Discussion:
OT – But Interesting for Beatles’ Music Fans
(too old to reply)
t***@iwvisp.com
2018-12-19 19:49:43 UTC
Permalink
OT – But Interesting for Beatles’ Music Fans

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2018/12/the-curmudgeon-the-case-for-paul-mccartney.html

Ray
md
2018-12-19 20:52:29 UTC
Permalink
Good read. He’s certainly right about why most critics favor John. I never thought it necessary to choose.

—md
Bob Roman
2018-12-19 21:11:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by t***@iwvisp.com
OT – But Interesting for Beatles’ Music Fans
The Lennon & McCartney team were better than the sum of their parts. Asking which of the two was a better songwriter in the Beatles is like asking whether hydrogen or oxygen is the wetter part of water.

--
BR
SavoyBG
2018-12-19 22:01:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Roman
Post by t***@iwvisp.com
OT – But Interesting for Beatles’ Music Fans
The Lennon & McCartney team were better than the sum of their parts. Asking which of the two was a better songwriter in the Beatles is like asking whether hydrogen or oxygen is the wetter part of water.
Although they each wrote songs separately after 1964 for the most part, they clearly each did much better work with the Beatles than they did after that. None of the 4 was a virtuoso on their instrument or had a sensational voice, but the sum of the parts was much better than what the 4 of them added up to separately. I guess John kept Paul from doing too many "Silly Love Songs" and Paul kept John from just hanging out and getting stoned all year. George and Ringo just complemented the main two guys excellently both musically and personality wise. They just got tired of each other after being constantly together for 8 straight years or so.
t***@iwvisp.com
2018-12-19 23:53:25 UTC
Permalink
I agree with most of that but I think Paul had a much better voice and much better abilities in using that instrument.

Ray

Loading...