Written only a short five months after his “Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! Music’s Gold Bugs” article, Aronowitz wrote this article in the same Saturday Evening Post, preparing the masses for the return of Britain’s super group. The tone of this article shows again the cavalier attitude of both the Beatles and the author. The direction this article takes however is a little different.
The first noticeable difference is in the Beatles themselves. In their first quotes from interviews readers can note sarcasm and fun tone, however as the world grows to know the boys from Liverpool, we see the sparks of youth in revolt. Be it Lennon’s passive jabs at the Lord Mayors excessive jewelry or the party attitude of the whole group the Beatles, these were considered unruly and rebellious by the days standards. Furthermore as the article describes the Beatles presence at royal functions the lights of early punk rock shine through as the gang mocks the crown.
Another point of interest that I found curious was the groups continued growth in popularity. While it seems that many were upset and even scared about the group’s ability to cause riots and undermine the law, the Beatles return to America was
…show more content…
However, Aronowitz made it a point to quote the Beatles in this later article addressing this very issue. As the band addressed the silliness of fame and how it allows people to distort the way the public perceives you readers can distinguish from this the early warnings from the stars of dangers of mass fame. Another aspect I found captivating was the Beatles blatant candidness about their early desires of making “piles of money,” as Lennon said. Knowing now what the Beatles would become in the late 60s and early 70s this objectionable materialism is almost a complete turn for the group’s future