A subgenre that appeals to me very much is “what if” premise fiction, but only when very well thought-out. Tarentino’s “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” and “Inglourious Basterds” belong to this subgenre–witty, clever, thoughtful, imaginative, and carefully crafted. Lately, I’ve been thinking about alternate versions of history that could have kept the Beatles together for another few decades, and I wonder which of these ideas seem most plausible and most entertaining.
McCartney would have realized that he was being overbearing and bossy, and would have backed off. “Guys, how about we take a little time off from each other, work on individual projects for six months or a year, and check back in, see if any of these projects are interesting to others in the band, and who wants to work with whom on what, with the project’s originator being in charge ultimately, and the others, me included of course, being that person’s sideman on that song?”
Them hiring a strong manager, not Allen Klein or Lee Eastman, whose judgment they all trusted and taking direction from him or her.
John coming to his senses, breaking up with Yoko–“Sorry, guys, just lost my head there for a couple of months”–and expressing his gratitude for everyone putting up with her.
George offering to take a leadership role and the rest of the band saying, “Yeah, that’s fair, let’s give old George a crack at directing us for the next while,” which might have assuaged his frustration at being subordinated to Lennon and McCartney.
someone coming up with the idea that they’ve earned more than enough money to last them a few lifetimes, so why not accept making fewer albums, playing only the rare and convenient gig, and paying less attention in general to the world’s demands on them.
These concepts and others aren’t mutually exclusive nor are they exhaustive, but they’re some of the ways they might have been able to function as a working band for a few more years at least. Can you suggest a few other ideas, or other prospects for the Beatles in some alternate universe to have staying together longer?
John survives an assassination attempt in 1980 and when his former band mates rally to help his recovery they discover they still love each other and are open to working together again now that they all have respectable solo projects under their belts.
I think if the Beatles had stayed together they would have gone a similar path as The Rolling Stones. The Stones’ last really significant, groundbreaking album was Some Girls (or maybe Tattoo You, but I think the former). Since then most every album they cranked out has been kind of “oh, there’s a new Stones album? Huh.”
In a similar vein I think the Beatles would have become a much less significant musical force, kind of fading into the background. “Oh, there’s a new Beatles album? Didn’t know they were even still together”. Maybe they would have started touring again, because just as the Stones basically became a successful touring “nostalgia act”, it would have been the best way for the aging Beatles to stay in the spotlight and make money.
Yeah. It’s their studio work that makes the Beatles still relevant. George Martin or some other genius would have to come along for the ride for them to compete against the groundbreaking stuff happening in studios in the 1970s.
I can’t imagine a scenario where they would have stayed together and not broken up. The breakup might have been delayed a few years if they had decided to take a break and do solo projects, but by the end, the magic was gone, and I think they knew it. Things were strained during the Let it Be sessions, and Abbey Road, while a great album, is not a 100% team effort by any stretch. There’s a Paul side and John’s side, with George and Ringo sprinkled around.
If they could have taken a break, done some solo work, and gotten back together once a year for an album, that might have delayed the inevitable, but a total breakup would still happen. It just wasn’t fun for them anymore, and touring wasn’t going to happen, like with the Stones, and that’s where the real money is, as Paul and Ringo later learned.
On “For All Mankind”, which is about an alternate history for the space program, there was a brief glimpse of a Beatles reunion concert. I think that may have been the best case scenario.
I believe the fact that the Beatles were relatively short lived contributes to their greatness. I’m skeptical that they could have maintained such a high quality of artistic expression if they continued for much longer. Almost certainly not if we’re talking about them staying together for decades.
But… if Lennon isn’t assassinated and in say, the late 90s they decide it would be fun to play together again in a limited series of concerts? Oh, that could have been heavenly to see.
I’ve said this before but I’d bet if Lennon had lived the Fab Four would’ve “reunited” in some manner for an appearance on The Simpsons - as it is, the producers got the other three to appear separately.
But the Beatles reunion would’ve been like Michael Jackson’s appearance - it was him but not really.
The Beatles were breaking up when they recorded the White Album, but they continued on because no one wanted to say so.
If Lennon had lived, they might have done some charity concerts (they nearly reunited for Bangla Desh, but McCartney didn’t was Allan Klein bragging how he brought them together), but they were all working on successful solo careers so there was no incentive to do it other than nostalgia.
The premise here is that the whole was greater than all the parts, which is true in my opinion, even if the parts were pretty good. What fans mourn is that, as poorly as they were getting on in the late 1960s, there was nothing breaking them up that a shrewd and far-seeing massager of egos couldn’t have at least delayed and possibly prevented. All it required was the placement of that massager of egos into their midst and their trust, including having one of them act brilliantly to keep the band together.
There was nothing inevitable, in other words, to split the Beatles apart in 1969–it just worked out that way. Any event, viewed retrospectively, seems inevitable, but this subgenre of fiction, alternate history, explores plausible ways it could have happened otherwise.
Of which, I just finished reading Jeff Greenfield’s alternate history If Kennedy Lived, which details the narrative that might have been if Oswald’s shots had landed slightly on JFK’s body so that he survived the shooting. No Vietnam, in his telling, but other problems and other scandals emerge–lively, interesting stuff.
Relative to the Beatles’ saga, it doesn’t take much imagination to posit what could have happened if Chapman’s bullets had landed such that Lennon could have survived the ordeal–the Beatles getting back together, and putting out a few great albums in the 1980s, might have been the result, if only a few bullets had gone this way instead of that way, as Elmer J. Fudd suggests.
I’m not sure you’re right about this, but it makes a certain amount of sense. A big factor in the Beatles’ breakup was the leadership vacuum caused by (1) the death of Brian Epstein and (2) Lennon, who had been the internal leader in the early years, abdicating that role because of his getting involved in drugs and/or Yoko and/or just losing interest.
I think it bends reality too much to ask all that pettiness and sniping and resentment to just go away.
I mean people would have actually have to have CHANGED to make it work. It just takes one guy saying “Oh here we go again.” to bring it all down.
But I appreciate the premise! I’ve done mental exercises like that before. “Guys. Just love each other. Stop taking shots at each other. Don’t be a dick. Is it that hard not to be a dick??”
Of course its one thing to tour together in reunions and (apparently) another to compose. Look at The Police or Genesis. I often lamented “You guys can tour but not sit down and hammer out a few new songs?”…in the case of Genesis even just some jam sessions would be good prog rock. Notice Im not interested in any new “Collinseaque work”. All this is moot of course given Phils disabilities.
Was listening to the Beatles Channel on Sirius/xm recently, and it was mentioned that John and Paul met sometime after finishing up Abbey Road but before the breakup, and agreed their next album would be 4 John tracks, 4 Paul tracks, 4 George tracks and 2 for Ringo if he wanted them. So there was some thought on bringing George up into their stratosphere. But then they went their separate ways anyway.