Paul McCartney, instead of the path he ultimately chose, could have been one of the major pioneers of heavy metal. He did, after all, write and perform
Helter Skelter in 1968.
1968. The same year
Steppenwolf debuted with
Born To Be Wild, which contained the line
heavy metal thunder, and that line alone gives Steppenwolf a notch in the genre.
1969.
Led Zeppelin I and
Led Zeppelin II.1970.
Black SabbathBut Macca came first. Had Paul decided to pursue that path, he could have trumped Zeppelin and Sabbath. Once "Abbey Road" was finished, if Paul was of a mind, he could have just went wild.
What we got instead was, like it or not,
Soft Rock. To an extent, Lennon was right about Paul when he sang
How Do You Sleep.
Despite his success in the 70's, he was obviously criticized for his music. McCartney never went with the genre of the moment. Yes, he defined the genre in the 1960's, but by the 1970's, even the Beatles would have had to change with the times. Punk rock; heavy metal; disco; soft rock. Those were your basic choices of music in the 1970's, and Paul chose 'soft rock.' Obviously that's what Paul liked, and that's what he played. I suppose you can't fault him for it, but a part of me wonders what might have been if Paul decided to choose 'heavy metal' or even 'punk rock.' He himself could have changed the face of music during that decade.
Instead, you got "granny songs," as Lennon dubbed them. But Lennon, well, that's another story for another forum.