|
Post by debjorgo on Sept 3, 2016 9:30:04 GMT -5
No statement here. I just found this and thought it was interesting to the subject. Band on the Run era Paul fronting Let it Be era Beatles. I wonder if the artist agrees with Joe.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Sept 3, 2016 22:29:42 GMT -5
I found the following information from 2014. It looks like it is more in Paul's favor now as far as the general public is concerned. Fifty years after The Beatles landed on U.S. soil and appeared on "The Ed Sullivan Show," Beatlemania appears to be alive and well in America. According to a CBS News poll, 75 percent of Americans say they like the Beatles (at least a little), including almost four in 10 who like them a lot. Only 15 percent of Americans say they dislike the Fab Four. Those between the ages of 55 and 64, who would have been teenagers in the first years of the British invasion, are especially fond of The Beatles -- nine out of 10. And who is America's favorite Beatle? Paul McCartney ranked highest, at 35 percent; following by John Lennon (29%), Ringo Starr (11%), and George Harrison (8%) and the balance no preference. As a percent of those who had a preference that translates to Paul McCartney at 42 percent; following by John Lennon (35%), Ringo Starr (13%), and George Harrison (10%). I guess the fact that Paul had been touring with his current band all over the world for the last 15 years and the fact that John is gone now for more than 35 years so all of our younger generations never knew him except for ancient Beatle films and Beatle recordings would have no bearing on such a poll as who is the current favorite Beatle.... But what difference is it anyway. The Beatles were/are still the gold standard by which all pop music groups are measured even now, 46 years after they ceased to exist. And the Fab Four are only where they are because of all four of them playing their own music catalogue, which now stands along side even the greatest classical music of the last 416 years. Can any band ever hope to top them? I doubt it. The four of them are forever a unit which created the music. No matter who wrote what, the musical catalogue stands atop the pop music world because all four of them brought it to life and to vinyl. Favorites within the band are a useless footnote.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Sept 10, 2016 20:03:04 GMT -5
We are "going again" because Paul himself keeps going again, always coming up with new stories and tidbits that boost his presence in The Beatles and diminishes John's... and often these are stories and revelations which he has never mentioned in previous decades. It's obvious that Paul is insecure about his legacy and still feels "in John's shadow", so he's doing everything he can to be Chief Beatle. Including touring relentlessly despite vocal limitations, and making the new generations know it was all about him. 1. Given that he was there and I wasn't, I'm always happy to hear previously untold stuff. 2. If Paul's recollection about, say, Mr Kite is true, isn't it better to know this than not? Should we not be told, on the grounds that it betrays John's legacy? 3. There must be thousands of bits of information which we don't know and never will. Does the fact that some of them get mentioned now after never having been mentioned before mean that Paul is lying about them? 4. Yes, clearly Paul feels insecure about his legacy. Seeing "Yesterday, by John Lennon and P" can do that to you. I suspect that subsequent generations will view them equally despite any of Paul's actions. 5. He shouldn't promote himself as Chief Beatle. It's arguable that he's promoting himself as Chief Surviving Beatle. 6. Paul should stop public croaking. Paul always was the Chief Beatle in the studio. John didn't know how to play the guitar properly and he didn't write songs before he met Paul. John wrote poetry but not songs when they met. Paul was a much better producer and arranger often having a significant hand in how John's songs were arranged. As for new facts and situations brought to light by Paul, yes, there are so many that we still may not have heard about. I think that's fine. Remember Paul is on tour and he does interviews to promote his tour and the new albums and re-releases. Its natural that he would talk about the Beatles and the situations are seldom self serving. As for touring, people always complain about his croaking, but when they see him 95% of the time he gets rave reviews. That includes people on this board. Remember they were a songwriting team critiquing each others work and contributing in ways we don't even know today. Even when they worked less close together later they always reviewed each others work. Go back and see how much Paul contributed to the recording of Come Together down to the electric piano, and the "smokey feel' by suggesting that tempo change and the bassline that transformed the song. Even John admitted as much.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Sept 10, 2016 20:30:40 GMT -5
Paul was a kid with stars in his eyes when he met John. John was already out there, getting it done. The best thing that ever happened to Paul was meeting John Lennon. Paul will tell you that. John was Elvis personified to Paul.
Trying to paint Paul as the bigger figure in the Beatles serves no purpose.
Paul may be the favorite Beatle and he is, in my opinion, the best person to bring in new fans. But ask the fans who have been around for a while, the ones who know the music. John will always be viewed in proper perspective. It will always be "John, Paul, George and Ringo!" (RTP being outside that box.)
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Sept 10, 2016 22:54:30 GMT -5
Paul was a kid with stars in his eyes when he met John. John was already out there, getting it done. The best thing that ever happened to Paul was meeting John Lennon. Paul will tell you that. John was Elvis personified to Paul. Trying to paint Paul as the bigger figure in the Beatles serves no purpose. Paul may be the favorite Beatle and he is, in my opinion, the best person to bring in new fans. But ask the fans who have been around for a while, the ones who know the music. John will always be viewed in proper perspective. It will always be "John, Paul, George and Ringo!" (RTP being outside that box.) The Quarrymen were not a professional band before Paul joined. If you research that you will find that the former members have said that to the man including John. They had only played one gig before the Village Church fete where they met and that was George's btother's wedding.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Sept 10, 2016 23:32:11 GMT -5
John's domination of the early songwriting of the Beatles is overstated. Here are the first 24 Lennon/McCartney originals to appear on their first two albums and early singles. The primary songwriter is noted in parenthesis. Note that the credits are divided evenly between Paul and John and both John and Paul one third each.
1. I Saw Her Standing There (Paul) 2. Misery (John and Paul) 3. Ask Me Why (John) 4. Please Please Me (John) 5. Love Me Do (Paul) 6. P.S. I Love You (Paul) 7. Do You Want To Know A Secret? (John) 8. There's A Place (John and Paul) 9. From Me To You (John and Paul) 10. Thank You Girl (John and Paul) 11. She Loves You (John and Paul) 12. I'll Get You (John and Paul) 13. I Want To Hold Your Hand (John and Paul) 14. This Boy (John) 15. It Won't Be Long (John) 16. All My Loving (Paul) 17. Little Child (John and Paul) 18. Hold Me Tight (Paul) 19. I Wanna Be Your Man (Paul) 20. Not A Second Time (John) 21. Can't Buy Me Love (Paul) 22. You Can't Do That (John) 23. A Hard Day's Night (John) 24. Things We Said Today (Pau1)
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 11, 2016 13:15:43 GMT -5
Paul was a kid with stars in his eyes when he met John. John was already out there, getting it done. The best thing that ever happened to Paul was meeting John Lennon. Paul will tell you that. John was Elvis personified to Paul. Trying to paint Paul as the bigger figure in the Beatles serves no purpose. Paul may be the favorite Beatle and he is, in my opinion, the best person to bring in new fans. But ask the fans who have been around for a while, the ones who know the music. John will always be viewed in proper perspective. It will always be "John, Paul, George and Ringo!" (RTP being outside that box.) The Quarrymen were not a professional band before Paul joined. If you research that you will find that the former members have said that to the man including John. They had only played one gig before the Village Church fete where they met and that was George's btother's wedding. Paul was not a professional anything when he joined the Quarrymen. Sure, he knew more proper guitar chords than John when they met but he was still a rank amateur guitarist and even less as a songwriter. You make it sound like 1964 Era Paul suddenly walked into John's life in the 1950's. John and Paul did a lot of growing together and that is the beauty of the story to most of us.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Sept 11, 2016 13:28:17 GMT -5
John's domination of the early songwriting of the Beatles is overstated. Here are the first 24 Lennon/McCartney originals to appear on their first two albums and early singles. The primary songwriter is noted in parenthesis. Note that the credits are divided evenly between Paul and John and both John and Paul one third each. 1. I Saw Her Standing There (Paul) 2. Misery (John and Paul) 3. Ask Me Why (John) 4. Please Please Me (John) 5. Love Me Do (Paul) 6. P.S. I Love You (Paul) 7. Do You Want To Know A Secret? (John) 8. There's A Place (John and Paul) 9. From Me To You (John and Paul) 10. Thank You Girl (John and Paul) 11. She Loves You (John and Paul) 12. I'll Get You (John and Paul) 13. I Want To Hold Your Hand (John and Paul) 14. This Boy (John) 15. It Won't Be Long (John) 16. All My Loving (Paul) 17. Little Child (John and Paul) 18. Hold Me Tight (Paul) 19. I Wanna Be Your Man (Paul) 20. Not A Second Time (John) 21. Can't Buy Me Love (Paul) 22. You Can't Do That (John) 23. A Hard Day's Night (John) 24. Things We Said Today (Pau1) I also noticed that all of the (John and Paul) songs were sang primarily by John.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Sept 11, 2016 20:18:21 GMT -5
John didn't know how to play the guitar properly and he didn't write songs before he met Paul. John wrote poetry but not songs when they met. John had written at least one song -- "Calypso Rock" -- before he met Paul. He'd likely written a second one as well (if not more), but details of this second one are not known to exist, other than John's recollecting it once. Most of the credit for teaching John proper guitar goes to George Harrison, not Paul. Paul was given his chance to be The Quarrymen's lead guitarist upon joining... and he blew it, by doing such a crap guitar solo at his first gig that they never let him play lead ever again. Its natural that he would talk about the Beatles and the situations are seldom self serving. Lol...! If that's true (which it isn't), it's only because he wrote a 600-page book of Paul-centred revisionism.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Sept 11, 2016 20:22:53 GMT -5
The Quarrymen were not a professional band before Paul joined. If you research that you will find that the former members have said that to the man including John. They had only played one gig before the Village Church fete where they met and that was George's btother's wedding. Again, wrong. The Quarrymen had random bookings in Liverpool through spring/summer 1957, including two at the Cavern (all before Paul joined). They also played school dances and youth clubs. How exactly do you figure the group suddenly became "professional" upon Paul's joining...?
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Sept 12, 2016 12:12:21 GMT -5
From Christopher Sanford's book "McCartney": Paul soon realized the Quarrymen were not the phenomenon his friend Vaughan had described to him, playing chiefly at friends' birthday parties and a church dance. The group was formed only a scant eight months earlier when John received a sum of money for his sixteenth birthday from his dentist uncle with which purchased a second hand guitar. Just a month earlier, the lads had taken the bus to the Empire Theatre to audition for a Carol Lewis talent shown. The local star maker had turnd them down flat in favor of the Sunnyside Skiffle Group, a Speke combo fronted by Nicky Cuff, the dwarf.
Vaughan made the four-word introduction that changed pop culture. 'Paul: this is John'. As it turned out, McCartney and Lennon lived only a mile or so apart, separated by the suburban golf links. McCartney's first act upon meeting Lennon was to helpfully offer to tune his guitar. His second was to casually demonstrate note-perfect versions of Eddie Cochran's Twenty Flight Rock and Gene Vincent's Be Bop A Lu La. Then over a smoke, came the proposition. John wanted Paul in the group. John had noted that Paul had a 'great set of pipes' and he wanted him to sing too.
Paul had a few terms of his acceptance. First, they should all get proper stage outfit. Secondly, the bands so called player-manager, Nigel Whalley, did not perform live with the group and thus shouldn't receive equal compensation. Paul's other contingency was that the drummer was 'crap' and must be replaced.
Paul had some stage experience that summer before joining the group when he and his brother Mike sang a duet of an Everly Brother's song at the Butlin's Holdiay Camp.
More to come.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Sept 12, 2016 13:18:27 GMT -5
I did not realize Paul was such a butthole. Thanks RTP.
I guess Paul just missed joining Speke, with Nicky the dwarf. Boy, that would have been fab!
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Sept 12, 2016 15:05:18 GMT -5
I did not realize Paul was such a butthole. Thanks RTP. I guess Paul just missed joining Speke, with Nicky the dwarf. Boy, that would have been fab! That's why I am always saying 'do your research'.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Sept 12, 2016 21:01:13 GMT -5
From Christopher Sanford's book "McCartney": Paul soon realized the Quarrymen were not the phenomenon his friend Vaughan had described to him, playing chiefly at friends' birthday parties and a church dance. The group was formed only a scant eight months earlier when John received a sum of money for his sixteenth birthday from his dentist uncle with which purchased a second hand guitar. Just a month earlier, the lads had taken the bus to the Empire Theatre to audition for a Carol Lewis talent shown. The local star maker had turnd them down flat in favor of the Sunnyside Skiffle Group, a Speke combo fronted by Nicky Cuff, the dwarf. Vaughan made the four-word introduction that changed pop culture. 'Paul: this is John'. As it turned out, McCartney and Lennon lived only a mile or so apart, separated by the suburban golf links. McCartney's first act upon meeting Lennon was to helpfully offer to tune his guitar. His second was to casually demonstrate note-perfect versions of Eddie Cochran's Twenty Flight Rock and Gene Vincent's Be Bop A Lu La. Then over a smoke, came the proposition. John wanted Paul in the group. John had noted that Paul had a 'great set of pipes' and he wanted him to sing too. Paul had a few terms of his acceptance. First, they should all get proper stage outfit. Secondly, the bands so called player-manager, Nigel Whalley, did not perform live with the group and thus shouldn't receive equal compensation. Paul's other contingency was that the drummer was 'crap' and must be replaced. Paul had some stage experience that summer before joining the group when he and his brother Mike sang a duet of an Everly Brother's song at the Butlin's Holdiay Camp. More to come. Yeah, this information is mostly wrong. Christopher Sandford is a hack-British writer who's written a bunch of rock bios of Sting, Eric Clapton, Paul, The Stones, Keith Richards, Springsteen, etc. He's not a quality researcher; just a production-line writer. In the time it takes a proper writer like Lewisohn to research one weekend in 1961, Sandford hack-writes an entire book. I like how you emphasised the "turned them down flat" in spring 1957. I guess you expected a bunch of 15-16 year old schoolboys in war-ravaged Liverpool, playing tea-chests and banjos, to be on the Ed Sullivan Show six months after forming. But wait! Once Paul joins, they're gonna be PROFESSIONAL!! Oh wait... they also got rejected by everyone after Paul joined until spring 1962.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Sept 13, 2016 4:43:49 GMT -5
Interview with Quarryman Rod Davis:
Q - Did the Quarrymen ever think "We're gonna go places."?
A - No. We were just guys having fun basically. When Paul McCartney arrived, Paul definitely had ideas of making his career in music, whereas the rest of us were just having fun basically. (laughs) I left in 1957. The group was getting away from playing skiffle and moving more toward rock and roll. That was also Paul's influence.
Q - At the height of Beatlemanina, did you have contact with John or the other guys in The Beatles?
A - Well, I lost touch with John on a regular basis in 1957, which is when John left school and went to the Art School. At the end of the year, when you were fifteen, you could leave if you wanted to. So, the other guys in the band from Quarry Bank, which were Pete Shotton and Eric Griffiths; Eric went to become an apprentice engineer; Pete went to become a police cadet and John went to Art School. So, I saw him from time to time. Although I was in the band, I was never a very close friend of John's.
Q - What kind of personality did John have in the years that you knew him?
A - Well, I think one of the things was he realized that there was very little of consequence that they could do to him, short of hit him on the backside with a cane. Even that was banned eventually at Quarry Bank School. The general idea of going to a grammar school was that you were supposed to learn as much as you can and then go away and use it later. If you rebelled at school it made the whole exercise pointless, but then again that's what John seemed to want to do. He just spent too much time fooling around at school. I got on with him very well 'cause I'd known him since I was about five years old. We were at Sunday School together. But he could be very unpleasant and he could be very cruel in fact. He was what we would call these days a "disruptive pupil." A sort of kid you do not want in your class. He was a nuisance basically.
Q - What did you think of him as a singer and a musician in The Quarrymen?
A - As a singer he was very good. As a guitar player, we were all rubbish. It didn't make any difference. We only knew three or four chords until Paul McCartney came and showed us how to play proper guitar chords. We had learned to play from John's mother Julia who only knew banjo chords. But John was a good harmonica player. Then, most kids I knew could play the harmonica. So, that wasn't really exceptional.
Q - I recall reading somewhere that George said John didn't have rhythm. I thought John's rhythm guitar playing in The Beatles was right there. It helped define The Beatles' sound.
A - What I think you've got to bear in mind is that when they went to Hamburg, that was the place they had to...that forged The Beatles. If you've got to play six hours a night, I mean, nobody practices for six hours. I've never known a band that will practice for six hours at a stretch. To practice six hours everyday, actually in front of the public, that either kills you or turns you into a great band. If you can't play rhythm having played six hours a night for a week, you'll never play rhythm. With The Quarrymen, we were all very much at the outer end of the spectrum. The fact that none of us were really very good didn't make much odds. In Hamburg, that's what made The Beatles basically, the fact that they were forced into playing well in Hamburg. It was either that or out.
Q - Did The Quarrymen work regularly in those early days?
A - No. it was just occasional stuff. We were a garage band I believe you call it in America and we didn't even have a garage. We would play anything that people offered us. A lot of the time it was playing at the interval at a dance. Sometimes you'd have a New Orleans Jazz band or a straight dance band playing. Then they would have a Skiffle group in the interval. That was the thing to do. That was a lot of our work. Then we got to play Rock 'n' Roll. You were supposed to just play Skiffle at The Cavern. We played Skiffle competitions. We played the odd golf club. We played church hall dances. It was a total rag bag. There were thousands of Skiffle bands in Liverpool. The only difference about us is it happened to be lead by John Lennon. At the time, it didn't cut any ice you know. (laughs)
Q - He was just one of many.
A - Yeah. We were all one of many. We had a drum kit, which made us stand out a bit. Colin was a bit older than the rest of us and he was working and therefore he was able to pay for some drums on the installment plan.
Q - What do you think John would have to say about The Quarrymen today?
A - Well, I would hope that he would want to come and play with us some time. That really would be nice. I know Paul has supposed to have had this idea of going back on the road and do those little secret gig places. I would be nice if Paul decided to turn up and play bass with us one day. We would be delighted. I would have hoped that John would've felt the same way. Come back and meet his old pals.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Paul Lied
Sept 13, 2016 7:09:49 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by lowbasso on Sept 13, 2016 7:09:49 GMT -5
Interview with Quarryman Rod Davis: Q - Did the Quarrymen ever think "We're gonna go places."? A - No. We were just guys having fun basically. When Paul McCartney arrived, Paul definitely had ideas of making his career in music, whereas the rest of us were just having fun basically. (laughs) I left in 1957 as the group got away from playing skiffle and moved more toward rock and roll. Again, that was Paul's influence. Q - At the height of Beatlemanina, did you have contact with John or the other guys in The Beatles? A - Well, I lost touch with John on a regular basis 1957, which is when John left school and went to the Art School. At the end of the year, when you were fifteen, you could leave if you wanted to. So, the other guys in the band from Quarry Bank, which were Pete Shotton and Eric Griffiths; Eric went to become an apprentice engineer; Pete went to become a police cadet and John went to Art School. So, I saw him from time to time. Although I was in the band, I was never a very close friend of John's. Q - What kind of personality did John have in the years that you knew him? A - Well, I think one of the things was he realized that there was very little of consequence that they could do to him, short of hit him on the backside with a cane. Even that was banned eventually at Quarry Bank School. The general idea of going to a grammar school was that you were supposed to learn as much as you can and then go away and use it later. If you rebelled at school it made the whole exercise pointless, but then again that's what John seemed to want to do. He just spent too much time fooling around at school. I got on with him very well 'cause I'd known him since I was about five years old. We were at Sunday School together. But he could be very unpleasant and he could be very cruel in fact. He was what we would call these days a "disruptive pupil." A sort of kid you do not want in your class. He was a nuisance basically. Q - What did you think of him as a singer and a musician in The Quarrymen? A - As a singer he was very good. As a guitar player, we were all rubbish. It didn't make any difference. We only knew three or four chords until Paul McCartney came and we improved. He showed us how to play guitar chords properly. But John was a good harmonica player. Then, most kids I knew could play the harmonica. So, that wasn't really exceptional. Q - I recall reading somewhere that George said John didn't have rhythm. I thought John's rhythm guitar playing in The Beatles was right there. It helped define The Beatles' sound. A - What I think you've got to bear in mind is that when they went to Hamburg, that was the place they had to...that forged The Beatles. If you've got to play six hours a night, I mean, nobody practices for six hours. I've never known a band that will practice for six hours at a stretch. To practice six hours everyday, actually in front of the public, that either kills you or turns you into a great band. If you can't play rhythm having played six hours a night for a week, you'll never play rhythm. With The Quarrymen, we were all very much at the outer end of the spectrum. The fact that none of us were really very good didn't make much odds. In Hamburg, that's what made The Beatles basically, the fact that they were forced into playing well in Hamburg. It was either that or out. Q - Did The Quarrymen work regularly in those early days? A - No. it was just occasional stuff. We were a garage band I believe you call it in America and we didn't even have a garage. We would play anything that people offered us. A lot of the time it was playing at the interval at a dance. Sometimes you'd have a New Orleans Jazz band or a straight dance band playing. Then they would have a Skiffle group in the interval. That was the thing to do. That was a lot of our work. Then we got to play Rock 'n' Roll. You were supposed to just play Skiffle at The Cavern. We played Skiffle competitions. We played the odd golf club. We played church hall dances. It was a total rag bag. There were thousands of Skiffle bands in Liverpool. The only difference about us is it happened to be lead by John Lennon. At the time, it didn't cut any ice you know. (laughs) Q - He was just one of many. A - Yeah. We were all one of many. We had a drum kit, which made us stand out a bit. Colin was a bit older than the rest of us and he was working and therefore he was able to pay for some drums on the installment plan. Q - What do you think John would have to say about The Quarrymen today? A - Well, I would hope that he would want to come and play with us some time. That really would be nice. I know Paul has supposed to have had this idea of going back on the road and do those little secret gig places. I would be nice if Paul decided to turn up and play bass with us one day. We would be delighted. I would have hoped that John would've felt the same way. Come back and meet his old pals. I believe John, had he lived, would have gone back to play with the band in some of their revival concerts in the 90's. What's Paul's excuse? Ego? Too good? If John had gone back in the 90's to play with them, you can bet Paul would have followed as well like a puppy following his master.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 13, 2016 10:08:42 GMT -5
One of my fondest Beatles' memories is meeting the version of the Quarrymen who released in 1997 the album Get Back – Together at that year's Chicago Beatlefest. That group was:
Len Garry - vocals, guitar Eric Griffiths - guitar Rod Davis - vocals, guitar Colin Hanton - drums Pete Shotton - washboard, tea-chest bass.
They were fun guys and Rod Davis is a true gentleman! I likewise loved their musical performance as it came 13 years before I discovered and got heavily into The Avett Brothers who originally did an Americana version of skiffle with banjo, guitar and stand-up bass.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 13, 2016 18:20:32 GMT -5
Interview with Quarryman Rod Davis: Q - Did the Quarrymen ever think "We're gonna go places."? A - No. We were just guys having fun basically. When Paul McCartney arrived, Paul definitely had ideas of making his career in music, whereas the rest of us were just having fun basically. (laughs) I left in 1957. The group was getting away from playing skiffle and moving more toward rock and roll. That was also Paul's influence. Q - At the height of Beatlemanina, did you have contact with John or the other guys in The Beatles? A - Well, I lost touch with John on a regular basis in 1957, which is when John left school and went to the Art School. At the end of the year, when you were fifteen, you could leave if you wanted to. So, the other guys in the band from Quarry Bank, which were Pete Shotton and Eric Griffiths; Eric went to become an apprentice engineer; Pete went to become a police cadet and John went to Art School. So, I saw him from time to time. Although I was in the band, I was never a very close friend of John's. Q - What kind of personality did John have in the years that you knew him? A - Well, I think one of the things was he realized that there was very little of consequence that they could do to him, short of hit him on the backside with a cane. Even that was banned eventually at Quarry Bank School. The general idea of going to a grammar school was that you were supposed to learn as much as you can and then go away and use it later. If you rebelled at school it made the whole exercise pointless, but then again that's what John seemed to want to do. He just spent too much time fooling around at school. I got on with him very well 'cause I'd known him since I was about five years old. We were at Sunday School together. But he could be very unpleasant and he could be very cruel in fact. He was what we would call these days a "disruptive pupil." A sort of kid you do not want in your class. He was a nuisance basically. Q - What did you think of him as a singer and a musician in The Quarrymen? A - As a singer he was very good. As a guitar player, we were all rubbish. It didn't make any difference. We only knew three or four chords until Paul McCartney came and showed us how to play proper guitar chords. We had learned to play from John's mother Julia who only knew banjo chords. But John was a good harmonica player. Then, most kids I knew could play the harmonica. So, that wasn't really exceptional. Q - I recall reading somewhere that George said John didn't have rhythm. I thought John's rhythm guitar playing in The Beatles was right there. It helped define The Beatles' sound. A - What I think you've got to bear in mind is that when they went to Hamburg, that was the place they had to...that forged The Beatles. If you've got to play six hours a night, I mean, nobody practices for six hours. I've never known a band that will practice for six hours at a stretch. To practice six hours everyday, actually in front of the public, that either kills you or turns you into a great band. If you can't play rhythm having played six hours a night for a week, you'll never play rhythm. With The Quarrymen, we were all very much at the outer end of the spectrum. The fact that none of us were really very good didn't make much odds. In Hamburg, that's what made The Beatles basically, the fact that they were forced into playing well in Hamburg. It was either that or out. Q - Did The Quarrymen work regularly in those early days? A - No. it was just occasional stuff. We were a garage band I believe you call it in America and we didn't even have a garage. We would play anything that people offered us. A lot of the time it was playing at the interval at a dance. Sometimes you'd have a New Orleans Jazz band or a straight dance band playing. Then they would have a Skiffle group in the interval. That was the thing to do. That was a lot of our work. Then we got to play Rock 'n' Roll. You were supposed to just play Skiffle at The Cavern. We played Skiffle competitions. We played the odd golf club. We played church hall dances. It was a total rag bag. There were thousands of Skiffle bands in Liverpool. The only difference about us is it happened to be lead by John Lennon. At the time, it didn't cut any ice you know. (laughs) Q - He was just one of many. A - Yeah. We were all one of many. We had a drum kit, which made us stand out a bit. Colin was a bit older than the rest of us and he was working and therefore he was able to pay for some drums on the installment plan. Q - What do you think John would have to say about The Quarrymen today? A - Well, I would hope that he would want to come and play with us some time. That really would be nice. I know Paul has supposed to have had this idea of going back on the road and do those little secret gig places. I would be nice if Paul decided to turn up and play bass with us one day. We would be delighted. I would have hoped that John would've felt the same way. Come back and meet his old pals. So what's the point of you posting this, RTP? To once again try to marginalize John Lennon as a big Nuthin', and build Paul McCartney up as "The Beatles"...? You know, I like Paul and his music... but Macca Mad Hatters tend to make me take it out on Paul, and it's not fair to him. Tactics like this often have the reverse of the desired effect. As Panther says in another post --- and brilliantly so I might add -- the group STILL went nowhere even with Paul joining... until Parlophone and George Martin stepped in. Furthermore, I was just re-listening to the Jan. 1962 Decca tapes again, and Paul is really the worst of the three of them (not including Pete Best). Who was Paul trying to emulate with his nervously lousy singing anyway .. Elvis? Some hybrid? So let's not make it out like Paul was this god who made the band a sensation.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 13, 2016 18:28:10 GMT -5
I like how you emphasised the "turned them down flat" in spring 1957. I guess you expected a bunch of 15-16 year old schoolboys in war-ravaged Liverpool, playing tea-chests and banjos, to be on the Ed Sullivan Show six months after forming. But wait! Once Paul joins, they're gonna be PROFESSIONAL!!
Oh wait... they also got rejected by everyone after Paul joined until spring 1962. Well said. Meanwhile, I love the way the great researcher Mark Lewisohn is deemed by Mr. RTP as "unreliable because he is in the Lennon camp" with his "Tune In" masterpeice, yet Christopher Sanford with his "McCartney" book is supposedly right on the money.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 13, 2016 18:42:39 GMT -5
John's domination of the early songwriting of the Beatles is overstated. Here are the first 24 Lennon/McCartney originals to appear on their first two albums and early singles. The primary songwriter is noted in parenthesis. Note that the credits are divided evenly between Paul and John and both John and Paul one third each. Leave it to you, RTP. I have been dealing with a lot of Paul Maniacs on various message boards, and at least they have finally managed to throw poor Lennon a bone by at least giving him the edge through 1965 ... from there it's pretty much recognized that Paul became the more dominant force from 1966 (REVOLVER) and beyond. But that is not good enough for the Paul Was The Beatles group; no ... Paul must always be #1 in everything, and at least right behind John as #2 in John's own songs. It is really unfair to John and gets increasingly more sickening by the year... And the craziest part? That group of fans STILL believe John is getting all the credit over Paul in 2016!
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 13, 2016 18:51:25 GMT -5
I did not realize Paul was such a butthole. Thanks RTP. I also thank Mark Lewisohn for making me aware what a jerk Paul could be in the early years. Deliberately making Brian Epstein and the other Beatles wait for Paul the Prima Donna to show up for important meetings... the dislike he harbored for Stuart Sutcliffe, etc. Not that I hold this against Paul, really.. finally I am coming to feel that Paul was somewhat human and not this endless "thumbs aloft" panderer. It's nice to know he could be as much of a jerk as John Lennon could be ... at least sometimes. Difference is that John didn't try to hide it.
|
|
markc
Very Clean
Posts: 447
|
Post by markc on Sept 13, 2016 19:01:32 GMT -5
Plus it was never Long Paul and the Silver Beetles! It was always Jobn's group. He was first among equals in the heyday. When he was done with the group, it was over. Period.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Sept 14, 2016 3:53:06 GMT -5
Sandford is a hack and always has been. Lewisohn is a meticulous researcher, brilliant writer, and an impartial historian.
Paul was so bad on the Decca audition that he wasn't even entertainingly bad. I think it's the first time I've ever heard pure fear on a record.
Joe is right - overstating a case often has the opposite effect to what was intended. Looking at the Beatles output shows, fairly clearly, John dominant up to and including Rubber Soul, Paul dominant from Revolver onwards, but a clear group ethos with both men (indeed, all four) pulling their weight throughout the groups' recorded output.
And when it was started, it was John's group. Yes, Paul added some gloss and professionalism, but it was John's group. And Paul was a bit of a shit at times. But so was John.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 14, 2016 10:36:29 GMT -5
Sandford is a hack and always has been. Lewisohn is a meticulous researcher, brilliant writer, and an impartial historian. Paul was so bad on the Decca audition that he wasn't even entertainingly bad. I think it's the first time I've ever heard pure fear on a record. Joe is right - overstating a case often has the opposite effect to what was intended. Looking at the Beatles output shows, fairly clearly, John dominant up to and including Rubber Soul, Paul dominant from Revolver onwards, but a clear group ethos with both men (indeed, all four) pulling their weight throughout the groups' recorded output. And when it was started, it was John's group. Yes, Paul added some gloss and professionalism, but it was John's group. And Paul was a bit of a shit at times. But so was John. Pretty balanced but I assert that neither John nor Paul dominated one period or another because I do not know what dominate means! If we go by A-Sides of singles then Paul dominated the second half of The Beatles sure but that means nothing to me as to the quality of who was doing what. I just point to the single "Hello Goodbye/I Am The Walrus" to make my point. HG is very good but Walrus is sublime yet it is not the A-Side. Thank God, the gods or magical unicorns that John gave the Beatles "Come Together" and every song he did on the "White Album" least The Beatles become The Monkees! And early on, how can we discount Paul's contributions and say John dominated? What, disregard "All My Loving," "Can't Buy Me Love," "Things We Said Today," etc.? No way baby, I assert John and Paul were vital throughout The Beatles in their own wonderful ways and I don't just write that to blow sunshine up anyone's ass! I mean it. I don't go by quantity but by quality and both John and Paul deliver album after album, single after single! Throw the ever-improving George into the mix and we have a band worth talking about 46 years after its demise!
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Sept 14, 2016 17:05:12 GMT -5
I agree with John here. To me, John's songs were the songs that broke the band in the early period. He sang a whole lot more of the songs and back then we didn't know who wrote what. To me, his songs sound dated. Paul's songs stand the test of time much better. Probably because John's songs define the time.
John and George's songs dominate the Beatles middle period, pre-White Album. By that time, the Beatles were mainstream pop. Paul's songs did nothing to shake that opinion. It was John and George who were getting the attention. Their songs sound more like modern music. (Modern rock, not that dreadful sounding modern pop.)
The White Album on, they are equals.
The solo years, it depended on who had the new album out.
|
|
kc
Beatle Freak
Posts: 1,085
|
Post by kc on Sept 14, 2016 20:18:13 GMT -5
John's domination of the early songwriting of the Beatles is overstated. Here are the first 24 Lennon/McCartney originals to appear on their first two albums and early singles. The primary songwriter is noted in parenthesis. Note that the credits are divided evenly between Paul and John and both John and Paul one third each. 1. I Saw Her Standing There (Paul) 2. Misery (John and Paul) 3. Ask Me Why (John) 4. Please Please Me (John) 5. Love Me Do (Paul) 6. P.S. I Love You (Paul) 7. Do You Want To Know A Secret? (John) 8. There's A Place (John and Paul) 9. From Me To You (John and Paul) 10. Thank You Girl (John and Paul) 11. She Loves You (John and Paul) 12. I'll Get You (John and Paul) 13. I Want To Hold Your Hand (John and Paul) 14. This Boy (John) 15. It Won't Be Long (John) 16. All My Loving (Paul) 17. Little Child (John and Paul) 18. Hold Me Tight (Paul) 19. I Wanna Be Your Man (Paul) 20. Not A Second Time (John) 21. Can't Buy Me Love (Paul) 22. You Can't Do That (John) 23. A Hard Day's Night (John) 24. Things We Said Today (Pau1) You have missed a lot of songs on your list, RTP. Most of those from the A Hard Day’s Night album are not present. Also, All I’ve Got To Do, from With The Beatles. Most of these are Lennon compositions. If they are counted then he is clearly ahead of McCartney in the song writing tally for the “early” Beatles period. Having said that, it should not be detrimental to Paul’s standing that this simple fact is recognised. John’s reputation is not diminished when it is pointed out that he produced less songs than his partner in 1966-67. I have always considered John and Paul’s contributions to the Beatles as being approximately equal. It matters little if one or the other wrote more material in one period as compared to another.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Sept 14, 2016 23:12:48 GMT -5
John's domination of the early songwriting of the Beatles is overstated. Here are the first 24 Lennon/McCartney originals to appear on their first two albums and early singles. The primary songwriter is noted in parenthesis. Note that the credits are divided evenly between Paul and John and both John and Paul one third each. 1. I Saw Her Standing There (Paul) 2. Misery (John and Paul) 3. Ask Me Why (John) 4. Please Please Me (John) 5. Love Me Do (Paul) 6. P.S. I Love You (Paul) 7. Do You Want To Know A Secret? (John) 8. There's A Place (John and Paul) 9. From Me To You (John and Paul) 10. Thank You Girl (John and Paul) 11. She Loves You (John and Paul) 12. I'll Get You (John and Paul) 13. I Want To Hold Your Hand (John and Paul) 14. This Boy (John) 15. It Won't Be Long (John) 16. All My Loving (Paul) 17. Little Child (John and Paul) 18. Hold Me Tight (Paul) 19. I Wanna Be Your Man (Paul) 20. Not A Second Time (John) 21. Can't Buy Me Love (Paul) 22. You Can't Do That (John) 23. A Hard Day's Night (John) 24. Things We Said Today (Pau1) You have missed a lot of songs on your list, RTP. Most of those from the A Hard Day’s Night album are not present. Also, All I’ve Got To Do, from With The Beatles. Most of these are Lennon compositions. If they ait re counted then he is clearly ahead of McCartney in the song writing tally for the “early” Beatles period. Having said that, it should not be detrimental to Paul’s standing that this simple fact is recognised. John’s reputation is not diminished when it is pointed out that he produced less songs than his partner in 1966-67. I have always considered John and Paul’s contributions to the Beatles as being approximately equal. It matters little if one or the other wrote more material in one period as compared to another. You're right, I did forget All I've Got To Do. Sorry, it was not intentional. I shouldn't try to do it from memory. So John gets a slight edge in this period (Nov. 1962 to July 1964 pre Hard Day's Night album) with the addition of All I've Got To Do in terms of volume. I think Paul was happy to have John sing more lead in those days and contribute equally to the songwriting. I did not intend to include the album A Hard Day's Night which, of course, John did dominate. I'm not unreasonable. For that album, that was the case, though I agree with JSD that its more quality not quantity. I believe the best songs from that album are the following: Can't Buy Me Love (P) A Hard Day's Night (J) And I Love Her (P) If I Fell (J) I'm Happy Just To Dance With You (J&P) Things We Said Today (P) I Should Have Known Better (J) I'll Be Back (J&P) You Can't Do That (J) The others are not standouts to me: When I Get Home (J) Anytime At All (J) Tell Me Why (J) I'll Cry Instead (J) They could have been replaced by some of the songs Paul gave away in that same period: World Without Love (P) A classic. It was the first No. 1 after the initial crush of Beatlemania. Nobody I Know (P) From A Window (P) Great song. One of Elvis Costello's favorites. I Don't Want To See You Again (P) Tip Of My Tongue (P) Would have been a perfect Herman's Hermits song. It's For You (P) Another Costello favorite. I don't think there was great domination even on A Hard Day's Night as far as quality. And I do not agree that John's songs broke Beatlemania. The songs that broke Beatlemania were pretty evenly shared and they are as follows: From Me To You (J&P) She Loves You (J&P) I Want to Hold Your Hand (J&P) All My Loving (P) This Boy (J) I Saw Her Standing There (P) Twist and Shout (cover) Sung at the pivotal Royal Variety Performance in 1963 and Ed Sullivan Show 1964 Till There Was You (cover) Sung at the pivotal Royal Variety Performance in 1963 and Ed Sullivan Show 1964 It was the Royal Variety Performance that helped unleash Beatlemania in Britain and Europe and that was when they got the attention of Ed Sullivan.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Sept 15, 2016 0:55:24 GMT -5
I don't mean to be a pain in the board. I want to bring a different perspective. We all know not to assume that everything people think is true is always so. I have always been suspicious of conventional wisdom. Conventional wisdom thought Donald Trump didn't have a chance and now look. He is ahead in the most recent national and important swing state polls. And anyway remember that saying "pain don't hurt you". It was one of those great philosophers, Smokey Robinson? No, Sparky Anderson. I always thought that was a funny saying. What else does pain do but hurt? Of course Sparky meant it only hurts you if you don't have a strong enough mind to play through it and put it out of your consciousness.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 15, 2016 5:45:48 GMT -5
You're right, I did forget All I've Got To Do. Sorry, it was not intentional. I shouldn't try to do it from memory. So John gets a slight edge in this period (Nov. 1962 to July 1964 pre Hard Day's Night album) with the addition of All I've Got To Do in terms of volume. I think Paul was happy to have John sing more lead in those days and contribute equally to the songwriting. I did not intend to include the album A Hard Day's Night which, of course, John did dominate. I'm not unreasonable. But how do you say you're not unreasonable when you make a full list of who supposedly wrote what, and then omit a bunch of John Lennon songs - and you by admission do not even include the HARD DAY'S NIGHT album!?? That is bizarre. And it smacks of an agenda, let's be honest. Yeah, well, I like those 4 songs. Then again, I'm not Anti-John. Why did you leave off John's BAD TO ME? That would have made a fine Beatles song. Of all these Paul songs you listed here, I think WORLD WITHOU LOVE is wonderful, and truly worthy -- but none of the others are particularly good, IMO. I think the 4 Lennon songs you have no use for on "A HARD DAY'S NIGHT" are all better than these 5 throwaway Paul songs (the exception being the classic "World Without Love")... that's why John and Paul gave many of these away. And where have you listed John's "Please Please Me'? Just admit it, RTP -- you and many other Macca Mad Hatters only reckon Paul as "The Beatles".
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Sept 15, 2016 9:14:12 GMT -5
Please Please Me was the first step toward Beatlemania but it wasn't until From Me To You spent 7 weeks at No. 1 in the spring of 1963 that it really began to take off. Then with She Loves You it really exploded.
|
|