Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Best: Happiness Is A Warm Gun, I'm So Tired
Worst: Don't Pass Me By

[Frightwolf]

Man, why does everyone hate on Good Night? 

[quote by=IndicaWalrus link=Blah.pl?b=albums,m=1088800419,s=19 date=1091301954]Favourite: Yer Blues

Least Favourite: Revolution 9.

Lennon trying to be Avante Garde...while realising Mccartney has been in the scene alot longer. [/quote]

I hope you're not basing that on McCartney's statements (in Many Years From Now, for example) that he was into "avant garde" much more than John. He may have hung out with the cool people, but he wasn't doing it like John Lennon was!

Beware Macca the Revisionist ...

Revolution 9 is a pretty good attempt at a sound-collage telling a story. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it's one of the ten best tracks on the album.

Revolution 9 is easily the worst thing on the album for me, and I just can't pick a favorite (some of them would be: Dear Prudence, Happiness is a Warm Gun, Helter Skelter, Savoy Truffle, While My Guitar Gently Weeps Yer Blues}.

Although I don't much like REVOLUTION 9, I recognize its uniqueness for its time. But Maria, what story do you think it tells?

And what is this stuff about McCartney being more avant garde than Lennon??? That's a laugh --- the closest thing he ever did to avant garde was 12 years later with McCARTNEY II....

[Indica]

[quote by=Maria link=Blah.pl?b=albums,m=1088800419,s=22 date=1091340802]

I hope you're not basing that on McCartney's statements (in Many Years From Now, for example) that he was into "avant garde" much more than John. He may have hung out with the cool people, but he wasn't doing it like John Lennon was!

Beware Macca the Revisionist ...

Revolution 9 is a pretty good attempt at a sound-collage telling a story. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it's one of the ten best tracks on the album.[/quote]




Doing it like Lennon?

What does this mean?
I meant mccartney on a musical-basis.
Ok, Lennon is cool...but I just dont agree with his later political naivety, and his child-like anger towards Paul and the rest of them.

Paul lived in london, with the Ashers...Obviously Lennon was into the scene...but Paul had it at his fingertips. His arragments etc are just alot more professionaly achieved. Even Martin explains that Mccartney was ahead* in the so called Music game/Scene.


This is not Dissing Lennon..Im a huge fan of John. But I feel Mccartney gets dissed because of the ignorant-narow minded view that Lennon was the clever one..and Mccartney was the commercial happy face.
This is nonsense.

[Indica]

Sound-collage telling a story*

Such an explanation can be atributted to the whole of the Beatles catalogue.
I can understand that it was crazy and surreal etc..but there is a fine line between great experimentation..and utter rubbish.


Mccartney also dips into this catergory....erm...Wild honey Pie.
 I feel including such songs as these two indicated the ego over-riding the basic principles of making good music for the listener.

Ok, Lennon is cool...but I just dont agree with his later political naivety, and his child-like anger towards Paul and the rest of them.

I've always felt Lennon was right for feeling angry with the others, considering the way they insulted Yoko and treated her. The other Beatles really gave the two of them the business. John told a story, something like this (all from my memory, so bear with me): "George insulted her right to her face, just by being honest and saying 'I'm gonna be up front because this is what I've heard - that you've got a lousy name and you give off bad vibes' -- that's what George said to her and I didn't hit him, I don't know why...."

Also, John felt Paul was "attacking" him first, with RAM.

By the way, I don't agree with his politics these days anymore either (I used to). I always console myself by thinking that John was always changing so it's possible he would have grown more to the right in the 21st Century.

Even Martin explains that Mccartney was ahead* in the so called Music game/Scene.

Are we talking musically or strictly avant garde?

This is not Dissing Lennon..Im a huge fan of John. But I feel Mccartney gets dissed because of the ignorant-narow minded view that Lennon was the clever one..and Mccartney was the commercial happy face.
This is nonsense.

I love McCartney's melodies. However, just this weekend my wife and I were driving upstate and we were listening to ABBEY ROAD and THE WHITE ALBUM for the first time in a long time. It hit me just how silly and sappy Paul was, especially with THE WHITE ALBUM -- after hearing Dear Prudence and Glass Onion we go into the silly Ob La Di Ob La Da. It sticks out like a sore thumb in that sequence.

Even worse is with ABBEY ROAD. You get the intense Come Together, right into the classic Something, and it all comes to kindergarten time with Maxwell's Silver Hammer!

Again - I like Paul -- and I'd name him the greatest songwriter of the 20th Century, just based on his melodies alone - but man, is he fruity...

[Indica]

yes.
But I think its unfair not to mention the likes of Back in the USSR and Helter Skelter.

I agree with you on Abbey-Road, as this is a real sign of what is to come..(Wings) which is Paul appealing to all crowds..including the over 65's.
But lets not forget Lennons Solo music..which includes songs such as Jelous Guy - Beautiful Boy etc...all having soppy arrangements with over-bearing strings..a sign of Spector Brainwashing!

Mccartney is fruity, but I feel you get a mixed bag of hits...
When Im Sixy Four, Helter Skelter, Oh Darling, Honey Pie, Sgt Peppers, Get Back etc

Diversity.
Lennon is great, and his mood, feelings and honesty all reflect through his songs..but you need a balance of dark with light.
I think Mccartney realised this.

The range on Mccartneys voice..from Till there was you... Long Tall Sally/Kansas City....through to Blackbird/ I will..to Get Back/Ive got a feeling.

magic.

I haven't forgotten Paul's heavier rockers and things, but they're the minority for him.
He's basically known to crank out silly love songs, and it's a label that will probably stick.

John was quite capable of mellow love stuff, too . In fact, he was probably more diverse than Paul. No way is everything Lennon did "dark". There's light there, too.

[Indica]

yes I know this. But again, isnt it a minority? (especially the later years).
Silly Love Songs? I feel using the tag silly* is a great misunderstanding of how well crafted these pop-songs* are.

When Im Sixty Four..can be seen as a silly light hearted Story of getting old...But look behind the bouncy fruity sense and listen to the great harmonies, the negative downbeat of rhetorical statements, and the great voice..which Mccartney does with ease.

John and Pail were inspired by the same artists to a degree, but took on different ways of showing their appreciation.

Johns more autobiographical...while Mccartney is more proffesional in the sense of writing little stories about made up creations.
This doesnt mean its all..Obla Di Obla Da*..Eleanor Rigby...a great creation with a dark and meaningful message. Truly fantastic.

It is a label that will stick with Paul, mainly becasue of his later work which is just terrrible (after the Beatles). There is no excuse for the change in direction..but it happens. If people think he could write like the Beatles stuff..then its stupid. people change, and move on to other things.

yes I know this. But again, isnt it a minority? (especially the later years).

No, I'd say after the more Lennon went on, the more prone to more light stuff he became. Most of the stuff after 1972 is more laid back.

Silly Love Songs? I feel using the tag silly* is a great misunderstanding of how well crafted these pop-songs* are.

I don't want to get a rep for not thinking Paul's a genius of pop. I said I would call him the greatest writer of the 20th Century, and that's because of the tunes, the melodies.
I do think he's a better songwriter than John in that regard, if we're talking musically.

It is a label that will stick with Paul, mainly becasue of his later work which is just terrrible (after the Beatles).

I'm not sure how much you've heard, because most of it is not at all bad. In fact, there's plenty of stuff I believe would have been considered "great" had it been on a Beatles album. Even Somedays (from 1997's FLAMING PIE) would have been a contender for REVOLVER. 

[Indica]

[quote by=Joe_Karlosi link=Blah.pl?b=albums,m=1088800419,s=30 date=1091368119]

No, I'd say after the more Lennon went on, the more prone to more light stuff he became. Most of the stuff after 1972 is more laid back.



I don't want to get a rep for not thinking Paul's a genius of pop. I said I would call him the greatest writer of the 20th Century, and that's because of the tunes, the melodies.
I do think he's a better songwriter than John in that regard, if we're talking musically.



I'm not sure how much you've heard, because most of it is not at all bad. In fact, there's plenty of stuff I believe would have been considered "great" had it been on a Beatles album. Even Somedays (from 1997's FLAMING PIE) would have been a contender for REVOLVER.

[quote by=Joe_Karlosi link=Blah.pl?b=albums,m=1088800419,s=23 date=1091364969]
Although I don't much like REVOLUTION 9, I recognize its uniqueness for its time. But Maria, what story do you think it tells?
[/quote]

Revolution 9 tells the tale of a revolution.

Listen for the beginnings, the climax, the denouement ...

[quote by=IndicaWalrus link=Blah.pl?b=albums,m=1088800419,s=24 date=1091365239]
Paul lived in london, with the Ashers...Obviously Lennon was into the scene...but Paul had it at his fingertips. His arragments etc are just alot more professionaly achieved. Even Martin explains that Mccartney was ahead* in the so called Music game/Scene.
[/quote]

Like I said, he may have hung out with the cool people (the Ashers & their friends).

But he sure wasn't doing (ie composing, playing) avante garde. That was Lennon.

Revolution 9 tells the tale of a revolution.

I never noticed that before. To me it's just a bunch of tape loops strung together at random. To John, too, if I remember right...

[Indica]

[quote by=Maria link=Blah.pl?b=albums,m=1088800419,s=33 date=1091391441]

Like I said, he may have hung out with the cool people (the Ashers & their friends).

But he sure wasn't doing (ie composing, playing) avante garde. That was Lennon.
[/quote]



How was that Lennon?
Explain?

How was that Lennon?
Explain?

I know the question was for Maria and I await her answer -- but how can you even ask this? With the TWO VIRGINS album, LIFE WITH THE LIONS, THE WEDDING ALBUM, REVOLUTION 9, John and Yoko's little films they made?

[Indica]

Yes I know this, But Im talking about pre-Solo beatles years...

Around 66, when John was still living out at Weybridge, with the Wife and son.

Ok, So Yoko was Underground in her art, but isnt that all just a pretentious movement, which seen little positive merit, and was basically a rather predictable and superficial cliche Sixties symbol of Youth orientated Lifestyle.

Ok, so John and Yoko made arty films. But again, I doubt they were taking themselves seriously, or maybe at the time yes, but we all Know what Lennon is like. He moves on, and is never happy with who he is at the time.

This is not Avante Garde as being a natural movement of thought, but a forced session which ends its state being totally reversed and ending as a weak and misunderstood form of useless 'modern' art.

Bagism* planting the acorns...Bed-In..all of these attempts at Peace and emphasis have that streak of absurd Lennon Creativity (which i love) all of them slightly surreal yet still humouress, in a world where the suit and tie still dominated the Working world.


the two virgins cover.....almost gives across the sense of an artificial message. The perfect controversial image was an ingenious decision, but again..is this Avante Garde?..is this Revolution in the form of a Record Sleeve?..I feel the answer is no.


It seems like Im having a huge dig at John, which im not. I just feel Lennon gets the representation of being underground beacuse of his later political stance and his love for 'strange' modern artists Yoko.
John is Underground, but Paul has the edge as far as the context for the Avante Garde scene. John was alot more commercial and open in his art dealings, while Paul kept it secret and quiet.
Once the 'Scene' slips into the normal homes, or onto the 9 Oclock News..or for that matter..the new release of Melody maker...has it not changed its status....surely it cant be attributed with the Avante Garde Tag of fashionable echerlongs.

Forget categorizations like "avante garde" -- we'll end up discussing definitions, and that can be sterile.

I think what people generally think of when they say Lennon was "avante garde" or "experimental" or whatever, is that John went out on a limb more often. he was a frontiersman, a pioneer. And we don't have to go to the Unfinished Music series to see this. Look at these pairings:

John's Strawberry Fields, versus Paul's Penny Lane
John's Rain, versus Paul's Paperback Writer
John's Walrus, versus Paul's Hello Goodbye
John's Happiness Is A Warm Gun and Rev9, versus Honey Pie (both wild and vanilla), Rocky Raccoon, Ob La Di, Helter Skelter
John's Tomorrow Never Knows, and She Said She Said, versus Paul's Here There and Everywhere and For No One

Paul can protest all he like these days, but the boundary-pushing came from Lennon (and Harrison in some ways). Paul is undoubtedly a brilliant musician, and I like most of his songs above -- but a frontiersman? No way.

[Herecomesyoursun]

I think Paul might have gotten into the experimental stuff first (like the pepper album, the sleeve design for the White album, magical mystery tour) but he never translated it well to music.  Musically, Lennon was the pioneer.