Is 'Sgt. Pepper' overrated?

The Beatles have been one of my top favorite bands since I started (properly) listening to music 14 years ago. But I'd say it's slightly overrated. In the musical aspect, well, it's very subjective, but I think there are albums that are as good that don't get nowhear near the same attention. I mean, I won't even compare to an "obscure" artists like Magma or something that is avant garde, etc. which will obviously never be commercially successful. But I think "Arthur" by The Kinks is as good and doesn't get nowher near the same attention. Or Days of Future Passed by Moody Blues. I'm not saying they're better, but they could be easily considered as good and it's a similar genre and time period. Also, I think Abbey Road and the White Album are the greatest Beatles albums, slightly above Sgt. Pepper's and Revolver, but it's sort of being established that Sgt. Pepper's was their number one, though that seems to be changing.

In a way it is. There are 4 really great songs on it

Edited by richardh - September 21 2020 at 23:43

I prophesy disaster wrote: Is 'Sgt. Pepper' overrated? Probably. That's because the Beatles are treated like demigods, which means that everything they did was given the Midas touch. Thus, it is inevitable that their music is overrated.

Good to see so many varying opinions!

"No".

Next question, please. 

moshkito wrote: judahbenkenobi wrote:   ... Personally, I prefer to have fun with the music I like, rather than making a philosophy of life out of it. After all I don't think that my life depends on it. But to each his own; it's a free world we live in Hi, I would imagine that many folks out there playing music, take it very seriously ... it is probably why they get as far as they do. I'm not sure that so many of the artists/musicians do not take their art seriously ... now, if the audience doesn't care, that's another story isn't it ... but what gives them the right to throw stones when it doesn't matter to them?

Throw stones? I don't think expressing an indifferent opinion about a fan's comment is throwing stones at an artist. I seriously doubt Paul or Ringo would be offended about something I posted as a reply to another person's post.

I am a Beatles' fan and I know they took their work very seriously, that's why they are here, in the center of this discussion, because they did something tremendously influential. And I concur with you, every artist takes what they do very seriously, whether they do it for a living or not.

Edited by judahbenkenobi - September 16 2020 at 10:17

moshkito wrote: Hi, Sometimes, given the way history is taught in school, people have no understanding as to how different things were 50 years ago ... and worse ... many don't care and think their opinion is more important. When you do not have the "history" and "perspective" on history, a lot of these things lose some of their ability to stand ... and it is sad ... at the time, it was all they had to do what they did ... so go ahead, be silly and say that Mozart is an idiot and acid-hole for what he created, and on top of it, stupid because he wanted to do something different, and could only do it on bars, drunk and cavorting with anyone. He saw it differently and we don't care ... we think he is over this or that or under this or that ...  this is one of the main reasons why so much of what I write is related to the time and place ... and it is a constant battle against the "commercialists" because it is like ... they don't believe in time and a place for anything ... so much for history in school! Or literature or any of the arts for that matter!

Personally, I prefer to have fun with the music I like, rather than making a philosophy of life out of it. After all I don't think that my life depends on it. But to each his own; it's a free world we live in

moshkito wrote: Hi, Sometimes, given the way history is taught in school, people have no understanding as to how different things were 50 years ago ... and worse ... many don't care and think their opinion is more important. When you do not have the "history" and "perspective" on history, a lot of these things lose some of their ability to stand ... and it is sad ... at the time, it was all they had to do what they did ... so go ahead, be silly and say that Mozart is an idiot and acid-hole for what he created, and on top of it, stupid because he wanted to do something different, and could only do it on bars, drunk and cavorting with anyone. He saw it differently and we don't care ... we think he is over this or that or under this or that ...  this is one of the main reasons why so much of what I write is related to the time and place ... and it is a constant battle against the "commercialists" because it is like ... they don't believe in time and a place for anything ... so much for history in school! Or literature or any of the arts for that matter!

Droxford wrote: To be honest , I don't know.  I own several Beatles albums including 'Pepper' . I totally understand that  The fact that we are having this discussion 53 years later says a great deal.  That each track on the album is quite individual and stands out well.  Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention parodying the original cover for their album 'We are only in it for the Money' is still quite a tribute to  the importance of 'Pepper'.  'A Day in the Life' is astonishing , Two songs rammed together , an orchestra playing in a discordant fashion thrown in, is an absolute classic. I played it to a friend who doesn't get The Beatles, and they had to agree that the track is an achievement.  But I am an getting on in years. I just do not know, as we stumble further  into the 21st Century if 'Pepper' is that important. But a fascinating thread nevertheless.

Yes, we are discussing it 53 years later, that means a great deal. It is of huge historical importance. But remember Beatlemania! That exagerrated, emphasised and overated everything they band did. What effect did that have one our opinion?
It all comes down to what you call overated. I do not think it is underated. In fact, I think it's just where it should be, overated or not. If it is overated, perhaps it deserves to be so. Certainly an interesting thread.