'd like to use my space today to discuss one of the most pressing cultural and political debates of our time. No, this isn't nukes in Iran or troops in Iraq or global warming—I'm talking about something infinitely more important: Is the new Beatles compilation album, Love, worth your dime or isn't it?
If you've been living on Neptune and haven't heard about Love, here's the background: Cirque du Soleil wanted to put together one of their acrobatic Vegas shows with a story told through Beatles songs. The show, also entitled ""Love,"" obviously needed a soundtrack, and so the good people of the Cirque went to George Martin, the Beatles' longtime producer, and asked him to spearhead a remastering and remashing of the entire Beatles catalog for use in their show. The end result is a greatest hits album of classic Beatles songs—but with a twist. See, what Martin did was he took these classic songs and put them in a blender, like what DJ Danger Mouse did for The Grey Album, but instead of mashing The White Album and Jay-Z's The Black Album, Martin just mashed Beatles with Beatles.
So what's the debate? Well, as there are in any culture, Beatles fans have many sects. Some are progressives, who don't mind a little experimentation with their old favorites. Others, however, are orthodox or even radical fundamentalists, and they feel that the Beatles are so good, so perfect in every way, that tinkering even just a little with any of their albums is straight-up blasphemy.
Now, I tend to consider myself a purist when it comes to classic rock. For me, listening to The Grey Album is like a Christian watching the Bible and a book of Bukowski stories get thrown into a blender together—it's sacrilegious. And yet, I love Love. I think it's not only worth your dime but also the $17.90 extra the album actually costs. Granted, because it's just monkeying around with old songs, it's not something you're going to want to hear everyday... if you're a Beatles enthusiast, most of it is old-hat, but even if you are a fanatic it's still a real kick for the first couple listens. It becomes a game, almost, trying to figure out what's been changed, what's been moved, what songs or albums have been thrown together on the same track. It's immensely fun.
If this isn't making sense, let me give you some concrete examples of what it is Martin did. The album opens with ""Because"" from Abbey Road (remember this one? ""Because the world is round, it turns me on...love is old, love is new / Love is old, love is you""?). But Martin strips away the music, making it a cappella. And while it's not so drastically different that you grab the jewel case and demand to know just what it is you're listening to, it's different enough to immediately catch you off guard and take notice. Other touching moments are an acoustic ""While My Guitar Gently Weeps,"" which has a new verse and a new string accompaniment that sounds just beautiful; a really kick-ass medley of ""Drive My Car,"" ""The Word,"" and ""What You're Doing,"" in which lyrical verses from the different songs play over musical verses from the other songs, and then the horns from ""Savoy Truffle"" kick in, just for fun, and the cacophony at the end of ""I Am The Walrus"" melts into the cheering of fans from the ""Ed Sullivan Show,"" who announces ""And now, the Beatles!"" which then goes into ""I Want to Hold Your Hand.""
No matter what side of the debate camp you fall into, though, I think an armistice can be reached on one point. Love is available in 5.1 Surround Sound, which sounds ethereally wonderful, and even if you don't agree with the acoustic guitar from ""Blackbird"" seamlessly playing into the acoustic guitar from ""Yesterday,"" purists and progressives alike can agree that its high time for some higher aural quality Beatles re-issues.
