John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Do talk back

Lennon or McCartney?

Lennon
39
50%
McCartney
39
50%
 
Total votes: 78

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 67263
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Diamond Dog » 30 Apr 2017, 19:13

zoomboogity wrote:Oh, and a friend of mine who writes for tv told me that he had a conversation a while back with a fellow tv writer. Both of them have worked on variety shows with musical guests, and they were swapping war stories. My friend asked him who, of all the musicians he's dealt with, is the biggest jerk. Without a thought, he immediately said, "Oh, that's easy - Paul McCartney." But, but... he seems so nice! "Exactly - he SEEMS nice." You can well imagine how he really is with all the peasants he deals with behind the scenes. At least with Lennon, you knew what you were getting. If he was a prick, well, that's him. If he was civil, well, you caught him on a good day, don't push your luck. But watching McCartney interact with Clapton and Townshend really summed it up for me. At least it's good for a few laughs. "Average Yank" - :lol:


This is exactly how I feel - nailed it.

There's always a facade with McCartney - he never lets his guard down. And he's learnt to cover his cuntishness very well.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”
"Don't be seduced into thinking that which did not make a profit is without value"
"'Seize the moments as they fly, know to live and learn to die'."

User avatar
zoomboogity
Shakin' All Over
Posts: 5278
Joined: 17 Jul 2003, 07:42
Location: Screwball Cultural Center

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby zoomboogity » 30 Apr 2017, 20:52

What surprised my friend wasn't that his buddy named McCartney - you spend forty years in the bowels of show biz, you're gonna see plenty of turds floating around. It was the quickness of the guy's response. He didn't even have to think about it, weigh the factors between the worst four or five, he actually answered before the question was finished being said. He does enjoy his work, and from the tales he's told, a lot of people you might think could be pretty nasty actually manage to be quite pleasant, even after multiple run-ins - easy to work with, no sense of entitlement, don't talk down to their subordinates, etc. And maybe Paul started off life as a pretty cool guy. But after all the never-ending fawning and adulation he's gotten throughout his entire adult life, what else was going to happen? He has to be "on" all the time - the second he walks out the door, every encounter has the potential for "Errrmerrrgerrrrrd, iss Pawwmuh Karrneeeeee!" And it usually is. At least Lennon reached a point where he just said, "Screw you guys, I'm going home."

I'd say Paul was more responsible for The Beatles' success, in that he was the one who was willing to do the heavy lifting. As talented a writer as Lennon was, he was pretty shiftless too, and he ended up exactly where he would have been without the success - sitting around the house all day, doing drugs and watching tv - only he was doing it as an ex-Beatle with tons of money and a wife who knew how to manage it for him. Paul had the drive to succeed without John, but John probably would have floundered without Paul as his partner. They were both lucky to find each other. Who else would have put up with these two?

User avatar
take5_d_shorterer
Posts: 5742
Joined: 22 Sep 2003, 23:09
Location: photo. by Andor Kertesz, Hung.

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby take5_d_shorterer » 30 Apr 2017, 21:57

Paul Zollo: Your current work is so much more concerned with rhythm than melody. Is your feeling that melody is no longer important?

PS: We're long out of the age of melody. Long out of there and we probably won't be going back into it...The days of Irving Berlin and those great songwriters was all about melody. Nobody comes close to writing melodies like they did. Nobody. [pause] Maybe Paul McCartney.

PZ:How about yourself?

PS: Not in the same league with Paul McCartney. But I still have memory of melody, so I mean, I do write melody. But I think he has a really great gift. He didn't study it, but he's very, very musical. He thinks clearly about it. He thinks about the shape of it. Yeah, I heard him describe music in terms where he understood the shape. He plays a few instruments. And his ear is really fine.

When I was working on Graceland, on the tracks, writing the songs, I saw Paul. He said, ``What are you working on?'' And I said, ``this stuff.'' ``Can I hear it?'' I said, ``yeah, sure, yeah.''

So we went into my car, and I was just playing him the tracks. And I'd finished quite a few of those songs and I had spent a lot of time writing them and I played those tracks for him and he began to improvise melodies and many of them were very good. I mean, they weren't as good as the melodies that I had, but I had reworked those melodies for a long time. His first impulse was very musical. He got it, sang easily, effortlessly, over the top of it. He's a very musical guy.




From Paul Zollo, Songwriters on Songwriting, 2003

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 67263
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Diamond Dog » 30 Apr 2017, 22:04

It takes a special kind of arrogance to say that Macca is the king of melody - but the melodies he wrote for my tunes weren't as good as mine!

But that's Paul Simon for you - the most insufferably smug cunt I can think of. He really makes my skin crawl live.....
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”
"Don't be seduced into thinking that which did not make a profit is without value"
"'Seize the moments as they fly, know to live and learn to die'."

Hugh
Posts: 15720
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:43

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Hugh » 30 Apr 2017, 22:36

That's not what he is saying though is it. He us saying that the melodies that McCartney came up with off the top of his head were not quite as good as those that Simon had toiled over. Its a compliment.

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 67263
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Diamond Dog » 30 Apr 2017, 22:41

A curiously backhanded one.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”
"Don't be seduced into thinking that which did not make a profit is without value"
"'Seize the moments as they fly, know to live and learn to die'."

User avatar
take5_d_shorterer
Posts: 5742
Joined: 22 Sep 2003, 23:09
Location: photo. by Andor Kertesz, Hung.

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby take5_d_shorterer » 30 Apr 2017, 23:39

And yet, the only compliment I have ever read Simon pay to anyone else (still living).

You may, in fact, like neither of the individuals involved in the quote above. I post it merely to show that there is something about McCartney that Paul Simon can't totally dismiss. That's saying something.

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 67263
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Diamond Dog » 30 Apr 2017, 23:41

Put that way, it is :)
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”
"Don't be seduced into thinking that which did not make a profit is without value"
"'Seize the moments as they fly, know to live and learn to die'."

User avatar
Fonz
Posts: 3723
Joined: 17 Feb 2014, 14:10
Location: Nevermore

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Fonz » 30 Apr 2017, 23:44

Neither.

George. Films etc
Heyyyy!

"Fonz clearly has no fucks to give. I like the cut of his Cupicidal gib."

User avatar
bhoywonder
The Magnificent
Posts: 27391
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 19:06
Location: Bristol, UK
Contact:

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby bhoywonder » 02 May 2017, 12:15

Diamond Dog wrote:There's always a facade with McCartney - he never lets his guard down. And he's learnt to cover his cuntishness very well.


Reading that Philip Norman bography I mentioned to you elsewhere, I got a real sense that this all stem from when his mother died when he was 15 (or whatever age he was). He basically refused to mourn, he looked at the practicalities and then immersed himself in making music. He met Lennon and joined the Quarrymen a few months later and, ever since, he pursued the same thing – to make music. He's never stopped. He's literally never stopped – look at his career, he's been working since he was 15 without a break. From a psychological point of view, people use distractions to avoid facing reality. Losing your mother suddenly as a teenager is a pretty severe trauma. He never seems to have dealt with it. Look at his response to Lennon's death – he went to work, what else could he do? His whole life is about his work and avoiding reality.

With McCartney, I feel a bit like I did watching Breaking Bad – I'm not sure at what point Walt stops being a good guy in a bad state and when he becomes an evil guy. At what point did McCartney become such a prick? I'd say early 70s. After the whole Beatles break-up, he was clearly very hurt by the events from after when Brian died up until the Let It be album was released. I don't blame him. But his response seems to have been a kind of "I'll show them" bitterness, where he set out very deliberately to make Wings the biggest band in the world at whatever cost. He seems to have become very dictatorial (arguably always had been, but was constrained by the other beatles and a deference to george martin) and ruthless. I suspect his intentions up until the end of the Beatles were pretty honourable, even if he could be quite hard to work with. By wings over the world, he seems to have been purely out for number one.

And he's the ultimate PR man.

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 67263
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Diamond Dog » 02 May 2017, 12:21

I think that's a pretty good summation.

But I do think the fact that his control freak side was only contained within The Beatles because they were big enough to stand up to him pretty much says what you need to know. Really, he's probably not the nicest guy, I'm afraid (and he's certainly not alone in that).

Wasn't there a hint that he didn't work with Nigel Goodrich after "Chaos...." because he didn't like some of the glory going to the production/engineering job?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”
"Don't be seduced into thinking that which did not make a profit is without value"
"'Seize the moments as they fly, know to live and learn to die'."

User avatar
Moleskin
Posts: 14589
Joined: 18 Feb 2004, 12:38
Location: We began to notice that we could be free, And we moved together to the West.

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Moleskin » 02 May 2017, 12:25

Diamond Dog wrote:I think that's a pretty good summation.

But I do think the fact that his control freak side was only contained within The Beatles because they were big enough to stand up to him pretty much says what you need to know. Really, he's probably not the nicest guy, I'm afraid (and he's certainly not alone in that).

Wasn't there a hint that he didn't work with Nigel Goodrich after "Chaos...." because he didn't like some of the glory going to the production/engineering job?


And Godrich told him to go away and work some more on the lyrics? (And he was absolutely right to do so)
@hewsim
-the artist formerly known as comrade moleskin-
-the unforgettable waldo jeffers-

Jug Band Music
my own music

User avatar
bhoywonder
The Magnificent
Posts: 27391
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 19:06
Location: Bristol, UK
Contact:

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby bhoywonder » 02 May 2017, 14:20

Yeah, I remember seeing something on the TV after Chaos & Creation where Macca clearly still took exception to the fact that Godrich had told him some of his stuff needed more work. He even said "Do you know who I am?", in his attack. They made light of it, but it was clearly not light from Macca's view. Shame, as it's the best thing he's done in decades.

User avatar
Quaco
F R double E
Posts: 46976
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 19:41

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Quaco » 02 May 2017, 16:13

Diamond Dog wrote:But I do think the fact that his control freak side was only contained within The Beatles because they were big enough to stand up to him pretty much says what you need to know. Really, he's probably not the nicest guy, I'm afraid (and he's certainly not alone in that).

I sympathize with him, though. One one hand, he can do it more or less all by himself, which he proved early on. But then he likes to interact and get fresh ideas, so he forms bands, but invariably chooses strangely bland bandmates -- possibly because they fit his idea of what his band should look like, good-looking, professional, no one deliberately detuning their guitars like John Lennon. (You can feel a bit of friction between him and Pete Townshend during the Rockestra session. Paul wants it professional with him taking the lead; Pete tends to push things a bit more and naturally draws attention to himself.) And unlike some superstars, he actually did submit to serious collaborations, which were not purely designed as ego-gratification (Costello, Wonder, Jackson, Godrich, Youth).

So, he's caught between different approaches. He knows he'll never find a collaborator who was as cuttingly candid as Lennon and who could then deliver real songwriting improvements, and thus will never reach the heights he did with The Beatles. Really, no one's left in his league -- barring Ray Davies or Pete Townshend losing all ego (not going to happen!) and deciding they want nothing more than to work with ol' Macca, really just for the songs -- so he's left all alone. Is he really a control freak? What is he supposed to do, get into a collaborative band with Rusty Anderson, et al.? He did that with Wings, and invariably it was best when he took the most control. But he's not supposed to be a dictator.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

User avatar
Goat Boy
Bogarting the joint
Posts: 32777
Joined: 20 Mar 2007, 12:11
Location: In the perfumed garden

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Goat Boy » 02 May 2017, 16:25

How do we know he's a prick? Because somebody claims he was when he visited some TV studio 20 years ago?

I'm sure ALL these guys have their dick moments. How could you not, you know? Christ, I can be rude to innocuous bus drivers. We all have our moments. But these guys have had to deal with a lifetime of crap. Stupid interviews, fans, other musicians. It must do something to a person. I'm surprised they aren't more dickish some of them. I think if I was Macca I'd be hard pressed not to tell everybody to fuck off!

He certainly isn't half as arseholish as Lennon by all accounts. He's not Mark E Smith or, I dunno, Chevy Chase.
Griff wrote:The notion that Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong vocal proponent of antisemitism, would stand in front of an antisemitic mural and commend it is utterly preposterous.


Copehead wrote:we have lost touch with anything normal

User avatar
Quaco
F R double E
Posts: 46976
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 19:41

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Quaco » 02 May 2017, 16:32

Not to mention doing all this with cameras and microphones in your face the whole time. It stands to reason he's guarded. Plus the Beatles thing hanging over your head. I just watched a thing about a Wings tour. Ringo comes backstage, and all the conversation in the room stops waiting for Paul and Ringo to say something, and so they start mucking about for the camera.It's got to be strange to be looked at like that. Same with beautiful people and models. They're rarely funny because they know they're always being looked at, and they are completely self-conscious.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

User avatar
zoomboogity
Shakin' All Over
Posts: 5278
Joined: 17 Jul 2003, 07:42
Location: Screwball Cultural Center

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby zoomboogity » 02 May 2017, 18:22

Goat Boy wrote:How do we know he's a prick? Because somebody claims he was when he visited some TV studio 20 years ago?

I'm sure ALL these guys have their dick moments. How could you not, you know? Christ, I can be rude to innocuous bus drivers. We all have our moments. But these guys have had to deal with a lifetime of crap. Stupid interviews, fans, other musicians. It must do something to a person. I'm surprised they aren't more dickish some of them. I think if I was Macca I'd be hard pressed not to tell everybody to fuck off!

He certainly isn't half as arseholish as Lennon by all accounts. He's not Mark E Smith or, I dunno, Chevy Chase.


Well, the anecdote I shared was just that - an anecdote, given by someone with 40 years' worth of other worthy candidates. (And i believe Chevy Chase was among them!) It sure does fall in line with what has been said by those who knew him better. And at this point, McCartney doesn't "have to deal" with anyone he doesn't want to. Given the choice of being left alone or sticking his mug back into the media, he always makes that same choice to go out there one more time. Like any of us, he weighs the good and the bad, and he makes his choice. He's in no position to complain. But as bhoy points out, he's only doing what he's done since he was 15. He literally can't envision a life of just sitting around the house. He could try to keep busy with activities that don't require being in the spotlight, but that's not him either.

I know that none of us would have dealt with it any better. But that's no reason we can't bag at the guy for fun. He still gets the last laugh. Just look at how those of us who are/were CSNY fans talk about them here, especially Crosby. (And yeah, I've heard firsthand stories about him too. Nothing extraordinary, just the same outcome you'd expect.) The difference is that the media doesn't stick cameras in his face all day long anymore, as much as he wishes they would. He lives for the spotlight too, but he's not exactly telegenic in an old-guy way, like McCartney is. It must drive him crazy to be ignored like that and know that the parade has passed him by. And the irony there is, HE is the walrus!

You're right, though, everyone has their bad moments. I certainly do. This chronic nerve pain in my hand has done a real number on my tolerance level for what used to be no big deal. That's the main reason I avoid leaving the house as much as possible. And going by the two times I met and spoke with Arthur Lee, he was a pretty cool guy, real charming and funny dude. So let's make of that what we will.

And I'll say this in his defense: a friend of mine shared an apartment in New York with Linda Eastman (platonically), just before she met Paul. They stayed in touch over the years, and he has nothing but good things to say about her. I don't think I've ever heard anyone speak negatively of her (apart from her singing). If she thought Paul was worth spending every day around, that's all that really matters. You don't want public scrutiny? Go home and count your money. Roger Daltrey manages to maintain a low profile somehow, what's his secret? Of course, these people don't deserve to be stalked or harassed, but we're not even coming close to that here. If we didn't have some appreciation for him on some level, we wouldn't talk about him in the first place. That's show biz!

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 67263
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Diamond Dog » 02 May 2017, 18:36

I'm not sure I ever told you about the time I met McCartney.... walking down Oxford St in broad daylight, with Linda, back in March 1981.... he was walking along - completely unmobbed- and I saw the pair of them a couple of hundred yards away. My brothers didn't believe me - until we got right up to them... I had no idea what to say... I just blurted out "Hello Paul" he came right back with "Wallo..." and they carried on walking. I loved that.
The interesting thing is - that's three months after Lennon was gunned down in NYC. I think that took huge courage. So, if he could do it then... I'm pretty sure he could now. He's certainly not as big a name now as then (in terms of chart success etc).
I also have massive admiration for the fact he sent his kids through comprehensive school.... and told them at a very early age they weren't going to inherit from his estate....
So I like Paul. I just think it's clear he can be an utter cock sometimes (but, as was pointed out, can't we all).
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”
"Don't be seduced into thinking that which did not make a profit is without value"
"'Seize the moments as they fly, know to live and learn to die'."

User avatar
sloopjohnc
Posts: 63756
Joined: 03 Jun 2004, 20:12

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby sloopjohnc » 02 May 2017, 18:45

Quaco wrote:
Diamond Dog wrote:But I do think the fact that his control freak side was only contained within The Beatles because they were big enough to stand up to him pretty much says what you need to know. Really, he's probably not the nicest guy, I'm afraid (and he's certainly not alone in that).

I sympathize with him, though. One one hand, he can do it more or less all by himself, which he proved early on. But then he likes to interact and get fresh ideas, so he forms bands, but invariably chooses strangely bland bandmates -- possibly because they fit his idea of what his band should look like, good-looking, professional, no one deliberately detuning their guitars like John Lennon. (You can feel a bit of friction between him and Pete Townshend during the Rockestra session. Paul wants it professional with him taking the lead; Pete tends to push things a bit more and naturally draws attention to himself.) And unlike some superstars, he actually did submit to serious collaborations, which were not purely designed as ego-gratification (Costello, Wonder, Jackson, Godrich, Youth).

So, he's caught between different approaches. He knows he'll never find a collaborator who was as cuttingly candid as Lennon and who could then deliver real songwriting improvements, and thus will never reach the heights he did with The Beatles. Really, no one's left in his league -- barring Ray Davies or Pete Townshend losing all ego (not going to happen!) and deciding they want nothing more than to work with ol' Macca, really just for the songs -- so he's left all alone. Is he really a control freak? What is he supposed to do, get into a collaborative band with Rusty Anderson, et al.? He did that with Wings, and invariably it was best when he took the most control. But he's not supposed to be a dictator.


I always wonder what kind of input Brian Ray gives. He has a couple good albums himself and was Etta James' musical director for 14 years, as well as other high profile jobs, before the McCartney gig.
Don't fake the funk on a nasty dunk!

User avatar
Quaco
F R double E
Posts: 46976
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 19:41

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Quaco » 02 May 2017, 18:52

Which mega-famous '60s stars (living or dead) would you actually like to hang out with long-term? Lennon, McCartney, Elton, Mick, Keith, Morrison, Townshend, Moon? Maybe Mick, maybe Entwistle. The rest seem pretty difficult! The less famous ones are always easier.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -