Ok, seriously, I’m getting pretty annoyed with people whining about “how can kids think Kanye is bigger than Paul McCartney?” So here’s the deal:
First of all, the original twitter posts where people were saying “Kanye is going to make that Paul McCartney guy blow up” were clearly a joke. If you can’t see that, then you’re old and get off the internet, Grandpa!
Second: Kanye West *IS* bigger than Paul McCartney. You don’t have to like it. But he is. McCartney’s last album didn’t even go. Kanye has sold about 21 million albums since his career started in 2004 (that’s physical albums, it doesn’t count his reported 66 million digital downloads). McCartney has sold like 15.5 million in his entire solo career (including Wings), meaning going back to 1970. So Kanye averages 2 million albums a year. Paul averages about 300,000. It’s not even close. And most of the hits were a long time ago. McCartney hasn’t gone platinum in the US since 1982. His last two albums haven’t even gone gold. Paul McCartney just isn’t really that relevant to modern music. He’s not. Stop pretending. I’m pretty sure more people are bitching about this than actually bought his last album.
What you’re really trying to say is that the Beatles are more important than Kanye, and they are… and that’s even arguable. I mean, all time sales, sure. Beatles are winning (though Kanye is climbing faster than most people whining probably think). But the Beatles last recorded an album 45 years ago! Their first album was 10 years before that. I’m 40. The Beatles have been gone longer than I’ve been around.
Third: It’s a different genre of music entirely. Really, what you’re complaining about is why don’t kids today like my music? They’re all into the new fangled hippity-hop. Except you’re not even talking about your music. You’re most talking about your parents’ music… because the people who were actually old enough to care about the Beatles were born in 1945-1955 and gave up on whatever is happening in pop music a long fucking time ago.
So, hugely influential, sure. Relevant? No. If you’re really that upset about kids not knowing who McCartney is (and again, they probably mostly do) then you seriously need to get a fucking grip. This isn’t even music their parents listened to. You’re complaining about them not being into music their grandparents listened to. How many of you would be able to pick Patty Andrews or Artie Shaw out of a lineup?
Actually, how many of you even know who Otis Williams is? That’s not even our grandparent’s era. No googling! He’s a contemporary of Paul McCartney (arguably as big) and still recording today. Yep… exactly…
I just figure, if Kanye’s good enough for Paul, then I’ll respect Paul’s decision. That is, if I cared at all that kids today listen to different music than my parents did.
I also got a little tired of how upset people got about people not knowing who Paul McCartney is, but I have to admit that I laughed when I recently overheard a teenager who was unclear on the difference between Paul McCartney and Joseph McCarthy.
Although, if I really want to get into it, album sales are a poor way of evaluating “relevance” or “importance”. You can’t compare Paul’s solo career to Kanye’s, because most of Paul’s importance was in the Beatles. And you can’t compare Beatles’ album sales to Kanye’s, because everything that contributes to the number of album sales, and their actual meaning, has changed in the 40 year gap between their careers.
But the truth is that Kanye is more relevant than Paul. He just is, because he’s current. Paul’s still making music, but mainly because he’s a musician, and that’s what musicians are compelled to do. And Paul is more important (musically) than Kanye, because his music has had more time to diffuse through popular culture. Also, the Beatles were big during, and greatly influenced, a time of massive cultural and musical shifts.
All of which is only important if you’re a teenager. Otherwise, just listen to the music that you like, and allow others to do the same. It’s ok for a musician to be famous for music that doesn’t appeal to you.
Except Justin Bieber.
Don’t care for either of them, so really this to me is a non issue.
In truth, we just like winding you up Mav!
Be fair, the population of the United States was 200M in 1970 (about 300M now) and the world population was about 3.6B (about 7B now). So, Kanye total sales numbers are probably only about even with McCartney when you take in account population inflation (and the Beatles are doing considerably better).
But, on the larger point, I agree, he definitely seems to be the more impressive solo artist than McCartney, especially since his career has either peaked or is still growing, while McCartney is definitely in the twilight of his career.
A bunch of old people got trolled.
Who’s this Kanye
Music has been in RUINS since Montiverdi went all secular and wrote that awful licentious Poppea piece, but I thoroughly enjoyed your rant about some of these popular beat combos that do so terribly well in the hit-parade, Chris.
Paul has shown some staying power. Do you think Kanye’s will be as lengthy? And this is just in music, not his second career as Kim K’s baby daddy.
I was curious, so I asked my kids if they knew who Paul McCartney is. They had no idea. Oops, my bad?
It’s all been a train wreck since Beethoven.
lay off of old people who only know how to express themselves by complaining about millennials or whatever they call young people today; it’s just how primitive human brains age.
Kanye’s stayed on the charts for over a decade so far. I would be surprised if he career were to end suddenly. And I suspect that his music will have staying power, especially now that there are starting to be “classic hip hop” radio stations in some markets, but it’s always hard to know for sure.
I would sell 1d4 of my toes for a classic hip hop format station in my city.
I could totally pick Patty Andrews out of a lineup, but that’s because I’m weird and might have listened to the Andrews Sisters a lot. And might have “greatest hits of 1938” in my amazon cart. Like you do.
Keith: I expect a lot of 15 year olds today would have that reaction. it’s not actually a bad thing. The man is 70.
Jeff: yes, that’s my point. it’s hard to actually compare them because they are so different. The success of the Beatles is one thing. The success of McCartney is different. Paul McCartney is NOT Michael Jackson. But that said, you got to one thing that’s important. In 2015, Paul McCartney needs Kanye West, way more than the other way around.
Strauss: See, I would argue it’s actually way EASIER to sell albums in the Beatles day than it is in Kanye’s day. I do agree that this isn’t the best way to measure relevance. It was just the easiest way to make my point for the sake of the blog.
Joy: Actually, yes I do. Keith got to that a little. Kanye, at this point, has been on the charts as long as the Beatles were, and if anything he is only becoming more relevant. It’s easy for old fogies (you know, people our age) to be dismissive of him because he makes music that isn’t what we’re used to, he says a lot of crazy shit that doesn’t make a lot of sense and married a quirky “celebrity” of far less talent than he has and helps ram her down our cultural throats. In those respects, he’s very similar to this guy named John Lennon. But as Keith said again… I expect he will remain relevant for quite some time. People don’t like him, but a lot of that is because he’s extremely innovative. And being innovative is what makes him less accessible to previous generations.
Barbara: Right, but I bet they’d know who the Beatles were. at least by name. He has never been all that important on his own. That was my point with naming Peggy Andrews and Otis Williams (who still no one has referenced).
Keith: I expect a lot of 15 year olds today would have that reaction. it’s not actually a bad thing. The man is 70.
Jeff: yes, that’s my point. it’s hard to actually compare them because they are so different. The success of the Beatles is one thing. The success of McCartney is different. Paul McCartney is NOT Michael Jackson. But that said, you got to one thing that’s important. In 2015, Paul McCartney needs Kanye West, way more than the other way around.
Strauss: See, I would argue it’s actually way EASIER to sell albums in the Beatles day than it is in Kanye’s day. I do agree that this isn’t the best way to measure relevance. It was just the easiest way to make my point for the sake of the blog.
Joy: Actually, yes I do. Keith got to that a little. Kanye, at this point, has been on the charts as long as the Beatles were, and if anything he is only becoming more relevant. It’s easy for old fogies (you know, people our age) to be dismissive of him because he makes music that isn’t what we’re used to, he says a lot of crazy shit that doesn’t make a lot of sense and married a quirky “celebrity” of far less talent than he has and helps ram her down our cultural throats. In those respects, he’s very similar to this guy named John Lennon. But as Keith said again… I expect he will remain relevant for quite some time. People don’t like him, but a lot of that is because he’s extremely innovative. And being innovative is what makes him less accessible to previous generations.
Barbara: Right, but I bet they’d know who the Beatles were. at least by name. He has never been all that important on his own. That was my point with naming Peggy Andrews and Otis Williams (who still no one has referenced).
Fine, fine, the Temptations made lots of popular songs that are still recognizable even today. I’m not sure they incited anywhere near the passion that the Beatles did or Kanye does, but, then again, that was before my birth.
they probably didn’t… it was 1960… and they were awfully black. That’s kinda my point. The Temps (and the Tops) did ridiculously well in an era where by all rights they had no business doing that well with everything stacked against them.
The Temptations impact on other artists outstrips their popular appeal pretty massively. A particular kind of superstardom, but not the thing being discussed. Impact vs fame, maybe call it.
Will: well, it sort of is what we’re discussing. What I’m saying is that the Beatles (and therefore transitively, McCartney) are still culturally influential just not relevant and the Temptations (and therefore transitively, Williams) are as well… possibly even more so.
But West is currently both relevant and influential.
I getcha. Agreed.
“But West is currently both relevant and influential.”
Well, he is NOW, but only because he’s recording with McCartney.
Jeff: yeah… no… seriously, Kanye does not need McCartney… McCartney does need West. The song is McCartney’s first top 40 hit in over 25 years.
Chris: Remember how you said the posts about “Kanye is going to make that Paul McCartney guy blow up” were clearly a joke?
ah… clearly I’m old and have no business on the internet.
How many times did you yell at kids to get off your lawn today?
Today? Not at all… but I do pretty frequently.
http://www.chrismaverick.com/wp/2014/04/26/12065/
http://www.chrismaverick.com/wp/2014/10/11/for-the-kids/
To be perfectly honest, I know very little about Kanye West at all. The only really important thing that I know about him is from 9.5 years ago, with his famous “George Bush doesn’t care about black people” line. Which is, of course, probably the most Rock & Roll moment in the history of telethons.
Because you’re an old fogey! But yeah, that’s kind of my point. Old people don’t like Kanye because he’s different and they don’t know anything about him other than that he’s vaguely countercultural in ways they don’t understand. Old people didn’t like the Beatles for much the same reason.
I’ll admit, I’d be shocked if any of the music I listen to is either relevant or important on a grand scale. The difference is I don’t begrudge Kanye his success. I’m actually pretty sad that I know of so few artists today who actually push boundaries or make a stand. In fact, to my very limited knowledge, the only true rocker on a grand scale is Miley Cyrus.
Seriously, I barely know who Paul McCartney is. I’m not sure I really care (because to be honest, I wasn’t all that into the Beatles let alone Paul McCartney)
Now the Monkees on the other hand 😉
Jeff: See, I’m not a Miley fan, but i certainly acknowledge her current cultural relevance. She hasn’t risen to Kanye levels of of success yet, but that doesn’t mean she doesn’t have the potential to. And I’d say she’s becoming influential too…
Kathleen: See, even though the Monkees were specifically created to be a Beatles parody, I’d say they’re far more culturally relevant than people tend to give them credit for.
They did have a television show and a movie 🙂
You put way too much thought into this Mav
Russ: it’s my job. (actually, it sorta is)
Kanye may be more commercially successful (I’m assuming you know their relative album sales), but then again, Kanye never pissed off 98% of the Western World by dancing like a black woman.
This pisses me off because the kids of today know nothing about history. I dislike the Beatles, and love the Stones. History should teach us something. It doesn’t matter if it’s good or bad because we learn from it. We are now all spoon fed.
Jeff: Actually Miley is pretty much on par with Kanye in a shorter period of time (20-something million albums since 2007) I’m not sure where she ranks with digital downloads. But where she’s really remarkable is she’s displayed a very impressive ability to reinvent herself from album to album which keeps her relevant. But as has been pointed out before, she’s not really “competing” because she’s going after an entirely different audience.
Kanye produces more artists though, and I’d argue that he’s probably more influential, but that’s hard to measure.
Avery: But that’s always been true. That was my point with Andrews, Willimas and Shaw. How much do you know about any of them. Kids probably have heard of the Beatles. But knowing anything about McCartney specifically really isn’t that important. He represents a very specific history, one that was spoon fed to you. There is absolutely no reason that Paul McCartney should be more famous than Otis Williams other than the color of his skin.
If history has taught me anything, it’s that people in general have never been terribly aware of history.
History has taught us that we were always asses. The fact that the kids of today don’t know this will allow us to carry it on. I love today’s music as I loved what came before. I at least know what became before and can measure it.
Avery: That’s what I mean though… Do you know what came before or just a very specific canonized subset. i.e. you know who McCartney is, but do you know anything about Shaw, Andrews or Williams?
And I don’t think that skin color is the only reason The Beatles were bigger than the Temptations. I mean, they sound very different. So it’s more complex than race. Certainly, black musicians had a much harder time getting their music out to white audiences (which was the entire basis of Elvis’s career), but to say it’s the only reason is simplistic.
If you were to write a book about the history of music across recorded history, there’d be at least one chapter on the Beatles (if not several) and Kanye might get mentioned in a footnote somewhere. If you were to write a book about the state of music in the year 2015 and its outlook going forward, there’d be a chapter on Kanye and Paul McCartney might get a footnote in relation to collaborating with Kanye.
Jeff: My point is, I’d argue that a big part of the Beatles being bigger than the Temptations was race. It was 1960. A group of black guys simply weren’t going to get the opportunities that a group of white guys were. They weren’t going to have the sales outlets. There were going to be white teens who wouldn’t listen to them simply because they were black. There were going to be white teens who WANTED to listen to them but their parents would forbid it. From 1960-1970, Black people were about 10-11% of the population. And even with all of that, the Temptations sold like 25 million records.
It is simplifying. It isn’t JUST race, but that was a big part of it. And given the cultural climate (especially then) it can’t really be separated out.
Of course I do Chris. Just messing with you. Shaw rings a bell. My main concern has nothing to do with music. I’m pissed that people are more concerned with selfies and Facebook than real life. History teaches us so we don’t repeat it. I’m just sad that we don’t look at it anymore. Instant gratification seems to be everyones goal. It is sad. All music has a history behind it. It’s just sad that people have forgotten that.
And I’m sitting in a karaoke bar, and some white guy just started singing “My Girl”.
Since we’re talking music history, who (NOT MAV!) can tell me the significance of this without looking it up?
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdnZ36F5n5c
Hint: It’s one of the most important tracks ever made that hardly anyone has heard.
Alex: Who is writing the book and when? If you were to write a book on the history of music in 2015, sure the Beatles take up more space than Kanye West. The Beatles are history. Kanye is current. But there’s no way Paul McCartney the solo musician gets his own chapter.
If you write a book on the history of music in 2035, I expect Kanye gets a chapter, or at the very least shares one with the hiphop pop revolution of the early 21st century (JayZ, Eminem, Justin Timberlake)
That’s assuming you write a fair book. History is never fair, it is always created. We canonize certain individuals and the Beatles certainly hit that level.
Of course the Beatles hit that level! They were bigger than Jesus, for Christ’s sake!
sure… I agree. But I think a lot of that is a feedback loop. They were huge. So were the Temps. So were the Stones. But for the Beatles (and for say Elvis), much of the legend is based on the fact that we decided they were legends so we’ve spent the past 50 years telling everyone to pay attention to them.
It’s the same reason, say Ernest Hemingway is huge.
All I know now after reading everything above is that I should probably start listening to Kanye. I’m a McCartney fan and always will be, but I don’t think I’ve ever heard a single song by Kanye West. As far as I can tell, pop music started to suck in the mid 90’s and I decided to hate everything mainstream without even listening to it ever since. I accidentally heard a Justin Bieber song recently and only just realized he wasn’t a woman. I just thought Kanye West was a “jackass”.
Emily: See, you’re OLD!!!!
You sound like my mother.
My Mom is probably a Kanye fan.
also, “No! Kanye isn’t a jackass, he’s rude at award shows. It’s different.” He’s also the most important philosopher of our time!
http://www.cracked.com/video_19038_why-kanye-west-most-important-philosopher-our-time.html
I actually show that as an example of how to make an evaluative claim in the class I teach.
Plato, Euripides, Socrates, Diogenes, Kanye. I think not.
Hemingway is a great, massively important author! He’s the author who first taught me that reading shouldn’t be enjoyable, it should be long periods of tedium punctuated by brief moments of soul-crushing depression.
Clearly you’ve never read Henry Fielding
I think I actually read half a chapter.
so like 600 pages?
No, like half a chapter, as defined by the standard of “what a reasonable person would think comprises a chapter”.
I went to key west at Xmas just because he wrote old man and the sea. it was the closest I could get to Cuba at the time.
Agreed on Paul’s solo stuff. Not so sure that you’re not underselling the Beatles’ continuing influence a bit, though. They’ve sold more records since 2000 than Kanye has (1 sold 31 million+), and they’re still pretty influential, including on Yeezus himself: see both the title of Jay-Z’s Black Album and the fact that Kanye-produced track Encore from that album samples a version of the Beatle’s I Will.
See also Danger Mouse’s Grey Album, Wu-Tang’s the Heart Gently Weeps, the Roots’ Thought At Work, the Canibus/Wyclef version of Gone Til November, and going back further KRS-One, Slick Rick, Public Enemy, A Tribe Called Quest and the Beastie Boys for more artists that have sampled the Fab Four.
(Jay-Z’s ahead of them both on sales over the past 20 years).
Oh, and just cause: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWOWt9f_pqA
Sumner: oh, I don’t mean to undersell the Beatles. Certainly still relevant and still influential. I’m totally referring specifically to Paul on his own.
I was just saying that a big part of the Beatles appeal is a self fulfilling prophecy. Inertia builds. So while I agree they’re good (I’m a fan) I’m saying that they outpace the Temptations not because of subjective quality alone but more because we constantly tell each other they’re more important. (but that’s a separate issue)
I’d similarly say this is why Ernest Hemingway is more important than Gertrude Stein or William Shakespeare over Francis Bacon.
While I don’t disagree with what I think is the most important general premise – that people don’t listen to the same music forever and get over it – I think comparing direct album sale numbers isn’t a good method of determining relative popularity (even putting influence aside) between time periods. I think a more relative measure is more useful, such as charting or album sales rank pet year. From a quick perusal it looks like Kanye is still coming pretty close to matching Paul’s solo career by such measures.
It seems silly to cite specific instances of sampling of the Beatles’ catalogue for their influence when they were the first widely popular music group to incorporate sampling in some of their songs. They certainly didn’t invent sampling, but they introduced it to a much wider audience than it had ever previously enjoyed. So you could honestly give them some credit any time anyone samples anything.
Laura: I don’t think you can make a total objective comparison, that was kind of the point, but I figured we could approximate them with sales figures. We can look at individual chart positions which gives them both six number ones on the US pop charts. Kanye also has one number 2 and Paul has three number 2s, but Kanye only has seven solo albums. Paul has 24. On the other hand, all seven of Kanye’s albums have been #1 in R&B, and none of Paul’s have (obviously, since they’re not R&B). If you compare singles, they’ve both had nine number ones.
The problem with using peak album position is that it doesn’t account for how long it was there and it depends on what else is going on at the same time. So you can actually reach a high mark for your debut week and then fall way down if everyone who cares about you buys the album the first week (which is exactly what has happened with Paul on his last two albums… he hit 5 and 3 without even making a gold certification).
Keith (and Sumner): See, I think samples is a horrible metric. It’s MAYBE a good indicator of influence, but it’s not really a good metric. because sampling is only a very specific kind of influence. In any case, by that metric, the Beatles have been sampled 610 times. Kanye has been sampled 549 times. So he is clearly going to pass them very soon. Jay Z is at 981 so already way past them. Paul, on his own, has only been sampled 66 times.
Compare that to George Clinton (in his various incarnations) with 1555 samples or James Brown with 4563.
Source: http://www.whosampled.com
I don’t think you can give the Beatles much credit for popularizing sampling either. Once the technology was available, it was going to be used like crazy regardless of whether anyone famous had done it before. Guys like Stockhausen and Varese were making very creative use of tape loops long before there were any Beatles, and early hip hop and electronic developed it as a common practice due to economic factors entirely independent of whether there had ever been any beatles.
…except Bambaataa, who did it to show off the breadth of his taste in music. 🙂
I love Paul McCartney and I even saw him in concert not so long ago. You are correct on this though. The whole thing is pretty silly though so its hard to take it seriously- to me both kanye and Paul are ‘winning’ Paul has just been around a lot longer.
Now to go back and read all of the comments..
Also… I just noticed that Sumner, like Dmitri on other posts, isn’t showing up in my blog sync gateway… now… what the hell is the relationship between the two?
Max: I’m not NOT giving the Beatle credit. I didn’t bring up sampling at all. I’m confused.
The Beatles weren’t bigger than the Temptations because they were white. Sorry. It was more because they were British.
Arthur: I’m not even really saying the Beatles were helped by being white. I’m more saying the Temptations were hurt by being black.
I just now, for the very first time, looked at some of the “lyrics” of Kanye’s music. They make absolutely no sense, they have no meaning. Why people buy this crap boggles my mind. He doesn’t have any of the song writing talent of Paul McCartney.
Lynette,
I know nothing about you, so I can’t really say for sure. But if McCartney lyrics make more sense to you than Kanye lyrics, I’m going to default to the argument that you can’t really relate to what Kanye is talking about. Kanye’s poetry is almost always aimed at black and urban issues, generally ones plaguing our current youth culture. So if you’re outside of that realm, he certainly should be less accessible to you.
Which ones did you look at? The ones that I’ve looked at seem very appropriate and understandable.
Kathleen, Absolutely. I certainly won’t say that every single thing he’s ever written is 100% coherent, but I wouldn’t say that about anyone. The Beatles, for instance, certainly have nonsense lyrics sometimes.
Chris I’d agree with that. They were incredible.
I have access for “Apps, websites, and plugins” turned off in my settings, as well as everything unchecked in the “Apps others use” settings. I suspect the latter is preventing your blog sync gateway from mirroring my posts.
Mav, I wasn’t arguing with you, I was responding to Keith’s comment re sampling.
Max: See, this is why Facebook is dumb. We need threading. Everyone should abandon Facebook and switch to using my blog.
(Or Cosmic Hellcats — cheap plug!)
Lynette commented on ChrisMaverick dotcom:
I just now, for the very first time, looked at some of the “lyrics” of Kanye’s music. They make absolutely no sense, they have no meaning. Why people buy this crap boggles my mind. He doesn’t have any of the song writing talent of Paul McCartney.
Lynette commented on ChrisMaverick dotcom:
Plato, Euripides, Socrates, Diogenes, Kanye. I think not.
Lynette,
I know nothing about you, so I can’t really say for sure. But if McCartney lyrics make more sense to you than Kanye lyrics, I’m going to default to the argument that you can’t really relate to what Kanye is talking about. Kanye’s poetry is almost always aimed at black and urban issues, generally ones plaguing our current youth culture. So if you’re outside of that realm, he certainly should be less accessible to you.
Kathleen L. Habel Willard commented on ChrisMaverick dotcom:
Which ones did you look at? The ones that I’ve looked at seem very appropriate and understandable.
I think it’s easy for us to say we know Paul so why don’t the youngsters, but they can just as easily say they know Kanye so why don’t we? I think what music you know depends on your musical interests and what you have been exposed to over the years by family and peers. I think it’s interesting when artists of different genres and generations unite. Sometimes, the result can be cheesy, but sometimes it can bring different fans together!
I sort of wonder if Lynette is doing something like refusing to acknowledge the existence of slang.
Jen: absolutely. Everyone will always think that the art they are drawn to is the best. When you are the older generation you feel like you can rely on “tradition” as proof. When you’re the younger one you claim it’s “innovation”
Keith: so do I. She appears to be a big Beatles fan. But really if you look at the Beatles heyday the big complaints about them were the same as she (and others) will say about Kanye (or say, Miley) today.
When I read stuff from people complaining about Miley, I just shake my head and think “Madonna.”
Kathleen: So do I. Same thing with Britney a few years back. When you point out the similarities people like to claim that Madonna was better because she was actually breaking barriers and innovating and such. But that’s what Miley is trying to do. And people forget that 30 years ago parents weren’t talking about Madonna the visionary. They were saying “Holy Christ, why the fuck is that slut rolling around the stage in a wedding veil and her underwear?”
Then they were getting pissed because they couldn’t figure out how to use the parental lock feature on the cable box to close out MTV.
For the kids who might be reading this: MTV used to be this network that played music videos. It was sort of like YouTube but you couldn’t pick.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. You damn kids just stay off my lawn and turn down that crappy noise you call music!
It’s funny because Mav’s mom is making fun of people Mav’s age for acting old. You go, Lynn!
When people are still talking about or know who Kanye West is 50 years from now you can talk about relevance. Otherwise you might as well be referencing Milli Vanilli. Sold more records? You mean in an age where music is available 24/7, music players are ubiquitous and people have a lot more disposable income? The only way you can legitimately make the comparisons you made would be between artists who existed under the same circumstances. In this case, the only real measure is longevity and like I said, if people know who Kanye is in 10 years, I’ll be surprised let alone 50…
You still know who Milli Vanilli is (and assume the rest of us do too) 24 years after they had 2 hit albums in their 2 year career, but you think that in 10 years time everyone will have forgotten Kanye’s 12 year career with 7 hit albums?
Does this theory involve some sort of mind-eraser ray being used on the world?
Wait, are you building a mind eraser ray?
Vic: But we are talking about Kanye 10 years later… technically 11. Will we be taking about him in 40 more? You’re right, I don’t know. I expect on some level we will, actually, but that not really what we’re talking about. No matter what, McCartney’s career will always be 44 years older than West’s. So sure, in 2054, we might say “sure, but will we be talking about Kanye after 90 years?”
But that’s not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about who is relevant now. It is entirely POSSIBLE that Paul will become more important than Kanye again. It’s POSSIBLE that he won’t. It’s possible that by 2016 noone will remember either of them (though unlikely). The point is, right now — in January 2015 — Kanye West is the bigger star than Paul McCartney.
We can always make an arbitrary definition for why one of them is important in a different way. But the complaint in this case is “why are kids paying more attention to Kanye West TODAY than Paul McCartney” and the answer is “because TODAY Kanye West is more important than Paul McCartney.”
Would we even be having this argument if it were Ringo?
Keith: also a very good point. Milli Vanilli is CLEARLY culturally relevant. More so because of their scandal than their music, but that’s not the point. The point is they are relevant. And Kanye has been charting AND creating repeated scandals (again, more of the John Lennon variety than the Milli Vanilli variety).
To assume he’s just going to go away is ludicrous.
Kanye is more POPULAR at the moment. He is no more relevant than any other pop star at the height of their career. What trend has he set musically? What lasting impact will be have on the art form. My opinion? None. Talented, sure, influential, um no. He sells records as part of a machine. He is no more important than the rest of the churn and burn artists out there. Maybe he can join Britney Spears in Vegas 10 years from now. Transformers made way more money than Selma, doesn’t make it more relevant. It is more popular to a wider audience, nothing more. Same goes for Kanye. Relevant… Lol
Vic: Yes, he is more popular AT THE MOMENT. That’s the only thing that matters in this context. That’s what relevance is by virtue of the definition that I am setting forth. Sure, you can change the definition of relevance, but you can always argue semantics.
That said, your semantic argument doesn’t have much merit because it doesn’t hold. I said specifically that PAUL MCCARTNEY was less relevant than Kanye West. I was quite clear that I was excluding the Beatles. People tend to equate the two, but in reality, for the really IMPORTANT part of McCartney’s career, Ringo Starr was there too. One could argue that McCartney was more important, but that’s not what people are really arguing. If you’re going to go with your definition of relevance, then you have to say “Ringo Starr is more relevant than Kanye West” and no one really wants to go there.
As for your examples. You’re flatly wrong. Kanye is hugely influential RIGHT NOW. Almost automatically so, simply because he’s one of the most prolific music producers recording today, but even not talking about the pop/r&b/hip-hop groups he doesn’t produce that are recording RIGHT NOW, his influence on a great number of them is pretty clear. Yes, one can make a value judgement that they might be crappy, but that doesn’t matter. The point is, RIGHT NOW. He’s more relevant and influential.
Your argument mostly relies on history. And by that metric, Transformers is more INFLUENTIAL than Selma RIGHT NOW. Selma (by my argument) is more RELEVANT, purely because it happens to be in theaters and in Oscar contention RIGHT NOW. But as far as cultural influence, Selma hasn’t even come close to the first TF movie yet. Far fewer people have seen it. Far fewer films are copying it stylistically. It hasn’t had time to build influence. Maybe it will. Maybe it won’t.
Maybe Kanye will go on to become president of the United States. Maybe he’ll go on to become a bum begging for change in an alley. Same with Paul. We don’t know. Anything we guess is pure speculation. Perhaps based on educated guesses, but speculation nonetheless. We can make substantive objective valuations on their relevance RIGHT NOW though, and by any metric other than historic, Kanye is going to win.
The historic metric he will never win. You are correct. He can’t. But that’s not a useful metric. It’s like saying that Hemingway and Tolstoy are more relevant than Stephen King or JK Rowling. And they aren’t. Not RIGHT NOW. It’s like saying that Calvin Coolidge and Grover Cleveland are more relevant than George W Bush and Barack Obama. And they aren’t RIGHT NOW.
Britney Spears is an interesting case that exactly proves the point. It’s easy to be dismissive of her, and complain that she’s some lame Vegas lounge act, but she’s not. She’s the biggest Vegas act of all time. She’s clearly an artist that, for better or worse, defined a musical generation, and that influence is still clearly shaping pop performers today. Much like the Beatles.
Will Kanye get there? Who knows? I actually expect he will, but I can’t prove it other than by waiting til his popularity starts to wane. What I can say is that the Beatles got there, Britney got there. Paul McCartney (the solo act) really hasn’t. He fared better than Starr or Harrison (John died too quick, so we’ll leave him out), but as a solo act he never achieved anywhere near the success that West has.
The reason I keep saying RIGHT NOW. Is because that’s the only thing that matters. The complaint that “kids should know McCartney” is based on the idea that “he should be important because he is important to us” but that doesn’t hold. No one was ever saying “Kanye is going to make McCartney historic.” Assuming the initial tweets were serious (and they weren’t) they were saying “West is going to make Paul relevant RIGHT NOW.”
There is absolutely no reason why any teenaged kid TODAY should care more about Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, Ford … Adams, or Washington than they should about Barack Obama.
I think the use of the word kids in the quote is the key there at least for me. It’s probable that during the 60’s people were asking how can kids think Paul is bigger than Sinatra or Elvis. All the number ones McCartney has written, all the awards, all the records are meaningless in that context because kids wanna claim their own music, and today , yes they prefer Kanye.
Robert: exactly. That’s why I made reference to Shaw and Andrews in the original post. Elvis was only a LITTLE older that Paul. Sinatra was old enough to be his dad. Paul is basically in the Sinatra role to West. Which for the kids in question makes him old enough to be their grandfather.
“What trend has he set musically?” Well, the easiest to name is chipmunk soul, which was basically his thing and was pretty big for a minute there. But he’s also been responsible to the overall shift in tone in popular rap to be more personal and confessional. Rappers like Lil Wayne, Drake, Kid Cudi, Schoolboy Q, and Kendrick Lamar all clearly show Kanye’s influence. And the list of hip-hop producers whose style has been influence by Kanye is also huge, but I would have to do more thinking and listening to come up with that list since I don’t always know who produced which song off the top of my head. If you haven’t noticed the trends that Kanye has set, it’s probably because you don’t listen to rap music much.
Yeah, I saw this go viral and wondered why this was so hard for folks to understand. I’ll also say this: Why would any teenage brown person give a @#$% about The Beatles in 2015? I mean, I owned several of their albums as teenager, but even then I was a bit of anomaly when it came to music. I could only imagine how much distance there is now between The Beatles and this generation. And let’s be honest, if there is any direct line of comparison to be drawn to Kanye it ain’t to Paul…it’s to Michael Jackson.