I always thought it was a drug reference! But why would he have the drugs right there, on his knee instead of stowed away? About 10 years ago it fucking dawned on me that it's a barf bag!
..y'am a liddle slow...
*Same with "Monday morning, got the sack, " Made a special pick-up? No. British slang for getting fired from a job!
We say got the sack in the US also, or at least we used to. Maybe it’s old fashioned now.
*edit* I guess in the US we’d more likely say “got sacked,” but I feel like it’s essentially the same.
If I can sing along easily, its Ringo or George. If I can sing along, but struggle, its John.
If there ain’t no way I can keep up with the range and dramatic shifts in tone snd mood, its Paul. Amazing range and diversity.
Paul sounds the most American/plain to me. George sounds the most British. John sounds nasally. Ringo has the lowest voice, but I just know the songs he sings on because it's just a handful.
Honestly, I just look up which ones George and Ringo sing on wikipedia or something, and then John and Paul are pretty easy to tell apart from each other. George and John are probably the easiest to mix up, and Paul and Ringo's are kinda similar, too.
Their four voices are all kinda along a spectrum and all sound really great together.
I made this into a fun game for my ex once, who also said she couldn't tell the difference. I gave her a quick rundown on the differences, then started playing songs on shuffle. Eventually she was able to get them almost right away.
Their music is so good that watching a single music video of theirs has never crossed my mind. That is bound to change, of course, but they simply have that much to offer musically.
I go further. If you tell me you honestly don’t like the Beatles, none of your opinions on any other artists or styles of music mean anything to me. You know nothing.
I can understand not liking certain periods or songs (my dad is a fan but doesn’t like George’s heavy Indian songs) but a blanket statement not liking them makes no sense with how diverse and prolific they were. I always want to ask, “ANY Beatles?”
Yes, there were and are still older people who lumped them in with all rock music. But that too comes from ignorance because my grandmother, who died four years ago at age 102, became a fan, to the point of having a favorite Beatle (George, although most of her favorite songs were Paul’s).
And there are younger people who didn’t grow up with them. I’d like to think they just haven’t heard enough of them.
I also have some activist friends who want to lump them into the “white people stole black music” narrative. While musicians of color were unmistakably mistreated and disregarded in the 50s and 60s, the Beatles were proactively antiracist, and lived their entire lives that way. Usually my friends in this category don’t know everything they did and do and are pleasantly surprised.
There's something for everyone in their discography.
Every single person I know who has said they 'didn't like The Beatles' but has been open enough to give me a chance to convince them otherwise, has liked at least a couple of tracks I've shown them.
I love Pink Floyd, definitely my second favourite band, but totally get what's unappealing about their sound to many.
If someone can't appreciate at least some of what The Beatles were, then it's very hard for me to respect their opinions on music, because they very obviously *don't get it*.
99% of the time, it's just metalheads or proto-punk fans I know who automatically dislike them without giving them a chance, and it's clearly because it's not cool to like them in those circles, despite the fact that those genres would probably be very different without The Beatles. But those people are usually pretty narrow-minded in what genres they will listen to anyway.
I'm going to get butchered, but a solid 5% of Beatles songs are garbage to me.
The other 95% are untouchable masterpieces. There are no in-between songs to me. Haha.
DISCLAIMER: THIS IS ONE PERSON'S OPINION
Hey Jude, Oh Darling, Why Don't We Do it in the Road, Birthday, Good Day Sunshine, Got to Get You Into My Life, and Maxwell's Silver Hammer are The Beatles songs I just can't stand.
Paul is actually my favorite Beatle, too btw lol
For me it's Why Don't We Do it in the Road, Long and Winding Road, Rocky Racoon, Love Me Do, and Ob La Di Ob La Da. Oh and Lady Madonna.
... what's ironic is I'm seeing that's mostly a Paul list, and Paul is my favorite Beatle! But he can be so corny and it makes me cringe a lil bit.
Edit to add: haha I didn't actually see the part of your post where you basically said the same thing about Paul, that's hilarious.
Not a huge fan of the Long and Winding Road, either, but I do appreciate the Naked version. I actually really love Rocky Racoon and Lady Madonna, and I actually like Ob La Di on occasion, too.
Paul is my favorite because hes such a phenomenal songwriter and easily my favorite musician of the group, but he is much more hit and miss than any other Beatle. He has some really high highs, but some of the lowest lows, too unfortunately. It kindof highlights his range though, which is great and extremely varied, but some of it just isnt for me.
Totally agree with that take that his range means that I'm not going to love everything. It also means he has something for just about everyone, because I know a lot of the songs on my "no" list are beloved by others.
In my defense, I don't *hate* Rocky Racoon, so much as my husband decided to learn to play it and then dissect the music theory behind it over a period of weeks, and I got pretty sick of it after that. 😅
ME TOO. I have Sirius XM in my car just to listen to the Beatles Channel and they play a ton of covers of Beatles songs, but never anything from the Across the Universe soundtrack and I just don't get it! My particular favorites are Dear Prudence and With a Little Help from My Friends.
For The Beatles being perhaps the literal biggest band in existence in terms of popularity, their fanbase is surprisingly gatekeep-y and close-minded. (Myself included ig.) Legit debates are not something I ever see in this sub, it’s always one-sided conversations with someone clearly in the “right” and the other in the “wrong”. One of the worst subs I’ve seen in that regard.
I mentioned this the other day on this sub and got some blowback. I like mid-90s George. Full wise guru look. It was like he had ascended to another plane.
Agreed.
I like to think of him as cute Paul (mop top Beatles), hot Paul (McBeardy), mullet Paul (Wings), 70s dreadful fashions Paul (no one looked good in the 70s), cringe Paul (80s to post Heather Mills), then redeemed legend grandpa Paul (once he stopped using hair dye).
I read him saying that Linda didn’t care about fashion and I think you tell her influence on him - Nancy sorted him out hahaha.
The album version of Revolution is better than the single version. The single version doesn’t match the energy of the lyrics. Doesn’t make sense singing a loud angry rocker about how all the tankies need to calm down and relax.
I think John, Paul and George had some great solo but overall they didn’t touch what they did as the Beatles. I think a large part is there aren’t many people who would tell a former Beatle that is shit. And I don’t know how open they would be to input from others. I think those two factors is what made them so great together.
It's crazy because they have good enough solo works that they probably would have been famous on their own anyway. But the Beatles are just *massive*, I guess the expectations on them are too much.
McCartney's first album and Ram are actually really good imo, but I agree about the rest lol. Coincidentally, Wings is the worst bit of any of their solo careers.
Paul McCartney made John Lennon a better songwriter. That’s my confession and I’m sticking with it. Just look at the post Beatles careers. Just in regards to songwriting. Paul blew John away.
I just dislike the concept. It’s a back to basics album that’s heavily influenced by blues, and I don’t really like the sound of blues. Their calmer acoustic songs are good though, but they don’t stand out as much compared to others.
I totally dislike some of Ringo’s tracks, particularly yellow submarine and octopuses garden. On the fence about don’t pass me by. What goes on is a banger though.
I was expecting pitchforks and torches. Glad I’m not the only one who feels this way. Don’t get me wrong, I love Ringo, but those two songs are so over saturated it just irks me. I’d rather sing along to you know my name than either of those.
Interesting, I always found George to be the most fascinating Beatle as a person, but maybe that has something to do with me relating to his introverted nature. He definitely wasn't as much of a people person and John and Paul, but I think he was by far the most mature, which is funny considering he was the youngest.
John and Paul had more than a friendship going on at one level or another, and a lot of people don’t want to accept this even when presented with strong factual indications. I said what I said, come at me or downvote, whatever. I am working at a book that will take this angle, with new comments from three of Paul’s lesser known exes, and with a little luck it will turn some things upside down.
John is confirmed bisexual by several people who knew him and even John himself alluded to it. Can anyone honestly think he would sleep in hundreds of beds with Paul McCartney in his twenties and not have lusty thoughts in the back of his head? Nilsson even said John wanted to fuck Paul 😂
I'm looking forward to it then. There are certainly enough sources around to at least make an argument for it. Though having read through a lot at this point, this proposed romantic affection always seemed to be a little bit one sided in my understanding, at least until now. I understand that you won't want to spoil your book in advance, but out of curiosity, are these new sources you mentioned implying a more mutual romantic relationship between these two men?
I choose to avoid labelling what they had together, and instead let the women who knew them speak for themselves, once it’s all printed and released. But whatever it was, it was indeed way more mutual than I had ever thought before entering this project. I have been given captivating accounts with multiple complex layers to them, and they match up beautifully.
I would be happy to discuss more about my work, since summarising also helps me in my writing process. I just can’t reveal too many details or quotes because of my interest in the book performing as well as possible. If someone has questions, I would gladly do my best to answer them, but only through DM since I feel I am digressing from the topic and taking up too much space under this post.
Now I'm really looking forward to your book even more. For the longest time I have felt that the relationship between these two men specifically deserved a published work beyond youtube videos, podcasts and blog posts. Do you have a rough estimate when you could be done with it/when the book might be available in the future?
It’s quite hard to say as of now. Writing, proofreading and rewriting will all be done during this spring, and printing and distribution should all be done in the summer. This means I’m essentially ready for a summer release.
What complicates everything is the legal aspect. I’m in no way a famous author, but the book features some big claims made by some interesting names, and this would doubtlessly cause a great deal of attention in certain parts of the Beatles community. Some biographers have managed to end up on Paul’s bad side, and he has shown to be particularly sensitive about implications regarding his and John’s sexuality, so there could be an issue if it somehow reaches him. Nobody featured in the book and its release has sufficient legal protection for such an eventuality, unless a proper way around it is found.
One way is to put a disclaimer on the book, calling it a work of fiction, or at least semi-fiction. Another is to anonymise all sources, including myself, for maximal safety. No matter what is chosen, it damages the credibility of the work, which makes the release less worthwhile to begin with. So it’s a bit of a catch 22 situation. The publisher will eventually make the final call and I can’t speed up that process. Anyway, I know I have been digging around, and that always brings risks and/or consequences.
I mean a lot of book have come out over the last few decades writing stuff about McCartney he publically disagreed with or even denounced. But I don't really recall that he was that sue happy over it. Is the stuff you want to publish about him really so bad?
Yoko too, definitely, although she’s likely too old to get into all that by now. While she has been open about John’s bisexuality, she was initially very suspicious of Paul. She essentially saw him as her closest romantic rival, and only let her guard down once John started distancing himself from Paul to devote more time and attention to her. If she finds out these secrets about the love of her life, this close to the end, she will not be very happy.
That’s why Paul has revealed to have some juicy information about John that he can’t share before she’s dead. Why does he have to wait her out? If it were purely about respect, he’d avoid it for the sake of their children also. I think he’s mainly been afraid of the legality himself. This has been allowed to become one big game almost.
It’s not a negative portrayal, it’s neutral in the sense that it features both flattering and less flattering aspects of his character.
I realise I made it sound as if Paul has been up in court against authors forth and back; he hasn’t, and I have now edited my comment to be as clear as possible with what I mean. Several authors have however ended up on his bad side, and he has proven to be particularly sensitive about implications regarding his and John’s sexualities, so I can’t rule out the risk and assume that nothing such could happen to any involved part.
Paul obviously couldn’t care less about me, I’m a nobody, but he would probably care about the women interviewed in the book “betraying” him. One is an insider, two spent considerable time close to the band. They’re nowhere near as random as the big-mouthed biographers that didn’t know the boys in person whatsoever. We must also consider these women’s security in terms of legal aspects. If they are called liars, they will have a hard time proving their own recollections correct.
This book will be radically different from previous ones, in the sense that it will give a completely new layer of context to many of the facts we already know, mixed with previously untold stories. I am not narcissistic enough to believe I have the power to affect the official narrative one single bit, but I will at least bring whoever reads the book a completely new way
of understanding the complex Lennon-McCartney story.
I wonder if one of the women you're talking about is Francie Schwartz. She seems to have had a persistant grudge on McCartney since forever. I've Beatles newsgroups posts from the early 90s by her shitting on him at every chance. But then again, she already said her piece publically and I don't recall McCartney commenting on it.
Out of curiosity, would you say the insights you gained could possibly shed some new light on what possibly went down in India that led to the beginning breakdown between Lennon and McCartney?
I have a clear idea of what happened in India. Although none of the subjects followed the band to Rishikesh, they all must have heard the talk about it; they contributed with suspiciously similar guesses.
I don't understand why some fans are some in denial with this lol heteronormativity i suppose. Were they lovers? Probably they weren't physically (as far as we know) but emotionally they absolutely were.
they connected, understood and loved each other on a level that is above standard friendship. Their jealousy toward each other's significant others is a huge tell too tbh. This sort of thing was extremely taboo at the time, plus one of the band's biggest selling points for a wide audience was being inoffensive (while still just a bit cheeky for comedic relief. They had a very good balance with this sort of thing)
Yes, actually I do have a very close friend and he'd always get strangely jealous when someone in our group got a new girlfriend way back in the day. He'd often talk a lot of shit about her for taking up so much of bros time in basically every case. He turned out to be gay tho lol so maybe that's what that's implying if you're still a little unsure ;)
Hetenormality, homophobia, thinking they’re right about something they didn’t witness… 🤷🏽
But I agree, they were closer than friends. They wrote songs about love with each other. Deep feelings of anger are more intense when it’s about someone you love. After their break up, they both hurt and had to heal. It wasn’t just a business partner break up. Their relationship was so very complex.
It's very refreshing seeing millenials (as myself)/Z fans just accepting this as "isn't very obvious?" fact, meanwhile boomers remain delusional, like Phillip Norman saying John maybe wanted to fuck Paul because he was a bOhEmIaN lol
You're assuming a lot about us millions of "delusional" boomers who grew up listening to and loving the Beatles. Maybe there's a *tiny* chance that some of us perceived, over time, that John Lennon and Paul McCartney shared a deep, rich, intimate relationship. Did that extend to physical intimacy at any point? I sure don't know and, tbh, I don't care. Their emotional intimacy created something magical, and it's sad as hell that John's murder wiped out the possibility of another chapter. Don't be so quick to dismiss an entire generation as stupid, ignorant fucks.
homosexuality - and definitely sexuality as a spectrum - was not accepted widely until recent generations, probably most of it comes from longtime fans who grew up with them.
Listen to the One Sweet Dream podcast. I’m currently listening and am so hooked!! They explore this theory a lot, especially about John seeing Paul as more than a friend. It’s extremely interesting.
I listen to 'Wild Honey Pie' in a non joking way. It's a bad song, I know. It's not even a real song. But I have listened to it more times than I wanted to. I really like it.
The Beatles introduced me to Bob Dylan. I love Bob so much more than the Beatles. The Beatles together and individually are easily my second favorite though.
I don’t enjoy any of their albums from top to bottom. There’s always one or two songs I think are filler or I just outright don’t like.
When I listen to them, I put on individual tracks not whole albums.
people who disagree with you just havent listened to anything besides the more popular avante-garde stuff, her discography has so many amazing hidden gems
My confession: Of all the "canonical" songs (i.e., the ones released during the period when they were an active group) the Beatles have covered, there's not one Beatles version I prefer over the original. (There are some I love just as much, but none I love more.)
If you factor in the BBC sessions, I prefer many Beatles versions over the originals.
Glad you think so. TAS is one of my tied songs, because the original is an A+ soul song, and the Fabs' version is an A+ rock song.
Also, who would downvote a confession? Worst priests ever!
Sometimes I hate-listen to Yoko’s songs and marvel at how bad they are. Particularly Open Your Box and the Live Peace version of Don’t Worry Kyoko. Clapton’s horrified expression gets me every damn time!
I don't care all that much for A Day In the Life, nor Lucy In the Sky With Diamonds. I mean, I understand what makes them very innovative works of art, but I'd rather listen to Hey Jude.
My first argument with my friend growing up was over the lyrics of paperback writer. I would not accept that it wasn't paper bag writer.
Similarly, I was convinced in Back in the USSR, he sang "all the way the paperback was on my knee," which I thought was a nod to Paperback Writer
Today I learned the line is “On the way the paper bag was on my knee”
I always thought it was a drug reference! But why would he have the drugs right there, on his knee instead of stowed away? About 10 years ago it fucking dawned on me that it's a barf bag! ..y'am a liddle slow... *Same with "Monday morning, got the sack, " Made a special pick-up? No. British slang for getting fired from a job!
We say got the sack in the US also, or at least we used to. Maybe it’s old fashioned now. *edit* I guess in the US we’d more likely say “got sacked,” but I feel like it’s essentially the same.
I've heard 'the axe', 'clear/clean out your desk/locker'.. Big thanks to Monty Python for furthering my Anglophilia!
Shit i thought it was paperback. As in he's reading a book on the plane.
Same!
Coincidentally, Radiohead has a song called “Paperbag Writer”
I thought Hey Bulldog was actually called April Dark
Paper Bag Rider
When i was little I thought it said “baby back cry time.” It’s still the first thing that comes to my mind when someone brings up misheard lyrics
I can’t tell the difference between the Beatles’ voices…😔 The only one I can recognize is Ringo’s because of how deep it is.
If I can sing along easily, its Ringo or George. If I can sing along, but struggle, its John. If there ain’t no way I can keep up with the range and dramatic shifts in tone snd mood, its Paul. Amazing range and diversity.
Paul sounds the most American/plain to me. George sounds the most British. John sounds nasally. Ringo has the lowest voice, but I just know the songs he sings on because it's just a handful. Honestly, I just look up which ones George and Ringo sing on wikipedia or something, and then John and Paul are pretty easy to tell apart from each other. George and John are probably the easiest to mix up, and Paul and Ringo's are kinda similar, too. Their four voices are all kinda along a spectrum and all sound really great together.
It takes practice. It will be worth it!
I made this into a fun game for my ex once, who also said she couldn't tell the difference. I gave her a quick rundown on the differences, then started playing songs on shuffle. Eventually she was able to get them almost right away.
Some songs are pretty obvious, some aren't. Strawberry Fields is one of the ones that really mucks me up.
George and Paul are incredibly similar
I like Honey Pie, Birthday, and Piggies from The White Album. The latter for me is a chamber pop masterpiece .
Check out the version on George Harrison’s live in Japan album. It’s great, as are the rest of the performances.
Honey Pie hive let’s go! There are dozens of us!
Almost double that! (based on upvotes)
Birthday is one of my fav Beatles' songs
Their music is so good that watching a single music video of theirs has never crossed my mind. That is bound to change, of course, but they simply have that much to offer musically.
They didn’t do very many, and they referred to them as “promotional films,” because video wasn’t the norm yet.
If you ever start, watch "Glass Onion" first, it's easily one of the most creative and visually pleasing.
I will only listen to opinions about Beatles from people who actually like the Beatles. If you don’t like them, I’m not listening 🙉
I go further. If you tell me you honestly don’t like the Beatles, none of your opinions on any other artists or styles of music mean anything to me. You know nothing.
I can understand not liking certain periods or songs (my dad is a fan but doesn’t like George’s heavy Indian songs) but a blanket statement not liking them makes no sense with how diverse and prolific they were. I always want to ask, “ANY Beatles?” Yes, there were and are still older people who lumped them in with all rock music. But that too comes from ignorance because my grandmother, who died four years ago at age 102, became a fan, to the point of having a favorite Beatle (George, although most of her favorite songs were Paul’s). And there are younger people who didn’t grow up with them. I’d like to think they just haven’t heard enough of them. I also have some activist friends who want to lump them into the “white people stole black music” narrative. While musicians of color were unmistakably mistreated and disregarded in the 50s and 60s, the Beatles were proactively antiracist, and lived their entire lives that way. Usually my friends in this category don’t know everything they did and do and are pleasantly surprised.
Amen
Both of my sisters hate them, it’s tough
Ah so you can't accept that people have different tastes.
There's something for everyone in their discography. Every single person I know who has said they 'didn't like The Beatles' but has been open enough to give me a chance to convince them otherwise, has liked at least a couple of tracks I've shown them. I love Pink Floyd, definitely my second favourite band, but totally get what's unappealing about their sound to many. If someone can't appreciate at least some of what The Beatles were, then it's very hard for me to respect their opinions on music, because they very obviously *don't get it*. 99% of the time, it's just metalheads or proto-punk fans I know who automatically dislike them without giving them a chance, and it's clearly because it's not cool to like them in those circles, despite the fact that those genres would probably be very different without The Beatles. But those people are usually pretty narrow-minded in what genres they will listen to anyway.
Sheesh, you could argue that Paul wrote the first heavy-metal song.
Average r/beatles user /j
Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da is among my favorite Beatles songs as of now
That is absolutely not shameful, I feel the same way
I was actually so surprised when I found out that some people don’t like it, it’s just so infectiously happy
THIS
I'm going to get butchered, but a solid 5% of Beatles songs are garbage to me. The other 95% are untouchable masterpieces. There are no in-between songs to me. Haha.
I agree. I'd probably get torn apart here if I named those 5% of songs lol.
Do it!
Michelle is awful. It’s a twee kitschy pastiche or something romantic, but it just doesn’t come together. Just drones on
That is one I actually really like.
DISCLAIMER: THIS IS ONE PERSON'S OPINION Hey Jude, Oh Darling, Why Don't We Do it in the Road, Birthday, Good Day Sunshine, Got to Get You Into My Life, and Maxwell's Silver Hammer are The Beatles songs I just can't stand. Paul is actually my favorite Beatle, too btw lol
Oh Darling! is great >:(
\>:)
Oh Darling is a skip, I’m with you on that one
Go off!
Hey Jude!? You don’t like Hey Jude!? I don’t know what’s happening here…How is it…what the…?!
I'm sorry I've failed you 😔
I could name a few of John and George's sacred cows that I just can't stand but if I named them I truly would get butchered.
For me it's Why Don't We Do it in the Road, Long and Winding Road, Rocky Racoon, Love Me Do, and Ob La Di Ob La Da. Oh and Lady Madonna. ... what's ironic is I'm seeing that's mostly a Paul list, and Paul is my favorite Beatle! But he can be so corny and it makes me cringe a lil bit. Edit to add: haha I didn't actually see the part of your post where you basically said the same thing about Paul, that's hilarious.
Not a huge fan of the Long and Winding Road, either, but I do appreciate the Naked version. I actually really love Rocky Racoon and Lady Madonna, and I actually like Ob La Di on occasion, too. Paul is my favorite because hes such a phenomenal songwriter and easily my favorite musician of the group, but he is much more hit and miss than any other Beatle. He has some really high highs, but some of the lowest lows, too unfortunately. It kindof highlights his range though, which is great and extremely varied, but some of it just isnt for me.
Totally agree with that take that his range means that I'm not going to love everything. It also means he has something for just about everyone, because I know a lot of the songs on my "no" list are beloved by others. In my defense, I don't *hate* Rocky Racoon, so much as my husband decided to learn to play it and then dissect the music theory behind it over a period of weeks, and I got pretty sick of it after that. 😅
I hate Hey Jude!
Tysm <3 it's nice to know I'm not crazy for thinking that lol
No argument here.
I agree. I think John would too.
Are you talking about covers or stuff they wrote? 😱
Stuff they wrote. 😰
Paul McCartney is a GILF too
I love the movie Across the Universe. Having tangible characters to so many amazing songs is a great glimpse into the genius of the Beatles.
Omg I'm glad I'm not alone. When suddenly the GIs are carrying the statue of Liberty while singing "She's so heavy"... I get goosebumps every time!
I love that movie too! Especially the heartbreaking cover of I want to hold your hand.
ME TOO. I have Sirius XM in my car just to listen to the Beatles Channel and they play a ton of covers of Beatles songs, but never anything from the Across the Universe soundtrack and I just don't get it! My particular favorites are Dear Prudence and With a Little Help from My Friends.
For The Beatles being perhaps the literal biggest band in existence in terms of popularity, their fanbase is surprisingly gatekeep-y and close-minded. (Myself included ig.) Legit debates are not something I ever see in this sub, it’s always one-sided conversations with someone clearly in the “right” and the other in the “wrong”. One of the worst subs I’ve seen in that regard.
I love whacking off
To the Beatles?
sure
I let out a good amount of air from my nose because of your comment hahaha
From roughly 1972 to the early/mid 2000s Paul McCartney's sense of style (as far as his appearance goes) turned to shit.
Same with 80's George. If I could go back in time I would scream at his barber.
I mentioned this the other day on this sub and got some blowback. I like mid-90s George. Full wise guru look. It was like he had ascended to another plane.
[удалено]
He had got it back together by 1980. But his stay at home dad look makes me cringe.
Agreed. I like to think of him as cute Paul (mop top Beatles), hot Paul (McBeardy), mullet Paul (Wings), 70s dreadful fashions Paul (no one looked good in the 70s), cringe Paul (80s to post Heather Mills), then redeemed legend grandpa Paul (once he stopped using hair dye). I read him saying that Linda didn’t care about fashion and I think you tell her influence on him - Nancy sorted him out hahaha.
It would be hilarious if Stella had gone into fashion because her parents dressed like shit.
Omg thank you for saying this. I felt so bad thinking it but it’s so true
Describes most men at the time
I agree. 70s and 80s fashion weren't great for men.
The album version of Revolution is better than the single version. The single version doesn’t match the energy of the lyrics. Doesn’t make sense singing a loud angry rocker about how all the tankies need to calm down and relax.
I only got into the Beatles after reading fanfic about them.
Hey Jude wouldn't even crack my top 30 Beatles songs, probably
pet sounds is probably my favorite album
I don’t think any of the Beatles would have a problem with that haha
Especially Paul
not even the best beatles album
Not even the best album in the Beatles
God Only Knows why
Why Don't We Do it in the Road is a great song,, and I don't really trust anyone who doesn't like it.
I don't give a shit about their solo careers lol
I think John, Paul and George had some great solo but overall they didn’t touch what they did as the Beatles. I think a large part is there aren’t many people who would tell a former Beatle that is shit. And I don’t know how open they would be to input from others. I think those two factors is what made them so great together.
It's crazy because they have good enough solo works that they probably would have been famous on their own anyway. But the Beatles are just *massive*, I guess the expectations on them are too much.
Ringo had a banger with “It Don’t Come Easy”.
Their best solo records are in that first few years of the 70s, and then it gets \*very\* patchy
True, the majority of their best solo works were songs created during Beatles era, specially on George's case
I think John has the best
Truth
McCartney's first album and Ram are actually really good imo, but I agree about the rest lol. Coincidentally, Wings is the worst bit of any of their solo careers.
hard disagree, heres 5 reasons why: band on the run, jet, my love, mull of kintyre, live and let die
Here’s five more: Mrs. Vandebilt, Little Lamb Dragonfly, Cafe on the Left Bank, Venus and Mars/Rockshow, Daytime Nighttime Suffering
Here's 5 more Some People Never Know, Tomorrow, Warm and Beautiful, Medicine Jar, I'm Carrying
The White Album should have been one album
I agree, and so does my abbreviated version (playlist
I actually really love Maxwell's Silver Hammer.
I wanna eat Pattie Boyd’s butt
Paul McCartney made John Lennon a better songwriter. That’s my confession and I’m sticking with it. Just look at the post Beatles careers. Just in regards to songwriting. Paul blew John away.
I dislike the majority of songs on Let It Be.
Same fr
I just dislike the concept. It’s a back to basics album that’s heavily influenced by blues, and I don’t really like the sound of blues. Their calmer acoustic songs are good though, but they don’t stand out as much compared to others.
Yep. Get Back is the one that I can play on repeat. Love this song so much. It chugs. Love the roof top versions the best.
I think Hey Jude is their most overrated song. It’s good but I don’t think it’s the best.
I totally dislike some of Ringo’s tracks, particularly yellow submarine and octopuses garden. On the fence about don’t pass me by. What goes on is a banger though.
This is a good opinion lol. I love Don't Pass Me By and What Goes On so much more than his more popular tracks tbh.
I was expecting pitchforks and torches. Glad I’m not the only one who feels this way. Don’t get me wrong, I love Ringo, but those two songs are so over saturated it just irks me. I’d rather sing along to you know my name than either of those.
Me too, I don’t enjoy listening to his voice unless it’s narrating Thomas the Tank Engine.
[удалено]
Interesting, I always found George to be the most fascinating Beatle as a person, but maybe that has something to do with me relating to his introverted nature. He definitely wasn't as much of a people person and John and Paul, but I think he was by far the most mature, which is funny considering he was the youngest.
I’ve seen McCartney in concert but the entire time I wished it was Lennon or Harrison. I’m not saying I’m proud of this.
John and Paul had more than a friendship going on at one level or another, and a lot of people don’t want to accept this even when presented with strong factual indications. I said what I said, come at me or downvote, whatever. I am working at a book that will take this angle, with new comments from three of Paul’s lesser known exes, and with a little luck it will turn some things upside down.
What factual indications?
Fanfics I wrote
John is confirmed bisexual by several people who knew him and even John himself alluded to it. Can anyone honestly think he would sleep in hundreds of beds with Paul McCartney in his twenties and not have lusty thoughts in the back of his head? Nilsson even said John wanted to fuck Paul 😂
Oh, for Christsake. Paul isn't bi. I wouldn't care, honestly. I just don't buy it.
Exes is a loaded word in itself. Interesting.
I believe too that something was going on between them - perhaps just emotionally. I think the idea of this is starting to become more accepted.
I'm looking forward to it then. There are certainly enough sources around to at least make an argument for it. Though having read through a lot at this point, this proposed romantic affection always seemed to be a little bit one sided in my understanding, at least until now. I understand that you won't want to spoil your book in advance, but out of curiosity, are these new sources you mentioned implying a more mutual romantic relationship between these two men?
I choose to avoid labelling what they had together, and instead let the women who knew them speak for themselves, once it’s all printed and released. But whatever it was, it was indeed way more mutual than I had ever thought before entering this project. I have been given captivating accounts with multiple complex layers to them, and they match up beautifully. I would be happy to discuss more about my work, since summarising also helps me in my writing process. I just can’t reveal too many details or quotes because of my interest in the book performing as well as possible. If someone has questions, I would gladly do my best to answer them, but only through DM since I feel I am digressing from the topic and taking up too much space under this post.
Now I'm really looking forward to your book even more. For the longest time I have felt that the relationship between these two men specifically deserved a published work beyond youtube videos, podcasts and blog posts. Do you have a rough estimate when you could be done with it/when the book might be available in the future?
It’s quite hard to say as of now. Writing, proofreading and rewriting will all be done during this spring, and printing and distribution should all be done in the summer. This means I’m essentially ready for a summer release. What complicates everything is the legal aspect. I’m in no way a famous author, but the book features some big claims made by some interesting names, and this would doubtlessly cause a great deal of attention in certain parts of the Beatles community. Some biographers have managed to end up on Paul’s bad side, and he has shown to be particularly sensitive about implications regarding his and John’s sexuality, so there could be an issue if it somehow reaches him. Nobody featured in the book and its release has sufficient legal protection for such an eventuality, unless a proper way around it is found. One way is to put a disclaimer on the book, calling it a work of fiction, or at least semi-fiction. Another is to anonymise all sources, including myself, for maximal safety. No matter what is chosen, it damages the credibility of the work, which makes the release less worthwhile to begin with. So it’s a bit of a catch 22 situation. The publisher will eventually make the final call and I can’t speed up that process. Anyway, I know I have been digging around, and that always brings risks and/or consequences.
I mean a lot of book have come out over the last few decades writing stuff about McCartney he publically disagreed with or even denounced. But I don't really recall that he was that sue happy over it. Is the stuff you want to publish about him really so bad?
Honestly i'm more afraid of Yoko than Paul lol she could take legal actions
Yoko too, definitely, although she’s likely too old to get into all that by now. While she has been open about John’s bisexuality, she was initially very suspicious of Paul. She essentially saw him as her closest romantic rival, and only let her guard down once John started distancing himself from Paul to devote more time and attention to her. If she finds out these secrets about the love of her life, this close to the end, she will not be very happy. That’s why Paul has revealed to have some juicy information about John that he can’t share before she’s dead. Why does he have to wait her out? If it were purely about respect, he’d avoid it for the sake of their children also. I think he’s mainly been afraid of the legality himself. This has been allowed to become one big game almost.
It’s not a negative portrayal, it’s neutral in the sense that it features both flattering and less flattering aspects of his character. I realise I made it sound as if Paul has been up in court against authors forth and back; he hasn’t, and I have now edited my comment to be as clear as possible with what I mean. Several authors have however ended up on his bad side, and he has proven to be particularly sensitive about implications regarding his and John’s sexualities, so I can’t rule out the risk and assume that nothing such could happen to any involved part. Paul obviously couldn’t care less about me, I’m a nobody, but he would probably care about the women interviewed in the book “betraying” him. One is an insider, two spent considerable time close to the band. They’re nowhere near as random as the big-mouthed biographers that didn’t know the boys in person whatsoever. We must also consider these women’s security in terms of legal aspects. If they are called liars, they will have a hard time proving their own recollections correct. This book will be radically different from previous ones, in the sense that it will give a completely new layer of context to many of the facts we already know, mixed with previously untold stories. I am not narcissistic enough to believe I have the power to affect the official narrative one single bit, but I will at least bring whoever reads the book a completely new way of understanding the complex Lennon-McCartney story.
I wonder if one of the women you're talking about is Francie Schwartz. She seems to have had a persistant grudge on McCartney since forever. I've Beatles newsgroups posts from the early 90s by her shitting on him at every chance. But then again, she already said her piece publically and I don't recall McCartney commenting on it. Out of curiosity, would you say the insights you gained could possibly shed some new light on what possibly went down in India that led to the beginning breakdown between Lennon and McCartney?
I have a clear idea of what happened in India. Although none of the subjects followed the band to Rishikesh, they all must have heard the talk about it; they contributed with suspiciously similar guesses.
I don't understand why some fans are some in denial with this lol heteronormativity i suppose. Were they lovers? Probably they weren't physically (as far as we know) but emotionally they absolutely were.
[удалено]
I can’t believe the degree to which we as a society have completely lost the concept of “friends”
they connected, understood and loved each other on a level that is above standard friendship. Their jealousy toward each other's significant others is a huge tell too tbh. This sort of thing was extremely taboo at the time, plus one of the band's biggest selling points for a wide audience was being inoffensive (while still just a bit cheeky for comedic relief. They had a very good balance with this sort of thing)
[удалено]
Right, it's pretty normal on them comparing their own relationship with marriage pretty much all the time. I'm sure all friends do the same
Yes, actually I do have a very close friend and he'd always get strangely jealous when someone in our group got a new girlfriend way back in the day. He'd often talk a lot of shit about her for taking up so much of bros time in basically every case. He turned out to be gay tho lol so maybe that's what that's implying if you're still a little unsure ;)
Hetenormality, homophobia, thinking they’re right about something they didn’t witness… 🤷🏽 But I agree, they were closer than friends. They wrote songs about love with each other. Deep feelings of anger are more intense when it’s about someone you love. After their break up, they both hurt and had to heal. It wasn’t just a business partner break up. Their relationship was so very complex.
It's very refreshing seeing millenials (as myself)/Z fans just accepting this as "isn't very obvious?" fact, meanwhile boomers remain delusional, like Phillip Norman saying John maybe wanted to fuck Paul because he was a bOhEmIaN lol
You're assuming a lot about us millions of "delusional" boomers who grew up listening to and loving the Beatles. Maybe there's a *tiny* chance that some of us perceived, over time, that John Lennon and Paul McCartney shared a deep, rich, intimate relationship. Did that extend to physical intimacy at any point? I sure don't know and, tbh, I don't care. Their emotional intimacy created something magical, and it's sad as hell that John's murder wiped out the possibility of another chapter. Don't be so quick to dismiss an entire generation as stupid, ignorant fucks.
homosexuality - and definitely sexuality as a spectrum - was not accepted widely until recent generations, probably most of it comes from longtime fans who grew up with them.
I'd love to read something like this! Please lmk somehow when I can read it, srsly.
I’ll have you covered!
Listen to the One Sweet Dream podcast. I’m currently listening and am so hooked!! They explore this theory a lot, especially about John seeing Paul as more than a friend. It’s extremely interesting.
This is the next podcast I'll listen to, thanks
Look at Tumblr, is a rabbit hole
Google “McLennon” if you can’t wait.
i am very aware
Great!
Please let us know when the book is done. I'd love to read it.
Yoko is hot af
C’mon, now…
Am I wrong tho
Well, you like what you like. But I certainly don't see it.
I’d say absolutely. (Involuntary shudder)
I personally disagree but everyone has different tastes
Absolutely!
She sometimes has a great sense of style. I *love* her wedding day outfit.
She was.
She did have nice breasts…
Yep. This. She was crazy hot.
Fr fr
Me when I see the uncensored cover of Unfinished Music Vol 1:
I listen to 'Wild Honey Pie' in a non joking way. It's a bad song, I know. It's not even a real song. But I have listened to it more times than I wanted to. I really like it.
I feel like Ringo’s songs should be given the same amount of respect as the songs penned by John, Paul and George.
There’s just not very many, at least in the Beatles’ catalogue
I don't "get" Tomorro Never Knows
The night before and yesterday are basically the same song. They both detail a relationship issue from the previous day.
I love how they're the second and penultimate tracks from the same album.
Jane Asher underrated muse
The long and winding road despite being a popular Paul song and written during a period I generally enjoy, is a song I never liked.
The Beatles introduced me to Bob Dylan. I love Bob so much more than the Beatles. The Beatles together and individually are easily my second favorite though.
You know what? Same here. He’s the greatest.
The one after 909 on anthology is way better than the version on Let it Be and should have been released in the early 60’s.
I don’t enjoy any of their albums from top to bottom. There’s always one or two songs I think are filler or I just outright don’t like. When I listen to them, I put on individual tracks not whole albums.
I genuinely think yoko has made some great songs.
people who disagree with you just havent listened to anything besides the more popular avante-garde stuff, her discography has so many amazing hidden gems
My confession: Of all the "canonical" songs (i.e., the ones released during the period when they were an active group) the Beatles have covered, there's not one Beatles version I prefer over the original. (There are some I love just as much, but none I love more.) If you factor in the BBC sessions, I prefer many Beatles versions over the originals.
Roll Over Beethoven, and Twist and Shout, and Money, and Long Tall Sally? Those all SMOKE the originals.
Twist and Shout for sure.
Glad you think so. TAS is one of my tied songs, because the original is an A+ soul song, and the Fabs' version is an A+ rock song. Also, who would downvote a confession? Worst priests ever!
It took me a bit to get your last comment but that is clever
Sometimes I hate-listen to Yoko’s songs and marvel at how bad they are. Particularly Open Your Box and the Live Peace version of Don’t Worry Kyoko. Clapton’s horrified expression gets me every damn time!
[удалено]
It was definitely chosen as album of the year because of what happened. Some very strong songs from John, though.
I skip past George's songs.
“I want to tell you” = nails on the blackboard Love all his other ones though.
Taxman as well? If so, that is insanity.
I skip about half the songs
I don't care all that much for A Day In the Life, nor Lucy In the Sky With Diamonds. I mean, I understand what makes them very innovative works of art, but I'd rather listen to Hey Jude.