Do we have to assault John Lennon to laud Paul McCartney?
A friend of mine just sent me an article from the August 27 issue of the National Review about Paul McCartney entitled "The Bard of Optimism," by Kyle Smith. The article falls into one of the sadder conflicts of modern music history, the seemingly inevitable John or Paul argument.…
Article comments
76 - Carolyn
First I want to let everyone know that I have been a huge highly impressed Beatles fan especially a big impressed John *and* Paul fan since I was 9,I got my first Beatles book for my 11th birthday and I had every Beatles album by age 13. I was born in 1965 during the middle of their recording career too.
I have always loved and admired *both* Paul and John equally and it really p*sses me off when either of them are underrated,in comparing one to the other! It's really ridiculous nonsense because as George Martin and millions of other people,many other well known music artists,like Elton John,Brian Wilson,Ozzy Osbourne,Bily Joel,Phil Collins,classical composer and conducter Leonard Bernstein have said and recognized,John Lennon *and* Paul McCartney were incredibly talented song composers and singers etc!
One thing that really bothers me is when people minimize Paul McCartney by saying his lyrics are often simple and that John's were much deeper and better. What many people don't understand is that Paul's father Jim McCartney was a naturally musically talented guy,who taught himself to play the piano as a very young guy,and became an accomplished jazz pianist and leader of his own jazz band called,Jim Mac's Band that were popular in the 1930's in clubs,but his father wasn't a poet,and he even wrote some of his own instrumental music,and Paul recorded one of his father's old jazz instrumentals called Walking in The Park With Eloise that was included on the 1976 Wings At The Speed Of Sound album.
So Paul inherited his father's natural musical talent to the genuis extreme! As someone already pointed out it was Paul who wrote most of the music in A Day in The Life,and he co-conducted The British Philharmonic orchestra at age 24 with George Martin. And it was Paul's often experimenting with tape loops that he would often come into the studio with bags of,that made the seagull sounds on John's Tomorrow Never Knows.
THere is an excellent web site called,The Evolution of Rock Bass Playing McCartney Style by Dennis Alstrand,and in it Stanley Clarke,Will Lee,Billy Sheehan,Sting,George Martin and John Lennon are all quoted saying what a great,melodic and influential bass player Paul always was! And the 1992 Rolling Stone Album Guide also calls Paul a remarkable bass player,and rightfully calls both John and Paul the 2 greatest song writers in the history of rock.
The All Music Guide says this too,and also says as singers both John and Paul were among the best and most expressive in rock. They also say that an inaccurate stereotype is that John wrote the rockers and Paul wrote more love ballads,but they said that the truth is they both were equally capable of writing love ballads and all out ballsy rock.Paul wrote some of their great rockers including in the early days,She's A Woman from late 1964 is a great blues type rocker,and I'm Down from early 1965 is a screaming hard rocker especially for 1965! And as most people here already know,he wrote what many have called the first true heavy metal song,Helter Skelter on the 1968 Beatles White album. Of course many people have pointed out that John's song I Want You She's So Heavy on Abbey Road was also one of the first true heavy metal songs.
Eric Clapton says in an online interview that John was a pretty good guitar player and he would have known because he played live in concert with John as a member of his 1969 Platic Ono Band.
Walls and Bridges is one of my favorite John solo albums,and Plastic Ono Band is really brilliant,and the Imagine album is also very good too. John's songs on Double Fantasy were very good,and it was nice to hear him happy and more emotionally together finally after 40 years of being so tormented and troubled from his traumatic childhood and it was stupid for any critics to not appreciate this and criticize his songs for being too "soft" etc. They liked it better when John was miserable!
Paul McCartney's first 5 years of his solo/Wings career was his his greatest music post Beatles! I really like his first solo album McCartney on which he played every instrument and played so many so well it sounds like a whole band playing,Ram has some great songs on it too like,Too Many People,Uncle Albert,and Back Seat of My Car,I love Red Rose Speeday,Band On The Run is a very good album,and Venus and Mars is so great,I think thats the last great album he made. He did some good stuff after this but for some reason he just never had the same great sound again.
77 - Paul Lennon
You do like to stir it up...don't you?
78 - Paul Lennon
That last comment was directed at Brad, not Carolyn.
79 - Carolyn
Paul,
Thank you I thought and hoped you meant Brad! I really didn't meant for my post to on here more than once but the site wasn't working and it kept saying my name is required,but I had already typed my name in,so I had to keep clicking on the publish button!
80 - JC Mosquito
Ummm.... Richards?
81 - Carolyn
bitch is a woman hating name along with slut and whore which women are often called in pornography!
82 - Carolyn
Who cares about Keith Richards or Mick Jagger I certainly don't! Even though they were both friends with and big fans of The Beatles!
83 - Carolyn
I also want to say this is like arguing who is better Beethoven or Mozart!
84 - JC Mosquito
Ummmm... Beethoven. If he was born in the modern world, he would never have let his songs be used on Stars on 45 Play the Classics.
85 - Lissa Parker
LOL! Brad, talk about opening Pandora's box. You have my sympathies, dude. As Ringo could say: Peace and Love, everybody. / <-- (peace sign) Peace and Love, Peace and Love, Peace and Love.
86 - Carolyn
Lissa,
Why does Brad deserve sympathy he's the one that started this ridiculous argument on here!
87 - Carolyn
Paul Lennon,
John and Yoko were totally equal partners and he said he and Yoko thought alike,and they both had the same dreams when they were alone and Yoko to her credit changed John for the better from a typical sexist woman hater to a feminist and he said himself it freed him to let go of the macho facade he had most of his life. And alowed him to be in touch with all of his "human" qualities our society defines and labels "masculine" and made him a whole full person instead of half of one which is what he realized feminism does for men!
88 - JC Mosquito
Hmm... do you know the story about Lennon with a tampon on his head?
89 - Carolyn
JC Mosquito,
Yes I do and John was drunk and admitted he acted like a total as*h*le! But he really grew up during the 5 years he was a stay at home father to Sean.
90 - John McCartney
Carolyn:
Don't let the name John McCartney fool you, it's me, Paul Lennon. I use the names in this way (interchangeably) to point out the actual duality of the Lennon/McCartney mystique (I hope everyone got that..stanz Man?). As someone has already stated, they truly are 2 sides of the same coin.
In response to your comment, I would never presume to debate the benefits or detriments of the John & Yoko relationship, in terms of the love they may (or may not?) have had for each other. I know all too well what it's like to be totally possessed by a woman.
Having said that, your average casual observer can pretty much tell when they've heard a noise that makes their skin crawl, or their ears bleed. My comments were based solely on Yoko's merits as a musical collaborator. In this regard, she leaves a lot to be desired. Equal partners? You're kidding, right?
If Lennon's solo music suffered as much as many have said, I would argue Yoko's influence played a major role in that. One of Lennon's major attributes, when he was in the Beatles (whether it is politically correct, or not) was his macho, masculine, kick ass attitude. His pussification (pardon my French) by Yoko, was most certainly detrimental to his music as, some would argue, he lost the edge that made him who he truly is/was.
Lennon said a lot of things in defense of Yoko. He would often comment on how his life was better because of her. In reality, he had to say these things. He had to provide some sort of justifaction for choosing a mate/collaborator that was so far beneath him. I mean, come on...Yoko Ono? How could she hope to hold a candle to the greatness that was John Lennon, or the Beatles. Give me a break!!
91 - John McCartney
Christ...I just read what I posted. The word is "justification" not "justifaction". Why didn't I catch this the first time around? The comments section does have a built-in spell checker. I must've not been paying attention!!
92 - Carolyn
Paul Lennon,/John McCartney,
You just said typical sexist woman hating crap! Even your coice of words,pussification! John was a much happier person,after Yoko's influence and he wasn't hurting inside as much as before,and as a result wasn't hurting other people like before! Yoko is a very intelectually inteligent woman I got news for you! And John made some of his greatest albums with Yoko's influence and she co-produced his brilliant Plastic Ono Band Album and Imagine albums,and he always said she inspired the beautiful song Imagine!
And of course they deeply loved each other everyone who saw them and knew them knew this!
93 - Carolyn
Also if it wasn't for Yoko John never would have gone into scream therapy and he really should have gone when he was a child and especially after his beloved mother Julia was hit and killed by the off duty cop who was drunk when John was just 17! I once read comments from a woman radio DJ who said after she was asked how she felt about Yoko,that Yoko turned John from a sexist liverpool guy into a feminist and she said anyone who did that is OK with her!
I also want to add that Paul McCartney is a very intelligent guy,and he even won a special prize for writing an essay when he was just 11 years old,and an art prize when he was just 17. And he was into Avant-garde *before* John,he was making experimental movies and music and friends with art dealer Robert Frazer,when John said he still thiught Avant- garde was french for bullshit!
94 - JC Mosquito
Y'know, eveybody, neither Lennon nor McCartney needs any of us to defend their great art they made, or even to excuse their artistic failures when their grasp overextended their reach. But both of themI would think when all is said and done (and Paul himself has passed away at some unforseeable point in the future), that they were both human beings, with their good points and their bad ones. But I believe neither of them wished to be set up as a god amongst mere humans (and I don't mean JL's belief one time on acid when he thought he was Jesus), so let's all admit - both of them did some things that many regualr folk do, but most people don't care about unless it's a celebrity. And both wrote some great songs, but by definiton, if there were great ones, there were others that were not. And possibly, had John lived he would have done much like Paul and kept trying to keep his hand in the game, only to succeed when the game meant nothing to him anymore.
What it comes down to is this: maybe I'm amazed that there's more instant karma hangin' around than any of us ever thought. Or whatever.
95 - Carolyn
JC Mosquito,
John And Paul wrote more great songs than not! And they wrote enough great ones in just a 7 year recording career,plus solo, two life times worth in such a short period of time!
96 - John McCartney
Carolyn:
Let me make something perfectly clear...I ABSOLUTELY LOVE WOMEN!!!! I wasn't trying to be sexist, chauvinistic, women hating, or whatever. As I said before, my comments were aimed at Yoko's musical abilities, or lack thereof.
Please don't take this the wrong way, but some people (both MALE & female) need to know their place. Yoko appears to be totally lost on this concept. John Lennon met a woman and wanted her in his life. Fine. God bless him. This is the natural way of things. But just because you're sleeping with a musical genius doesn't make you one. Yoko Ono, who is sadly lacking in musical talent, somehow thought (probably still thinks) she could stand as a musical equal to not only John Lennon, but the Beatles as a whole. Ridiculous!!! Utterly ridiculous!!
Again, don't get me wrong here. I'm not hating on women. I have no problem with any woman standing as an equal to any man, as long as that woman IS AN EQUAL. I'm sorry...I don't care how intelligent Yoko is/was, she had no business offering up suggestions as to how THE BEATLES should be recording music (which, if you know your Beatles history, she would often do). John's first wife, Cynthia, stayed out of this aspect of her husband's life, as she had enough intelligence to realize she had no business there.
With regard to Yoko's contribution/influence on two of John's greatest solo albums; please keep in mind these albums were made during a time (1970-1971) when the residual influence of The Beatles (specifically Paul) was still fresh in John's mind and soul. Just because he gave her a co-producer credit doesn't necessarily mean she merited it.
97 - JC Mosquito
True 'nuff, C, but they were still just people all the same - give them their due credit - but accept their limitatioins, too.
98 - Diane Selwyn
"I have no problem with any woman standing as an equal to any man, as long as that woman IS AN EQUAL."
Err...then that means you have a problem with women. Most definitely. (who gets to determine if the woman is lucky enough to be equal to you? you?)
One reason it always irritates me to see people attacking Yoko (or Linda) is that they seem to use it as an excuse to express their underlying resentment and/or hatred of women. Under the guise of oh no, I like women really, but this little bitch...!
It's rather like the John/Paul argument isn't it? I know people who think the Beatles are lousy and that Yoko's stuff was cool. What's that prove? Just that people have different opinions.
John put out 2 solid classics after he got together w/Yoko, Plastic Ono Band and Imagine. I also think D Fantasy is good all the way thru, if not a classic. I'm not going to go thru all the singles, but there are other songs on his other albums I think are good. And I thought he did some great stuff w/Yoko, I do happen to like her stuff, esp the Plastic Ono Band album of her own, Fly, Approx. Infinite Universe, from the '70s. My favorite tracks on Some Time in NYC are hers too; We're All Water, and that killer live version of Don't Worry Kyoko (John on guitar).
I liked Paul better as a child (you have to have a "favorite," don't you?), but switched to John as a teen as he gave better interviews! I don't think he put out an album as good as POB or Imagine in the '70s, but Band on the Run is obviously a classic, (for me), and I quite like Ram as well. Frankly, I think I'd even take Some Time in NYC over Wild Life or R Rose Speedway if I had to listen to one of them.
Paul's problem is he's so desperately insecure, as could be seen in Many Years From Now; all me me me, I did this I did this I did this! Someone earlier said you can't compete with a martyr. He should take that lesson to heart and let it be! It some interviews it seems he compares himself w/John as much as others do! He needs to relax and just enjoy the fact that he's already accomplished more in one lifetime than most could do in 20. The recent appearances in small places were a great idea.
99 - zingzing
john mccartney--
you're probably not a woman hater, but you sure haven't listened to much of yoko's work if you think she lacks talent.
go listen to her plastic ono band, fly, "walking on thin ice," and her half of double fantasy. (here's a clue for you: her half is much better than john's.)
yoko pre-figured a lot of sounds that would eventually find their way into western rock music. of course, you've not listened to it, so you wouldn't know. yeah, she shrieked sometimes. whatever. shrieking's cool.
maybe you don't like abrasive music or something. fine. but don't say she lacked musical talent. she didn't play an instrument, but she had musical creativity oozing out of her.
100 - JC Mosquito
zing -
Interesting thought you tucked in there at the end regarding musical creativity as opposed to muscial talent. It's a hard concept for some people to grasp but I think I'd agree with you. Being a musician is kind of like being a micromanager - able to do all those little things that make you technically adept - a musician, for lack of a better word. This doesn't necessarily mean you have a musical vision, although I would say most musicians do have this talent to some degree, but not all necessarily.
Or you could be the kind of person who can see the big picture - be a macro manager as it were, and be unable to play an instrument well enough to want to record yourself playing it, but you could be a good arranger or producer.
This is where many of the "my rock star is smarter than your rock star" arguments always seem to spring from - usually, the two artists are working two different sides of the street.
Sk.
101 - Carolyn
Diane,
Try a listen to the 1975 Venus and Mars Paul and Wings album,it's really great.the whole album! It's better than ohn's Mind Games! And I love Red Rose Speedway,I find many people on message boars rediscovering or re-evaulating it as a very good album from Paul. As I said his greatest sound post Beatles was from 1970-1975,with Venus and Mars being the last album he truly sounded that great! And anyone who would say The Beatles are lousy is an ignoramous and thanfully in the minority and is deaf and dumb!
And actually as John always said Yoko was one of the first punk rockers and groups like the B52's have said Yoko was a big influence! I don't Yoko's songs are better than John's on Double Fantasy though. And it's not that Paul is so insecure or that he doesn't have any good reason to be a little p*ssed off that he *has* been unfairly underrated after John died,and people are biased towards John often and as I and others already said on here John often gets credit for doing things in songs that Paul actually wrote and did,so you really can't blame Paul for trying to set the record straight!
And I have an excellent hour long interview with Paul from 1986 by Barbara Howar from Entertainment Tonight and she was such a great interviewer and asked a lot of great questions,and he really opened up and he was intelligent,serious,funny and likable. She asked him about his kind nurse midwife mother Mary's death from breast cancer when he just 14,(which he wrote the beautiful song Let it Be about after he had a vivid dream 12 years after she died and saw her alive,and she told him to accept things as they are,and when he woke up he thought how wonderful it was to see her again!)his 1980 drugs bust and 9 days in jail in Japan,his relationship with Linda and their kids and his music etc.
102 - Carolyn
I just realized I made a few typing mistakes,I really wish there was an edit button on here! I also forgot to mention that Barbara Howar asked Paul about his feelings for John and about his murder by the crazy fan!
103 - Carolyn
And Paul told Barbara Howar that Yoko called him up not long after John died just to let Paul know that John had shared teary eyed moments with her and told Yoko how much he really loved Paul. In the June 1975 Rolling Stone interview which you can find online,John said that Band On The Run is a great album,and it's Paul's music and it's good stuff.He also almost recorded The Venus and Mars album with Paul and Wings towards the end of his relationship with May Pang,but he reunited with Yoko instead and she was soon pregnant with Sean.
Also Bob Dylan said in a Rolling Stone interview this Spring,that he really admires Paul McCartney for his musical talent as a composer and that he can play any instrument great,and his beautiful melodies and harmonies,and he said he's the only one he really admires! He also said there were no greater singers than John Lennon and Paul McCartney!
104 - John McCartney
""I have no problem with any woman standing as an equal to any man, as long as that woman IS AN EQUAL.""
"Err...then that means you have a problem with women. Most definitely."
"One reason it always irritates me to see people attacking Yoko (or Linda) is that they seem to use it as an excuse to express their underlying resentment and/or hatred of women. Under the guise of oh no, I like women really, but this little bitch...!"
Err...what?!?!
In the first place, the statement was in reference to whether or not Yoko could stand on equal ground to John Lennon, musically; not whether or not they are equal humanists, pacifists, citizens, parents, money earners, or whatever other aspects of ones character/nature you want to include. I find it hard to believe anyone (even zingzing) could hope to argue she was Lennon's equal, musically speaking, of course.
"(who gets to determine if the woman is lucky enough to be equal to you? you?)"
Err...I don't know? I guess it depends on what we're talking about. Just by virtue of the physical differences between the two, there are certainly many instances in which women are not equal to men, and vice versa. But hey, let's talk real world examples where physicality is not part of the equation. If a woman earns more money than her husband (a reality in today's society...Kevin Federline/Britney Spears, anyone?) with respect to income, would you say he is her equal? Gee...who decides this? Me? You? The public at large? How about it doesn't take a genius to figure out, with respect to income, he is not her equal. Does this mean anyone who comes to this obvious conclusion has a problem with men? Is a man hater? Come on...you can do better than that.
105 - John McCartney
"you're probably not a woman hater"
Thanks zing!! I was really starting to worry.
"you sure haven't listened to much of yoko's work if you think she lacks talent."
I find myself unable to listen to her work. Given enough money, most anyone can hire a top-notch set of studio musicians to create enjoyable sounding accompanying music (karaoke anyone?). But the voice man...the voice (shudders uncontrollably).
"and her half of double fantasy. (here's a clue for you: her half is much better than john's.)"
WOW!!! Now there's a statement that's definitely in the minority. I forgive you, though!
106 - CCarolyn
John McCartney/Paul Lennon,
I got news for you for *most* jobs women still get payed les than men for doing the same exact job with the *same* qualifications,except when they use their bodies to sexually serve men in pornography,stripping and prostitution,women are payed the most for the only thing they are valued for the most!
And when Yoko spoke,she always had a very pretty little girl pleasant sounding voice,and even though Cynthia Lennon is intelligent too,she admits she was conditioned to be a submissive obedient wife,who John got bored and unsatisfied with,he wanted an intellectual and artistic equal partner,and he found it pretty much in Yoko! And exactly what physical things do you think men and women are not equal in? Machines and other technology help women now do heavy kinds of work etc that have nothing to do with mental capacities.
And believe it or not women and men have more similarities than differences,and lots of psychological research studies prove this,something John and Yoko realized.
107 - John McCartney
Carolyn:
Whoa...didn't mean to turn this into a debate on the equalities/inequalities between men and women. I am fully aware men still make more money than women for the same job, which believe it or not......wait for it.....I think is totally unfair (did you hear that Diane?). The situation, however, is improving. Women are closer to men, in terms of income, then ever before.
I could easily have used the reverse situation (man makes more than wife) however, the point I was trying to make really had nothing to do with the fact there was inequality, simply that it didn't take a genius to DECIDE it existed.
108 - John McCartney
"simply that it didn't take a genius to DECIDE it existed."
Replace DECIDE with DETERMINE. I want to be sure I use the same wording as Diane.
109 - joel beers
george martin was the most indespenable part of the Beatles Empire, although the fact they had three of the best songwriters of their generation (John, Paul and, much later, George) certainly didn't hurt.
As far as the John vs. Paul imbroglo: John was more political, introspective and artistic than Paul. But Paul (Helter Skelter, back in the ussr, I'm down) was every bit as much a rocker.
Paul also possessed something that John, even with all his popululist, idiosyncratic charm and self-awareness, never had: musical genius. Want proof? Check out his bass lineson Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds, Dear Prudence.
McCartney was a phenomenal, self-trained musician, and as good as a bass player as classic rock can boast of. That explains both why people love, and dismiss him: Lennon could not have written "Penny Lane." Invariably, there would have been darkness and ambiguity ala "For the Benefit of Mr. Kite."
By the same token, McCartney could never have written the beautifully self-reflexive "Strawberry Fields."
The Beatles were both Penny Lane and Strawberry Fields, Yer Blues and Martha, My Dear.
We should count ourselves lucky that we lived in a time when two such great artists worked...
110 - Joe Rodriguez
It's funny reading how people are saying that one is better than the other when, in reality, these two loved each other as well as respected and admired the other's work and talents.
111 - Michael Hughes
I realize that this movie "Two of Us" is many years old now but I just watched it for the 1st time. I wasn't sure what to expect from it going into it but I really enjoyed it. I also realize that any piece of fiction, especially ones made directly for TV will do anything to dramatize the story to the point of totally misconstruing reality but...I still enjoyed the movie. It kinda left me with a nice warm cozy feeling inside and sure made me wish John had lived long enough for the boys to have reunited one last time! Any thoughts on this movie from anyone??
Oh, by the way, both John and Paul were/are wonderful artists. Mays/Mantle?? Astaire/Rogers?? Lennon/McCartney?? Why try to compare their talents? Both apples and oranges are delicious in their own ways...Enjoy them both!
112 - Brad Laidman
I liked the movie although the funniest part for me was where a fan recognizes John but not Paul which was accurate since Aiden Quinn looked nothing like Paul
113 - Michael Hughes
True, Aidan Quinn did not look like Paul. Jared Harris looked a lil more like John, I thought. I wonder if Paul ever watched this movie, and if he did, if he ever gave his thoughts about it.
I have lil doubt that the real meeting between John and Paul had little resemblance to this fictitious account but it was nice to see how it could have gone down and to see that the hard feelings may have been laid to rest before John was, 4 years later.
114 - Brad Laidman
In real life, Paul showed up with a guitar and John turned him away saying it wasn't 1958 or something, but supposedly they chatted on the phone a lot before John died and made up. Or at least that's Paul's story and he's sticking to it.
115 - Dan
"This saw such musical moments as when Lennon muted the optimism of McCartney’s "We Can Work It Out," with a pessimistic bridge,"
life is very short, and there's no ti-i-i-i-ime for fussing and fighting my friend. I have always thought, that it's a cri-i-i-i-ime, so I will ask you once again...
I thought that was Lennon. Once you explore there differences you see how freakishly compatible they were.
116 - Michael Hughes
Brad..."In real life, Paul showed up with a guitar and John turned him away saying it wasn't 1958 or something..."?? Did John report that? or Paul? I had never read either of their accounts of what happened that night. Being the hopeless romantic that I am, I prefered the movie's idea better! :)
117 - Brad Laidman
John Lennon discussed the Saturday Night Live episode, as well as his relationship with McCartney, in a September 1980 interview for Playboy:
Paul and I were together watching that show. He was visiting us at our place in the Dakota. We were watching it and almost went down to the studio, just as a gag. We nearly got into a cab, but we were actually too tired [...] That was a period when Paul just kept turning up at our door with a guitar. I would let him in, but finally I said to him, 'Please call before you come over. It's not 1956 and turning up at the door isn't the same anymore. You know, just give me a ring.' He was upset by that, but I didn't mean it badly. I just meant that I was taking care of a baby all day and some guy turns up at the door. . . . But, anyway, back on that night, he and Linda walked in and he and I were just sitting there, watching the show, and we went, 'Ha-ha, wouldn't it be funny if we went down?' but we didn't.[3]
Paul McCartney also remembered the event for an interview: "[John] said, 'We should go down there. We should go down now and just do it.' It was one of those moments where we said, 'Let's not and say we did.' "
118 - Michael Hughes
Brad,
Thanks for that info! I'll have to look up those interviews. Adios!
119 - Jack F
I AS A JONH LENNON FAN, STILL BELIEVE THAT PEOPLE SHOULD JUST ACCEPT BOTH HIM AND PAUL FOR WHAT THEY ARE, GREAT SONGWRITERS AND SINGERS. THEY BOTH APPEALED TO A WIDE VARIETY OF PEOPLE, JOHN TO THOSE WHO PREFER STRAIGHT-TALKING, NASAL INFLUENCED OPINIONS, WERE AS PAUL EQUALLY APPEALED WITH HIS THROATY, MELODY INFLUENCED POPTASTIC TUNES, SO REALLY BOTH ARE JUST AS GOOD AS EACH OTHER. BTW GEORGE WAS ALSO A CRACKING SINGER AND WRITER, HE TO ME IS THE BEST OF JOHN AND PAUL, HE HAS JOHNS NASAL AND PAULS THROATY VOICE, AND HE ALSO WRITES OPINIONATED MELODY BASED SONGS!
120 - full beard master
Paul McCartney suck!! John Lennon is the best!!
121 - Owen J
Far too many people take Goldman as an authority for any comparison to bear scrutiny, as is bourne out by reading some of the comments here. Goldman's book is nothing but a rehash of every other 'kiss and tell' character assassination book published after Dec 1980. Double Fantasy won the Grammy in 1981, so so much for the idea that it was poorly received. I happen to think that McCartney's Memory Almost Full was the album of 2008, but Lennon is my favourite of the two. Anyone who says Lennon was in decline after 1972 has never heard Dream No 9, Mind Games, Out the Blue, Woman, Watching the Wheels to name but a few. McCartney was a pop musician, one of the greatest melodicists and bass players of all time; Lennon was an artist, one of the greatest lyricists and rhythm guitarists of all time. George Martin said he wouldn't place a cigarette paper between the two. Trying to make out that Lennon lifted musical ideas off mcCartney ie Bluebird/Woman is wrong. Both McCartney and Lennon used to magpie ideas off Motown/R&B. McCartney said the tune for In My Life (which he claimed as his own; Lennon disputed) was taken from ideas contained in The Tracks of My Tears by Smokey Robinson. Had Lennon lived, we could make more of a debate about it, but since Lennon's ouevre is half that of McCartney's, it's fairly pointless. For me, Strawberry Fields Forever is ten times the song Penny Lane is, and as for A Day In The Life, it's Lennon's verses that elevates the song to genius, McCartney's chirpy middle eight is asinine in comparison. Whereas McCartney had the greater commercial appeal, Lennon's genius was for cultural impact, vis Give Peace a Chance and Imagine. No Post Beatles McCartney songs are as famous as these Lennon classics.
122 - My
See? This is what I’m TIRED of reading.
Did you know, dear Brad, that Lennon WASN”T the one who had the idea for the tape loops in “Tomorrrow Never Knows”? That was a McCartney, Emerick and Martin work? Emerick got the idea for the loops and Paul did the most work. Lennon wasn’t even present at te studio when it was done.
That it was McCartney who organized the arragements and thhe orchestral part in the middle of ” A Day In the Life”
That the music (not the lyrics) of “In My Life” are McCartney’s?
That the mellotron part of “Strawberry Fields Forever” was composed by McCartney?
And where is the optimistic. McCartney in “You Never Give Me Your Money”? IMO, McCartney songs in that album are superior than Lennnon’s. As his songs are also superior in Revolver. By the way, where is “McCartney optimism” in that Abbey Road? He seems pretty gloom to me in that one.
All this is in Geoff Emerick book. He gives many details about the Beatles studio work.
Dear writer, I’m also fan o Lennon’s. I think his songs are superior in “White Album”. But I’m not going to be blind to McCartney’s contribution to Beatles experimentalism. He was the one who started it. “Revolver” and “Sgt Pepper” were pretty much idea. (and I think “Fixing a Hole” and “Getting Better” are masterpieces)
You are just repeating the same old clichés I’m TIRED of hearing. You didn’t do your homework. You take a weak composition of Paul and say he is a bad political song writer (is this something bad?) . Well, I think John’s politics are naive and shalllow. I enjoy his other work way more.
But I’m losing my time with this. Paul is still alive and he won’t be recongnize so early.
123 - John Lennon Site
Lennon and McCartney were both great songwriters.
Lennon was the genius and McCartney the beauty.
In My Life and Yesterday. Strawberry Fields Forever and Penny Lane. Imagine and The Frog Song.
124 - Beatles Myspace
In reply to 'My'.
'In My Life', was written by John Lennon, with Paul helping only on the middle eight.
In many interviews, Lennon actually gave McCartney a lot more credit than he deserved. He failed to mention his own contributions on many songs, just dismissing them as 'a Paul song'.
eg: Middle sections/Chorus, of 'Michelle', 'And I Love Her', 'She's Leaving Home'.. all written by John.
John also finished off 'Good Day Sunshine', 'Here, There and Everywhere', and 'Penny Lane' with Paul.
and things like, 'I Saw Her Standing There', and 'MMT', which were 'very' co-written, as McCartney later said.
125 - Brad Laidman
I've always read that the piano middle to in my life was actually George Martin