John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Do talk back

Lennon or McCartney?

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

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23774
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 06 Jun 2010, 16:35

I think the notion of equality is a bit of a false one in this context.

As musicians sitting in a room they certainly ought to have viewed each other as equals. They had different talents, but both played at a very high level and it makes sense that they would choose to work with each other.

But from a distance we fans are not looking so much at potentiality or ability so much as accomplishment and narrative. John Lennon remains the more compelling figure because he took greater risks. Paul was certainly the better pure musician and had one of the greatest gifts for melody ever, but a great percentage of his work attempted little more than to charm. Nothing wrong with silly love songs of course - some people want to fill the world with 'em. I don't see anything wrong with that. (okay...I'll stop) - but John had bigger fish to fry. You can knock him for the pretense in that, but he also gets the glory for the risks that pay off.

John moved me more because he dug deeper. Paul certainly had his moments where he went for more (you don't have to list them), but they were the exception for him. For John they were the rule. They were after different things. I value what John was up to more.
The opinions of this poster are subjective. That’s how opinions work.

Image

Molony

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Molony » 06 Jun 2010, 16:41

I don't doubt the risk thing. Did Lennon take more risks and care less about the fallout? Yes.

However, I don't always think that risk-taking and pushing the envelope makes the best music.

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

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby sloopjohnc » 06 Jun 2010, 16:51

Davey the Fat Boy wrote:I think the notion of equality is a bit of a false one in this context.

As musicians sitting in a room they certainly ought to have viewed each other as equals. They had different talents, but both played at a very high level and it makes sense that they would choose to work with each other.

But from a distance we fans are not looking so much at potentiality or ability so much as accomplishment and narrative. John Lennon remains the more compelling figure because he took greater risks. Paul was certainly the better pure musician and had one of the greatest gifts for melody ever, but a great percentage of his work attempted little more than to charm. Nothing wrong with silly love songs of course - some people want to fill the world with 'em. I don't see anything wrong with that. (okay...I'll stop) - but John had bigger fish to fry. You can knock him for the pretense in that, but he also gets the glory for the risks that pay off.

John moved me more because he dug deeper. Paul certainly had his moments where he went for more (you don't have to list them), but they were the exception for him. For John they were the rule. They were after different things. I value what John was up to more.


Any art is therapy in a way, and I think John used it more for cathartic reasons than Paul did/does. I don't think Paul used songwriting any less for that, he just needed a different kind of therapy because of who he was.

But don't get me wrong, I think Paul's as passionate about music. When you see him interviewed and talk about Little Richard or Buddy Holly, you can still see that 13 year-old boy who discovered rock & roll.
Don't fake the funk on a nasty dunk!

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 23774
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 06 Jun 2010, 17:06

Molony wrote:I don't doubt the risk thing. Did Lennon take more risks and care less about the fallout? Yes.

However, I don't always think that risk-taking and pushing the envelope makes the best music.


In the abstract, I agree. But relative to these two guys, I think Lennon made more compelling music.
The opinions of this poster are subjective. That’s how opinions work.

Image

Johnny Dumfries

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Johnny Dumfries » 06 Jun 2010, 17:47

Common Sense Checklist wrote:as a side discussion - whose Irish anthem was the better?





(ignored)
:evil:

The Modernist

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby The Modernist » 06 Jun 2010, 18:01

Davey the Fat Boy wrote:I think the notion of equality is a bit of a false one in this context.

As musicians sitting in a room they certainly ought to have viewed each other as equals. They had different talents, but both played at a very high level and it makes sense that they would choose to work with each other.

But from a distance we fans are not looking so much at potentiality or ability so much as accomplishment and narrative. John Lennon remains the more compelling figure because he took greater risks. Paul was certainly the better pure musician and had one of the greatest gifts for melody ever, but a great percentage of his work attempted little more than to charm. Nothing wrong with silly love songs of course - some people want to fill the world with 'em. I don't see anything wrong with that. (okay...I'll stop) - but John had bigger fish to fry. You can knock him for the pretense in that, but he also gets the glory for the risks that pay off.

John moved me more because he dug deeper. Paul certainly had his moments where he went for more (you don't have to list them), but they were the exception for him. For John they were the rule. They were after different things. I value what John was up to more.


Excellent post.

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 » 06 Jun 2010, 20:15

Common Sense Checklist wrote:
Common Sense Checklist wrote:as a side discussion - whose Irish anthem was the better?





(ignored)
:evil:


I think they're both pretty dreadful - Macca's is lyrically more nauseating, but Lennon's is just as twee when you get right down to it. Used to piss my mother and - more importantly, my YC brother - off royally when I put it on the radiogram though.
@hewsim
-the artist formerly known as comrade moleskin-
-the unforgettable waldo jeffers-

Jug Band Music
my own music

Piggly Wiggly

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Piggly Wiggly » 06 Jun 2010, 20:18

The Modernist wrote:
Sir John San Juan And His Old Lady wrote:
And, as a hardcore fan, I think "Beautiful Boy" and "Yer Blues" work to make each other more resonant. Take either away, and the import of the other is diminished.


I would say they are from two very different points of his career, are two songs with very different intentions and I don't really see why they'd be related to each other even as a contrast.
I voted Lennon as I always do. Ultimately he was the more imaginative artist, though I think his last album was awful.


He contained emotional multitudes and depths, and the two examples chosen demonstrate an equal commitment to either end of the spectrum.

User avatar
Muskrat
World's Foremost Authority
Posts: 20923
Joined: 17 Jul 2003, 01:05
Location: Next to the park; across the street from the college; and the freeway at my back
Contact:

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Muskrat » 06 Jun 2010, 20:48

Sir John San Juan And His Old Lady wrote:I voted Lennon as I always do. Ultimately he was the more imaginative artist, though I think his last album was awful.


Matter of opinion, of course -- which "last album"? Menlove Avenue?

Still, every prolific artist should be allowed the occasional awful album. It's not as though Dylan, Presley, and McCartney didn't have at least their share. Doesn't invalidate the good work, though of course it bears consideration.
Things that a fella can't forget...

zoomboogity wrote:Psych should be fun, carefree, whimsical, colorful, anything but portentous...Otherwise, you might as well listen to prog.

Johnny Dumfries

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Johnny Dumfries » 07 Jun 2010, 16:44

comrade moleskin wrote:
Common Sense Checklist wrote:
Common Sense Checklist wrote:as a side discussion - whose Irish anthem was the better?





(ignored)
:evil:


I think they're both pretty dreadful - Macca's is lyrically more nauseating, but Lennon's is just as twee when you get right down to it. Used to piss my mother and - more importantly, my YC brother - off royally when I put it on the radiogram though.


...be honest - did you laugh when Yoko started singing on the second verse? :lol:
I did :oops:

Piggly Wiggly

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Piggly Wiggly » 07 Jun 2010, 16:48

Muskrat wrote:
Sir John San Juan And His Old Lady wrote:I voted Lennon as I always do. Ultimately he was the more imaginative artist, though I think his last album was awful.


Matter of opinion, of course -- which "last album"? Menlove Avenue?

Still, every prolific artist should be allowed the occasional awful album. It's not as though Dylan, Presley, and McCartney didn't have at least their share. Doesn't invalidate the good work, though of course it bears consideration.


Did I say this?

Piggly Wiggly

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Piggly Wiggly » 07 Jun 2010, 16:58

Evidently, Modernist said it.

Watch yer quote function, Todd.

I consider Double Fantasy a peak of sorts - middle aged Lennon. "Just Like Starting Over"? "Beautiful Boy"? "Watching The Wheels"? Oh, yes.

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 29684
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Matt Wilson » 07 Jun 2010, 17:06

I like Double Fantasy too. I don't understand the antipathy certain BCBers have towards that album. What were they expecting? Lennon always wrote about his life and that LP is no exception. He'd been sitting around for five years raising his child and er, baking bread. His political phase was over and so was the primal scream era. It's not like McCartney wrote a better set of songs in the late '70s or early '80s.

And the Yoko material is probably her most accessable as well.
John Coan wrote:I've lived in many different countries in Europe and whenever I come home I think 'England is the best'

Piggly Wiggly

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Piggly Wiggly » 07 Jun 2010, 17:28

neverknows wrote:
Lance Matthew wrote:Lennon always wrote about his life and that LP is no exception.

Sure, but there are two problems there:
-His personal stories were less interesting because there apparently wasn't much happening in his life.
-And he didn't do his usual job of blowing said personal stories to enormous proportions. Whatever you think of it, his early solo work was epic. He suffered The Biggest Loss Ever, split from The Biggest Circus On Earth, lived The Most Romantic Love Story Ever, suffered The Most Painful Withdrawal Ever, and he was going to End War Forever and release The Definitive Christmas Song within the same single.

In comparison, 'Beautiful Boy' doesn't even try to be The Most Dangerous Walk Across The Street With Your Kid Ever!


Spector would have overdubbed car horns and the screech of tires/brakes.

And monsters.

I'd buy it.

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 29684
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Matt Wilson » 07 Jun 2010, 17:30

neverknows wrote:
Lance Matthew wrote:Lennon always wrote about his life and that LP is no exception.

Sure, but there are two problems there:
-His personal stories were less interesting because there apparently wasn't much happening in his life.
-And he didn't do his usual job of blowing said personal stories to enormous proportions. Whatever you think of it, his early solo work was epic. He suffered The Biggest Loss Ever, split from The Biggest Circus On Earth, lived The Most Romantic Love Story Ever (including The Longest Binge Drinking Weekend Ever), suffered The Most Painful Withdrawal Ever, and he was going to End War Forever and release The Definitive Christmas Song within the same single.

In comparison, 'Beautiful Boy' doesn't even try to be The Most Dangerous Walk Across The Street With Your Kid Ever!


Some might say the album's lack of pretention works in its favor
John Coan wrote:I've lived in many different countries in Europe and whenever I come home I think 'England is the best'

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 29684
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Matt Wilson » 07 Jun 2010, 17:31

Sir John San Juan And His Old Lady wrote:Spector would have overdubbed car horns and the screech of tires/brakes.

And monsters.

I'd buy it.


No, that would've been Shadow Morton.
John Coan wrote:I've lived in many different countries in Europe and whenever I come home I think 'England is the best'

User avatar
Canis lupus
Posts: 1456
Joined: 20 Nov 2008, 19:38
Location: Tickhill

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Canis lupus » 07 Dec 2014, 10:29

Finely poised, this

...whatever happened to Molony?

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

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Hugh » 07 Dec 2014, 11:20

He's bringing up a kid and baking bread.

Or writing a song for Rupert Bear.

User avatar
Canis lupus
Posts: 1456
Joined: 20 Nov 2008, 19:38
Location: Tickhill

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Canis lupus » 17 May 2015, 12:11


User avatar
Canis lupus
Posts: 1456
Joined: 20 Nov 2008, 19:38
Location: Tickhill

Re: John Lennon vs Paul McCartney

Postby Canis lupus » 30 Mar 2017, 12:52

flippin Eck how did that happen