In presenting the history of early British rock, Rock: Music, Culture and Business focuses almost
exclusively on the Beatles’ career, particularly their first four years in the public eye (1962-1966). Critique
this approach to teaching the “British Invasion,” discussing what’s gained and lost by using the Beatles’
music and popularity to explain why British rock acts were so commercially and artistically important in
the 1960s. (Put another way: could you write a textbook chapter on the British Invasion without focusing
on the Beatles? What would that chapter cover instead?)
Pro tip: At first glance, this seems like the easier question of the two. Don’t fall into the trap of simply
listing other bands or songs without explaining why they would be a good alternative to the Beatles. Make
sure your answer is a thoughtful meditation on what the term “British Invasion” signifies (e.g. genre, style,
cohort of musicians, marketing label), and what the lasting impact of this moment in rock history has been.
sample Solution
