DONE. Finished. All watched. Nearly eight hours of unfiltered John, Paul, George and Ringo in their late-1960s glory – lots of smoking, dodgy moustaches and shapeless fur coats. The recording of Let It Be – long considered the acrimonious death knell of the 20th century’s greatest musical act – repackaged and renamed in Peter Jackson’s much-anticipated Get Back behemoth. The motherload has landed, and, for any Beatle obsessive, it doesn’t disappoint.
For those with a passing interest in the Fab Four, sitting through 468 minutes of in-jokes, mugging to the camera and repetition of songs would be excruciating. If I’m honest, there were times I found myself reaching for my phone for a little distraction after the seventh take of “Don’t Let Me Down”.
But make no mistake, it is utterly fascinating. Its fly-on-the-wall style is decades ahead of its time, while many myths are debunked – Lennon and McCartney were not at each other’s throats but clearly retained a genuine friendship and Yoko Ono did not tear the band apart. Meanwhile, it was incredible to listen to the recording of John and Paul admit their failings towards Harrison as they resolved to be kinder towards him.
Read more: The Rolling Stones: Brown Sugar: Mick and Keith are right to axe song
However, as happens whenever something new on The Beatles surfaces I find myself asking: will we ever see their likes again? The answer has to be no. There have been contenders: some serious (Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young), some doubtful (Oasis), some laughable (The Bay City Rollers). But The Beatles were a one-off – a unique combination of talent, timing and circumstances that will never be repeated. All the stars aligned to create the musical equivalent of the Goldilocks Principle – everything just right.
No music act has had such an impact on a society as the Fabs. The shockwaves are still being felt today. At their height they were arguably the most famous four people in the world. They emerged from a Britain still riven by class prejudice and brought in an age of optimism. Their exuberance and humour turned a black and white world into one of brilliant colour. They may not have smashed class barriers for good, but they did create a revolution in the head that said: “It doesn’t matter where you’re from, you can do this too.” The music aside, it’s their most enduring and endearing legacy.
As untrained, working-class musicians from the provinces, they must have experienced moments of imposter syndrome. But watching the film, they often come across as the only normal ones in the room as they miraculously plucked soon-to-be classic songs out of thin air. In contrast, the rest of the cast appear either middle-class stuffed shirts or lowly pliant gophers.
The chemistry between each Beatle was always the key to their success, but their talent was also facilitated by a generous welfare state and open-minded education system that gave them the freedom to hone their skills in the early days. The absence of such a safety net today is one of the main reasons why so many of our recent successful music acts often hail from well-heeled backgrounds.
Read more: Tangled up in blue… why I just couldn’t cancel Bob Dylan
Orson Welles said every era has its heroes, whether they be opera singers in the late 19th century, the stars of cinema’s golden age or the post-war rock gods. But the days of music as a driver of social change have long since passed. You could argue today’s tech tycoons fill that space, but they are not artists. Perhaps we have reached saturation point in music and can’t consume any more. More likely, it’s just easier to get back to where we once belonged than look to the future.
Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel