Print

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

[Mairi]

I agree Sandra. I think that John has just become this dead sainted Beatle who can do no wrong. Paul, however, who continues to put out work and tours nonstop, is the less talented one. Puh-lease!
I think they were equally talented (if not, more so Paul). I hate it when people catagorize Paul's music as "fluff" just because he wrote mainly love songs.
They were both pretty egotistical, but what do you expect from two demi-gods. If anything, John was more egotostical than Paul. Look at his songs, they're all "me, me, me."
And I also agree about Paul trying to keep the band together. If it weren't for him they may have even broken up as early as late 1966.

[adamzero]

I have a theory that the aggressive John fans or aggressive Paul fans (each of whom tries to discount the value of the other) suffer from a lack of personality integration.  Lacking harmony or a coherent sense of identity within, they project their own internal discord onto the mythic figures of John and Paul.  The Paul devotees were probably potty-trained too early and the John devotees weren't potty-trained at all.  

Seriously, it seems the Paul fans as a group are more self-confident and satisfied and don't seek an identity from the music, but rather entertainment.  The John fans seek a voice/identity--they don't want entertainment and seem to suffer from the same vulnerabilities that John projected in his songs.  Let's face it, although both John and Paul lose their mothers (and perhaps the reason behind their ill-conceived teenage blood-brother 50/50 songwriting agreement), John seems to have suffered from drug abuse, codependency and mental illness (including paranoia and borderline personality disorder) much more than the relatively sane and mentally healthy (if at times overbearing and brusque) Paul.  

I think we ought to accept the John vs. Paul conflict as a window on the form of modern mass psychosis that we called "the entertainment industry."

[Herecomesyoursun]

The one thing, if its true, that i think shows where paul bashers are coming from is the following:  he made guests pay for drinks at his wedding to heather.  if thats true, thats just dicky, hes a billionare

[Herecomesyoursun]

but i still love paul

[In Blue Hawaii]

I just listened to the John Lennon: Wenner Tapes on radio 4.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/arts/lennon_wenner.shtml

We've heard most of it before from extracts used in the Anthology series and Imagine film. The programme was padded out with pompous reminiscences from Wenner and Yoko. They didn't miss the opportunity to damn Paul with light praise. (Paul was a great charmer and diplomat, while John contributed the artistic weight.)

[Bobber]

I've stated before that Paul would probably be the only one who would have made it without The Beatles. That says enough.

[Joost]

I agree Sandra. I think that John has just become this dead sainted Beatle who can do no wrong.

It's true. Dying young is good for your image. Take James Dean and Marlon Brando for istance. Everyone remembers Dean as a young god and Brando as the ugly old fat guy from The Godfather. Or Marilyn Monroe and Brigitte Bargot. Monroe is the biggest sex-symbol of all time, Bardot is a racist old hag.

[In Blue Hawaii]

I would also say that based on reading all the books about The Beatles and who did what in the studio...I would say it breaks down for me as far as my favorite Beatles songs go to about 75% McCartney 20%Lennon 5%George and it does seems like Macca was the one in the driver's seat during their best period.

And also, I think that Lennon's influence on Macca was nothing like the bloody world thinks that it is.

[Kevin]

and it does seems like Macca was the one in the driver's seat during their best period.

 

What period are we talking about here?

[tkitna]

What period are we talking about here?

I didnt write it, but i'd gather that the period would be right around 66' to 70'.

[Joost]

my favorite Beatles songs go to about 75% McCartney 20%Lennon 5%George and it does seems like Macca was the one in the driver's seat during their best period.

I think that 2/3 to 3/4 of my favorite Beatles songs are Paul's.

[Kevin]

^Thought so. And if you consider that their best period you'd be right, Paul was the man. But, if you think 62 - 66 is their peak, then

[An Apple Beatle]

I have a theory that the aggressive John fans or aggressive Paul fans (each of whom tries to discount the value of the other) suffer from a lack of personality integration.

[GreenApple]

If anything, John was more egotostical than Paul. Look at his songs, they're all "me, me, me."
.

Except for We Can Work It Out, at least; every time I hear it, I notice that it's all from Paul's point of view. Nothing like 'I tried to see it your way' in the lyrics.

[Bobber]

WCWIO is mostly a song from Paul. John's part is the 'Life is very short'-thing.

[raxo]

^Right.

[GreenApple]

WCWIO is mostly a song from Paul. John's part is the 'Life is very short'-thing.

John almost makes the song into a kind of peace and understanding thing with that part. I suppose there's two ways of listening to it.

That part originally put me onto the idea some time ago that Paul's songs are not so good without John to 'come in' on them - plus something I once read by a journalist. Of course, it's not true - now I realise! Since I've been here!  

[Indica]

I have a theory that the aggressive John fans or aggressive Paul fans (each of whom tries to discount the value of the other) suffer from a lack of personality integration.  Lacking harmony or a coherent sense of identity within, they project their own internal discord onto the mythic figures of John and Paul.  The Paul devotees were probably potty-trained too early and the John devotees weren't potty-trained at all.  

Seriously, it seems the Paul fans as a group are more self-confident and satisfied and don't seek an identity from the music, but rather entertainment.  The John fans seek a voice/identity--they don't want entertainment and seem to suffer from the same vulnerabilities that John projected in his songs.  Let's face it, although both John and Paul lose their mothers (and perhaps the reason behind their ill-conceived teenage blood-brother 50/50 songwriting agreement), John seems to have suffered from drug abuse, codependency and mental illness (including paranoia and borderline personality disorder) much more than the relatively sane and mentally healthy (if at times overbearing and brusque) Paul.  

I think we ought to accept the John vs. Paul conflict as a window on the form of modern mass psychosis that we called "the entertainment industry."

Best post I've read ina long while.