Why did The Beatles Sgt Pepper lose its appeal?

Yes indeed! In those days, there were heaps of silly utopian themed ditties being churned out. I listen to a lot of that schmaltz, but I mostly do so for its melodies and instrumentation. And to be fair, much of the lyrical content back then beats the pants off of that of modern pop.

 

75% of The Beatles seemed to think it was overrated.

 

I do not see what the lyrics of Within You have more childish than those of Love me do, but I'm 53 )))

 

Still my favorite album of all time. I try not to listen to it that often to preserve its freshness.

 

Instrumentally, it is the Beatles‘ most interesting album. Several years back, there were some Rock Band instrumental versions of the album around, and it is a very nice listen - in a way that is kind of symphonic - with all the hallucinogenic-inspired textures and layering going on. There is enough melody in the playing to carry the songs across, and the whole thing holds together as a piece.

 

For those that experienced it in the summer of 1967 it will likely retain its magical aura. For those that discovered it after the fact, and only rely on what is in the grooves, as opposed to the context of that summer, it will likely seem less magical.

 

Age impacts how we interpret and perceive things, and points of view change with age. Have you ever wondered why the minimum age to be the President of the United States is 35 years? Have you ever wondered why in most states the minimum age to cast a vote is 18 years? Yes, age matters very much! I'm not saying that views and opinions of youngsters don't matter, but knowing a person's age helps me to understand where they are coming from when they state their thoughts and opinions.

 

So that leaves the other 7 billion+ people on the planet who don't own a copy.... Somewhat proves my point on the other thread.

 

Not impossible to explain at all. It's called the mere-exposure effect -

The mere-exposure effect is a psychological phenomenon by which people tend to develop a preference for things merely because they are familiar with them. In social psychology, this effect is sometimes called the familiarity principle.

The Beatles have been beneficiaries of it for the past 50 years.

 

Very interesting point and much probably true if extended to most of mainstream popular music, IMHO.

 

44 year old Indian dude born in the US. The red and blue albums were the first English-language albums I had ever heard. (Thanks, Dad - RIP)

I like the Beatles a lot but not as much as I love Pink Floyd, Depeche Mode, The Cure, and King Crimson. I think Sgt. Pepper is a good album, but not the studio album I'll reach for when I want to hear the Beatles. That would be the White Album, glorious mess that it is.

I love the Sgt Pepper tracks that made it to the Blue album as well as "Within You Without You". I'm pretty lukewarm on the rest of it. Having said that, I appreciate and acknowledge the album's cultural significance.

 

nobody was comparing it to Love Me Do, which is indeed an awful lyric but pop lyrics had grown by leaps and bounds between '62 and '67, which still doesn't excuse Harrison's lyric (which should be held to a higher standard than a 1962 debut single)... and I'm a year younger than you for what that's worth...

 

When it came out, fans’ jaws dropped at everything about the album from its cover to its lyrics and to the songs and their sequencing. It was a show of fun with the pretended sgt peppers band, lucy in the sky, melodrama/adult storyline of shes leaving home , laughed at being for the benefit of mr. kite, plodded through within and without before Harrison got the rep he deserved then and after, we knew 64 for what it was, hokey, but fun, and the show ending, but then the bomb at the finish: day in the life.

For years afterwards, influenced bands like the stones and others tried to come out with albums that critics would claim this is their sgt. Pepper, the album being a bar for different, making an impact, for doing something unique, with song quality with tape technology of the time. That’s what sgt. Pepper was and is.

That’s what i remember about the release of sgt. Pepper.

Hampered by US versions of their albums, Revolver was the new beatles sound advancing from the great Rubber Soul, leading us to sgt. Pepper. It was the right choice for the first 50th deluxe.

 

Absolutely. Think about how advertising works, or radio pluggers. The vast majority of people like what they know.

 

You're not getting my meaning. I'm sure your intentions are pure. But I've seen too many ageist comments/attitudes on these forums that I'm not particularly keen on giving those people any more ammo. (And I'm not even that old. Hell, Kurt Cobain was older than me.) All that said, let's not make a mountain out of this particular molehill, its not worth the thread derailment.

 

What were the lasting changes?

 

I know no one compares them ... except me ))) I think Within You Without You is often blamed for things we don't care about in other songs. But I stay cool about this.

 

I am not sure the folks on here who are attacking the lyrics of "Within You Without You" as embarrassing understand that what Harrison is saying is the basic principles of the Vedanta and the concept of Maya. The lyrics clearly mirror those concepts. In fact, the spiritual teacher Ramakrishna said, “The feeling of ‘I’ and ‘mine’ has covered the Reality so we don’t see the truth.” This is reiterated by Harrison nearly word for word. Another Vedantic precept is the oneness of existence. Again, Harrison restates that in unambiguous terms. Maya "is the veil that covers our real nature and the real nature of the world around us." Once more, Harrison nearly repeats the idea.

It is not a religious doctoral thesis, but as a song on a Beatles album, it touches on basic concepts of Harrison's religion.

It would be as out of context and rather backward to criticize the lyrics of "Turn, Turn, Turn" as juvenile or banal without knowing that Pete Seeger lifted the song nearly word-for-word from Ecclesiastes 3.

 

Thanks for the reference! Fascinating.

 

And why did it happen to the Beatles and not to other band/artist instead? Why were they exposed in such a way?

 

FWIW:

 

I'll refer you to my other comment about how advertising works. You back your horse...

 

Well this is timely. Trending on twitter atm: is Outkast better than the Beatles. The debate is stupid but some of the comments from young ones are an eye opener.

OutKast Sparks Debate After Co-Signing Claim About The Beatles

What's interesting reading through all the comments is how many hold it against the Beatles that they 'ripped off black southern music'. Of course, Beatles fans know that they were well aware of their influences but the general younger public don't know that. John Lennon's character has also come under scrutiny by the younger generation.

I don't think the younger ones will be holding Sgt Pepper's in high esteem.

It doesn't make for pleasant reading for Beatles fans, but it does go to show how firmly entrenched in the cultural psyche rap and hip hop are that they think Outkast (who I like) is more influential on music than the Beatles.

Edit: didn't post this with intention of thread derailment but just to highlight the changing cultural shift towards the Beatles and hence an album like Sgt Pepper's.

As an aside look at the order in which the band members are introduced: The earth-shattering group made up of John Lennon, George Harrison, Paul McCartney, and Ringo Starr is widely known as the greatest band to ever exist.

 

Bit off topic, but for everyone arguing and anyone being generally unpleasant, apparently ‘All you need is love..’