It's Either This, Or I Write About Baseball and/or Jenny Lewis. You Pick.

The Beatles were the first band I clearly remember listening to. I'm not sure if this is because they were a favorite of my parents or just because theirs was one of the last albums my parents bought when they got married. Regardless, it's been a long time I've been familiar with their music.

In fact, my first misunderstood lyrics were to "Pay the Back Rider". I thought the story was of a guy who wanted to give piggy-back rides for a living instead of budding novelist.

I may have written about this in an earlier post. A lot of recycling of stories goes on if you hang around me long enough.

Anyway, my third-grade teacher allowed each student to bring in his/her favorite music to be played on the last day of school. If little educating had been conducted throughout the year, none was going to start the day before summer recess.

I couldn't recall that day's playlist, but I'm sure there was a lot of J. Geils Band, Joan Jett, and Rick Springfield.

I brought The Beatles.

My second year in college coincided with the 30th anniversary of the British Invasion. My professor at the time was in his 30's, had studied at Oxford, and was quite fond of The Fab Four as well; each student was assigned to read Shout! by Philip Norman and to write a five-page paper about the band and their metamorphosis from teen pop stars to Establishment dissidents. It was one of the few guaranteed A's I had in my academic career.

The other day, Melissa and I were talking about The Beatles and whether more credit for their collective success can be traced to either Lennon or McCartney.

As is par, we came to different conclusions. She opined that McCartney is the better songwriter, the better voice, and because of those qualities, more credit should be given to him.

While I can generally agree with her premises, I come to a different conclusion.

I declared (maybe a bit too definitively; what can I say, I like debate) that without the creativity and direction of Lennon, McCartney would be Britain's finest skiffle singer ever, The Quarry Men might still to be a good band, and McCartney would still be hanging out with Pete Best.

In the same breath, I can also acknowledge that whatever responsibility Lennon is afforded for their uprising, he bears the same for their demise. I'm not even talking about her - I'm talking about Maharishi.

Were I asked, their decline began around the same time somebody convinced them the sitar should be added with their other sounds. Put me down for an early Beatle's fan.

I wish I could remember who said it because it's such a great line, but years ago, somebody wrote that in the early 60's, the Beatles just wanted to hold our hand; by the end of the decade, they wanted to do it in the road. It seems like only George Will or David Halberstam could write something that clever. Anyway, the point was that their later music was radically different from their first offerings.

I also disagree with the idea that after JFK's assassination, America's youth were looking for somebody to provide new answers. I believe the term is "hooey". They just made good music and were different in every way. JFK or LBJ, they were going to be popular.

I look forward to the day that my kids "discover" this fine group and I can tell them that they started playing music before their grandparents were teenagers.