|
Post by sayne on Jul 11, 2016 11:38:40 GMT -5
Through the years we have posted and commented on various Top 10/20 lists, but I don't know if this question has been asked.
If we were to consider the entire Beatles/post-Beatles catalog, from 1962 to now, would you put ANY solo song in the Top 20? If so, which one(s). Think hard. For example, is there really no solo song as good as Come Together or Something or Penny Lane or . . . ? I'd say, arguably, that I'm Losing You, Someplace Else, and English Tea, respectively, could compete with them.
Anyway, it's all subjective, but I'm interested to read what you think.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jul 11, 2016 12:22:49 GMT -5
Great question. First off, yes I believe there should be several Solo Beatles songs in a Top 20 from 1962 to 2016.
Some solo songs that would be in my Top 20 Beatles/Solo Beatles:
"Imagine" and "Instant Karma(We All Shine On)": John
"Maybe I'm Amazed" and "Too Much Rain": Paul
"Your Love Is Forever" and "What Is Life": George
"It Don't Come Easy" and "Don't Go Where The Road Don't Go": Ringo
I would thus have 8 out of 20 being Solo Beatles but admittedly they would be spread out, these wouldn't be my Top 8 or Lower 8. "Imagine" and "Maybe I'm Amazed" would be in my Top 10 though.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Jul 11, 2016 16:20:57 GMT -5
Through the years we have posted and commented on various Top 10/20 lists, but I don't know if this question has been asked. If we were to consider the entire Beatles/post-Beatles catalog, from 1962 to now, would you put ANY solo song in the Top 20? If so, which one(s). Think hard. For example, is there really no solo song as good as Come Together or Something or Penny Lane or . . . ? I'd say, arguably, that I'm Losing You, Someplace Else, and English Tea, respectively, could compete with them. Anyway, it's all subjective, but I'm interested to read what you think. One; "Imagine."
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jul 11, 2016 18:55:44 GMT -5
Through the years we have posted and commented on various Top 10/20 lists, but I don't know if this question has been asked. If we were to consider the entire Beatles/post-Beatles catalog, from 1962 to now, would you put ANY solo song in the Top 20? If so, which one(s). Think hard. For example, is there really no solo song as good as Come Together or Something or Penny Lane or . . . ? I'd say, arguably, that I'm Losing You, Someplace Else, and English Tea, respectively, could compete with them. Anyway, it's all subjective, but I'm interested to read what you think. One; "Imagine." "Imagine" grows in cultural significance each year even if like many of us, I don't want Solo John defined by that one song. But what a hell of a one song!
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Jul 11, 2016 20:11:58 GMT -5
My top twenty Beatles' list has 29 songs on it already. I don't have room to squeeze solo songs in.
My top songs are the more rocking songs, I Saw Her Standing There, I Should Had Known Better, Happiness Is a Warm Gun, Helter Skelter.
Imagine would not fit in with that. I Found Out, Cold Turkey or You Don't Know What You Got might fit better.
For Paul, Maybe I'm amazed is the obvious choice, although I'm a little burned out on it. I might consider Hi Hi Hi, although it might have to be skipped in certain crowds. That kind of disqualifies it. Live and Let Die, the same as Maybe I'm Amazed. I've always liked Juniors Farm and it rocks.
George's Someplace Else is an excellent choice. It's my favorite from George. And it rocks in a more subtle way. I like This Guitar Can't Keep From Crying a lot. And Woman Don't You Cry For Me.
Ringo's It Don't Come Easy still sounds good. Don't Go Where The Road Don't Go is also excellent. I like Give Me Back My Beat.
Getting the list down to twenty songs is un-do-able. I can't play this one.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Jul 12, 2016 8:52:18 GMT -5
I think the following would make my top-20: - Maybe I'm Amazed - My Sweet Lord - Imagine
That might be it. The other 17 would be Beatles' songs. So, 3/20 are 'solo'.
A couple other solo tracks that would be close are: - Beautiful Boy (Darling Boy) - Mull of Kintyre
but they wouldn't make the top-20.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jul 12, 2016 11:07:34 GMT -5
I think the following would make my top-20: - Maybe I'm Amazed - My Sweet Lord - Imagine That might be it. The other 17 would be Beatles' songs. So, 3/20 are 'solo'. A couple other solo tracks that would be close are: - Beautiful Boy (Darling Boy) - Mull of Kintyre but they wouldn't make the top-20. I am glad that you listed "My Sweet Lord" Panther and not let the litigation over it spoil its majestic qualities. I am afraid that is what stopped me from listing it and I chose the "safer" "What Is Life" which I also believe is a universal Pop classic! But MSL is royalty and it is a shame the litigation makes many folks put an * after its title for a footnote on the litigation.
|
|
markc
Very Clean
Posts: 447
|
Post by markc on Jul 12, 2016 12:37:30 GMT -5
In addition to it Don't Come Easy, Photograph is worthy.
|
|
|
Post by coachbk on Jul 12, 2016 21:45:43 GMT -5
Two songs would make it for sure: Imagine (John) Calico Skies (Paul)
Others that would be close: Instant Karma (John) Beautiful Boy (John) Maybe I'm Amazed (Paul) Band On The Run (Paul) Wandrlust (Paul) Give Me Love (George) Your Love Is Forever (George) It Don't Come Easy (Ringo)
Honorable Mention: Working Class Hero (John) Oh My Love (John) Grow Old With Me (John) Back Seat Of My Car (Paul) Mull Of Kintyre (Paul) Little Willow (Paul) What Is Life (George) Run Of The Mill (George) Photograph (Ringo)
|
|
|
Post by coachbk on Jul 12, 2016 21:47:58 GMT -5
Great question. First off, yes I believe there should be several Solo Beatles songs in a Top 20 from 1962 to 2016. Some solo songs that would be in my Top 20 Beatles/Solo Beatles: "Imagine" and "Instant Karma(We All Shine On)": John "Maybe I'm Amazed" and "Too Much Rain": Paul "Your Love Is Forever" and "What Is Life": George "It Don't Come Easy" and "Don't Go Where The Road Don't Go": Ringo I would thus have 8 out of 20 being Solo Beatles but admittedly they would be spread out, these wouldn't be my Top 8 or Lower 8. "Imagine" and "Maybe I'm Amazed" would be in my Top 10 though. This is a great list! i6 of them made my list of the ones I would consider!
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Jul 12, 2016 21:50:33 GMT -5
"Imagine" grows in cultural significance each year even if like many of us, I don't want Solo John defined by that one song. But what a hell of a one song! I consider "Imagine" on par with "Yesterday." They are the best two songs they ever wrote. Why can't John be defined by that song?
|
|
|
Post by coachbk on Jul 12, 2016 21:50:53 GMT -5
My top twenty Beatles' list has 29 songs on it already. I don't have room to squeeze solo songs in. My top songs are the more rocking songs, I Saw Her Standing There, I Should Had Known Better, Happiness Is a Warm Gun, Helter Skelter. Imagine would not fit in with that. I Found Out, Cold Turkey or You Don't Know What You Got might fit better. For Paul, Maybe I'm amazed is the obvious choice, although I'm a little burned out on it. I might consider Hi Hi Hi, although it might have to be skipped in certain crowds. That kind of disqualifies it. Live and Let Die, the same as Maybe I'm Amazed. I've always liked Juniors Farm and it rocks. George's Someplace Else is an excellent choice. It's my favorite from George. And it rocks in a more subtle way. I like This Guitar Can't Keep From Crying a lot. And Woman Don't You Cry For Me. Ringo's It Don't Come Easy still sounds good. Don't Go Where The Road Don't Go is also excellent. I like Give Me Back My Beat. Getting the list down to twenty songs is un-do-able. I can't play this one. Wow! I would never consider any of the John or George songs you listed and Hi Hi Hi is the very defintion of "mediocre rocker" in my book. I do agree that Junior's Farm rocks and It Don't Come Easy still sounds good though!
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Jul 12, 2016 22:32:26 GMT -5
My top twenty Beatles' list has 29 songs on it already. I don't have room to squeeze solo songs in. My top songs are the more rocking songs, I Saw Her Standing There, I Should Had Known Better, Happiness Is a Warm Gun, Helter Skelter. Imagine would not fit in with that. I Found Out, Cold Turkey or You Don't Know What You Got might fit better. For Paul, Maybe I'm amazed is the obvious choice, although I'm a little burned out on it. I might consider Hi Hi Hi, although it might have to be skipped in certain crowds. That kind of disqualifies it. Live and Let Die, the same as Maybe I'm Amazed. I've always liked Juniors Farm and it rocks. George's Someplace Else is an excellent choice. It's my favorite from George. And it rocks in a more subtle way. I like This Guitar Can't Keep From Crying a lot. And Woman Don't You Cry For Me. Ringo's It Don't Come Easy still sounds good. Don't Go Where The Road Don't Go is also excellent. I like Give Me Back My Beat. Getting the list down to twenty songs is un-do-able. I can't play this one. Wow! I would never consider any of the John or George songs you listed and Hi Hi Hi is the very defintion of "mediocre rocker" in my book. I do agree that Junior's Farm rocks and It Don't Come Easy still sounds good though! It sounds like I may be spot on again then. Thanks for the validation.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jul 13, 2016 11:02:16 GMT -5
"Imagine" grows in cultural significance each year even if like many of us, I don't want Solo John defined by that one song. But what a hell of a one song! I consider "Imagine" on par with "Yesterday." They are the best two songs they ever wrote. Why can't John be defined by that song? I am not knocking "Imagine" at all and like you I listed it as Top 20 worthy from 1962 to 2016. But John was a Rocker too, he was not just a utopian dreamer and his character flaws and sharp tongue endear him to many of us who know we are not perfect either and in John find a hero. There are Rock Stars who always look perfect, always say the right thing(even the right controversial thing in step with the times) and always make music that curiously is with the trend. John Lennon did none of that. He was a pinball whirling wildly though a pinball machine and we never knew what he would bump. John was not a saint and that is why many of us love him and as great, as majestic, as forever as "Imagine" is, that was just one part of John, a very great part for sure. John was also "New York City" and "Bring On The Lucie" and "You Don't Know What You Got," etc. That's all.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jul 13, 2016 11:08:11 GMT -5
Two songs would make it for sure: Imagine (John) Calico Skies (Paul) Others that would be close: Instant Karma (John) Beautiful Boy (John) Maybe I'm Amazed (Paul) Band On The Run (Paul) Wandrlust (Paul) Give Me Love (George) Your Love Is Forever (George) It Don't Come Easy (Ringo) Honorable Mention: Working Class Hero (John) Oh My Love (John) Grow Old With Me (John) Back Seat Of My Car (Paul) Mull Of Kintyre (Paul) Little Willow (Paul) What Is Life (George) Run Of The Mill (George) Photograph (Ringo) When I was driving from far east Massachusetts back to western Indiana, I replayed "Calico Skies" three times on Pure McCartney as it is that good! It does rank up there and I had simply forgotten it. It strikes such a nerve in me, Paul really hits a home run there.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Jul 13, 2016 11:50:33 GMT -5
One of the reasons I created this thread is that I tend to believe that most of us can't really be totally objective when it comes to evaluating Beatles songs. Beatles' songs carry so much emotional baggage with us. I have a feeling that if we played a sampling of Beatles songs and solo songs to someone who couldn't tell a Beatle from a hole in the wall, they might actually prefer the solo songs. Didn't Heather Mills say that she preferred Wings over the Beatles? She couldn't be alone. Kids growing up in the 70s would be more familiar with the solo songs, so it would make sense that they might like them more. Without the baggage and history, many solo songs could easily find favor over a group song.
Why don't we, as huge Beatles fans, not go bonkers over great solo songs - even to this day? It can't be because the songs aren't good. Handle With Care and Riding to Vanity Fair are two super songs, to me, and I think they match up well with much of the Beatles catalog. I'm sure you can name others. Why do we give favor to Helter Skelter, but not to Cut Me Some Slack? Yes, it is arguable that Helter Skelter is a better song, but it is NOT absolutely. Why do we love Blackbird, but not Calico Skies? You now, I'd put up When We Was Fab along with the best of Revolver, Pepper, or Magical Mystery Tour. It's been said by some of us that if some of the solo songs were Beatles songs we'd think they were great and if some of the Beatles songs were solo songs, we'd be less impressed.
Yes, there are Beatles songs that are great. They can't be touched. But, I argue there ARE solo songs that are just as grood, but there is something in the way that keeps us from hearing it.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jul 13, 2016 15:22:17 GMT -5
I don't disagree with one word you wrote, sayne.
Our boys continued to write and record great, great songs but it was harder for them on an album basis to keep up with the quality of a Beatles album by themselves but even saying that, there are many damn excellent Solo Beatles albums.
In my first post here 40% of my Top 20 songs from 1962 to 2016 were Solo and I have been reminded here of a few others that might bump me over 50%.
JoeK and I, in a rare meeting of the minds, have advocated the Solo catalogs for years. But you are correct, there are the staunch "Beatles 1st" crowd who would never consider a Solo song equal to a Beatles' one.
I am against though blurring the lines between Beatles music and Solo Beatles music. I have seen it written here that some day people will not distinguish between Beatles and Solo Beatles but I think that is unfair to John, Paul, George and Ringo because of all their good solo work. It is unfair to the Beatles, the greatest pop Band ever! I llke that dividing line between the two.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jul 13, 2016 17:57:25 GMT -5
Hold onto your hats because I am 100% in agreement with BOTH Sayne and John S Damm. Of course there are solo songs that are as good as Beatles songs... some are even BETTER than some Beatles songs!
I do think there is something in the way that prevents some diehard Beatles fans from recognizing very good/great solo tracks being "as worthy". I think it's silly and ridiculous to suggest that few (or "no") solo songs can be in the same league, merely because all four Beatles (or some combo of the members) do not participate on the songs. I would bet that -- if all four Beatles were alive now and still making group albums, with the very same solo tracks being released as 'Beatles' -- they would magically be giving them more credibility. And no, I don't think for a moment that "Any solo song would be an even BETTER recording with The Beatles doing it together"... no way.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jul 13, 2016 18:02:39 GMT -5
John was also "New York City" and "Bring On The Lucie" and "You Don't Know What You Got," etc. -- and "How Do You Sleep?"..
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Jul 13, 2016 18:40:29 GMT -5
I am against though blurring the lines between Beatles music and Solo Beatles music. I have seen it written here that some day people will not distinguish between Beatles and Solo Beatles but I think that is unfair to John, Paul, George and Ringo because of all their good solo work. It is unfair to the Beatles, the greatest pop Band ever! I llke that dividing line between the two. When George was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, While My Guitar Gently Weeps was THE song to represent him (thank you, Prince). I haven't revisited the induction, but I think Here Comes the Sun and Something were part of the video tribute. My memory is that his Beatles songs were featured more than solo stuff. Don't you think that years and decades from now when some college kid is taking a critical analysis class on the songs of Paul McCartney or John Lennon or George Harrison they will be going back to the very beginning of their work? They may discuss that there was an influence from the other members and George Martin and Dylan and Brian Wilson and the 60s that wasn't there in later years, but perhaps there was a maturity and thoughtfulness in later material that, although not as popular, was more revealing of who they were as individuals. Perhaps, looking at each of their entire catalog independent of the others and without drawing distinction between group and solo, they might conclude that what the songs may have lost in popular "hit" production arrangements and instrumentation gained in serious and personal reflection. To reflect this, I can see future greatest hits and anthologies going from 1962 to when they stopped making records.
|
|
kc
Beatle Freak
Posts: 1,085
|
Post by kc on Jul 13, 2016 19:16:00 GMT -5
It can't be because the songs aren't good. Handle With Care and Riding to Vanity Fair are two super songs, to me, and I think they match up well with much of the Beatles catalog. I completely agree with your identification of this song, sayne. One of the best things Paul McCartney has done, IMO. I wish it had been included on Pure McCartney.
|
|
kc
Beatle Freak
Posts: 1,085
|
Post by kc on Jul 13, 2016 20:01:10 GMT -5
sayne said,
"To reflect this, I can see future greatest hits and anthologies going from 1962 to when they stopped making records."
I'd like to see this happen one day. The scope is there for numerous releases of this type. The thought of four comprehensive box sets covering the life work of the individual members is appealing to me. Plenty of other artists have such collections to their name. In a similar vein we have previously discussed the possibility of a Solo 1 album being compiled. All good.
|
|
|
Post by coachbk on Jul 13, 2016 21:07:36 GMT -5
Wow! I would never consider any of the John or George songs you listed and Hi Hi Hi is the very defintion of "mediocre rocker" in my book. I do agree that Junior's Farm rocks and It Don't Come Easy still sounds good though! It sounds like I may be spot on again then. Thanks for the validation. I might also point out that nobody else has mentioned the songs you listed either
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Jul 13, 2016 23:15:35 GMT -5
I consider "Imagine" on par with "Yesterday." They are the best two songs they ever wrote. Why can't John be defined by that song? I am not knocking "Imagine" at all and like you I listed it as Top 20 worthy from 1962 to 2016. But John was a Rocker too, he was not just a utopian dreamer and his character flaws and sharp tongue endear him to many of us who know we are not perfect either and in John find a hero. There are Rock Stars who always look perfect, always say the right thing(even the right controversial thing in step with the times) and always make music that curiously is with the trend. John Lennon did none of that. He was a pinball whirling wildly though a pinball machine and we never knew what he would bump. John was not a saint and that is why many of us love him and as great, as majestic, as forever as "Imagine" is, that was just one part of John, a very great part for sure. John was also "New York City" and "Bring On The Lucie" and "You Don't Know What You Got," etc. That's all. I agree with everything you say about who John was. But his wild unpredictable personality and his anger he could bring out at any moment were a result of his upbringing and were a result of external events in his life. A father who left him, a mother who left him with his Aunt Mimi, and then a tragic accident removed her from his life as he tried to reconcile with her. His best friend died of a brain hemorrhage when barely in his twenties. Is it any wonder John carried a huge chip on his shoulder his whole life? But the real John underneath all that was the guy who wrote "Imagine." In my opinion, this song defines the man who lay beneath all the bullshit. The lyrics are phenominal, the music a perfect companion to the lyrics. John opened his soul to the world when he wrote this song. Like he did with "All You Need Is Love." Which is an embryonic "Imagine." This was the real John. Music comes from the soul, it is often the essence of who we are. John dropped his guard, stepped out of his skin to create this song and then went back inside. That is how I hear it. Other songs that reveal the real John; "Beautiful Boy", "Good Night", "Woman", "In My Life". "Imagine" defines him. A guy who imagined the world the way he would like it to be. For himself and the world. Let's take his word Imagine; Can you imagine if John had two parents who had raised him in a loving home, who lived to see his success and supported him and were proud of him? If his best friend had not died so young? If he hadn't been forced to marry too young due to an unwanted pregnancy? And through no fault of his own; had he lived a full lifetime instead of some scum cutting it short? If all that had occurred, what kind of person would John have been? Imagine........
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Jul 14, 2016 0:39:01 GMT -5
In retrospect, it was clear that the 'Beatle energy', if you will, still drove the three principles in 1970, 1971, and (sort-of) 1972.
In John's case, once he left England for good -- autumn 1971 -- the Beatle-energy was gone and his truly 'solo' period started.
In George's case, once 'Living in the Material World' was finally in the can (late '72/early '73), his Beatle energy was dissipated and gone.
In Paul's case, it's a bit trickier because 'Ram' still has some Beatle leftover ideas on it, but in fact it was recorded in New York and therefore seems like a fresh start. Somewhere around 'Ram' or maybe when he started the group concept (later known as "Wings") is when the Beatle energy dissipated.
Anyway, the best stuff these guys did in 1969 / 1970 / 1971 (and to a lesser extent 1972, esp. for George) is easily on par with their best Beatle-stuff, and in some ways is better. The issue is that the accompanying albums and projects required one Beatle to do the work of 4 (previously) and quality-per-quantity suffered. You know, we've all seen the fantasy '1970 Beatle album' or '1971 Beatle album' and there's absolutely no doubt that in terms of sheer song-quality, there was more than enough 1st-rate material to match 'Revolver' or 'Abbey Road' in quality.
By the mid-1970s, you can't say that anymore, though. But by then, John and George had kind of checked out of the 'solo career' thing anyway, Ringo was a drunk, and Paul was deep into making throwaway pop.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Jul 14, 2016 6:10:42 GMT -5
It sounds like I may be spot on again then. Thanks for the validation. I might also point out that nobody else has mentioned the songs you listed either Right. As I say quite often, I tend to like the more rocking songs.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Jul 14, 2016 8:25:25 GMT -5
In retrospect, it was clear that the 'Beatle energy', if you will, still drove the three principles in 1970, 1971, and (sort-of) 1972. In John's case, once he left England for good -- autumn 1971 -- the Beatle-energy was gone and his truly 'solo' period started. In George's case, once 'Living in the Material World' was finally in the can (late '72/early '73), his Beatle energy was dissipated and gone. In Paul's case, it's a bit trickier because 'Ram' still has some Beatle leftover ideas on it, but in fact it was recorded in New York and therefore seems like a fresh start. Somewhere around 'Ram' or maybe when he started the group concept (later known as "Wings") is when the Beatle energy dissipated. Anyway, the best stuff these guys did in 1969 / 1970 / 1971 (and to a lesser extent 1972, esp. for George) is easily on par with their best Beatle-stuff, and in some ways is better. The issue is that the accompanying albums and projects required one Beatle to do the work of 4 (previously) and quality-per-quantity suffered. You know, we've all seen the fantasy '1970 Beatle album' or '1971 Beatle album' and there's absolutely no doubt that in terms of sheer song-quality, there was more than enough 1st-rate material to match 'Revolver' or 'Abbey Road' in quality. By the mid-1970s, you can't say that anymore, though. But by then, John and George had kind of checked out of the 'solo career' thing anyway, Ringo was a drunk, and Paul was deep into making throwaway pop. You make a lot of good points here. I will always feel the more Beatles that were on a track the better it usually was, even after 1970. That was the magic of that band. When they worked together, it was almost always better than not. It seems today it is sappy to think that way so call me sappy; The more Beatles involved in a song, the better it sounded. I think John's Beatle "energy" started fading when Brian died and Yoko came along. By 1969, his drug use buried his musical energy or creative motivation big time. It came back fully not until Double Fantasy. Ironically his best song "Imagine" came along in his drug hazed period. He must have sobered up temporarily.....
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jul 14, 2016 9:47:33 GMT -5
I am not knocking "Imagine" at all and like you I listed it as Top 20 worthy from 1962 to 2016. But John was a Rocker too, he was not just a utopian dreamer and his character flaws and sharp tongue endear him to many of us who know we are not perfect either and in John find a hero. There are Rock Stars who always look perfect, always say the right thing(even the right controversial thing in step with the times) and always make music that curiously is with the trend. John Lennon did none of that. He was a pinball whirling wildly though a pinball machine and we never knew what he would bump. John was not a saint and that is why many of us love him and as great, as majestic, as forever as "Imagine" is, that was just one part of John, a very great part for sure. John was also "New York City" and "Bring On The Lucie" and "You Don't Know What You Got," etc. That's all. I agree with everything you say about who John was. But his wild unpredictable personality and his anger he could bring out at any moment were a result of his upbringing and were a result of external events in his life. A father who left him, a mother who left him with his Aunt Mimi, and then a tragic accident removed her from his life as he tried to reconcile with her. His best friend died of a brain hemorrhage when barely in his twenties. Is it any wonder John carried a huge chip on his shoulder his whole life? But the real John underneath all that was the guy who wrote "Imagine." In my opinion, this song defines the man who lay beneath all the bullshit. The lyrics are phenominal, the music a perfect companion to the lyrics. John opened his soul to the world when he wrote this song. Like he did with "All You Need Is Love." Which is an embryonic "Imagine." This was the real John. Music comes from the soul, it is often the essence of who we are. John dropped his guard, stepped out of his skin to create this song and then went back inside. That is how I hear it. Other songs that reveal the real John; "Beautiful Boy", "Good Night", "Woman", "In My Life". "Imagine" defines him. A guy who imagined the world the way he would like it to be. For himself and the world. Let's take his word Imagine; Can you imagine if John had two parents who had raised him in a loving home, who lived to see his success and supported him and were proud of him? If his best friend had not died so young? If he hadn't been forced to marry too young due to an unwanted pregnancy? And through no fault of his own; had he lived a full lifetime instead of some scum cutting it short? If all that had occurred, what kind of person would John have been? Imagine........ I was going to say that if John had had that nice home-life then he would have been Paul! But Paul lost his mother very young and in fact that was a source of bonding with him and john. Nice points made lowbasso and John's actual childhood is why he always gets more ink as to the childhood years than the others although Paul and Ringo had their share of heartaches growing up. George truly had a happy childhood it seems and it kind of showed in his adult demeanor.
|
|
|
Post by coachbk on Jul 14, 2016 21:30:35 GMT -5
In retrospect, it was clear that the 'Beatle energy', if you will, still drove the three principles in 1970, 1971, and (sort-of) 1972. In John's case, once he left England for good -- autumn 1971 -- the Beatle-energy was gone and his truly 'solo' period started. In George's case, once 'Living in the Material World' was finally in the can (late '72/early '73), his Beatle energy was dissipated and gone. In Paul's case, it's a bit trickier because 'Ram' still has some Beatle leftover ideas on it, but in fact it was recorded in New York and therefore seems like a fresh start. Somewhere around 'Ram' or maybe when he started the group concept (later known as "Wings") is when the Beatle energy dissipated. Anyway, the best stuff these guys did in 1969 / 1970 / 1971 (and to a lesser extent 1972, esp. for George) is easily on par with their best Beatle-stuff, and in some ways is better. The issue is that the accompanying albums and projects required one Beatle to do the work of 4 (previously) and quality-per-quantity suffered. You know, we've all seen the fantasy '1970 Beatle album' or '1971 Beatle album' and there's absolutely no doubt that in terms of sheer song-quality, there was more than enough 1st-rate material to match 'Revolver' or 'Abbey Road' in quality. By the mid-1970s, you can't say that anymore, though. But by then, John and George had kind of checked out of the 'solo career' thing anyway, Ringo was a drunk, and Paul was deep into making throwaway pop. I can agree that much 1970 and 1971 solo Beatles stuff is "Beatles worthy". For John you have "Instant Karma" and most of PLASTIC ONO BAND and IMAGINE. Paul has "Another Day", a couple songs from MCCARTNEY (Maybe Im Amazed and Every Night), most of RAM, and one song from WILD LIFE (Tomorrow). George has most of ALL THINGS MUST PASS while Ringo has "It Don't Come Easy". But 1972 is a solo Beatles wasteland. Perhaps their poorest year of the 70's. I still see Beatles magic in 1973. John has a few songs from MIND GAMES (most notably the title track). Paul has "Live And Let Die", a couple songs from RED ROSE SPEEDWAY, and most of BAND ON THE RUN. George has a few songs from LIVING IN THE MATERIAL WORLD. Ringo has true Beatles energy (and participation) on the RINGO album, particularly "Photograph". From there it comes and goes. John had it back for DOUBLE FANTASY. He also had it on "#9 Dream". Paul had it for much of TUG OF WAR, but even more so on the great FLAMING PIE. Various songs here and there (think "This One", "Hope Of Deliverance", "That Was Me") also showed Paul in Beatles worthy mode. George had it somewhat on both GEORGE HARRISON and CLOUD NINE, but very little otherwise. Ringo rarely approaches it. But yeah I'm with you Panther that 70 and 71 could have provided at least one more (if not two) great Beatles albums out of the solo work. I think there was also a great Beatles album available from 73 material as well.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jul 14, 2016 22:17:23 GMT -5
But 1972 is a solo Beatles wasteland. Perhaps their poorest year of the 70's. Well, at least there's "Back Off Boogaloo" and "Hi Hi Hi".
|
|