Talk:Helter Skelter (song)

I got blisters on my fingers

I always thought it was John Lennon screaming "I got blisters on my fingers" at the end, not Ringo. Anyone know for sure? Postdlf 20:27 4 Apr 2004

I remember reading that no one knows for sure, but that it was most likely Ringo (since he had been playing drums for 27 minutes or however long the original take was) Adam Bishop 00:29, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I'd say Ringo. Listen to McCartney talking about it here. He mentions Ringo but I can't claim to hear what he sais exactly. Metallion 00:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't it more properly be recorded as "on me fingers"? --BlackTerror 00:23, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

---

"McCartney got the idea for the song after reading a newspaper review of the latest single by The Who." OK...WHICH single by The Who??? Lee M 23:57, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The article suggest the single was "I Can See for Miles". This single seems unlikely as "I Can See for Miles" is one The Who's softer songs. A more likely single would be My Generation. This was a much 'louder' song which had highly distorted guitar segments and screaming vocals. Could someone clarify this?

There was no particular single. In the article Pete Townsend mentioned "a track", but not even 1989 Paul McCartney knew which one - if there is one. He got the inspiration from reading the article and not from reading a review. Listen to McCartney talking about it here Metallion 00:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Fade In-Out

"Fade In-Out" somewhat resembles "Helter Skelter" and has the line "Get on the helter skelter" among its lyrics.

Although true that "Fade In-Out" contains a reference to Helter Skelter in the lyrics, the "somewhat resembles" is perhaps a bit of a stretch. Would anyone mind if I removed this line?

Genre

On the Paul McCartney page, the song is referred to as Heavy Metal. On this page, it is Hard Rock. I do not want to start a religious war, but I think both labels are misleading. Early Noise Rock should be most fitting. It is in the repertoire of many bands in that genre as well.

Strange, the article on Noise Rock (a term that I confess I've never heard before) describes the genre as an '80s offshoot of punk. Classing "Helter Skelter" in that category seems rather anachronistic. We can debate whether the song actually is heavy metal, but unquestionably it played an important role in the development of heavy metal, which emerged as a distinct genre only a few years after the song's release. It did not play any direct role in the development of "noise rock," a genre that emerged at least fifteen years later and had punk as its main antecedent. marbeh raglaim 20:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

unquestionably? wtf helter skelter has nothing to do with metal, it's just noise

Says which respected critic? --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 16:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I also feel this song is neither Hard Rock or Heavy Metal. However it isn't Noise Rock either... - Prede (talk) 22:31, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I think Hard rock is right, but not heavy metal. Maybe we should remove that. ☺ Spiby ☻ 12:38, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Changing to Hard Rock as I tend to agree to this rather than heavy metal, and nobody have said anything here for the past 11 months. Bjelleklang - talk 14:04, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

hard rock is right i think, heavy metal wasn't born some years after this, it was born roughly some months later with sabbath (beatles fans, at least ozzy is a huge fan) bringing out their first album, so yeah ithink this is heavily influential with the origins of metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.196.255.115 (talk) 14:28, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Manson Interpretation

Where the article goes into some detail about the english ride, it fails to mention the common definition of the phrase "helter skelter" which is "disarray, confusion, etc." Surely that's why the english ride was named as it was. So, in America in lieu of the english novelty, it seems natural that an American might infer a state of anarchy in the song. Now that this excuses Manson's actions or interpretation.

Broken Link

The first external link - the one that goes to "Instrumentation and lyrics for 'Helter Skelter' "(http://www.thebeatlesongs.com/helter_skelter.htm) is broken. Just thought I'd mention it... Zaita 03:42, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The White Album.jpg

Image:The White Album.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 03:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

"Paul's completely..."

The quote by John Lennon beginning with "Paul's completely ..." found twice in the article (though a different piece of the quote used each time), is used differently in its two instances. The first time, that article states that Lennon said it reflecting his view of the song. The second time, it says that he said it sarcastically. Anyone know which is right? Otherwise there will be two conflicting ideas in the article. Glassbreaker5791 (talk) 01:00, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

How do you think those quotes conflict?

Regardless, I think sarcastically should be removed; I just reviewed the interview in question and I don't see any remarks to indicate that Lennon was being sarcastic. "completely" is in italics in the book, but that only means that he emphasized the word. In any case, for reasons known only to Lennon, in 1980 when the interview was conducted he wanted to disassociate himself with the song. John Cardinal (talk) 02:46, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Alright the "sarcastically" has been removed. That was the only thing that I found made the information conflict, one being sarcastic, the other not. Glassbreaker5791 (talk) 00:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

So, as Lennon himself would say, are we "as happy as Larry" about it now? <g> John Cardinal (talk) 02:34, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Cleaned up crap from "Trivia" section

People, people, people. "Cultural relevance" should be significant, not "somebody mentioned the song once on, like, Family Guy and here is a detailed summary of that episode! Family Guy roolz!!!!1!" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.129.135.114 (talk) 17:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Genre revisited

At present we have Hard rock and Heavy metal. An editor keeps changing the latter to Proto-metal, which is somewhat pointless since this redirects to Heavy metal. In the absence of a reliable source for what "proto-metal" is, I suggest we retain the genres as those that readers will understand. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 22:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The recording is something quite its own. Classifying it as hard rock, heavy metal, or, frankly, anything is presumptuous.71.242.159.196 (talk) 06:30, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps heavy metal is overdoing it? ☺ Spiby ☻ 18:16, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I think heavy metal is over doing it. The song isn't really a heavy metal song so I would think proto-metal fits good because it was an important hard rock song of the late 1960's in the development of heavy metal. 68.102.235.239 (talk) 04:02, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Brian Epstein, speaking to reporters three months before the Beatles’ New York arrival of February 1964 (as quoted on page 98 of the 1968 paperback edition of Julius Fast’s The Beatles — The Real Story, Berkley Publishing, New York):

Their beat is something like rock and roll, but different.

There you have it, straight from Epstein himself: The Beatles aren’t even a rock-and-roll band. This song should not be categorized.71.242.135.107 (talk) 06:34, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• Epstein sold washing machines before managing The Beatles so you'd hardly expect him to be reliable as a music critic. The question is "how have reliable sources described this song?", and for that we use sources like Rolling Stone and Allmusic. Not vendors of electrical appliances. --Rodhullandemu 11:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

IMO, a song should not be described, particularly in an infobox, as a genre that did not exist at the time it was created; that would seem to take "heavy metal" and maybe even "hard rock" out of contention. "Proto-metal", which implies a backward-looking point of reference, is right out. Detailed genre definitions, especially on a song-by-song basis for a band with a wide stylistic range, are pretty much a fool's errand for a well-referenced encyclopedia anyway, because sub-genre definitions are so poorly defined, overlapping, and subject to personal history and interpretation. I'd say it's a rock music song, and leave it at that. Jgm (talk) 12:46, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Gee, Rodhullandemu — I seem to have touched a nerve.71.242.135.107 (talk) 19:25, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Didn't mean to sound like that. It's just that we do need reliable sources. However Allmusic describe it here as "hard rock", so I don't mind going with that. Certainly heavy metal hadn't been invented at the time, although it was just around the corner. "Proto-metal" here redirects to hard rock, so that doesn't help. Propose we call it "hard rock", source it, and stick to it. I watchlist most of The Beatles stuff and you wouldn't believe the nonsense some people think are appropriate genres for songs. --Rodhullandemu 19:37, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I can believe that strange classifications have been offered for songs. Although I won’t offer a vote re this song in particular, I’ll note that the discussions here and earlier on this talk page show, at least, that Wikipedia editors are taking seriously the problem the recording poses. I suppose you’re right that the Allmusic passage you’ve linked refers to the song as hard rock — somewhat indirectly. On the other hand, Jgm’s argument, above, for “rock” is good, even if it doesn’t involve footnotable sources.71.242.135.107 (talk) 22:10, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Helpsloose came up with a citation (put in his comments only) wherein a critic (?) writing some 40 years later, describes the White Album as including "heavy metal" and makes the (not unreasonable) leap that he meant this song in particular. Again, my contention is that since heavy metal did not exist as a genre at the time this song was released, it cannot retroactively be placed in that category. This is a pretty weak reference, both in terms of direct verifiablity (was that really what he meant?) and the veracity/qualifications of the writer, but moreover this may be a policy issue that needs to be discussed on a project page somewhere, more than an issue of how good a particular source or citation might be. Jgm (talk) 17:52, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Heavy metal did already exist, Deep Purple is a good example: [1]. Helpsloose 18:00, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

BBC's Daryl Easlea says heavy metal is one of the genres on this album [2], what other song could it be? Helpsloose 17:47, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Of course Deep Purple became a heavy metal band (the AMG genre tag is for their overall existence), but they weren't playing "heavy metal" in 1968, both because it didn't exist then and because that wasn't their early sound. Jgm (talk) 18:21, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

since what we now know as hard rock started with link wrays rumble in 58, he got even more harder with jack the ripper in 61, then louie louie by the kingsmen what made ray davies of the kinks write you really got me and all day and all of the night and so hard rock was born. so i go for hard rock on helter skelter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.196.255.115 (talk) 14:25, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I think that this song should be hard rock/heavy metal because saying it's heavy metal is overdoing it, but saying that it is hard rock is underdoing it a bit, because that puts it with songs like Hey Bulldog and Polythene Pam. It is nothing like those. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FootyStavros (talk • contribs) 21:28, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

In-A-Gadda-da-Vida is listed as a heavy metal song here on wikpedia, that was in 1968 so can't Helter skelter at least be Proto-Metal? It's about as hard as In-a-gadda-da-vida. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FootyStavros (talk • contribs) 18:08, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

• I believe that the song genre should be rock and proto-metal with a link like this one here: Proto-metal. This song is in the article about heavy metal music, put as one of the major influences, and by form it really would be a heavy metal song if it had been recorded in the period when heavy metal existed. The same example can be found with The Stooges, who are a proto-punk band, performing music way ahead of their time, among many other proto-future music genre bands. This song is also ahead of its time, and deserves this genre label as a recognition of its importance. I also do not mind leaving hard rock, as all early heavy metal bands have hard rock put in the genre sections of their infoboxes. Milosppf (talk) 12:22, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

God most of you are stupid and have no clue what you guys are talking about hahahahaha wiki is a joke. Hard rock and Heavy Metal are practically the same. Sometimes its even used interchangeably. Rock N' Roll is most commonly used to refer of ALL of rock and its sub-genres including Metal. Helter Skelter is an early Hevy metal song, you could call it proto heavy metal. Which is what I'm editing it to. And stop deleting my comment on the talk page.

Covers

Should this version sang by former Democratic and Libertarian party presidential hopeful and mixed by rx2008, be put under the covers section? 76.111.88.167 (talk) 04:52, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Why not? In its unexpected way, it shows more of a feel for the song than, say, U2's version.JohnBonaccorsi (talk) 07:30, 9 November 2008 (UTC)