I always dug this but I've never known what a collective bunch of Beatle fans thought about it.  What do you think?  Like it?  Hate it?

Never fails to freak me out.

I love annoying people and jsut repeating the words "number 9 number 9 number 9 number 9"

I don't like it, but then again I probably don't understand it.

i onli have like 2 mins of it on a tape, and its ok...quite random

Unique. Quite unique. Gotta love it, such a great montage...

I like this song. Very intresting. John was very ahead of his time when he wrote this though

Anthology tells that in fact it was Paul who was experimenting a lot with these tape-montage. He felt a bit pissed when John wanted to do Rev #9. He'd rather done it himself, for now all the credits of this 'masterpiece' go to John. But can you say he'd really 'wrote' it? I've listened to it many times, but still I can't figure it out exactly. Also being somewhat limped by not being a native English speaker, I guess. It scared the mess out of me the very first time I heard it. I'm used to it now, that's the best I can make of it. Not really a song, I think.

Quoted from Borrie

Anthology tells that in fact it was Paul who was experimenting a lot with these tape-montage. He felt a bit pissed when John wanted to do Rev #9. He'd rather done it himself, for now all the credits of this 'masterpiece' go to John. But can you say he'd really 'wrote' it? I've listened to it many times, but still I can't figure it out exactly. Also being somewhat limped by not being a native English speaker, I guess. It scared the mess out of me the very first time I heard it. I'm used to it now, that's the best I can make of it. Not really a song, I think.

Anthology doesn't tell us: Paul tells us! He's always going on these days about how HE was the avante garde man, how he was into tape loops, yadda yadda. Paul: only your most fervent fans believe any of your revisionist nonsense. John went and DID things. While you were doing Honey Pie, John did Rev 9, and bit you on the bum! Take that Paulie!

Why can't you figure Rev 9 out, Borrie? It's the story of a revolution! Go listen to it with that in mind ... and it is obvious! Talk about having to spell it out!

I love it. Pure genius!

Yes, you are right in fact. Paul is telling us. Hmm. But it's there and co-writers didn't seem to bother. Did they? It's true that John did it on the White Album and Paul didn't. He made Honey Pie, but then John did Bungalow Bill.

Revolution #9 does not turn me on, actually. But it's interesting and it makes the White Album complete. I mean, what would the album be without it? It would still be the White Album if they'd taken Honey Pie, for instance. Maybe a little bit less white... It's all these funny and weird things together that makes the album. And it's a fact that Paul is not the revolutionary kind.

Quoted from Bobber

I mean, what would the album be without it?

Better?

Probably. But I'd miss it somehow. Got any alternatives?

Quoted from Ydoll_Gwyn

Anthology doesn't tell us: Paul tells us! He's always going on these days about how HE was the avante garde man, how he was into tape loops, yadda yadda. Paul: only your most fervent fans believe any of your revisionist nonsense. John went and DID things. While you were doing Honey Pie, John did Rev 9, and bit you on the bum! Take that Paulie!

Why can't you figure Rev 9 out, Borrie? It's the story of a revolution! Go listen to it with that in mind ... and it is obvious! Talk about having to spell it out!

Just go and tell Paul why don't you? lol.  The likes of us and you will never know. I'm surprised they had any bum left after all the chunks they bit off each other.

Ydoll likes to spell things out for us Borrie.

I see. Well, I don't mind a fine discussion. As long as there's respect for each others opinion...

Quoted from An_Apple_Beatle

Just go and tell Paul why don't you? lol.  The likes of us and you will never know. I'm surprised they had any bum left after all the chunks they bit off each other.

Ydoll likes to spell things out for us Borrie.

Paul knows - that's why he's into such a revisionist mode these days. You know Appy, some fans actually fall for all that "Paul was the real avante garde one". On being asked to actually give us some examples, they shuffle their feet and um & ah. Fact is, Appy, the likes of us DO know. We have Rain, and Fields, and Tomorrow Never, and Walrus, and ... Well, there ya go. Case closed.

Quoted from Borrie

I see. Well, I don't mind a fine discussion. As long as there's respect for each others opinion...

Excellent, Borrie. I love a good discussion too. You might find, however, that some people here fancy themselves as knowledgeable fans, but in reality they don't know much.

Just what I always feared, that John and George would be gone one day and Paul would then create the revised history of the Beatles with Paul being the backbone to all the group's successes and experimentation.

I think the white album would of been perfect if they had cut out rev. 9 and put in hey jude. even though I like rev. p i think this would have been better

Quoted from norwegianwoody

Just what I always feared, that John and George would be gone one day and Paul would then create the revised history of the Beatles with Paul being the backbone to all the group's successes and experimentation.

Well, George was alive and somewhat kicking when the whole Anthology thing was released. I don't know the truth (who does?) and I guess even Paul has got his own version of the truth. I don't think he's rewriting history. I think it's not about 'I did this' and 'I was the one who was into the avantgarde thing' and 'I visited to most galleries'... They really had a big influence on each other. And maybe they were rivals on a particulair way, but I still believe that they were first of all friends. And then, I also believe that Paul's part on the Beatles becoming this big cannot be denied.

Uh, about Revolution #9. Somehow I can't imagine Hey Jude being on the White Album. Looking for an alternative, I'd rather place What's The New Mary Jane there.

Quoted from Borrie

Well, George was alive and somewhat kicking when the whole Anthology thing was released. I don't know the truth (who does?) and I guess even Paul has got his own version of the truth. I don't think he's rewriting history. I think it's not about 'I did this' and 'I was the one who was into the avantgarde thing' and 'I visited to most galleries'... They really had a big influence on each other. And maybe they were rivals on a particulair way, but I still believe that they were first of all friends. And then, I also believe that Paul's part on the Beatles becoming this big cannot be denied.

Uh, about Revolution #9. Somehow I can't imagine Hey Jude being on the White Album. Looking for an alternative, I'd rather place What's The New Year Mary Jane there.

The underlined bit: Sorry, but THAT'S EXACTLY what Macca is doing!! He's going around saying exactly those things!!!

The bold bit: Boy, that mistype hurts your Fab Cred, man!

Jesus Christ. Don't you ever mistype anything? What's The New Mary Jane? Alright? You get the point, don't you? You do like to spell things out!
About the underlined part: again, I suggested it is NOT about those things. I don't care. Spell it out, please, not everybody here is a native English speaker. Shall we switch to Danish?

Hmm. Fine discussions, eh? Let's not put salt on every snail, as the old Chinese use to say. Meaning: let's not point at every mistake somebody is making. It's about the discussion and trade of knowledge, isn't it? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Quoted from Bobber

Hmm. Fine discussions, eh? Let's not put salt on every snail, as the old Chinese use to say. Meaning: let's not point at every mistake somebody is making. It's about the discussion and trade of knowledge, isn't it? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Oh if only...
I think Hey Jude would have been an excellent finish for the album - the "tone" of the song and that long fade out would have been perfect.

Does that mean you'd skip Goodnight as well? Fine by me, I always get a bit tired of it. Looking at the Esher demo's again -the base of the White Album- I'd rather suggest Child Of Nature or Sour Milk Sea.

Apart from Revolution (the song) I don't like side 4 at all, and would burn it to the ground and start again.
I'm ashamed to say I haven't heard the songs you mention. And yes, Goodnight can go.
But then it wouldn't be the White Album I guess, and maybe its flaws are all part of the package.

Sorry. You can pick up these songs here. Child of Nature is John's first approach to Jealous Guy.
http://s27.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=1L1L9K9HP90D82OK743RXJVFZ6 for Sour Milk Sea and
http://s27.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=107X4CKZ4MG7F0P7D8F8ZG3VSV for Child Of Nature. I just found these songs and links somewhere...

I agree side 4 isn't the best, I like Savoy Truffle tho and Honey Pie (is that side 4?) is kinda funny too. I guess we can do without the Revolutions in our lives, at least in mine that is. But I agree again that this is The White Album, it somehow fits in. But maybe that's just because we are used to it the way it is.

I don't think Paul is rewriting history. He's been saying these things for over 30 years. He said he was listening to John Cage in the late '60s and had an open mind to more avant garde things. George Martin has acknowledged that. The difference between him and John (in my opinion) is that Paul has typically gone for creating more accessible (read commercial) product and John hooked up with Yoko, and he got off on the fact that you can create 'art' out of anything and applied it to his music, avant garde, music concrete, or however you want to spin it. Hell, he wanted Revolution 9 as an 'A' side of a single.

Thanks. That's a good point.

Perhaps the point being made is that while Paul talks about being into avante garde (like it or not) this is not reflected in the music he produced, whereas it seems John absorbed and used these influences (for better or worse).

Quoted from Ydoll_Gwyn

Paul knows - that's why he's into such a revisionist mode these days. You know Appy, some fans actually fall for all that "Paul was the real avante garde one". On being asked to actually give us some examples, they shuffle their feet and um & ah. Fact is, Appy, the likes of us DO know. We have Rain, and Fields, and Tomorrow Never, and Walrus, and ... Well, there ya go. Case closed.

It seems it's well documented that McCartney's time with The Ashers towards the mid-sixties, played a part in his nurturing interest in the London, Avante Garde scene. Invoking a lot of classical arrangements in his compositions.

Did'nt you know Ydoll?

Thought a REAL fan might.

I think Lennon's interpretations of Psychadelia were much further down the road due to his deeper experimentations in Hallucinogenic drug taking (Mid-sixties). I personally love this time in Lennon's writing.

Is your blood boiling about Paul again Ydoll? ..........What case? I did'nt know I presented one. Ummm & Ahhh, Errrm shuffle, shuffle.....

Quoted from juniorsfarm

I don't think Paul is rewriting history. He's been saying these things for over 30 years. He said he was listening to John Cage in the late '60s and had an open mind to more avant garde things. George Martin has acknowledged that.

I think he's rewriting history for sure - and he's been doing it for a long time, as you say. To my mind it's got a lot worse in the last five years. Both John and George cannot gainsay him.

A lot of folk were listening to Cage, it's true. Paul as well I'm sure. But my point is: who was DOING it as opposed to talking about? Mr Lennon.

Quoted from An_Apple_Beatle

It seems it's well documented that McCartney's time with The Ashers towards the mid-sixties, played a part in his nurturing interest in the London, Avante Garde scene. Invoking a lot of classical arrangements in his compositions.

Did'nt you know Ydoll?

Thought a REAL fan might.

I think Lennon's interpretations of Psychadelia were much further down the road due to his deeper experimentations in Hallucinogenic drug taking (Mid-sixties). I personally love this time in Lennon's writing.

Yeah, yeah I know all that about Paul and the Ashers. Yadda yadda, Appy.

BUT as I just wrote in reply to a post from juniorsfarm: Paul only talked about it. John actually did it. That's the difference between the two. Kevin_b puts it better than me:
Perhaps the point being made is that while Paul talks about being into avante garde (like it or not) this is not reflected in the music he produced, whereas it seems John absorbed and used these influences (for better or worse).

And further from Appy:

Quoted Text

Is your blood boiling about Paul again Ydoll? ..........What case? I did'nt know I presented one. Ummm & Ahhh, Errrm shuffle, shuffle.....

Well, seems as if you're trying to put a little bit of bite into your posts, Appy. But you've failed!

What is the problem then? Paul might be into avantgarde and experimental things just as much as John or anybody else did. He's obviously been telling us he was doing so for over thirty years. John put these things into his music quite clearly, Paul chose another way of expressing himself. Can't see the problem... Paul might have been experimenting with tapes and loops and things as well as John. John had the guts to show it, and got the credits for being into this avantgarde thing. But that still doesn't mean Paul might have wanted to do the same thing, had he been the more revolutionary kind. He wasn't, but that's ok.

There's that scene in A Fish Called Wanda when Kevin Kleins charachter keeps going on how clever he is because he reads Nitzche (spelling)
"Monkeys can't read Nitzche!" he says.
"Yes they can" retorted Michael Palin (I think) , "they just don't understand it."

That can count for more monkeys and people!

Quoted from Ydoll_Gwyn

I think he's rewriting history for sure - and he's been doing it for a long time, as you say. To my mind it's got a lot worse in the last five years. Both John and George cannot gainsay him.

A lot of folk were listening to Cage, it's true. Paul as well I'm sure. But my point is: who was DOING it as opposed to talking about? Mr Lennon.

Right. That's what I said, but I thought the point was who was into it, not necessarily doing/creating it. I think Paul was as open minded to experimental stuff as anyone. John just took it to an extreme. I guess I wish Paul could let the John thing go. He has been duking it out with a dead man for years to prove that they were equals and it wasn't so one-sided as far as John was concerned. John has been deified, martyred, what have you, and regardless if they were both into Cage or whatever, its a battle he can't win.

Quoted from juniorsfarm

I guess I wish Paul could let the John thing go.

Yes - this is THE point isn't it?

He seems to me to be as insecure as he could be; and the irony is, he has no need to be insecure at all!

Quoted from Ydoll_Gwyn

Yes - this is THE point isn't it?

He seems to me to be as insecure as he could be; and the irony is, he has no need to be insecure at all!

Agreed.

Yes. We finally agree...

I think so. lol

Radio Lightning WRLT here in Nashville does an oldies program on Saturday mornings--they pick a year and play music from that year for three hours, ending (always) with a Beatles (or ex-Beatles) song.

This past Saturday was 1968 and they closed out with "Revolution 9."

I wonder how many times it's gotten radio play.

Quoted from Ydoll_Gwyn

Anthology doesn't tell us: Paul tells us! He's always going on these days about how HE was the avante garde man, how he was into tape loops, yadda yadda. Paul: only your most fervent fans believe any of your revisionist nonsense. John went and DID things. While you were doing Honey Pie, John did Rev 9, and bit you on the bum! Take that Paulie!

well said. paul tends to take credit for mess that john did...after they broke up or he died. funny that.
but anyway, rev 9 was about a revolution in music and what john and ringo could really do when playing around with the stuff in the studio. its a great piece of music even if one doesnt like it. although i think most believe its crap cause it's not straightforward or hints at a deeper meaning. its just as the name implies, it's a revolution

but just curious, what did they do with the revolutions 2-8?  

Yeah, that was Paul's plan all along. Wait until John dies so he could take all the credit. Maybe he's just telling it like it was. He knows John went and did it. All he said was the he was living in London at the time and was around it more and introduced John to it. So what? Now he's taking credit. Jeez, I'm surprised no ones ever started a conspiracy about Paul plotting John's death just so he could come out as top Beatle. I REALLY don't believe Paul has any ulterior motives when he talks about the past. I think he's telling it as he remembers it. And George and Ringo never seemed to dispute his stories.

It seems to have gotten to the point with alot of people that if Paul talks about ideas he had, input he had, etc., that he is trying to take credit for everything. That's not the case. He gives John tons of credit where it is due. Just because Paul was more of a balladeer doesn't mean he didn't have different tastes even if they were radically different than the product he was releasing. I can go from Sinatra to Primus to Chopin without blinking an eye, and I'm certain there are others that have tastes in music that run the gamut. Just because Paul didn't release a Revolution 9 with the Beatles doesn't mean he didn't get it or have an affinity for the radical or avant garde.