|
|
Post by nicole21290 on Mar 1, 2011 6:06:43 GMT -5
But Nicole, I am reacting in particular to the subject of this Thread, the 1981 statements to Davies you kindly shared with us. Yes, there are other interviews where Paul expresses sorrow but this 1981 series of statements made to Davies is basically a pity party by Paul for himself. John was the first to admit that he wasn't a saint yet Paul works pretty hard in these series of statements to make the point that John was no saint. It wasn't John's fault or desire to be murdered. The grief felt throughout the world for John's death was not manufactured, it was real. In 1981, I naively turned to Paul for comfort and healing and these statements were then thrown in our faces and it personally felt to me like Paul had punched me in the gut with the infamous lines like “a maneuvering swine” and "Martin Luther Lennon." Sorry but that was how I felt back then and rereading some of these quips still makes me upset. I see. As I said, I kind of just got slightly mad then and had to dash off a quick reply before my next lecture at uni... Sorry! I guess it's very different for me because I wasn't even born until 10 years after John's death. As I've grown up I've only read interview after interview of Paul talking lovingly and warmly about John. I'd agree that Paul was very self-pitying in this telephone conversation but god, it was a telephone conversation to his friend a few months after John's death. I don't think Paul is 'working' trying to make John un-saintlike. Besides, in saying that John wasn't a saint - isn't that just the truth? Paul didn't say he didn't think the world of Lennon, that he didn't think he was a good person, that he was a bad father to Jules - none of that. He did make the point that John wasn't a saint and did so in terms that are regrettable but it's true - he wasn't a saint. I think he's trying to explain his own emotions and feelings and hurts and does so in a rather all-over-the-place manner. It's not like he sat down with pencil and paper, made a list of exactly why John wasn't a saint and read it to Davies. Of course John didn't desire to be murdered or seen as a saint and I don't see where Paul is saying he was. He's concerened about the media perception and the general public more than anything and he knew and knows the grief over John was real - he has talked about how loveable John was and how everyone loved him (and not in this case comparing this love to how others perceive Paul himself). Even in these statements he talks about how he always looked up to John, how great he was, how much the 'it's only me' moment meant to him (it was a frigging mantra in his mind, apparently...) He'd talked about how painful it is to have John appear in his dreams and then wake up to the realisation that he's no longer alive. I understand that this may have been incredibly hurtful to see that Paul had said these things about John but I get equally upset seeing John or Paul diminishing or insulting the other in the interviews through the 1970s and 1980. 1981 was a particularly sensitive time, I grant, and it's unfortunate that you had to read this stuff. However, I don't think Paul wanted this conversation out in the open - everyone knows how much he likes to remember the good times, try and convey optimism and happiness, how he likes to gloss over negative times quite often. People always bang on about Paulie-the-PR-man: such a man would not have wanted this out in the open, I don't think. I mean, he's underplayed the depression he had at The Beatles breakup and over his mother's death etc - he doesn't like to go on and on about his own pain - when he does talk about it he often also talks about how much worse John had it and how painful John's childhood etc was. In the mid-eighties he talked about how he'd always thought that to be loved and like you had to appear 'unwarty' - trying not to show your faults and insecurities. You've got to remember that Paul was (I would say) more hurt and upset and angry and devastated over John's death than you and we don't always respond well in grief (Paul certainly hadn't when his Mum died or when Stu died...). Sure, those comments are regrettable and I don't think Paul would look back on them and go "I'm so pleased I said that and now everyone will think even better of me". Also remember that, as Davies said, this conversation was a particular one in response to something else -that something else being a comment by Yoko that deeply, deeply hurt Paul and which seemed to be utterly bewildering and painful to him - that HE was the person who'd most hurt John in his life. Do you blame Paul for saying these things in a private conversation (evidently, to me at least, in hurt and confusion and anger) or do you blame Hunter Davies for publishing them for a new edition of his book? You probably would've never heard these comments if it weren't for the latter, I don't think... Paul was talking on a radio show about his new (at that time) Tug Of War album and after discussing 'Here Today' he was asked about Somebody Who Cares and said he was thinking about John whilst writing that too. He sympathises with people's loss - he understands it (see also: Too Much Rain, Little Willow). The lyrics of that song may not be the best he's ever written but I think he meant it... When your body is coming apart at the seams And the whole thing's feeling low You're convincing yourself That there's nobody there, I know I know how you feel As I say, I understand your perspective on this but I can't say I agree with some of the conclusions you draw... Nevertheless, I'm sorry you felt so hurt by it. Really. |
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Mar 1, 2011 6:15:40 GMT -5
"But here was Paul complaining in 1981 that people were now liking John more because he was dead." And that's exactly what people were doing, isn't it? Without hearing the conversation, this could be either "It's not fair - John's death means people prefer him to me" or "People are making him out to be a saint, and that's not what he wanted." Either appears to be a valid interpretation, and the latter is more in line with almost everything else McCartney has ever said. But even if it was the former, can't you understand him being a bit put out that his own work is downgraded in the public eye due to the death of his collaborator? "I think the difference here is that when John said it, it was natural and in the heat of the moment. He just always talked about whatever what on his mind during that hour. Whereas when Paul says such stuff, it NEVER feels spontaneous or honest. It always seems carefully calculated... to make Paul look better." Like I said - double standard. You cut John a break when you don't cut Paul one, because "it was natural and in the heat of the moment". That's OK then. The fact that John says it intending it to go on the record, and Paul says it in a private conversation (despite what JSD says) counts for nothing. Double standard. "If he wants to change the order, he can do so on any of his 472 live albums" Er, which is all he wanted to do. You seem to be working on the basis that he was looking to change it on Beatles records, which he wasn't - but thanks for proving my point!  |
|
|
|
Post by nicole21290 on Mar 1, 2011 6:36:33 GMT -5
I think the difference here is that when John said it, it was natural and in the heat of the moment. He just always talked about whatever what on his mind during that hour. Whereas when Paul says such stuff, it NEVER feels spontaneous or honest. It always seems carefully calculated... to make Paul look better. See, I'd agree that what John said was natural and in the heat of the moment - he was that kind of guy - but that doesn't make what he says any more true or legitimate or reflective of his feelings than Paul's usually more consistent, calm and unspontaneous statements. I think, to be honest (and sorry) that it's actually rather unfair to say that 'it NEVER feels' 'honest'! I mean, you can't speak for everyone here. You may never believe what Paul says or feel that he's speaking honestly or from the heart but I almost always do believe him. You think this conversation was 'carefully calculated to make Paul look better'? Well, oops, looks like Mr PRman-nofeelings-neverhonest-cold McCartney screwed up this opportunity big time. Paul likes to make himself look better in interviews, as he's said, because he doesn't see the point in exposing his flaws to everyone in the media and public - they pick up on enough reasons to pick on him without him helping and besides, as he also said, he'd always thought to be liked one had to appear 'unwarty'. Is this such a bad thing? Not that many people go around constantly trying to make others look better and themselves look worse... John would big himself up in one interview and then talk himself down in the next, depending on what he had for breakfast that day. But after years of being burned by his cheesy and calculated comments, we all know that Paul only enters the realm of media if he has a self-serving agenda. Absolutely. His opinions and thoughts and moods were everchanging and I love that about him, even though his interviews and comments sometime frustrate and infuriate me. You've spent years being BURNED by Paul's 'cheesy and calculated' comments? It's not a crime to be cheesy - it's something Paul's always been and sure it can be a bit cringey but it's not THAT horrible. As to the calculated - calculated hasn't exactly got the best connotations but really, just because he doesn't go/didn't go shooting his mouth off all the time doesn't mean he isn't telling the truth about what happened or how he thinks and feels. As you say it's a personality thing but being a bit goofy and thinking about what you say and sometimes trying to put across a certain opinion isn't exactly a crime. I truly don't see why people despise Paul for that. He only enters the media to promote his 'self-serving' agenda!? Yes, he's mostly a private guy and uses the media to put forward his views (mostly when he's promoting a new product/album/etc). What's wrong with that? Whose agenda wasn't or isn't self-serving? John's? George's? What's his agenda meant to be then? Sorry, I don't understand at all... Everyone is self-serving at times, especially giving media interviews to promote product. I mean, should he spend all his interview time talking about how he was bossy in the studio, didn't support J&Y's relationship enough, wrote songs like Too Many People, had stupid arguments with his friends, wasn't always nice and graceful, resented and was jealous of people like Stu and Yoko, constantly praise everyone else and put himself down. ? What? Then it would seem like false modesty and he'd get criticised for that, surely. I don't really hold this against Paul, it's just his personality type. I know people like him, just as I know people like John. The 'John-type' is much easier to get along with and laugh along with, but the 'Paul-type' is the one you'd rather be stuck in an elevator with for four hours. Yeah. I think it was Pete Townshend or another musician who once said that when you were John you felt like his best friend (SOOOO many people claim this in interviews - John told me everything, we were so close etc) and he was so open and enjoyable to be around and was happy to sit there as John Lennon with people around him. However, he said that it was more difficult with Paul because he would get nervous and really want to connect properly not just superficially - he wanted to know about you and he didn't want to be worshipped and share everything with you. This made conversations sometimes awkward whereas with John it was always very easy and pleasant and you felt like you were receiving a lot from John. IIRC, of course... However, even Sean said last year that he loves spending time with Paul because it's really the closest he can come to spending time with his father (with Paul not Yoko?) and that his Dad really hadn't had many friends so it means a lot to spend time with his Dad's best friend. So, I really think Paul was acting out of his ego and talking out of his ass with that silly request. If he wants to change the order, he can do so on any of his 472 live albums, or he can self-servingly publish any number of books explaining that he wrote 34.74% of "In My Life". I think is/was an ego thing and I'm sort of glad he's not really mentioned/complained about it in the last five or six years at least. Oh, and he DID want to change the order the live albums - in 2001 wasn't that what the row was about in the first place? It's not like he was going back and changing the credits on Beatles records. And he wanted to write 'McCartney and Lennon' instead of 'Lennon and McCartney', not the /'s swapped. Wasn't he saying that he'd seen music books and the like with songs like Blackbird that said it was written just by John Lennon and it had made him concerned. I understand that even if I think it was silly to keep going on about it so long. It certainly didn't do him any favours in the public's eyes... Oh, please. Even John's talked about Paul contributing to the music of 'In My Life' - there is nothing inherently wrong with Paul wanting to get his side of the story across. Just because it doesn't exactly match up to what John said all the time does not necessarily make it wrong - they are/were both humans with egos, failings and memories which aren't perfect. Besides, I was more annoyed with Barry Miles than Paul reading that book... Also, I love MYFN for the many, many times Paul is complimentary about John, praises him, talks lovingly about him etc. He focuses on their partnership and relationship, sure, and maybe it is 'self-serving' to point out that, actually, he helped John with so and so a song but it's not that big a deal. Was it self-serving of George to write an autobiography? Was it self-serving of John to talk about who wrote what in the first place and lie about their partnership and how much they'd written TOGETHER (as he later he admitted he had)? |
|
|
|
Post by nicole21290 on Mar 1, 2011 7:20:18 GMT -5
Paul was a confused man in the eighties regarding his relationship with John...
"It was the world coming to an end."
MUSIC EXPRESS: Let me ask you what everybody wants to know. How did you feel when you heard the news about John's murder?
(At that precise moment my cassette auto-stopped)
McCARTNEY: You see, your cassette didn't even like the question (laughs). Listen, John would be the first guy to laugh about that. How did I feel? I can't remember. I can't express it. I can't believe it. It was crazy. It was anger. It was fear. It was madness. It was the world coming to an end. And it was, "Will it happen to me next?" I just felt everything. I still can't put into words. Shocking. And I ended up saying, "It's a drag," and that doesn't really sum it up.
MUSIC EXPRESS: Were you actually still close to him?
McCARTNEY: Yes, yes. I suppose the story was that we were pretty close in the beginning when we were writing stuff together. We felt a lot of sympathy for each other, although on a personal level, based on a lot of stuff that went down later, I obviously wasn't that close to him. To me, he was a fella, and you don't get that close to fellas. I felt very close to him, but from a lot of what he said later, obviously, I was missing in the picture. But anyway, I felt very close to him then and when the Beatles started to feel the strain towards the last couple of years, it (the relationship) was getting to be a bit of a strain and we were drifting more apart. I think the kind of anchor that had held us together was still there. I think that we all, in a way, started to get really angry with each other, annoyed and frustrated, but we were still very keen on each other, loved each other, I suppose, because we had been mates together for so long. Like Ringo says, "We were as four brothers." It's that kind of a feeling. I mean, I didn't realize that, but Ringo would tell me later, "You are like my brothers, you lot." We all knew that there was some kind of deep regard for each other. I talked to Yoko the day after John was killed and the first thing she said was, "John was really fond of you, you know." It was almost as if she sensed that I was wondering whether he had...whether the relationship had snapped. I believe it was always there. I believe he really was fond of me, as she said. We were really the best of mates. It was really ace.
|
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Mar 1, 2011 10:30:20 GMT -5
Paul was a confused man in the eighties regarding his relationship with John...... I am fascinated with Paul's experience through the 1980's as it was a very trying time for him both personally and musically as there was a changing of the musical guard. Granted, Linda's illness and death in the second half of the 1990's meant that half of the decade was even worse but the 1980's were tough on Paul: 1. Japan bust, canceled tour and implosion of Wings; 2. John's murder and the emotional toll of that not to mention the safety concerns felt by all the other Beatles; Paul(and the others) became very guarded and reclusive in their public appearances for several years after; 3. The glorious response to Tug Of War tempered by the increasingly tepid responses to POP(although it had monster hit "Say, Say, Say") and the absolute drubbing both critically and financial to Give My Regards To Broadstreet; 4. Paul's mic goes dead at Live Aid dampering what would have been a very moving finale(don't get me wrong, just seeing Paul up there was cool and it was nice when the mic came back on); 5. Poor public response to Press To Play although it did well with critics; 6. The whole Return To Pepperland saga where there is apparently an album worth of material never released; 7. More Apple litigation leading Paul to skip the RRHoF induction of The Beatles; 8. Paul's going back to the basics musically to clear his head resulting in Back in the USSR; and 9. Rumors of a strained marriage(per Keith Badman's book and the so-called "Linda Tapes"). It was a long, tough decade for Paul and I feel for him. It was the first complete decade for me as a fan so I felt right there experiencing it as a fan. It had a happy ending(for a while). We know Paul gloriously ended the 1980's with Flowers In The Dirt and the very successful World Tour of 1989/1990 which had to reawaken in Paul the joy of who he was. The Japanese bust and John's murder though were terrible ways to start that new decade and it rattled Paul to his core. Throw in the "New Wave" of music and it was a period of transition. It fascinates me but also I feel Paul's music conveyed a lot of sadness throughout the 1980's(of course there are exceptions to that). |
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Mar 1, 2011 10:46:43 GMT -5
Vectisfabber, you seem to have joined the conspiracy ranks -- "there's a double-standard, and the world is out to get Paul!" I'm not out to get Paul, and there is no double-standard. A double-standard assumes that all things are otherwise equal, but what I'm trying to point out, above, is that Paul and John were not equal because they treat/treated their roles with media completely differently.
Also, I'm not saying that John's approach is better, which is what you seem to be assuming. I'm not saying that either is better; I'm just saying that's the way it is. John just said whatever what on his mind, and Paul carefully planned/plans everything he's going to say with an agenda in mind. John is open and naked, and Paul is closed and calculated. There are understandable reasons for Paul to be the way he is, and I'm sure none of us understand what his life is like. I'm not seeking to judge him, I'm merely seeking to explain why he rubs so many people the wrong way and why John often gets a free-pass.
|
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Mar 1, 2011 13:09:06 GMT -5
Vectisfabber, you seem to have joined the conspiracy ranks -- "there's a double-standard, and the world is out to get Paul!" I'm not out to get Paul, and there is no double-standard. A double-standard assumes that all things are otherwise equal, but what I'm trying to point out, above, is that Paul and John were not equal because they treat/treated their roles with media completely differently. I don't know that I'd call it a conspiracy but, while I take the point you are making, it does appear to me that there is often a vastly different reaction towards John and Paul in respect of comments they have made of broadly similar type, and that reaction always seems to be to admire John for his frankness and to deplore Paul for his unpleasantness. And that simply isn't fair. Both could play the PR game, they just played it in different ways. Again, I take this very fair point on board. But, again, I point out that not everyone is quite so dispassionate about how they look at the different ways these two men went about their interactions with the rest of the world. As someone who always wants to put the best face on things and cause the minimum amount of friction, I naturally sympathise with McCartney's approach towards dealing with people. |
|
|
|
Post by Jason I on Mar 1, 2011 15:30:29 GMT -5
Paul was a confused man in the eighties regarding his relationship with John...... I am fascinated with Paul's experience through the 1980's as it was a very trying time for him both personally and musically as there was a changing of the musical guard. Granted, Linda's illness and death in the second half of the 1990's meant that half of the decade was even worse but the 1980's were tough on Paul: 1. Japan bust, canceled tour and implosion of Wings; 2. John's murder and the emotional toll of that not to mention the safety concerns felt by all the other Beatles; Paul(and the others) became very guarded and reclusive in their public appearances for several years after; 3. The glorious response to Tug Of War tempered by the increasingly tepid responses to POP(although it had monster hit "Say, Say, Say") and the absolute drubbing both critically and financial to Give My Regards To Broadstreet; 4. Paul's mic goes dead at Live Aid dampering what would have been a very moving finale(don't get me wrong, just seeing Paul up there was cool and it was nice when the mic came back on); 5. Poor public response to Press To Play although it did well with critics; 6. The whole Return To Pepperland saga where there is apparently an album worth of material never released; 7. More Apple litigation leading Paul to skip the RRHoF induction of The Beatles; 8. Paul's going back to the basics musically to clear his head resulting in Back in the USSR; and 9. Rumors of a strained marriage(per Keith Badman's book and the so-called "Linda Tapes"). It was a long, tough decade for Paul and I feel for him. It was the first complete decade for me as a fan so I felt right there experiencing it as a fan. It had a happy ending(for a while). We know Paul gloriously ended the 1980's with Flowers In The Dirt and the very successful World Tour of 1989/1990 which had to reawaken in Paul the joy of who he was. The Japanese bust and John's murder though were terrible ways to start that new decade and it rattled Paul to his core. Throw in the "New Wave" of music and it was a period of transition. It fascinates me but also I feel Paul's music conveyed a lot of sadness throughout the 1980's(of course there are exceptions to that). Wow, true, I'd never thought about it this way. Also don't forget that from 1987 the one solo Beatle everyone was only really excited about was George. First having the number one single (Got My Mind Set On You) then having the well recieved, critically and publically, album: Cloud 9. Although Paul would never admit to it, you'd have to think he'd have felt a professional jealousy of sorts. And George seemed to go up even another level once he formed the Traveling Wilburys, garnering public respect for hanging with Dylan, Petty and Orbison. Paul was left behind, without a band and with his failed 'Press To Play' and 'Give My Regards To Broadstreet' projects. And let's be frank, these weren't just failed projects, these were PANNED publically (rightfully so with Broadstreet..) It's ironic that whilst Paul's film career imploded before it'd begun, that George had even outdid him in that respect in the 80's with five years or producing successful independent British features; eg, Monty Python’s Life of Brian, The Long Good Friday and Time Bandits. Definitly a mid life crisis and then some for Macca. |
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Mar 1, 2011 16:25:33 GMT -5
We ALL know that if the roles had been reversed, John would not have tolerated the "beatification of St. Paul."
|
|
|
|
Post by winstonoboogie on Mar 1, 2011 21:58:41 GMT -5
We ALL know that if the roles had been reversed, John would not have tolerated the "beatification of St. Paul." Very good point, sayne! |
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Mar 1, 2011 22:01:58 GMT -5
We ALL know that if the roles had been reversed, John would not have tolerated the "beatification of St. Paul." Very good point, sayne! That is a reasonable guess but we will never know for sure, will we. |
|
|
|
Post by nicole21290 on Mar 2, 2011 0:42:57 GMT -5
It fascinates me but also I feel Paul's music conveyed a lot of sadness throughout the 1980's(of course there are exceptions to that) Paul's written his fair share of sad and melancholy songs, to be honest. I won't write out all the lines for his Beatles one (esp. on Abbey Road and Let It Be & For No One/Eleanor Rigby) but here's some favourite sad/melancholy (at least to me) Paul solo-songs that show you that his thumb isn't permanently erect after all! Yvonne - "She never knew how much I loved her / I never got to tell her / We never found a way / To say farewell." Growing Up, Falling Down - "We were crying now / With the pain / We will never be here again" This One - "Did I ever open up my heart / And let you look inside? / If I never did it / I was only waiting / For a better moment / That didn’t come." Somebody Who Cares - "When your body is coming apart at the seams / And the whole thing’s feeling low / You’re convincing yourself that there’s nobody there / I know. I know how you feel." Dear Friend - "Are you afraid? / Or is it true?" (the way he sings and plays in the first piano demo of this one is heartbreaking...) No Words - (for the significance of this) "I wish you’d see / It’s only me / I love you." - "That phrase keeps coming back to me all the time. 'It's only me.' It's became a mantra in my mind." - "Whatever bad things John said about me, he would also slip his glasses down to the end of his nose and say, 'I love you'. That's really what I hold on to." Best Friend - "Tell me why, why, why, do you treat me so bad, so bad? / You’re the best friend a man ever had... I wake up in the evening / I’m still screaming out / Over you, over you" Little Lamb Dragonfly - "Dragonfly, you've been away too long / How did two rights make a wrong? / Since you've gone I never know / I go on / I miss you so in my heart" Some People Never Know - "I’m only a person like you, love / And who in the world / Can be right all the right time? / I know I was wrong, make me right" Tragedy - "All that's left is the dark... You've gone from me / Oh, tragedy" How Kind Of You - "I thought my faith had gone / I thought there couldn't be / A someone who was there / For me" At The Mercy - "Sometimes I'd rather run and hide / Than stay and face the fear inside" Friends To Go - "I've been sliding down a slippery slope, I've been climbing / Up a slowly burning rope, but the flame is getting low" Too Much Rain - uplifting in a way but still rather sad. "Laugh when your eyes are burning / Smile when your heart is filled with pain / Sigh as you brush away your sorrow" Riding To Vanity Fair - bitter and hurt. "I tried to be so strong / I did my best / I used the gentle touch / I've done it for so long" Anyway - "When did I begin to fall?... If we could be closer longer, that would help me; Help me so much. / We can cure each others' sorrow. / Won't you please, please, please get in touch?" Lonely Road - "Don't wanna let you take me down / Don't wanna get hurt second time around / Don't wanna walk that lonely road again, yeah" From A Lover To A Friend - "How can I walk when I can't find a way... All I want is to tell me / You're going to take it away... Let me love again" Magic - "And this is the hour / That they turn out the light / Nothing but memories / Burning so bright" The Interlude of Ecce Cor Meum Somedays - "Somedays I cry / I cry for those who live in fear / Somedays I don't / I don't remember why I'm here" Calico Skies - (especially considering what he and Linda were going through...) "Always looking for ways to love you / Never falling to fight at your side / While the angels of love protect us / From the innermost secrets we hide / I'll hold you for as long as you like / I'll hold you for the rest of my life" Little Willow (esp. accompianed by the video) - "Life, as it happens / Nobody warns you / Willow, hold on tight" Every Night - "Every night I just wanna go out / Get out of my head / Every day I don't wanna get up / Get out of my bed" Junk & Singalong Junk (the tune is equally or more affecting) - "Something old and new / Memories for you and me" My Brave Face (with E. Costello) - "Ever since you went away I've had this sentimental inclination / not to change a single thing. / As I pull the sheet back on the bed / I want to go bury my head in your pillow... Now that I'm alone again I can't stop breaking down again" Maybe I'm Amazed (happy + sad) - "Baby, I'm a man and maybe I'm a lonely man / Who's in the middle of something / That he doesn't really understand" Waterfalls - "I need love...And it wouldn't be the same / If you ever should decide to go away" You Tell Me - slightly melancholy feel to it. "Were we there? / Is it true? / Was I really there with you?" Gratitude - "Well, I was lonely / I was living with a memory... I should stop loving you / Think what you put me through / But I don't want to lock my heart away" The End of The End - the subject matter... *refuses to think about it* Footprints - "Oh white blanket / Hiding the traces of tears she didn't see / Snow white blanket / Simply covers the memory of all that used to be / But his heart keeps aching in the same old way / He can't help feeling that she might come back someday" The way Paul covers No Other Baby & Lonesome TownTry Not To Cry - "I want to enjoy / Being alive / Don't want to leave / Before I arrive" Winter Rose - the melody. Treat Her Gently / Lonely Old People - "Here we sit / Two lonely old people / Eking our lives away Call Me Back Again - "I called your house / many a night since then / But I ain't never, no no never / heard you calling me / C'mon and call me back again" And the ultimate (for me) in solo-Beatles sad songs: Here Today - "But as for me / I still remember how it was before / And I am holding back the tears no more / I love you" So, yeah, that's our always-cheerful, eternally-hopeful, thumbs-aloft Paulie. |
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Mar 2, 2011 4:59:50 GMT -5
That is a reasonable guess but we will never know for sure, will we. No, of course we won't. And let's face it, he would have had to tolerate it, same as Paul has. But my guess is that he would have consistently debunked the Legend of St Paul with a slyly humorous edge throughout. |
|
diego
Very Clean
Posts: 130
|
Post by diego on Mar 2, 2011 13:51:36 GMT -5
Tragedy - "All that's left is the dark... You've gone from me / Oh, tragedy" I think that one is a cover. |
|
|
|
Post by nicole21290 on Mar 2, 2011 16:54:07 GMT -5
Tragedy - "All that's left is the dark... You've gone from me / Oh, tragedy" I think that one is a cover. Ah, bugger. Well, ta muchly - I don't claim to know that much; have only really been interested for a year or so... Well, the rest remain... |
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Mar 3, 2011 10:24:35 GMT -5
"But here was Paul complaining in 1981 that people were now liking John more because he was dead." And that's exactly what people were doing, isn't it? Without hearing the conversation, this could be either "It's not fair - John's death means people prefer him to me" or "People are making him out to be a saint, and that's not what he wanted." Either appears to be a valid interpretation, and the latter is more in line with almost everything else McCartney has ever said. But even if it was the former, can't you understand him being a bit put out that his own work is downgraded in the public eye due to the death of his collaborator? Then Paul should consider walking in front of an oncoming train. Problem solved. |
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Mar 3, 2011 10:30:36 GMT -5
Because it's all about vanity and image with Paulie. And the two of them wound up having an early agreement that their billing would be "Lennon & McCartney" (even though Paulie always wanted it the other way even in the early days). So now that it's the "Classic" arrangement, he should just shut the hell up and honor it as such. But why do you care? Why do "I" care? LOL! ;D -- I don't! -- I'm not the one bitching about the credits (that'd be Paul), or the Paul fans who think Paul's right and whine that he should have his way... But I suppose I do care about preserving Beatles History, and thats "Lennon & McCartney". |
|
|
|
Post by brothermichael on Mar 3, 2011 19:20:30 GMT -5
Someone should give us a history of McCartney "bitching" about the credits. I'm betting there's a lot more smoke than fire here. How many times did he actually say something about it? Did actually make a move to have them changed other than doing so on Wings Over America? This has become one of those clubs used to beat him with, IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Mar 3, 2011 20:00:30 GMT -5
But I suppose I do care about preserving Beatles History, and thats "Lennon & McCartney". And always will be, as far as Beatles history is concerned. But where's the harm in crediting Let It Be to McCartney and Lennon on (frinstance) Good Evening New York? |
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Mar 4, 2011 6:36:36 GMT -5
But I suppose I do care about preserving Beatles History, and thats "Lennon & McCartney". And always will be, as far as Beatles history is concerned. But where's the harm in crediting Let It Be to McCartney and Lennon on (frinstance) Good Evening New York? Why would Paul even want to bother, if it's still Lennon/McCartney on the actual records? He's being very paranoid and vain about it, I think. |
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Mar 4, 2011 11:25:06 GMT -5
But he did explain why, about his part of the credit disappearing in certain information fields. Easy to not be paranoid if it's not your credit disappearing, I think.
|
|
