DM's Beatles forums
Beatles forums => Songs => Topic started by: Kevin on February 02, 2010, 09:36:01 AM
-
A great single, but maybe more of a triumph of the studio, with new instruments and gizzmo's. And so precise and well put together.
Only complaint is the lyric, which as with much of Paul's work, seem ever so disingenious. (always my one bugbear about his work.) Just a little deftness could have made this a nice comment on, say, their Beatlemania hits-on-demand days.
Love Rain, but don't believe it to be a better single than the A side (though a better song all round.) Great coupling of songs, in a way anticipating Penny Lane/Strawberry Fields (only better.)
-
Now we're talking. Paperback Writer is in my top 5 Beatle tunes ever. Harmonies are incredible. I love the bass work and guitar riff. Ringo is spot on and creative on this one. He ends his roundhouses with rim shots on purpose. Its genius. How do people think of things like that? Its something your not supposed to do, but it works for him. If I did it, they would have called it a mistake. Absolutly love the song.
Rain is a decent song, but I think people give it more credit than it deserves. It has its psychedelic moments with the fade ins and backwards guitars and so forth, but its a pretty boring song. It doesnt go anywhere in my mind. It just drags and drags and i'm sure thats what they intended, but damn. Ringo always says Rain was his greatest song, but I could name 20 or more songs that he's done that are better from a drummers standpoint. Alright song over all.
-
I adore this song. Great vocals, great bass, great guitar... just a good song in my opinion. I actually like Paperback Writer and Rain about the same, just depending on my mood.
-
What I love about this song is the subject matter. It's a nice change to hear about something other than boy-girl love. Of course it has Paul written all over it, it's incredibly typical of his songwriting. I think it's a very well-crafted song. Harmonies and pacing are great. It's just very polished, don't you think?
-
What I love about this song is the subject matter. It's a nice change to hear about something other than boy-girl love. Of course it has Paul written all over it, it's incredibly typical of his songwriting. I think it's a very well-crafted song. Harmonies and pacing are great. It's just very polished, don't you think?
I agree. Is this the beginning of McCartneys Brian Wilson infatuation? I reckon from here on in there is a marked distinction between his clear, precise recordings and Lennon's muddier sound. (compare the horns on Get To Get You Into My Life and Good Morning Good Morning.) John always moaned that Paul's songs received more studio time than his, but was this a result of Paul's more active interest of the process, whereas John still relied on asking Martin for something that sounded "like an upside down orange" (or whatever the famous quote is.) ?
-
A great single, but maybe more of a triumph of the studio, with new instruments and gizzmo's. And so precise and well put together.
Only complaint is the lyric, which as with much of Paul's work, seem ever so disingenious. (always my one bugbear about his work.) Just a little deftness could have made this a nice comment on, say, their Beatlemania hits-on-demand days.
Love Rain, but don't believe it to be a better single than the A side (though a better song all round.) Great coupling of songs, in a way anticipating Penny Lane/Strawberry Fields (only better.)
I love this song it's one of my favorites. It is SO incredibly well put together and really creatively done. I mean geez, there is even a typewriter carriage return type effect like the author of the letter that is being sung is typing right then. That's just brilliant. The bass is great, the vocals are great, the harmonies are great and fun, the drumming is great. I love Rain, mostly for that incredible bassline and the drumming, but I don't think it is as good as PW.
I totally disagree about the lyric. I think it's perfect, it's exactly what it should be for the subject matter. He's a weedly young writer trying to ingratiate himself and get himself published and that's exactly what the lyric sounds like. Paul wasn't writing it about being asked to write hits on demand, he was telling the story of someone who hasn't had any hits yet(in this case in writing) but really really wants one.
I don't think there's anything disingenuous about it, except in the way that ambitious young people who are desperate to get ahead can often seem a bit disingenous(or like they are "kissing up").
I thought it's a pretty good portrait of someone in that position, who isn't as sophisticated as they want to seem and Paul would know all about that because back in the early days HE was the one who used to write letters to people trying to get them jobs and I'm sure he wrote letters that in their own ways sounded rather similar to this. It sounds ingratiating, the author trying to appear confident, which because he has clearly never had a success yet, comes off a little ridiculous and trying to sound like he isn't really desperate, when in fact he clearly is.
You know the whole job interview 101 "Why should we hire you for the job, what will you bring to this company"? That's in the letter too(you can have the rights, it'll make you lots of money, just let me get my foot in the DOOR PLEASE!!!":)) . It's all there "see I'm a self-starter, I'm a hard worker, I can make you money".
See I love the story this song tells and I think it's a far better lyric than Rain is, talk about a lyric that doesn't "resolve into anything" John. ;)
-
Ooops sorry, meant to edit the previous post.
-
I think this must be my favourite single, not just by The Beatles, but by anyone ... EVER.
Two top Beatles tunes on one slice of vinyl. I LOVE it!
As someone else has already said - my favourite song out of the two changes all the time so I could never pin one track down as my out-and-out favourite.
What makes these tracks really remarkable is that I don't think either song is particularly amazing in terms of songwriting or structure - if you play either of them alone on an acoustic guitar you aren't struck by their brilliance.
It is in the recording process where they come alive.
Everything about the two recordings - the drums, the bass, the guitars, the vocals - is just a huge leap forward from what the Beatles have done before.
PW is a similar sort of riff-based rocker to Day Tripper (recorded only a matter of months before) yet Day Tripper sounds like an easy listening record alongside PW!
McCartney said these recordings were the first time he'd really been able to hear his bass come through on record, and I can see exactly what he means - it totally jumps out at you. And Ringo is inspired on both tracks.
I think these two records would still sound fresh if released by a new band today - what the average record buyer must have though of them in summer 1966 I don't know! I wish I could have been there to see people's reactions!
-
I totally disagree about the lyric. I think it's perfect, it's exactly what it should be for the subject matter. He's a weedly young writer trying to ingratiate himself and get himself published and that's exactly what the lyric sounds like. Paul wasn't writing it about being asked to write hits on demand, he was telling the story of someone who hasn't had any hits yet(in this case in writing) but really really wants one.
See I love the story this song tells and I think it's a far better lyric than Rain is, talk about a lyric that doesn't "resolve into anything" John. ;)
Good points. They are indeed smart lyrics for a smart song.
But if I have one complaint about McCartneys lyrics it's that sometimes they are very impersonal. In much of his music you never learn anything about the man himself. You rarely get to know what he's actually thinking.
On the other hand I love the lyrics to Rain. They're simple but evocative. They create a mood. They give you an insight into the artists mind. If George tried to tell us in his ponderous fashion that the material world is a facade to our real existence, then John manages it with the beautifuly simple "Can you hear me, that when it rains and shines, it's just a state of mind" Combined with the thunderous drone of the backing and we have a masterpiece.
Not wanting to be a Mother Superior and jumping the gun, but it's the same for Penny Lane/SFF. While PL is a beautifully constructed and recorded song, really it could be snapshots from anyones childhood. SFF on the other hand leaves us in no doubt that these are John's memories, again with lyrics that are simple yet deeply ambiguious and evocative.
-
Good points. They are indeed smart lyrics for a smart song.
But if I have one complaint about McCartneys lyrics it's that sometimes they are very impersonal. In much of his music you never learn anything about the man himself. You rarely get to know what he's actually thinking.
On the other hand I love the lyrics to Rain. They're simple but evocative. They create a mood. They give you an insight into the artists mind. If George tried to tell us in his ponderous fashion that the material world is a facade to our real existence, then John manages it with the beautifuly simple "Can you hear me, that when it rains and shines, it's just a state of mind" Combined with the thunderous drone of the backing and we have a masterpiece.
Not wanting to be a Mother Superior and jumping the gun, but it's the same for Penny Lane/SFF. While PL is a beautifully constructed and recorded song, really it could be snapshots from anyones childhood. SFF on the other hand leaves us in no doubt that these are John's memories, again with lyrics that are simple yet deeply ambiguious and evocative.
That's an interesting observation. Personally, I think it's much harder to craft a song that many people can relate to than to pour your guts out on a page. I love John's songwriting, but I think it takes a lot of talent to remove yourself from the writing process and write something completely apart from yourself.
For instance, Cole Porter is one of my favourite songwriters ever, but none of his songs give us any insight whatsoever into his personality. That doesn't take away that he has written some of the cleverest and most beatiful songs ever.
-
Good points. They are indeed smart lyrics for a smart song.
But if I have one complaint about McCartneys lyrics it's that sometimes they are very impersonal. In much of his music you never learn anything about the man himself. You rarely get to know what he's actually thinking.
On the other hand I love the lyrics to Rain. They're simple but evocative. They create a mood. They give you an insight into the artists mind. If George tried to tell us in his ponderous fashion that the material world is a facade to our real existence, then John manages it with the beautifuly simple "Can you hear me, that when it rains and shines, it's just a state of mind" Combined with the thunderous drone of the backing and we have a masterpiece.
Not wanting to be a Mother Superior and jumping the gun, but it's the same for Penny Lane/SFF. While PL is a beautifully constructed and recorded song, really it could be snapshots from anyones childhood. SFF on the other hand leaves us in no doubt that these are John's memories, again with lyrics that are simple yet deeply ambiguious and evocative.
Interesting. I think you just explained why a lot of people prefer John over Paul and vice versa. The people in Johns camp always bring up the fact that Paul couldnt write a song with his feelings on his sleeve. Thats true, but why does he have to? I have always been a person that listens to the music itself and not the lyrics. I dont care about the lyrics or what the song means, if its musically interesting, i'm on board. I just find Pauls tunes more interesting even though they might be talking about pure gibberish. A song doesnt always have to tell a story for me to like it. 'I Am The Walrus' is one of my top 5 Beatle tunes ever just to sight an example.
-
Sorry Mairi, I just basically repeated what you just said.
-
Paperback Writer is not my favourite, musically speaking; but I do recognize its qualities, as described by other members of the forum (although I am surprised that no one said something about the little Frère Jacques vocal harmonies midway in that song). In my view, I see Rain as being much more innovative and experimental, again, musically speaking.
-
But if I have one complaint about McCartneys lyrics it's that sometimes they are very impersonal. In much of his music you never learn anything about the man himself. You rarely get to know what he's actually thinking.
So? :) Also the subjects a writer chooses to write about tell us about them. It's just not as obvious as screaming "THESE ARE MY FEELINGS!! MINE DO YOU UNDERSTAND!!!" It's like the internet, it really shouldn't need to be stated at the end of every sentence that most of what we say are our opinions, it's kind of understood. Any subject a writer writes about is viewed through their eyes, coming from their brain, giving us their perception, even if it's just the perception of how they believe someone else would feel.
Paul's written songs about his feelings, plenty of them and many of them have been great. He's also written songs that focus on others and many of them have been great. It also makes me think that maybe he wasn't so entirely self-centered as people like to claim he was - he could clearly put himself into other people's shoes and feel for them, at least if he chose too and clearly were times he chose to.
Shakespeare wasn't writing about himself in his plays, it doesn't change their brilliance or their ability to move people. Michaelangelo, DaVinci they never experienced those biblical scenes, doesn't make their work less beautiful. Why bother having a fiction section if only the writers personal experiences matter? I don't see why Paul needs to be writing specifically in the first person for it to have meaning. The subjects he chooses to write say as much as using the word "I" does.
I think it's actually easier to write "from experience" that's pretty much what most young writers do when they first start out - they write poem after poem about how misunderstood they are, etc. If anything I'd think it takes a certain amount of maturity to get outside yourself and write about others.
-
This is in my Top Ten Beatle songs. Amazing sound showing the lads were moving into different areas.
I love this review of it from a series of small books that covered a few band's music. The Complete Guide to.... they came out in the mid nineties and different rock critics review every song. Some of you might know the ones I mean.
Quote: 'Widely greeted as a disappointment - a brash, unsubstantial throwaway - at the time it was released, the Beatles first single of 1966 reamins one of the jewels of the Beatles' crown, especially when coupled with 'Rain'. It's true that Paul McCartney was writing a snapshot of fictional life rather than a confessional masterpiece or a straightforward teen romance, but the instrumental and vocal complexity of the song - plus its dazzling conceptual ambition - forced the ever-competitve Beach Boys to respond with the even more complex 'Goood Vibrations'. The limts of EMI's studio technology were stretched to produce the richest, toughest sound of any Beatles record to date'. End quote.
1966 is my fave Beatle period. They were moving on from pop, but hadn't gone totally freak out just yet. 'Revolver' is my favorite all time album (the best ever made IMHO). Coupled with this single, the period becomes brilliant. The lads looked their coolest then too, before they got the facial hair stuff going!
-
So? :) Also the subjects a writer chooses to write about tell us about them. It's just not as obvious as screaming "THESE ARE MY FEELINGS!! MINE DO YOU UNDERSTAND!!!"
You guys are right. My criticism of the lyric was a minor one. And his songs do juxtipose nicely with Lennon's. But have to if one complaint about Paul's music has dogged him over the years is that it can be a bit "soulless."
I would rather listen to Venus and Mars than Walls and Bridges any day. But no artist is perfect, and this is my only (minor) complaint about Macca's work.
I love Gershwin, so i'm not a "music as a confessional" thing. But I do find a distance in McCArtneys work that bugs me sometimes.
And in fairness to Lennon, when he was at his best he was far more subtle than this: "THESE ARE MY FEELINGS!! MINE DO YOU UNDERSTAND!!!" That's a bit of an extreme example. :)
Lennon couldn't do McCArtney (I'm thinking of the underachieving Good Morning Good Morning here) and McCArtney coudn't do Lennon. Probably why they are such a joy to listen to.
-
1966 is my fave Beatle period. They were moving on from pop, but hadn't gone totally freak out just yet. 'Revolver' is my favorite all time album (the best ever made IMHO). Coupled with this single, the period becomes brilliant. The lads looked their coolest then too, before they got the facial hair stuff going!
Agree with that completely. This is four young men, their minds buzzing with possibilities of the ready-to-explode drug culture, trying different things to see what would come out the other end. By Pepper they'd become a little more self aware and that innocent magic was gone.
I find it bizarre that what many people now regard as their musical peak was achieved against a background of such chaos. They were performing appalling badly on stage, concert numbers were falling, soon they'd be forced off the road, (besides, their 20 minute sets were terribly old hat by 66. They new this.) Paperback Writer was their worst performing single since 1963, Revolver would be greeted with the same general dismay, and rumours were rife that their days were up and they were about to split (Epstein had to issue a press statement denying this.)
And yeah, they looked very sharp. The 66 promo's wouldn't look out of date today. They definately suited the image of urban hipsters.
-
Funny that Paperback Writer was the first single in ages that didn't go straight to #1 and only stayed there for one or two weeks. Plus Revolver was not regarded as one of their highlights back then. Today it all changed it seems. Paperback Writer is the beginning of what seems to be a new Beatles era. Moptop time is over and it's time for serious business. That's why I do dig this song. It's like their new Love Me Do, the beginning of something. Although lately I consider Day Tripper and Paperback Writer as a tandem. PW is the better single than Rain imho, which has been overrated somewhat. Great hit potential and overall a wonderful single.
-
Funny that Paperback Writer was the first single in ages that didn't go straight to #1 and only stayed there for one or two weeks.
And spent less time in the charts (11 weeks) than any previous single - including Love Me Do. After 5 weeks in the top ten it dropped like a stone.
-
Agree with that completely. This is four young men, their minds buzzing with possibilities of the ready-to-explode drug culture, trying different things to see what would come out the other end. By Pepper they'd become a little more self aware and that innocent magic was gone.
I find it bizarre that what many people now regard as their musical peak was achieved against a background of such chaos. They were performing appalling badly on stage, concert numbers were falling, soon they'd be forced off the road, (besides, their 20 minute sets were terribly old hat by 66. They new this.) Paperback Writer was their worst performing single since 1963, Revolver would be greeted with the same general dismay, and rumours were rife that their days were up and they were about to split (Epstein had to issue a press statement denying this.)
And yeah, they looked very sharp. The 66 promo's wouldn't look out of date today. They definately suited the image of urban hipsters.
Yep...just read yours, Stevie and Bobber...could not agree more. :)
-
Not wanting to come across all Justiny or provoking talk about singles yet to come, but I had this thought on my lunchtime walk:
Paperback writer kicks off a sequence of three singles that are all very similar. On one side we have a through-the-curtains glimpse at ordinary people living their ordinary lives (with varying degrees of success), and in each case the flip side presents a hazy, counter-culture alternative: Rain's "rain or shine, I don't mind", Yellow Submarine's "we live a life of ease, everyone of us has all we need" and SFF's "nothing is real and nothing to get hung about." They do the same trick with Lady Madonna/Inner Light.
Probably more a sign of their mood than anything intentional, but they are three (four) wonderful packages of trickery and delight.
-
Good one Kevin. I hadn't thoght about that before but now that you mention it, it really does say a lot about the dualistsic nature of the Beatles, doesn't it?
-
Funny that Paperback Writer was the first single in ages that didn't go straight to #1 and only stayed there for one or two weeks. Plus Revolver was not regarded as one of their highlights back then. Today it all changed it seems. Paperback Writer is the beginning of what seems to be a new Beatles era. Moptop time is over and it's time for serious business. That's why I do dig this song. It's like their new Love Me Do, the beginning of something. Although lately I consider Day Tripper and Paperback Writer as a tandem. PW is the better single than Rain imho, which has been overrated somewhat. Great hit potential and overall a wonderful single.
Yep...just read yours, Stevie and Bobber...could not agree more. :)
Yeah I agree with Kevin and Bobber too. They look great and they sound great, it was definitely a transitional period but in the best sense of the word.
-
Yeah I agree with Kevin and Bobber too. They look great and they sound great, it was definitely a transitional period but in the best sense of the word.
That is exactly the way I view this single : transitional. In the guitar sound, subject matter, lyrics, vocal harmonies, studio gimmickry and such.
-
Graph showing singles UK sales figures up to including Paperback Writer. Shows how easy it is to reach different interpretations of figures. While it is indeed their worst selling single since Please Please Me, it's not dramatically less than many other singles (AHDN for instance). It would be just as easy to tag it as an average (by Beatle standards) performance. We also made a deal of it not entering at #1. It in fact entered at #2, kept off the top spot by Sinatra's Strangers In The Night, but went to #1 the next week. (though it fell away far quicker than any preceeding single).
(http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/2075/22750863.png) (http://img3.imageshack.us/i/22750863.png/)
-
Graph showing singles UK sales figures up to including Paperback Writer. Shows how easy it is to reach different interpretations of figures. While it is indeed their worst selling single since Please Please Me, it's not dramatically less than many other singles (AHDN for instance). It would be just as easy to tag it as an average (by Beatle standards) performance. We also made a deal of it not entering at #1. It in fact entered at #2, kept off the top spot by Sinatra's Strangers In The Night, but went to #1 the next week. (though it fell away far quicker than any preceeding single).
([url]http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/2075/22750863.png[/url]) ([url]http://img3.imageshack.us/i/22750863.png/[/url])
I'm liking the graph. Thanks for that.
Do you have one that includes all their UK singles - could you maybe post it in a new thread?
It would be interesting to discuss the sales of singles relative to each other and I don't want to hijack this thread by starting it here!
Getting back to the PW thread ....
I think it is too much of a generalisation to say that McCartney was the "third-party" writer while Lennon was always first-person.
I do think Macca is capable of writing very personal songs just like John - I find "Here Today" is as touching and personal as anything on Plastic Ono Band, for example. There probably aren't too many songs where one man says "I love you" to another man like that.
And he is criticised for writing "Silly Love Songs" yet surely it doesn't get much more personal than telling someone you love them. Lennon said he didn't like writing love songs in the Beatlemania years and he would just churn them out, which is maybe why McCartney's love songs are more enduring - there was more of himself in them.
I don't really see how we learn anything about either John or Paul from PW or Rain. Neither of them strikes me as a personal song.
-
(http://www.rarebeatles.com/photopg3/cd5sing/cd15912.jpg)