People usually are conforming their interests to their society. Most people are not dreaming of being baroque composers today, but perhaps audio engineers, or whatever. The Beatles are a product of their time. They saw what was being encouraged, and it influenced them. A Beatles does not exist today because our society does not encourage it.
Frankly, there exist many contemporary painters who I consider clearly superior to Van Gogh, and their society thought so as well. For whatever reason, our society doesn't value them as much as him. Our views have reversed.
I do not know if this makes sense at all. I'm sure that I'll see this tomorrow and wonder what I was thinking.
It makes great sense, thank you. It's a cliche'd point in most situations, that people are products of their time, but in this case it explains and joins two mechanisms - the Beatles not only benefitted from 'ideal conditions', but were possibly driven (in part) by them.
Also, most importantly, don't expect popular acclaim - the Beatles are an extreme exception - and don't measure your 'success' that way. Especially in art, have faith in your vision and accept that the public may not grasp it now, soon, or even in your lifetime. Even many great artists recieved little acclaim (or worse) in their lifetimes.
> They did not wait for ideal conditions.
In fairness, they didn't need to wait because ideal conditions were there - in culture (esp. at time that valued innovation and creativity), in music (ditto), in recording technology, in television, in mass media generally. It's a bit harder to be the Beatles today. (Who is doing it?)