What was the impact of SGT PEPPER at the time it was released?

Because their opinions of it lessened as time went by. It was 'great' at the time (when they didn't have any other ideas of their own besides Indian music and the world loved it, and besides, Paul was on a creative roll, so why not go along with him?), and then later on, when it became associated with Paul, George Martin and his Production, and the dreaded 'concept' album, it was something to dismiss with a half-embarrassed shrug. Just like John later disavowed I Am The Walrus, MMT, and the medley on Abbey Road.

You could ask the same general question about the Let It Be film: Why did they agree to release it in the first place if it was so bad, so negative, so Paul-dominated? The answer is, at the time, they (George & John) probably liked the idea of something documenting the end of the Beatles albatross they were so eager to get out of at the time. (Paul loved it then and now ) The negatives became a positive, for a brief time. And now 45 years later in the golden age of the beatle brand, it is something to not talk about and pretend that it never existed, never happened.

 

The BEATLES owned popular culture in the 60's
Even the Stones followed them.
We'll never see anything like it again.

 

Amen.

 

Paul reportedly also was going to go with Dr. Pepper but MaL as I recall pointed out there was a soda called that. I bet Dr. pepper wishes it had a tie in....

 

Pepper certainly has not been reviled since the days of punk, an absurd exaggeration. Throughout the 80s, it was regularly hailed as rock's great masterpiece and it still frequently appears on countless "best album" lists, though it's reputation has declined a bit from its heady peak. Maybe it's not fair to hold Pepper to an unrealistic standard, but when an album has been praised from day one in the most lavish terms imaginable, it's not really surprising that there's been a bit of an adjustment over time. Though I like it quite a bit, Pepper has never quite lived up to the hype for me. I felt this way before I even knew what Lennon said and I don't regard him as some sort of infallible authority on everything anyway--he made plenty of bizarre, contradictory statements over the years. Like any other work of art, different people have different reactions to it.

I didn't mean to derail the discussion, but I saw that Anthology episode this week and I was struck by those comments. It seems like you have an axe to grind here and I don't care to discuss it with you further.

 

I was age of the time (well, I was 7) and was blown away by it as were by brothers (who 16--it finally convince my one brother Garry who was a huge Stones, Hemdrix, Pretty things and Cream fan) that they were more than just a pop band (Revolver had started that as had Rubber Soul) .

 

I said "some fans", not "Tristero". You're welcome.

I also stated that concept albums, not specifically Pepper, have been reviled since the days of Punk. But Pepper got lumped in with Tales of Topographic Oceans by lazy journalists eventually.

 

I doubt John or George's songs would be much different without the Sgt Pepper concept.

 

I kind of wish that "It's Only A Northern Song" had made the cut, along with "Strawberry Fields" and "Penny Lane". They've been added to my customized CDR.

 

John was into more "honest" and direct music when he made most of those comments. He rejected much of his songs thst no personal connection to what he was going g through at any given time. That was John's way whereas Paul always wrote veiled references to his personal life (sometimes direct as well but less often). He never rejected those songs that were written based only on craft and made up Stories about others.

 

May have never got the other George song though, which was song when George Martin suggested he record something else.

 

I can't speak to the world at large but in my neighborhood the White Album actually had more impact. It was more playful, grave, mysterious....

 

The Ed Sullivan Show was seen in Canada and from what I was told a week later in Japan.

Canada had the highest per capita enrollment in the Beatles fan club and Japan probably was the Beatles 3rd biggest market after America and the UK. My business associates who were teenagers in Japan at the time told me that getting the Beatles to perform in Tokyo in 1966 was on a par with winning the 1964 Olympics.

Make no mistake, the Ed Sullivan show had a deep cultural impact outside of the States.

 

on the contrary there were musicians that could follow in those foot steps--one such example is Love's "Forecer Changes" and, to a degree "Pepper" was influenced by "Pet Sounds" . As far as playing the music we have to keep in mind, at least in the case of "Pet a Sounds", the large group of studio musicians that appeared on it who were often times formally trained.

 

That's consistent with this quote from John: "Sgt Pepper is called the first concept album, but it doesn't go anywhere. All my contributions to the album have absolutely nothing to do with the idea of Sgt Pepper and his band; but it works 'cause we said it worked, and that's how the album appeared. But it was not as put together as it sounds, except for Sgt Pepper introducing Billy Shears and the so-called reprise. Every other song could have been on any other album."

 

I take issue with that last part. I really can't imagine "Mr. Kite" on Let It Be.

 

Would fit fine on Magical Mystery Tour though, altho maybe that's a touchy subject as to whether it's an album or not.

 

By its' very nature, ANYTHING would have fit on the White Album.

 

Sure, Pepper and MMT were both part of their psych phase, recorded around the same time, and are stylistically similar.

 

This thread has made me jealous. But it also made me want to listen to Sgt. Pepper in its entirety again.

 

Just as you probably can't imagine "I Me Mine" on the Help! album.

"Every other song could have been on any other album."....with the implication likely being any other album within the same musical time period, which for the Beatles in clearly shorter than two years back to Help! or two years forward to Let It Be.

 

It's hard to even imagine those songs on The White Album, in large part due to the production.

 

That's it. Thanks.
He was a contributor to Rolling Stone for awhile.
I'd have to find the book if I still have it but I believe the section one The Beatles quoted him.

 

Running out of time here, so, briefly . . . (1) I don't believe John and George really thought that Paul's concept was "great" at the time. Enthusiasm for some of the songs on it or having fun with the cover photo is something else. (2) "[D]idn't have any other ideas of their own besides Indian music"? Huh? The album is certainly overrated, but let's not get carried away here. (3) Just because John expressed more negative views of Pepper's later than he did at the time, doesn't mean that he was motivated to do so because it was no longer "cool", which is what you were asserting, and what I've been disagreeing with.

But John and George are no longer here, and have not been for quite some time. So you've shifted from talking about John's and George's views on Pepper's and Let It Be to some other, unidentified people's (critics? Beatles aficionados? SH forum members?) views "now 45 years later in the golden age of the beatle brand".

Your argument is wandering, and I don't have time to continue following it.

 

It definitely was for me. It took me a while to really warm up to Pepper.