Any info on why George dropped the Indian/world music thing before the Beatles finished? As far as I know Indian music is not on any of his solo albums.

I think he realised he'd hit a dead end with it. Plus he was hanging out with Dylan, Clapton and co. And British rock in general was becoming more blues based by 68, and Indian music just didn't fit they way it had with psychedlia.
Whatever the reason - praise the lord.

Quoted from GreenApple

. John the progressive, Paul the ambitious, George the spiritual, and Ringo the fun(ny).

Apparently there's a spiritual gene scientists have discovered.

Ooh. You'll need to explain that progressive/ambitious thing a bit more. And I'd have to disagree that George's Beatle music was any more spiritual than the others. Hey Jude, Let It Be, Blackbird, Mother Natures Son, Long and Winding Road, Fool On The Hill are as "spiritual" as anything I can think of George's. And Taxman and Piggies aren't exactly dripping with good kharma.
Sorry, those old stereotype tags just don't ring true for me. I'd say Paul was every bit as progressive as John.

Quoted from GreenApple

Apparently there's a spiritual gene scientists have discovered.

Interesting. Though I would have thought the discovery that it is genetics that predisposes us to sprituality just shows that it has nothing to do with gods, or kharma or any thing supernatural, but just another evolutionary tool to help humans be a dominant species.

Quoted from Kevin

Ooh. You'll need to explain that progressive/ambitious thing a bit more. And I'd have to disagree that George's Beatle music was any more spiritual than the others. Hey Jude, Let It Be, Blackbird, Mother Natures Son, Long and Winding Road, Fool On The Hill are as "spiritual" as anything I can think of George's. And Taxman and Piggies aren't exactly dripping with good kharma.
Sorry, those old stereotype tags just don't ring true for me. I'd say Paul was every bit as progressive as John.

We had the debate last year about John being progressive, and Paul ambitious. I don't want to go over it again. At least, it fits how I see it. I just like the idea that each member had a kind of loose theme. Really, I think, of all the things they innovated, the idea of themes in music seems to be yet another one of them. The bands that followed in their wake had themes - alienation for Pink Floyd and Supertramp, Celtic and Indian fascination with Led Zeppelin, space with Hawkwind, lyrical landscapes with Yes, world music and then spirituality with Santana, etc.

But, they did cross over into each others 'territory', if that's what it was. George was obviously the most explicitly spiritual.

I think you're right about the Indian music thing being a dead end.

This website for something about the spirituality gene.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A46793-2004Nov12?language=printer


And other sites, but it seems like it's more of a theory than a scientific fact.

Quoted from GreenApple

We had the debate last year about John being progressive, and Paul ambitious. I don't want to go over it again.  

I respect your opinions. John could be progressive and George could be spiritual. I just find Paul's (one of the generations finest songwriters, musicians and performers) contribution being summed up as "ambition" a bit irksome.
But you're right, we've both stated our cases.

Quoted from GreenApple

And other sites, but it seems like it's more of a theory than a scientific fact.

Yes. The study of genetics is very much in its infancy and open to much debate.

Quoted from Kevin

I respect your opinions. John could be progressive and George could be spiritual. I just find Paul's (one of the generations finest songwriters, musicians and performers) contribution being summed up as "ambition" a bit irksome.
But you're right, we've both stated our cases.

Somebody else here suggested Paul as the ambitious one, and I thought that suited him. I just like the rose-tinted view of it like the four 'areas'. Seems to add colour to the whole thing.