As should be clear to any long-term reader of my blogposts, growing up in the 1970s-1980s, I started loving the Beatles at an early age, 4 or 5 to be precise, and my love affair with the band just got deeper and deeper over time. By the time I was 12, I had collected maybe a dozen of their albums, including all the major ones plus several minors. Of course, as an American I had all the American versions of their albums. Later in high school I acquired some of the British versions of their classic albums as well.
I never bought a Rolling Stones album, but my parents had several, and I did listen to them now and then. I remember they had Goat’s Head Soup, and Let It Bleed, and maybe a collection of their early hit songs. But mostly, like every other kid growing up in that era, I imbibed and absorbed the Stones via radio. They were ubiquitous on all the major rock stations, such as WBCN (I grew up outside of Boston). Since they were still active and touring and coming out with new albums, I heard all their latest hits on the radio and many of their back catalog songs as well. But I can’t say I became a real fan of the band until my 20s, when I moved to New York City. The first album that I truly dug was Beggar’s Banquet, which somehow jibed well with my experience living in NYC. Over the years, I steadily learned more about the band and their music, but never in a fanatical way.
As for Bob Dylan, although I knew about him as a kid, I never really listened to his music in a deep way until I was in my 20s. When I was in my youth, there was something about Bob Dylan that was a bit of a turnoff. The mop of curly hair, the rough, gravelly voice, and the folkloric style didn’t appeal to me in the least, nor to any of my friends. We just didn’t have the background or context to appreciate his work. My dad was a fan of Dylan’s early work, but unlike some of his other musical interests—jazz mainly—it didn’t trickle down to me. My mom and stepdad didn’t seem to care much for Dylan either. Although I was vaguely familiar with some of his most well-known songs from the 1960s, mostly through the work of other artists like the Byrds, Peter, Paul and Mary, Judy Collins and the likes, I didn’t know much if anything about him.
All that changed when learned how to play guitar in graduate school and started digging into folk music. But the real game changer was when I discovered his 1975 album Blood on the Tracks (I happened to be living in Japan and Taiwan at the time, but that is another story). This was a real “where have you been all my life” moment, which I think I share with millions of other fans who were turned onto Dylan by this album. Unlike his work from the 1960s, this was a more accessible album, with stories you could relate to and vivid character development, not just a laundry list of famous names. It was his most personal album to date, and perhaps his most coherent one as well, and so it’s no wonder that I identified with this album as I was going through my own personal struggles and trying to “find myself” as a young man. It’s no coincidence that I also discovered Tom Waits around this time.
Now for the analogy with alcohol. I first took an interest in beer as a young boy, just as I did with the Fab Four. I remember when I was 7, my dad once “bribed” me to eat a clam for a sip of beer. I’ve never been a big fan of mollusks but was willing to down one for a taste of the sudsy gold. Then, when I was 10 or 11 and I started going to weddings (my own parents’ weddings but also other relatives’), I discovered that it was fun to have a beer or two and turn into an energizer bunny for a while before nodding off in some corner. Champagne, the tasty bubbly drink also offered in weddings, was even more fun.
To me, The Beatles felt—and still feel—like drinking beer or fizzy champagne. It tastes nice going down, and you get a wonderful energetic buzz. It doesn’t zap you or overwhelm you, and it’s hard to get really wasted unless you are chugging it in huge amounts, and the bubbles usually prevent you from doing so unless you are a 200 pound frat boy named Gus who drinks beer by the pitcher (I knew such a guy at Dartmouth—many of them in fact). Like beer (or champagne), you can acquire a strong taste and even a deep craving for Beatles music at a very early age. Then, as you age, you learn to appreciate the subtleties of beer, the varieties of it and the craftsmanship that goes into brewing beer (let’s drop the champagne analogy for now and stick with the brewskis). As you age, you also learn a great deal more about the Beatles, their story, and all the ingredients and techniques and craft that went into making their music. In other words, you can imbibe Beatles and beer at any age and always find something new to appreciate about both.
As for the Rolling Stones, they are the gin of the music world. Why gin, you say? First of all, it’s a distinctly British drink, and the Stones have a very British feel to them, more so than the Beatles I’d say. It’s stronger than beer and much more of an acquired taste, but even a teenager can mix gin with tonic water and enjoy the tasty buzz. It’s probably the first alcohol you got really drunk with, unless of course it was vodka. But really, gin is just vodka with some additional taste supplied by the juniper berries, right?
The Rolling Stones is not a band that a child would typically embrace, but certainly one that a teen can appreciate. They’re not as cuddly as the Beatles. They’re not the kind of band that you and your ten-year-old mates would replicate with four teddy bears, one assigned to each of the lads. There’s something naughty about the Stones, something downright nasty even. They’re much more of a hard blues band than the Beatles ever were, but even their more melodious songs have a strong tinge of sarcasm to them, and much more misogyny, though you could interpret them as parodies of British working- and upper-class mores as well. Like gin, the Stones grow on you over time. You develop a taste for the strength and subtlety of their music beyond just the loudness and the angst. The killer combo of Jagger and Richards is like a gin and tonic. Bubbly like champagne but with a darker tone, and a louder finish. And you can get really wasted on gin. Especially those strong pours, where you don’t realize how much you’ve had until it’s too late. It was just two G&Ts. What happened?
Now, on to Dylan and whiskey. The analogy is so obvious I need not belabor it here. First, there’s the voice: rough and gravelly, but over time you come to appreciate the finer tones, and the wide range of his singing. It’s like discovering all the great whiskeys out there in the world. Some are strong and bitey, while others are mellow with a hint of caramel. With Dylan, you’ve got the plummy voice of Nashville Skyline, the “old man” voice of his early folk tunes, or the hard gravel voice of his later albums. Whiskey is a drink for which most kids have no appreciation. I don’t remember ever having whiskey at all until I reached my 20s. Then, as a young adult, you begin the road to discovery, from the Irish and Scotch whiskeys to the Single Malts. You start with Jack Daniels or Johnny Walker and coke. Jack Daniels is Blood on the Tracks. Strong, smooth, potent. The earlier albums are the Johnny Walker Reds and Blacks. The later albums are the Single Malts. And then comes Tom Waits, and now you are in Bourbon territory.
So then, what about Leonard Cohen? Well, obviously we are now in wine country. As a kid, I could take a sip from a glass of wine now and then and though I didn’t like it a great deal, I certainly didn’t hate it. Then in high school you discover wine coolers. Those are the Dylan and Cohen soundalike bands—the ones you dug in high school with their cool and fruity lyrics. The New Wave bands of the 1980s in other words. But you still don’t have a taste for real wine. You start to develop that in your 20s. About the time I got into Bob Dylan, I was also starting to listen to Leonard Cohen and learn some of his songs. Suzanne was the first song of his that I learned to play on guitar. Then came his other classics, like Famous Blue Raincoat and Story of Isaac and That’s No Way to Say Goodbye. Later you discover he wrote that song Hallelujah. Eventually, you’re deep diving into the incredible depth and breadth of the Grand Canyon of his work and discovering that he tapped a goldmine of Biblical and mythological references and concocted them into a fine golden tapestry of songwork that is unmatched even by Dylan. You’ve discovered fine wines in other words, and you can identify their bouquets and their provenance with a taste or even a smell. Yep, Cohen is for oenophiles all right.