Pandora's Boxes in the Hands of The Future

Did you know that children from wealthy families were said to have been "born with a silver spoon"?

My cousin brother was born with a Pandora's box instead. The box was there to take a picture of his parents holding him for the first time. It was there to entrance him with a video of The Gummy Bear song when he refused to eat. It was there when he was cranky; it was there to make him happy. Digital devices like smartphones and tablets compromised my brother’s childhood. He liked playing outdoors, but he loved the shiny and sleek Pandora's boxes! He would play the same games on the phone repeatedly. Engrossed in the phone, he would stop responding to people around him. Because his school wanted to introduce "enhanced learning", my brother got his very own iPad at seven years of age! The amount of time and effort he put into playing games and downloading apps on the tablet surprised me. There was a point when I even wondered if he was addicted. He became reticent, yet more aggressive due to all the fighter and racing games he played. I couldn't accept that he was wasting away his precious childhood in front of a screen, which was slowly turning him into a machine such as itself. There was even a time when I saw some disturbing content in the suggestions list on YouTube while he was watching a simulation game. I was horrified by the possibility of my brother's mind getting polluted. The thought of that possibility becoming a reality drew the line for me. 

Today, we are all living in a digital world. Though there is technology all around us, somehow it has proven incapable of solving urgent problems like Global Warming. We may leave the world before the system collapses, but our children will suffer because they are the future. If we want them to survive, then we need to nurture them in the right way. I know it would be impossible to start lecturing teenagers on the adverse effects of over-using technology. But there’s still hope with children. We can shape their future in the right way. So, if we are handing a smartphone or a tablet to a child, then we need to understand the consequences and act accordingly. 

I firmly believe that children below the age of ten should have restricted access to smartphones and tablets. 

By restricted access, I mean the amount of time the child spends using these devices at home, i.e., screen time. Writing from direct experience, I am convinced that excessive screen time can have adverse effects on young children. It can lead to difficulties in learning and communication, along with a decrease in social skills. Immoderate usage can also cause drastic behavioural changes. Online activity, of "digitalised kids" between five and ten years, can expose them to cyberbullying and undesirable content. At a very young age, children can become materialistic, thereby plunging into needless consumerism and identity crisis. Above all, essential parent-child relationships can deteriorate due to valuable time at home lost inside luring screens.

Dr Nicole Beurkens (2017), a clinical child psychologist, notes that "non-verbal (emotional) cues are a critical component of social communication, and deficits in this area create difficulties for children in forming relationships and communicating effectively with others." Supporting her observation, researchers from the Boston University School of Medicine suggest that children's over-indulgence in smart devices reduces their sensorimotor and visual-motor skills (Walters, 2015). Therefore, it becomes hard for digitalised kids to comprehend language and face-to-face interactions. Also, the researchers find that these kids show a weakening of higher-level cognitive skills needed for understanding subjects like math and science. According to Dr Beurkens these skills belong to executive functions of the brain, which gets impaired due to kids' particular overexposure to silly and fast-paced on-screen games (Beurkens, 2017). She also warns parents not to use mobiles and tablets to distract kids because not only do such tactics reduce their ability to self-regulate, but they also act as conversation-killers, especially among children of the same age. 

An extensive study of digitally-active three-year-olds and five-year-olds, conducted by a group of Canadian investigators, revealed the dominating effects that increased screen time had on the behaviour of these children (Tamana et al., 2019). Externalising problems such as inattention and aggression and internalising problems like depression, withdrawal and anxiety, seemed to have significantly affected those kids whose screen time was more than two hours every day. Contrastingly, they discovered that those children who spent the same amount of time in physical activities had almost no mental-health complications. The association of screen time with behavioural morbidities was higher than its effect on the kids' sleep patterns and parenting style. Hence, their study proves how easily a few extra hours can change the nature of a child: from cute to diabolic. 

If you're looking for an amusing take of the relationship between digital devices and children, then Dean Burnett, a doctor of neuroscience, is your guy. In his article in The Guardian, Burnett writes about the danger of having children around tablets; not the other way around. He is determined that, due to their incapacity to hold things, toddlers mainly are bound to drop/break these fragile and hard-to-repair gadgets, at least once (Burnett, 2015). Though this is a hilarious insight, it is essential to note the logic behind it: Don't give expensive devices to children unless you are Bill Gates! 

It would be ignorant of parents to assume that their kids' activity on smart devices is restricted to playing games and watching colourful YouTube videos. But, a survey taken in eleven countries presents many respondents expressing concern over their children's exposure to immoral and harmful content (Silver et al., 2019). It was only recently that an online-hoax called Momo Challenge threatened the lives of young children who fell into its traps. Moreover, physicians from the American College of Pediatricians affirm that a lot of kids have social media accounts by the age of ten. While online, they accidentally come across undesirable content, especially pornography ("The Impact of Media," 2016). The physicians assert that such perversion of innocent minds can induce early sexual attitudes and gender-stereotypical beliefs. Online activities further affect the morality of children. An article in the Journal of Social Science reports the impact cyberbullying has on all young minds associated with it. It claims that while the victims of internet harassment descend into depression, anxiety and low self-esteem, the bullies themselves succumb to risky behaviours and belligerence and the bystanders experience agitation and guilt (D'Antona et al., 2010). To avoid children underdoing such trauma, I would suggest parents monitor screen time heavily. When I found out that my brother was under the danger of exposure to illicit content, I immediately told his parents to install parental control on his device and switch his account to YouTube Kids. 

Back when mobile phones were emerging as a fad, the main reason why parents agreed to buy them for their children was for security purposes. A research paper based on Roy Morgan's Young Australians Survey concurs with this notion but informs that today the reasons for buying smartphones are fast-changing. The document states that children, particularly tweens, attracted mainly by the brand, the ringtones, the lastest application facilities and appearance of the device, pressurise their parents to buy expensive gadgets (Downie & Glazebrook, 2007). The research discloses that many tweens fear missing out on new updates and models. It claims that these children are attempting to establish their identity through possession of "cool" phones. This materialistic attitude commercialises their childhood and inflicts upon them, a never-ending consumer culture. The survey notes the existence of such a culture predominantly among children from low-income families. When their families' financial circumstances deny them the needful, the survey opines, these kids undergo identity crises and begin to experience psychosomatic dysfunctions (Downie & Glazebrook, p.05).  

A subtle existence of all the fore-mentioned traits existed in my cousin brother as well. I have been in my brother's life since the day he was born. Numerous times, I cradled him as a baby, fed him, bathed him and watched him play. He used to be excessively tall and tanned for his age because of all the time spent in the sun. My best memories of him involved him playing games, both imaginary and real: jumping around chasing after footballs and narrating tales about the tiny plastic people he stationed around huts he built out of wet playground mud. But clearly, these activities did not define him as much as the gadgets did. The first ten years of a child's life make up for his/her best childhood. It's the time when kids begin to discover their surroundings; the time they just go out and have fun! It's also a crucial time for them to bond with their parents. It is at this pivotal phase of their lives that their parents can undisputedly shape their minds, teach them moral values and help them grow responsibly. So, when a lifeless machine substitutes the role of parents and the outdoors, the child's attachment and loyalty immediately shift to the former, creating a permanent break in his/her bond with the latter. But even after knowing all these facts, some argue in favour of children having access to digital devices. 

Jordy Kaufman, director of a research facility called BabyLab, insists that mobile phones and iPads are not like the traditional television set or video games. He claims that their benefits are plenty when used in the right way. He also believes that these devices can replace traditional toys, saying that they have the potential to exceed the teaching capacity by engaging the mirror neurons - which help the human brain understand the virtual space - in children thereby increasing cognitive development (Cocozza, 2014). Another scholar named Rosie Flewitt, from the Institute of Education at the University of London, talks about the benefits of tablet use in early primary education (Cocozza, 2014). 

Tablet learning can curb creativity and imagination by reducing children to a fixed framework and not allowing them to think outside the box. But that is one minor setback which can be overlooked if the tablets are only used for educational purposes. So, while I agree with Miss Flewitt about tablet learning stimulating intelligence in children, I cannot accept Mr Kaufman's arguments. Scientific research and testing prove that giving tablet access to young children (between 24-60 months) can lead to poor performances that are undetectable to parents (Madigan et al., 2019). Due to this factor, parents will be oblivious to how their children utilise their gadgets. Without parental control, the ethical and moral usage of devices is highly tested. Also, I strongly question the advantage of replacing traditional toys with tablets. I remember witnessing my brother once trying to move a building block from the floor by placing his finger in the air around it and swiping up. He was trying to move the block without even touching it! Very young children are not capable of reinterpreting virtually gained knowledge in real life. At that time, my brother was not more than one year old. So if we want our children to be able to understand the simple concept of picking and holding objects, then putting a tablet in their hands is not going to do the trick. It is also important to note that the engagement of children is heightened when they actively take part in what is entertaining them, like outdoor activities, not when they are being entertained by a screen. 

In conclusion, restricted screen time is the answer to all the problems posed by the use of digital devices. Firstly, access must be denied entirely to very young children (below five years) at home. The only exception for these kids using the devices should be during school-time. Secondly, children between five and ten years of age should have monitored and time-constricted screen time. Parents must also learn to be assertive about these rules and must always try to supplement benefits from the screen time by teaching the kids new things on gadgets such as basic animations and reading. Finally, it is imperative for parents to always remind children of all ages about the harmful effects of using digital devices.

If these three things are kept in mind, then even if our children are born with Pandora's boxes, they can still learn to live with them and also use them for the betterment of society and the future. 

Bibliography

Beurkens, Nicole. “Screen Time Can Be DANGEROUS For Kids' (Mental & Physical Health).” Dr. Nicole Beurkens, 1 Oct. 2018, www.drbeurkens.com/dangers-overexposure-electronics-kids-mental-physical-health/.

Burnett, Dean. “Toddlers Pose a Serious Risk to Smartphones and Tablets | Dean Burnett.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 3 Feb. 2015, www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2015/feb/03/toddlers-damage-smartphones-tablets.

Cocozza, Paula. “Are IPads and Tablets Bad for Young Children?” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 8 Jan. 2014, www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/08/are-tablet-computers-bad-young-children.

D'Antona, Robin, et al. “Sexting, Texting, Cyberbullying and Keeping Youth Safe Online.” Journal of Social Sciences, vol. 6, no. 4, 2010, pp. 523–528., doi:10.3844/jssp.2010.523.528.

Downie, Christian, and Kate Glazebrook. “Mobile Phones and the Consumer Kids.” Australia Institute, Feb. 2007, pp. 1–7., http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.554.4187&rep=rep1&type=pdf

“The Impact of Media Use and Screen Time on Children, Adolescents, and Families.” American College of Pediatricians, 9 Nov. 2016, www.acpeds.org/the-college-speaks/position-statements/parenting-issues/the-impact-of-media-use-and-screen-time-on-children-adolescents-and-families.

Madigan, Sheri, et al. “Association Between Screen Time and Children’s Performance on a Developmental Screening Test.” JAMA Pediatrics, vol. 173, no. 3, 28 Jan. 2019, pp. 244–260., doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.5056.

Silver, Laura, et al. “2. Majorities Say Mobile Phones Are Good for Society, Even amid Concerns about Their Impact on Children.” Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech, Pew Research Center, 7 Mar. 2019, www.pewresearch.org/internet/2019/03/07/majorities-say-mobile-phones-are-good-for-society-even-amid-concerns-about-their-impact-on-children/.

Tamana, Sukhpreet K., et al. “Screen-Time Is Associated with Inattention Problems in Preschoolers: Results from the CHILD Birth Cohort Study.” Plos One, vol. 14, no. 4, 17 Apr. 2019, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0213995.

Veldhuis, Lydian, et al. “Parenting Style, the Home Environment, and Screen Time of 5-Year-Old Children; The ‘Be Active, Eat Right’ Study.” PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 2, 12 Feb. 2014, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0088486.

Walters, Joanna. “Tablets and Smartphones May Affect Social and Emotional Development, Scientists Speculate.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 2 Feb. 2015, www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/01/toddler-brains-research-smartphones-damage-social-development

My Own Hero

The year was 2008. Imagine a timid, tubby young girl with goofy spectacles. That was I, Aathishree. I was in third grade at that time. My parents were full-time doctors, and I was an only child. So, loneliness was a constant companion. My mother got me into a Carnatic music class at a prestigious performing arts academy called Vidhya Vaani to keep me occupied in the evenings after school. The room in which I had my music lessons was opposite a Bharathanatyam (a form of Indian classical dance) class. I remember being entranced by the bhaav (dance expressions) of the dancing girls and the sound of their resonating anklets to the beats. For a month, I watched them with awe, taking in every tiny detail of their steps and movements. Finally, I asked my parents to enrol me in the dance class. I do not remember my experience of the first Bharathanatyam lesson, but I will never forget the impression the teacher made on me. 

Sampath sir was an accomplished dancer-turned-teacher. He was a dark man of average height with shiny black hair curving towards his shoulders. In every way, Sampath sir fit the criteria for a professional dancer. He only wore matching pairs of kurta pyjamas. His namaskaram (South Indian greeting/seeking blessing) was artistic and animated. So were all his gestures - poised and assured. More importantly, he walked or rather carried himself gracefully.  

His countenance though bore a tale of its own. His clean-shaven face had multiple dark spots. He always had this smug look which made his lips stretch thin. To me, his eyes were as blank as an unused blackboard. On the whole, the man looked like a serial killer. Unsurprisingly his attitude complemented his appearance. 

It would be an understatement to call him a mean teacher. His teaching style can be explained simply like so: Do what I say, or get lost! His disciplining tactics were even worse. If we were late to class, we were not asked to stand out but were beaten on the legs with the thazha-kattai (a thick wooden stick used to hit on a small plank to produce beats). If we cried from the pain, he only beat us more. If our steps were wrong, we were sent outside and made to repeat the same steps at least a hundred times. Even if some students performed really well, he would never acknowledge their efforts. We all trembled at the sight of Sampath sir because the man's temper knew no bounds. 

Despite such cruelty, the students never complained about him to their parents or discontinued his classes. Sampath sir was, like I said, quite talented. So no one missed the chance of learning under him, and everyone craved his validation. I was no different from the others. 

Every year, we - Sampath sir's entourage - would give at least two performances at public gatherings. Every student needed to participate. That year, our first performance was at a temple for a poojai (ritual). Sir had given us crystal clear instructions on the Do(s) and Don't(s) during the performance. Among these was one crucial rule: no one was allowed to take pictures/videos/recordings of the performance. Sampath sir, not the temple authorities, put this rule forth. What for? No clue. Ordinarily, every teacher would be thrilled to have his/her students on tape. Then again, Sampath sir was no ordinary teacher, so no questions were asked.

On the day of the announcement of the upcoming temple performance, I sat my father down and pleaded with him to not click pictures. If Sampath sir's ego was sky-high, my father's reached out into the great hollows in space. He detested Sampath sir for his rude behaviour towards his pupils. Still, because of my insistence, he empathetically controlled his objections against my teacher. I was aware of these facts, which was why I needed my father to 'behave'. But he argued that my teacher's conditions were silly. I was performing for the first time in a temple, so my father wanted to capture the moments. After arguing with him for days, I finally persuaded my father to drop the idea of taking photographs during the performance. All may have seemed well after that, yet I was hysterical. 

On the day of the temple poojai, my father assured me that he would refrain from even touching his phone. Nevertheless, he made a request to take pictures before I went on stage. I gave in and posed for some clicks under the backdrop of the temple Gopuram (the entrance tower). When the photo session was over, I noticed Sampath sir giving me that cold stare indicating his anger. I convinced myself not to worry. Technically no rules were broken since the pictures were taken before the performance began. 

Our performance started. The musicians played their instruments, Sampath sir sang the Jati(s) (vocalizing of the beats), and we danced. From the very beginning, my eyes searched for my father. I was still worried that he would break the rules. There were lots of other parents whose cameras flashed everywhere. To my relief, I spotted my father amidst the crowd, hands in his pockets and tapping his feet to the music. Pride was written all across his face. Then my eyes wandered off to where Sampath sir was seated on stage. My eyes met that cold stare of his again. My heart began to race. 

What now?! No rule was broken! Why is he angry? 

Wait. Oh no. 

Assuming I was making some horrible mistake with my step sequences or my posture, I decided to concentrate on my performance. When the dance came to an end, we all did our Namaskaram to God and to Sampath sir. Then I ran down towards my parents. They embraced me and told me how well I had danced. Even some members of the audience came up to the other girls and me to congratulate us. I was pleased with myself. Though I knew there wouldn’t be any appreciation from Sampath sir, I couldn't wait to go to class the next day and witness that slight hint of approval in his eyes. 

However, the next evening, the atmosphere in the class was anything from what I had imagined. All the girls, young and old, stood in straight rows and columns, their heads down and hands to their sides. Tensed, I scurried across the room to join the girls, but Sampath sir's booming voice called me out. I stopped in my tracks, steadied my breathing, and walked up to him. He was seated, as usual, legs crossed on the floor, with the thazha-kattai placed in front of him. Without even looking at me, he asked in a hissing, low voice if my father had clicked pictures during the performance the day before. Somewhere within me, I knew this was coming, so I answered 'no' in a calm voice. At that, he hit the kattai on the marble floor and screamed at me, calling me a liar. Taken aback, I answered with a stutter saying that my father only took some pictures of me before the dance but never during. This time, the kattai hit my feet. Not once. Not twice. Several times. I screamed in agony and begged him to stop but in vain. At that moment, I realized that maybe he mistook someone else for my father. I tried to reason with him. He only got more furious and began to hit me harder. I decided to stay silent and endure the pain. Eventually, he stopped, told me to bring my father the next day, and then shooed me to the back of the class. 

I don't remember anything else from that day other than going home in tears with red, swollen feet and telling my parents what had gone down with Sampath sir. Of course, my father was enraged! He stormed into the academy the next day, walked straight into Sampath sir's room and shut the door. To this day, I don't know what happened inside the room. But when my father came out, he told me that he had removed me from the academy. 

To be honest, my feelings were mixed. Though I was happy that my father had stood up for me, I was still upset that I could not convince Sampath sir that I had done nothing wrong. This was the first time I saw my father as my hero. But this was also the first time I witnessed the making of a coward. I felt weak. In hindsight, I know that it was ambitious of my 8-year-old self to want to defend myself in such a situation. But at that time, it was a moment of shame for me. To make amends, I took a vow that day. A vow I have never once broken since; a vow that I will be my own hero. 

The Musical Journey of The Beatles

The Quarrymen. Jonny and the Moon Dogs. The Silver Beetles. The Beatles. 

John Lennon, Paul McCartney, George Harrison and Ringo Starr, known as the Fab Four, were the members of this more than just successful English rock band of the 20th century. How did this magical amalgamation come into being? 

Well, it all started with the teenaged John Lennon and Paul McCartney discovering music together in July 1957. Then George Harrison joined them in 1958 followed by a vocalist called Stuart Sutcliffe and drummer Peter Best in 1959. The name The Beatles was conjured up by Lennon. It was a wordplay between the words ‘beat’ and ‘beetles’. In 1960 the Beatles worked in Germany where Ringo Starr joined them, but he did not become a permanent member of the band yet because Peter Best was still the main drummer. Then in November 1961, Brian Epstein became the official manager of the Beatles. This man did wonders to the image of the group. He gave the boys new haircuts, made them wear suits, ties and classic shoes. 

Up until then, the Beatles lived and worked in Liverpool, England. But in January 1962, they went to London and recorded fifteen songs at the Deccan Records. This became a similar routine wherein they regularly travelled to London and auditioned for different labels. Epstein was keen to get the newfangled band a record deal. But every major record label in the UK including the Deccan rejected them until the band passed an audition held by Parlophone’s George Martin at the Abbey Road Studios. This was only a partial pass because Martin did not like Peter Best and recommended someone else in his place. With that, Best was fired, Ringo Starr became a permanent member and The Beatles, as we now know them, officially came into being. 

They say ‘success is not easy, and it’s certainly not for the lazy’. The Beatles proved this right by literally working like dogs during their early days in 1960 as a band starved of fame and recognition in Hamburg, Germany. They played at a seedy, former strip club called Indra were they were only paid £2.50 per day. For this below-average pay, the band worked tirelessly in a gruelling schedule of 7-8 hours every night without a day off for the whole of three months that they stayed in Hamburg. To top this off, where they stayed was even worse. They lived behind the screen of a trashy cinema right next to a stinky old ladies toilet from where they used cold water from the urinals to wash and shave. When on stage in the club they had to play very loud and indulge in desperate on-stage behaviour (later to be known as their signature on-stage antics in the USA in particular) to keep the attention of the audience and to get them to buy more drinks. It was the same punishing routine (minus bad lodgings) when the band got transferred to another club, the Kaiserkeller. But after 600 hours of working under such hellish conditions in Hamburg, The Beatles finally returned to the UK, all thanks to George Harrison’s deportation due to being under-aged. Later, when Lennon was asked about his experience in Hamburg, he recalled that they genuinely put their heart and soul into their music when in Germany and the hardships they faced there helped build their confidence manifolds. 

Today, no living person who is familiar with The Beatles will think of them without the image of the Fab Four passing through their inner vision at least once. The band was unique mainly because of the drastic difference in the persona of its members. Four became the magical number and Lennon, McCartney, Harrison and Starr were the perfect quartet. Because of the varied musical tastes and inclinations of each of the four, the sound of the band was ever-evolving. 

Among the four, Paul McCartney, the lead vocalist and bassist, had the most diverse taste in music, which covered the entire musical spectrum from plain folk to acid rock and metal. That’s why we could see the man penning the words for the song ‘Blackbird’ as well as the eccentric ‘Helter Skelter’. We can attribute such inclinations of McCartney’s to his early musical upbringing by his father, who was a Jazz pianist and trumpeter. 

While McCartney was a perfectionist by nature, John Lennon was the exact opposite. He was known for composing parts of albums within a few hours paying little or no heed to the loose ends. Lennon’s style of music was highly influenced by Bob Dylan, so his songs were folkish and rhythmically guitar-powered and the lyrics quite socially conscious. His personality can be best portrayed in songs like ‘All You Need Is Love’ and ‘Revolution’. 

Then came George Harrison with his ‘Within You Without You’ and ‘While My Guitar Gently Weeps’. Harrison had gotten deeply passionate about Indian Spiritualism and meditation after The Beatles’ visit to Maharishi Mahesh Yogi’s ashram in India. Therefore, his taste in music majorly sat with classical and Indian compositions. Harrison penned both the songs mentioned above and their lyrics proved that he was as capable as Lennon as a lyricist. 

Richard Starkey, known more famously as Ringo Starr, as his latter name suggests was driven towards country music. Though The Beatles did not showcase country styles in their songs, Ringo had a distinctive drumming technique which was more stylistic than technical. While his general Western “Ringoism” (as his style of drumming later came to be known) reflected in songs like ‘A Hard Day’s Night’ and ‘Strawberry Fields Forever’, his country-inflected drumming is quite prominent in ‘Don’t Pass Me By’ and ‘Octopus’s Garden’. 

As we all know, George Martin was the renowned record producer for The Beatles. But what most of us fail to see is the amount of impact he had in the music the Fab Four created due to which he is to this date silently called the Fifth Beatle. Martin had a strong western classical music background having studied the piano and oboe at the Guildhall School of Music and Drama, London, England and used this knowledge to his best efforts in helping the band ‘find their sound’. He would listen to the initial acoustic guitar compositions of Lennon and McCartney’s songs and add missing elements to them, sometimes even playing some piano pieces (in early records). He also wrote out charts and conducted musicians. Something to be keenly noted, not only did he arrange music for some top charted Beatles songs like Penny Lane (a technique called Modulation was used here), A Hard Day’s Night and Help!, he also scored Baroque orchestrations in Yesterday, Eleanor Rigby and In My Life. 

An interesting thing about The Beatles is that they cannot be placed under one type of band; not then, not even now (with so many genres of music being discovered endlessly). But tracing the evolution of the music is less complicated than pinning them to a particular genre. In the beginning, the band mostly concentrated on playing songs that were either rock-n-roll or R&B-based pop. Rock And Roll Music and I Want To Hold Your Hand are apparent examples of the above descriptions, respectively. But soon, the band began to function on multi-genres and cross-styles, which included mixtures of rock-n-roll, blues, soul, country and simplified versions of jazz. Indian and other Oriental cultural music also began to get added to this bizarre yet exquisite sounding mixture from 1965 onwards. The “Beatlemania” heightened when the band further sophisticated their mixed style with psychedelic experiments and multiple classical-sounding creations. To be on par with their prodigious creations, the members’ talents and skills naturally grew, and they went from mere guitarists and drummers to multi-instrumentalists. For instance, Harrison began to infuse pieces played on exotic instruments like the Indian sitar, ukulele, darbouka and tabla into many of the songs so intricately that only a sharp ear would be able to tell what instrument was being played where; the best example for this is Within You Without You which is packed with the sweet resonance of so many Indian classical instruments that the listeners eventually stop paying attention to detail and merely enter a musical trance. 

The Beatles are said to be the proud producers of certain new types of genres that had never before existed. To list down a few: Acid Rock – Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds, Proto-Metal – Helter Skelter, Jangle Pop – A Hard Day’s Night, Folk-Rock – I’ll Be Back, Power Pop – She Loves You, Art Rock – Tomorrow Never Knows, Stoner Music – Yellow Submarine, Doom – I Want You (She’s So Heavy), Prog – Eleanor Rigby. Though it can be agreed that they neither intended to create such genres nor did they log songs under them (this was mainly done by music producers while analysing The Beatles music in the later years), it is still a fact that these over-the-top songs led to the evolution in their music throughout the years. Since this evolution of theirs had a heightened level of magnitude and complexity, it was simply impossible to visualize their progress until very recently when one Mr Sambhav Jain took to the internet to showcase a simple exhibit he had created using visual technology and statistical database of all the records on The Beatles based on the different genres, the time period, the album name and several other filters. (The link to his webpage is highlighted in my bibliography) 

Among at least the 132 songs The Beatles produced, some of the most noteworthy were the following. I Want To Hold Your Hand became the number one hit in the USA when the band played it as their debut song in the Ed Sullivan Show in 1964. A Day In The Life came to be known in the late 80s as the ‘masterwork of the band’ with its newspaper themed lyrics and its “orchestral orgasm” as Martin called it. The song has been at the top of the list ever since. While My Guitar Gently Weeps would be the song that gave Harrison the same level of importance as a lyricist as Lennon and McCartney always received. Eric Clapton’s solo in the work added even more credibility to the song’s already heart-touching feel and it went on to become one of the greatest guitar songs ever made. I fell in love with the song as soon as the introductory guitar track began to play. The background track of the bass guitar also caught my attention because of its rebellious vibes. Another song that I liked a lot was Blackbird, which has a lullaby feel to it. Again my love for this song had to do with the simplicity of the lyrics and the song itself not to mention the complex classical guitar work. But my all-time favourite by The Beatles would be the first-ever song I heard of theirs, Eleanor Rigby. The mesmerizing violin and cello music in the background along with the layered chorus immediately caught my fancy. Still, the poetic and almost satirical lyrics themed on loneliness and death were the starring elements in the song that made it to the top of my list. Some of my other favourites are Strawberry Fields Forever (mainly for Starr’s drum sequence during the chorus), Let It Be, Love Me Do (the second song I listened to) and the evergreen Yesterday. 

From musicians, The Beatles soon turned into celebrities acting in their own movies eventually becoming cultural icons. This shift further intensified after the 60s when the band began to compose serious music heavily rigged with feelings of protest and social unrest that was caused by events like the Vietnam conflict and JFK’s death. The members stopped wearing suits and began to inspire the American dream of Individualism in their stage personalities; this added more value to the band’s name since the band stayed on track with its audience and the then culture. 

But this very Individualism that made The Beatles so unique ultimately led to the end of the band as well. Lennon had always wanted the leadership position in the band since he was the founder. But he also dreamed of a life outside The Beatles. McCartney, on the other hand, centred his life on the band. Moreover, while Lennon went through a bitter and depressing (on his part) domestic life, McCartney enjoyed the publicity brought on by the band’s popularity and could be seen attending all social events. This again forked the journey of two of the most successful songwriting duos in the field at that time. Harrison’s falling out with the band timed in during their visit to Rishikesh, India where his peers began to dislike the ways of the ashram they were living in, contrasting Harrison’s passion for spirituality and meditation. Ringo also began to write his songs inspired by the others which is when the members each began to go their separate ways. They saw each other as supporting musicians and disrespected each other’s art constantly out of spite. Though there is more to this complex story, we could conclude that these were the key reasons why The Beatles finally split up and ceased being a band. 

The split had its worst effects on John Lennon and its best on Paul McCartney. Lennon fell in love with artist Yoko Ono and released an album that was quite well received. The couple were known for their activism in opposing the Vietnam War but after the birth of their son Sean Lennon, Lennon became family-oriented and stopped focusing on music. Then a lunatic fan assassinated him in 1980. In contrast, McCartney continued to create music and became a very successful composer bagging the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Inductee twice and the GRAMMY-award 21 times! He was also knighted in 1997 for his contribution to music, which to this day he continuous to do. As for George Harrison, he released a much-acclaimed triple album under the title All Things Must Pass. He co-founded the platinum-selling group Traveling Wilburys and was also a two-time Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Inductee. Harrison passed away in 2001. Finally, Ringo Starr also released three successful solo albums after the breakup. His album titled Ringo took the second position in the Billboard 200 charts and has permanently claimed a platinum status. He produced the famous Born to Boogie and has also acted in several movies. His recent photography endeavour led him to compile a book titled Photography, which contains 250 unseen photos of his life and that of the former band. 

Many from today’s generation assume that the great legacy of The Beatles will be lost within the next few centuries. This fear is not unrealistic because our generation is bogged down with a gazillion albums and the infinite number of songs and artists surfacing every day. In this Age of Electronic Music, it is truly hard to find someone who appreciates music from former centuries since there are too many options and very little incentive to pay attention to “old music” when so much of “new music” is on-trend. But youngsters must familiarize themselves with musicians like The Beatles if they ever wished to be part of an era that produced revolutionary music and musicians. So as long as kids of this era listen to and appreciate the music woven by these legends, be it at their own disposal (like me) or through their parent’s influence (like many of my peers), their work and the permanent mark they left in the world of western music would forever live on.