Quoted from The_Word, posted August 5, 2004, 8:20pm at here

Meh. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Just because its chorus is a bit simple doesn't necessarily mean it's filler. The verses and harmonies, IMO, make the song much more than just "filler."

Yes, there's more to the song than just the lyrics 

OK Frighty: it really boils down to this. You're more impressed with Paul than I am. Finis!

Before Frightwolf asked "what exactly is filler?" I was going to ask the same thing.

To me, "filler" is a song that's simply not good. It's just lying  there, and not very memorable or enjoyable. It's only my opinion, but every song on PEPPER is good, to varying degrees. None of it is what I'd call filler - by my definition, that is.

My 3 Favorites:
1) A Day in the Life
2) Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds
3) Sgt Pepper/With a Little Help From My Friends (counting it as One)

1. Being for the benefit of Mr. Kite
2. She's leaving home
3. Lucy in the sky with diamonds

Quoted from Maria, posted August 5, 2004, 10:19pm at here

OK Frighty: it really boils down to this. You're more impressed with Paul than I am. Finis!

I'd like to know if you actually read all my arguments before you stopped, since I took the time to read everything you had to say.

Quoted from Joe_Karlosi, posted August 5, 2004, 10:41pm at here

Before Frightwolf asked "what exactly is filler?" I was going to ask the same thing.

To me, "filler" is a song that's simply not good. It's just lying  there, and not very memorable or enjoyable. It's only my opinion, but every song on PEPPER is good, to varying degrees. None of it is what I'd call filler - by my definition, that is.

That's what I always thought, but when this debate popped up, I started to get confused as to what filler was.

I agree completely with Joe.  Fillers IMO do exactly that... just fill the gaps.  A lot of the Pepper tunes ARE good and pretty catchy at that.  Now if only Penny Lane and Strawberry Fields coulda been on it 

Wow, Frightwolf... nice argument on that previous page. I didn't want to get into an argument about the entire album (just "Getting Better" since it's one of my favorite songs off the album and I felt I should stick up for it...), but I completely agree with everything you said. Well put, especially on how the Beatles worked as a team--it wasn't just John and Paul on their own, "saving" each others' songs.

Filler? What is "filler"? It's one of those terms that everyone "knows" the meaning of, but is hard to apply in some situations. English abounds with terms like that: young, bald, intelligent -- you get the idea.

The trouble in this thread is that one person's filler is another's well-liked song. And -- people forget that all this is opinion. Adding "in my opinion", "imo" and the like is infrequent. Rightly so, as it gets boring and makes the writer look like a frightened rabbit. We all know it's opinion!

PEPPER is often classed as "over-rated" -- and in one way it is. A majority of songs are simply not top Beatle product. They are certainly well played: the musical effects on Pepper give the songs an aura and feel that is amazing. But look behind that: how good are the songs as songs? My call is that Getting Better, Leaving Home, 64, Rita are not that great.

Quoted from The_Word, posted August 6, 2004, 5:08pm at here

Well put, especially on how the Beatles worked as a team--it wasn't just John and Paul on their own, "saving" each others' songs.

One of the ways they worked as a team was by "saving" each others' songs. Two examples:

Paul suggesting to John how best to sing Lucy, when it wasn't gelling at all. Briliant Paul!

John adding "it can't get no worse" to Paul's "getting betters" in GB's chorus. John puts the sharp edge on!

Quoted from The_Word, posted August 6, 2004, 5:08pm at here

Wow, Frightwolf... nice argument on that previous page. I didn't want to get into an argument about the entire album (just "Getting Better" since it's one of my favorite songs off the album and I felt I should stick up for it...), but I completely agree with everything you said. Well put, especially on how the Beatles worked as a team--it wasn't just John and Paul on their own, "saving" each others' songs.

Thank you 

Quoted from Maria, posted August 6, 2004, 9:40pm at here

One of the ways they worked as a team was by "saving" each others' songs. Two examples:

Paul suggesting to John how best to sing Lucy, when it wasn't gelling at all. Briliant Paul!

John adding "it can't get no worse" to Paul's "getting betters" in GB's chorus. John puts the sharp edge on!

You could CALL teamwork saving each other, but the rest of us call it HELPING ONE ANOTHER. 

Filler? What is "filler"? It's one of those terms that everyone "knows" the meaning of, but is hard to apply in some situations. English abounds with terms like that: young, bald, intelligent -- you get the idea.

You are absolutely right, Maria.

The trouble in this thread is that one person's filler is another's well-liked song. And -- people forget that all this is opinion. Adding "in my opinion", "imo" and the like is infrequent. Rightly so, as it gets boring and makes the writer look like a frightened rabbit. We all know it's opinion!

Actually -- not all of us know that this is opinion, so we save other people time by saying "IMO" before the "Just because you say so, it doesn't mean it's true" remark comes in.  I'm sure you're familiar with the latter remark.

PEPPER is often classed as "over-rated" -- and in one way it is. A majority of songs are simply not top Beatle product. They are certainly well played: the musical effects on Pepper give the songs an aura and feel that is amazing. But look behind that: how good are the songs as songs? My call is that Getting Better, Leaving Home, 64, Rita are not that great.

Are you sure you don't mean "How good are the songs lyrically?" Because that's the idea everyone debating with you is getting.  As songs, you have to consider all the elements that helped construct the songs with the musical effects, style of singing, how it sounds, and lyrics added together.  It's nice to have great lyrics (For No One and Eleanor Rigby come to mind), but -- they do not make the song!

If I may refer to this statement made by Maria:

If you think those three songs are three of the stronger songs on Pepper, then I think you miss the point of Beatle music.

I guess she's the only one that understands anything about the Beatles.  Everyone else who's responded to her knows nothing 

^ Yeah... you know, it's funny Maria brings up that this is all opinion we're discussing when her posts certainly don't seem that way. Personally, I've always felt that one "point" of Beatle music is that there's something for everyone--I mean, look at all of us. After browsing all these "favorite" threads, you get the feeling that we all have very different tastes in music, and yet we all have the same favorite band. We can't help our tastes in music, and it seems like Maria is insulting some of us for it.

And Frightwolf, you took the words right out of my mouth that "saving" is also known as "helping one another."

Quoted from The_Word, posted August 7, 2004, 4:17pm at here

^ Yeah... you know, it's funny Maria brings up that this is all opinion we're discussing when her posts certainly don't seem that way. Personally, I've always felt that one "point" of Beatle music is that there's something for everyone--I mean, look at all of us. After browsing all these "favorite" threads, you get the feeling that we all have very different tastes in music, and yet we all have the same favorite band. We can't help our tastes in music, and it seems like Maria is insulting some of us for it.

And Frightwolf, you took the words right out of my mouth that "saving" is also known as "helping one another."

Indeed! The genres that the Beatles music cover is amazing! That's why it's odd when I hear kids my age saying that they dislike the Beatles because the music is old... the music has aged well and they did NOT cover only rockers (my guess is that they hear She Loves You and I Wanna Hold Your Hand and tune out).

Personally, I'm glad Maria knows so much about them, but she sure has odd ways of displaying it.  While browsing through the Lennon forum, I came across this thread:

http://beatles.murashev.com/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?b=lennon,m=1088623466

In it, Maria accuses Rowdy of having low standards because he didn't include all the Lennon albums.  That's leaning towards arrogance and is definitely not the way she should have phrased anything.  I also have had similar experiences with her, which forced me to string together a long list of profane words for her (to put it mildly).  She certainly knows how to get under your skin.  Take a look at this comment she made on the previous page when I asked about filler:

OK, don't be frightened. I'll go through it for you one more time, using less complex sentences.

See the filler songs. They are Getting Better, 64 and Rita. They are good filler songs.

Look! There's another song. It has a chorus with a bit of bite. John did that. Imagine the song without that John bit. It would not be as good. It would be filler then.

If, however, she could stop sounding so demeaning, immaturish, and insulting like that, AND if she would come off the John-bias (I've noticed in a few threads that she does indeed have a big one), it would be easier to debate something like this.

That aside, you're right -- The Beatles were a team.  They may have had the horrible falling apart in 1970, but even when they HATED each other, they STILL got the job done.