Were the Beatles considered "underground" in the late 60s?

I came across an undergound music magazine today from 1967 with a list of the 10 best albums of that year. Among the groups mentioned were the Rolling Stones and Pink Floyd but surprisingly the Beatles and their Sgt.Pepper wasn't mentioned... It made me wonder what the status of the Beatles was in the late 60s amongst the more serious and hardcore hippies. Were the Beatles seen as commercial and therefor not "hip" enough by purists?

 

The biggest band in the world at the time? No. Not underground.

 

With underground I mean seen as hip and groovy.

 

Yes, that's another reason they were so extraordinary. They were seen as hip and groovy in the late 60s, but were also very much mainstream.

 

The Beatles were more mainstream than those others you listed, they ruled the charts. However, when the White Album came about they shifted into the 'heavy' category a bit more. I doubt that they were ever considered 'underground'.

 

They weren't considered underground. But John was certainly doing his best to bring the weird factor.

 

They were both underground and mainstream...that's one of the things that made them such a great band.

 

The Savile Row studio was in the basement, so technically they were under ground for a short time.

 

It's fascinating how people on this board want the Beatles to be all things, simultaneously. No, there's simply no way that you can be the biggest act of the Sixties (and one of the biggest acts of all time) and also be considered part of the underground. But the Beatles were considered hip, because the music they released was of a very high quality.

 

I was in third grade elementary in '69,
and every kid in my school knew and
loved the Beatles. I had been aware of
them since the Sullivan broadcast (I was
3 y.o. then but the screaming girls were
impossible not to notice) and my Mom
who was in her twenties then bought
Sgt. Pepper in '67, when I was six. It
was like that in those days - everyone
my age had an older brother, sister, cousin,
and/or young parents who embraced the
Beatles as family-fare, despite the obviously
drug-influenced Sgt.Pepper/ Magical
Mystery/Yellow Submarine. They were so
lovable- especially Ringo!- no one could resist
their charms except for maybe a few very old,
very curmudgeonly folk. There was even a
cartoon version for the kiddies!
It'd be pretty damn hard to embrace them
as hip, groovy, or "underground" in that sense
if one was a rebellious teenager in
the late 60s. I suppose that is why the
rebels embraced bands like Blue Cheer,
Cream, Savoy Brown, and a plethora of
truly underground garage-psych outfits like
Calico Wall, Brain Train, Haymarket Riot, The
Moving Sidewalks, Thirteenth Floor Elevators,
et al.

 

They were so underground, they made G.G. Allin look like Walter Mondale.

 

No

 

But was that really the case at the time? There is an interesting thread here on SHF about the popularity of the Beatles in 1966 and it seems that Beatlemania by that time was slowly fading, unlike what we read in books. History is being rewritten all the time.

 

Maybe whoever composed the list was a Rolling Stones fan ..

 

I'd say of course not but the presence of the Stones has me at least curious about the article and the context. Where did it run?

And were the Velvet Underground on the list?

 

I don't have the list here but there were a bunch of obscure bands mentioned as well. It was from a Dutch music magazine.

 

I still remember the passage in Tom Wolf's The Electric Kool Aid Acid Test where Kesey and his cohorts had wired up the woods they were living in with speakers all over the place, and listened to the psychedelic Beatles.

 

I think in the States they were considered gods in the late sixties. Things were a bit different in the UK where they tended to be assessed a little more realistically. All in all, they were always considered pretty "hip" for a mainstream band.

 

They played in the Cavern so maybe? my bad... early 60s

 

Their goal was to be the toppermost of the poppermost. So they never even thought of themselves to be part of the underground.
But they were always considered cool by the underground because they were so great and because they influenced everyone who was part of the underground.

 

Not a chance, but perhaps some of their bootlegs might be considered that way.

 

Not rewritten. Beatlemania fading only means the fans had become more mature, not that their popularity was declining. Screaming 12 year olds had been a fad. You must consider that in the 60's everything was happening at an accelerated rate. Albums had begun to replace singles, underground radio had appeared, drugs were everywhere... of course the madness of Beatlemania could not last in such an environment.

 

The OPs suggestion that underground print media would preclude discussion of the mainstream is flawed. There is no alternative status without recognition of the mainstream.

 

Yeah, them underground Rolling Stones.