Well, they probably know “I’m a Believer,” if only from the cover versions by Smash Mouth and Weezer heard in the *Shrek *movies; the Smash Mouth version was also a hit single.
You’re welcome to offer any evidence you care to in order to support your argument.
So far, though, you’re batting .000
I wouldn’t have brought it up if he had offered anything else of value. If you can point out something in his argument that has any substance to it that I’ve missed, I hope you will.
True enough, they know the song. But what percentage of those who made it a hit know (or more importantly, care) that The Monkees originally did the song?
Does it matter? It does show that the Monkees’ *impact *still lingers in the culture.
I’m failing to see how yours is substantially different, when you claim nobody of X age knows who the Monkees are. Hell, everyone in Generation X is very familiar with them after MTV ran their show nonstop for a while. I was born after 1973, and every single person I know could name you about 10 Monkees songs. Half of my class went to see them in concert in the late 80s.
My argument that everybody knows the fucking Monkees?
I saw some films about that in my upper division biology classes.
Exactly what I noted in my post. Yes, you were of prime age for the MTV revival in February 1986. But once that ran its course, what exposure did 90s and 00s kids have to The Monkees? They had one TV special (generally panned), no new recordings, no regular airings of their TV show.
My son was born in 1980. He got bit by The Monkees MTV bug as a six-year-old. Hell, I even took him to see them in concert (great show, by the way!). I’d be surprised if he could name more than a couple of Monkees songs today. By the time he was the age you were in 1986, he got into Nirvana and Pearl Jam. I don’t think he was spending much time listening to The Monkees.
My point is you have to have some sort of an exposure mechanism. You had one in 1986. What exposure mechanism did 90s and 00s kids have?
Well, artists will always be on the lookout for songs that were proven hits to cover when they can’t deliver the goods themselves.
It’s the song more than the artist, really. Did the awful latter-day covers of “Big Yellow Taxi” or “Spirit in the Sky” show the lingering cultural impact of Joni Mitchell or Norman Greenbaum?
I saw The fucking Monkees last fucking summer and the fucking audience was fucking filled with every fucking generation of fucking humans alive to-fucking-day. There were little fucking kids, fucking teenagers, fucking college students, fucking twentysomethings, fucking thirtysomethings, your fucking mother, your fucking father, and your fucking grandfather fucking your fucking grandmother.
In the post-Davy concerts, they’ve been selecting fans to come up on stage to sing “Daydream Believer”- at the show I saw, it was sung by three girls celebrating a 16th fucking birthday.
Those young enough to have the fucking lung capacity sang every fucking word of “Goin’ Down”.
People of every living fucking generation of humans interact with Michael Nesmith’s official Facebook page.
People of every living fucking generation of humans interact with Peter Tork’s official Facebook page.
People of every living fucking generation of humans interact with Micky Dolenz’ official Facebook page.
You want cites as to which radio staions young people are hearing The Monkees played on? What the fuck is radio, Grandpa? Young people don’t listen to the radio. They explore music on the internet. They share videos with each other. You think radio has to be playing The Monkees for young people to know about them? The music of The Monkees is so fucking pervasive people know it through fucking osmosis- you hear it in the grocery store, while filling your gas tank, while eating your fucking mozzarella sticks at TGIfuckingFridays!
P.S. I’m actually entirely calm, I just filled my post with profanity because I’m feeling charitable and want to help DChord568 automatically win the argument.
Really, bienville, I’m touched that you would expend this much energy replying to me.
I never claimed that The Monkees have no young fans. I saw The Monkees a year and a half ago, and yes, there were some young people in the audience. I rejoice in this.
It’s hardly surprising that a young person attending a Monkees concert would know the words to “Daydream Believer.” My challenge to you…find a significant percentage of attendees at a Justin Bieber concert who do.
The flaw in your logic is thinking that, because you see SOME young people in the audience of a Monkees show, therefore ALL members of the younger generation are enthralled with or knowledgeable about The Monkees and their music.
But for every one young person you see at a Monkees show, there are thousands more that don’t give a shit about them, or indeed have barely heard of them (oooh, see, I can swear too! Now my argument is so much more convincing!).
I’ll repeat my point again…whether it’s radio, the internet, or any other medium, an audience has to be drawn in some fashion toward hearing an artist in the first place. I’m guessing a lot of young people in the audience at a Monkees concert were probably exposed to them by their parents’ record/CD collection (or perhaps their grandparents’!).
That’s one route of exposure. But that plus all other media you can think of has not pushed The Monkees to mass contemporary commercial popularity — or even “everybody knows them and their music” status among young people. If you’d like to provide some hard data (as opposed to “I’ll pull this assertion out of my ass; why should anyone want more than that?”) that contradicts this statement, please be my guest.
That would require attending a Justin Bieber concert.
You do it. 
I’ve forgotten why all of this is relevant. So far, you’ve demonstrated that the Monkees’ influence via music and television spans two distinct generations, which is one more than the vast majority of R&R HOF musicians can claim.
And I don’t mean to sound flippant or dismissive.
My kids (born in 1990 and 1994) regularly watched The Monkees on some channel - could have been VH1, or Nickelodeon, or even a local channel; I don’t really remember. But it was still being shown after '86.
In any case, according to this site, which is obviously not exhaustive (i thought of a couple off the top of my head that aren’t listed), there are 74 covers of Monkees songs and only 18 of Yes (57 for the Moody Blues). Make of that what you will, but I’d venture to say they had at least some influence on other acts.
No! You were so close to winning the argument, now you automatically lose because you swore! I practically handed you the win on a silver platter!
Shucks, you were doing so well. Better luck next time.
True enough…which goes back to my earlier point that The Monkees had a unique leg up that was not enjoyed by any other artist (except maybe Ricky Nelson).
Without the TV show, that “influence” across generations never would have happened, and they would have been just another of the dozens of 60s acts that produced some good pop music (except that, as I also pointed out, that might not have even happened without the TV show).
That’s fair, but they also had a large catalog, and some quality music that appealed to a new generation. You can’t say that about The Partridge Family, and I doubt we’ll be saying it about Hannah Montana in 2028.
MTV decided that the show would play well with that generation. And it went over very well. I don’t see that as an unfair leg up, I see it as a quality product. I mean, even The Beatles cartoon didn’t get picked up by MTV.
I agree completely with your first paragraph. And I agree that the TV show and most of the music were indeed quality products. But a lot of 60s artists produced even higher-quality product that went without notice, because they didn’t have the advantage that TV exposure conferred upon The Monkees.
I hope no one takes from anything I say that I don’t like The Monkees. I really like them a great deal. I’ll say again: it’s quite miraculous that they produced so much good music that stands the test of time. You wouldn’t have laid any odds for that happening given how they started out. But the four of them had unique talents, musical and otherwise, and they made the most of them.
I’m just trying to take a balanced view of the whole phenomenon, which really is without precedent in the annals of rock ‘n’ roll. When evaluating anything about them, including possible RRHOF induction, you have to take their entire story into consideration.
I wonder if the New Monkees will ever be considered for the hall. It’s been 25 years since their first record.