 

Humbug!

 

They Velvets had a pretty massive influence on many bands as well. Some of the bands were more influenced by them than the Beatles (the horror!). How they managed to do that without playing or singing well & with only one decent album, is just something we'll never know.

 

Very true. But Beefheart wasn't derogatory. He often sang the praises of others. And anyway, I find his music much more fun and much more creative and more positive than Lou Reed's.

 

I'll begrudgingly spot one Moe Tucker's unorthodox yet perfect style in the "can't play their instruments" thing if you twist my arm, while disagreeing, but where are the examples of Lou, Cale, Sterling, or Yule being bad players? Everyone in that band was a distinctive instrumentalist, including the somewhat idiosyncratic percussionist. Hey, just like the Beatles!

And though Lou's prickly reputation is well-known, I hear an enormous amount of humor and heart in his songs, and not just one album's worth, either.

 

I'm impressed that this discussion continues. It reminds me of the never ending war of words between Captain Kangaroo and Mr. Rogers in the 60's. The two camps battled for years about who better served the kids. When Romper Room tried to get involved in the spat, that's when it all hit the fan. I remember the rage that fans felt when
Mr. Greenjeans tried to bite off the head of Henrietta Pussycat. That's when President Johnson got involved, declared a truce and this was during the Vietnam War!

Oddly enough, The Beatles and the Velvet Undergound are probably the two bands that take up the most real estate in my collection. And they live in peace on my shelves...no matter what the late members each band have said in interviews over the years.

 

Lou Reed was a comedian?

 

Yes, he even had a stand-up album - Take No Prisoners.