Time for Sir Paul to RETIRE.

[Tyler Durden]

Paul McCartney has SO jumped the shark, more likely YEARS ago.

And if I see him prancing along in his Converse All Stars playing the mandolin singing his repetitious malarkey about how "Everybody's Gonna Dance Tonight," the demon flying monkeys are going to eat my flesh and pick their teeth with my bones. If I'm lucky.

Seriously: IT'S 2007. Songs that would go over great on "Teletubbies" are so far beyond outre that they aren't even in this CENTURY.

Dude, you're humiliating yourself.

[SeattleGirl]

1. The opening chords made me think of Lennon's Give Peace a Chance.

Did you see the resemblance?

[Tyler Durden]

3. Watching him bob his head and prance like he's 20 again...

I was too busy screaming and scratching at my eyes.

[Le Taz Hot]

31. So, tell me,

at what age am I not "allowed" to bob my head and dance? 40? 50? Tell me, oh wise one.

[Tyler Durden]

48. Oh please now.

If His Grace Sir Paul wants to be considered an artist, perhaps he should behave with a little more panache and a little less "Barney the Dinosaur." The argument here is he has passed his prime as an artist, and if he wants to act SILLY, then there are many children's shows on TV.

Once again THESE ARE OPINIONS.

[JVS]

2. A real rock star would have died decades ago

[Tyler Durden]

4. Now's his chance: he can die of SHAME. n/t

[KamaAina]

But, but, but, "Paul is Dead"!

Have you never played "I Am The Walrus" backwards? "Ha, ha, Paul is dead... ha, ha, Paul is dead..."

:sarcasm: :tinfoilhat:

[Tyler Durden]

128. Oh if only.

No I don't wish he was dead. I just wish he'd retire.

[LostinVA]

218. That made me laugh

[ForrestGump]

5. I saw him live last year. He's still

one of the best performers out there, and put on a stellar three-hour show that was all solid gold, with no throwaway filler, when there's no earthly reason he had to knock himself out like that (I mean, "Helter Skelter" as one of the encores?!?). Paul's all right with me.

[Tyler Durden]

6. I don't mean to gore your ox here, but...

You said it yourself, a "...three-hour show that was all solid gold..." Where is the raison d'etre for him to be doing concerts? Anyone can get up there and "DO" "The Beatles." Been done to death.

McCartney was NOT the genius of the Lennon/McCartney partnership: SURE he was and still is a fine, yeoman musician, but how many "studio" musicians can make the same claim? Mozart he ain't.

I won't try to convert you, but after decades of "Band On the Run," some of us have seen the better half of McCartney and it left the station years ago.

That said, glad you liked the concert: I used to LOVE the OLD, EDGY AND POWERFUL Rolling Stones...but everybody gets old and retires eventually. I would not cross the street to attend a concert by either one of them.

[ForrestGump]

9. I don't follow the logic in your first paragraph

He was a Beatle. And at least as much a 'genius,' musically, as John -- a better and more versatile musician, too. If anyone's going to be doing Beatles songs, why not one of the two founders of that group? The fact is that the very power he has as a live performer is more than reason enough for him to be doing concerts. He may not be innovating, particularly, but he is a fine live performer and there're few around these days who are doing big venue tours who could even hope to rival his abilities as a live performer, let alone his past accomplishments. These attributes set him aside from the average 'yeoman' musician and studio whiz-kids.

Here's a setlist from the show I saw here in Las Vegas (it was 2005, not last year) -- it's not just comprised of Beatles songs but includes hits from Wings and from various phases of his solo career. I cannot understand why you or any other musical snob insists that he should abandon the stage when it's plainly apparent that he and his audiences are loving every minute of these performances:

1) Magical Mystery Tour
2) Flaming Pie
3) Jet
4) I'll Get You
5) Drive My Car
6) 'Til There Was You
7) Let Me Roll It
8) Got To Get You Into My Life
9) Fine Line
10) Maybe I'm Amazed
11) The Long And Winding Road
12) In Spite Of All The Danger
13) I Will
14) Jenny Wren
15) For No One
16) Fixing A Hole
17) English Tea
18) I'll Follow The Sun
19) Follow Me
20) Blackbird
21) Eleanor Rigby
22) Too Many People
23) She Came In Through The Bathroom Window
24) Good Day Sunshine
25) Band On The Run
26) Penny Lane
27) I've Got A Feeling
28) Back In The USSR
29) Hey Jude
30) Live And Let Die
31) Yesterday
32) Get Back
33) Helter Skelter
34) Please Please Me
35) Let It Be
36) Sergeant Pepper Reprise/The End

Personally, I'd be pretty happy if, when I reach his age, people equate my behavior to that of a 20-year-old.

[Tyler Durden]

10. WHOA there TEX. Cool off.

Opinions are opinions. My opinion is that more than half of your list (mostly McCartney and McCartney/Wings songs) would have gone nowhere without the Beatles "Legacy": I found them mediocre at best, with so many others in that era not given anywhere near their "props."

At the outset, I made disclaimer, so if you love him, GRAND. I don't, and I'm not trying to convert you.

By the way, then comment about "musical Snobs": When I was referring to Mozart, I was referring to a prolific genius, regardless of genre. McCartney is prolific; a genius he ain't. But as long as we're on the subject, When ONE of his "tunes" carries enough long term musical weight as say, Irving Berlin or Rimsky-Korsakov, then you've got a hot horse in the race. Personally, I doubt it.

Enjoy away. I'm not asking you to stop.

[Crazy Dave]

23. That's why I wish I would have been the first....

...to start a radio talk show designed to piss off liberals. It's so easy to do as you can see hear on DU with anybody you disagree with or they disagree with you.

It would be so easy that you'd almost be embarrassed to pick up your paycheck every week :rofl:

[Tyler Durden]

24. With such easily bruised feelings, why are more of us in the STREETS...

...SCREAMING our heads off?

I vividly remember 1968. Now you can raise more ire pissing off on SUV's. Something if very wrong with that.

[Crazy Dave]

27. Yeah....the "I need my SUV" crowd really got squirmy yesterday

All the "Bush and Cheney's War For Oil" people were off that day. I don't think the war for oil got started just for people driving Toyotas.

[johnnie]

25. Who on this thread is pissed off besides McCartney bashers?

That's funny. :rofl:

You're right. When a song or a musician can piss off liberals, they must be easy. I too see that all the time on DU, you should have jumped at the chance to start that radio show.

[leftofthedial]

61. Yeah!

Oasis rawks!

[ForrestGump]

105. I don't need to cool off. I'm undoubtedly less upset than you seem to think.

I have not seen the commercial and I haven't heard even a second of a track from the new album. I do not think Sir Paul can walk on water and there're plenty of songs of his that just don't do much for me and a very few that outright make me cringe. On balance, though, he's produced some of the best pop songs ever laid down, whether with John and the other lads or alone (including some fine work since the '80s).

But I wasn't talking so much about his abilities as a songwriter or a recording star...I was referring in my post mainly to his prowess as a live performer, an attribute that is undeniable if you ever see him live. There are other very capable live performers out there, many languishing in relative obscurity, but Paul remains one of the greats and of all the Beatles he (George would be next in line, I think) is the one who was best suited to carry a live show and to carry it exceptionally well.

You are a musical snob -- it's got nothing to do with how prolific Amadeus may have been but is proven beyond contention with every post you have in this thread -- and I am sorry that not everybody shares your love of classical music or certain other forms of music. Sure, I like some of that stuff, too, but it'll never replace the blues-based musical forms that gave rise to the music I really, organically love, by people like Elvis and the Beatles and those who followed them, all of which is art -- albeit for the most part relatively unpretentious -- and all of which results from a kind of genius, albeit untrained in a formal sense.

Frankly, I don't need to have training as a musician to appreciate music and young Master johnnie is entirely right, as he almost invariably is, in every one of his responses to you in this thread: people like what they like, and analyzing it and bemoaning their choices is not going to make anyone change their minds about something that is inherently a very, very subjective thing. For the record, I don't even know who Rimsky-Korsakov is (or are, if the conjunction's a Lennon-McCartney kind of thing) and, though it's entirely possible I'd like their offerings, I'm not exactly burning with curiosity about him/her/them.

I find some of your posts in this thread very telling. I can understand some of your frustration, and I am sorry that an injury essentially sidelined you from continuing to excel at something you both loved and were good at, but this is not a zero-sum game in any but perhaps certain aspects of public funding and the popularity of other kinds of music does not mean, alternately, that either classical and whatever-the-Irving-Berlin-and-show-tune-genre-would-be-called (and the works of Rimsky and Korsakov or, possibly, Rimsky-Korsakov) are irrelevant or that adherents to other types of music, music some might see as more 'primitive,' are unenlightened hoi-polloi who do not know what is good for them. Further, it is not Alice Cooper's fault -- or even Britney Spears' fault -- that Brahms is not a fixture on the Top 40 (actually, at this point that would be a nice change) or that Cole Porter songs are today recorded by aging rockers, nor is it Sir Paul's fault that the popularity that ensures he can fill large stadia around the world pushes symphonies to street corners in crack-infested parts of the seedier sides of major metropolitan areas.

To quote from another man who undeniably had no formal training in music and who undoubtedly had musical tastes so catholic and eclectic that he recorded both works of everlasting brilliance and banal clichés and worse with (mostly) the same degree of commitment (and who, further, had the temerity to achieve unparalleled commercial and pop-cultural success):

Well, there ain't nothing wrong with the longhaired music
Like Brahms, Beethoven, and Bach
But I was raised with a guitar in my hand
And I was born to rock

Guitar, mandolin...whatever.

[Tyler Durden]

111. You know something? You DIDN'T read my posts...

Or you would have known that my gripe with McCartney has to do with the fact that IN MY OPINION most of what he has done IN RECENT YEARS is SCHLOCK and IN MY OPINION it's getting worse. You also didn't notice my appreciation goes from Jobim to Brubeck to Laws to Lester Flatt and Earl Scrugs Bluegrass to Ramones and beyond.

So you go right ahead and keep supporting a marketing MASTERPIECE. And as to musical SNOB, I appreciate MOST music because I have been exposed to it, unlike you. I see you spent a lot of time on this, so I'll throw you a cookie.

http://www.russianlaw.net/RK/creative.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Rimsky-Korsakov

Anyone who in this day and age cannot place the author of "Sheherazade" or at the very least "The Flight of the Bumblebee" AND sports anything above a grade school education has not been paying attention. This is not a sin, unless, as in your case, you're PROUD of it and use it to denigrate others. If I am IN YOUR NOT SO HUMBLE OPINION a "musical snob," what does your screed trashing PARTS of my taste in music demonstrating YOUR narrow musical taste make YOU?

Sorry to be nasty, but you did ask for it.

[ForrestGump]

133. I did, but they just blurred together into one big ball of

musical snobbery.

That has nothing to do with the scope of your musical appreciation or your opinion that Paul's work has suffered since the '70s, both of which are just fine with me. What I was responding to was your contention that the man should retire because he is no longer 'cutting-edge' or because he's not acting his age, or whatever the hell your problem -- as revealed in this thread -- is with him.

My observations about you are not based on supposition but on what you've made empirically observable in your posts within this thread. You, on the other hand, assume both that I have not been exposed to as many musical forms as you have and that I am some kind of anti-intellectual who is proud of my ignorance. You have absolutely no basis for assuming the first, or a narrow musical taste, and anyone who knows me at all would laugh in your face regarding the second.

Yes, I am familiar with both "Sheherazade" and "The Flight of the Bumblebee" and I think that both are good musical works, but I also think they're not the be-all and end-all of music and the fact that I do not remember the name of their composer is totally irrelevant to my appreciation of them as music. I guess that's one difference between a musical snob and someone to whom music is just important. I don't care, in other words, how many people I impress by pontificating on matters musical whereas to you it seems to be some kind of holy mission. I have been paying attention, just not to some of the same things to which you pay attention.

Don't be sorry about being nasty. There's no call to be apologizing for who you are.

[Tyler Durden]

146. Enjoy your crusade.

You still are not reading my posts.

Enjoy ol' Pauly. I'm SURE he loves your money, I mean, your fandom.

[ForrestGump]

153. I have to agree with my esteemed colleague below:

trying to reason with you is entirely a waste of time. And, really, if all I wanted to do was to point out what a condescending blowhard you are...well, you're doing that just fine all by yourself, with every post.

Keep up the good work. :hi:

[Tyler Durden]

156. And you, sir, are a BOOR...

Who has not noticed that the count on this thread is running about 50-60% against Mr. McCartney's latest effort.

Why can't you find someone better to worship? Like maybe the Rev. Moon? Normally, you have something to say that I've taken time to read. I may have to reconsider that one.

You exhibit all of the logic of a member of the Hari Krisna, combined with the tolerance for others of David Duke, with the manners of a swine. I admitted to devotees of "Paul the Great" that you were welcome to your own tastes and that I chose not to participate, but like most children I deal with, that was not good enough for you: I had to join your club.

Sad that you have to end with such silly insults, and I do consider this conversation ended.

[AndreaCG]

175. "Why can't you find someone better to worship? Like maybe the Rev. Moon?"

You're equating a musician to a sociopath who actively wants to run the world? And more frighteningly has US politicians kowtowing to him? Deluded is too mild a word to describe you.

[Tyler Durden]

178. You know, I think you're in the wrong fight.

The person in question has felt free to belittle my taste and has felt it necessary to infer that anyone who did not feel the way he did was a musical snob and a blowhard.

I equate NOTHING. I INFER that his slavish necessity to belittle PEOPLE as he has done is out of line and approaches cult status.

Insert Jonestown or Hari Krisna if you like. You're objecting to a COMPARISON that is metaphorical not literal.

[AndreaCG]

192. It's easy now to claim you were being metaphorical

And for you to complain of being belittled is laughable. I've read your posts. You claimed that Rimsky-Korsokov carries more longterm musical weight than ONE tune of McCartney's. That's hard to quantify. But let's look at some numbers: ask.com has McCartney hits outnumbering R-K hits by 2,379,000 to 149,800. On Google the numbers are a lot closer. 8,7300,000 to 1,210,000. I guess Google's a lot more erudite. Regardless, McCartney wins.

Or perhaps I misread you. Maybe when you said ONE of his "tunes" you meant specifically THE one tune, "Everybody's Gonna Dance Tonight", will not carry the musical weight of R-K's work. If so, then you are correct.

P.S. I await your refutations of my posts 169 and 181.

[Tyler Durden]

200. No, I don't think I will.

Anyone who can draw that kind of conclusion (I assume from your sort of statistics that since Paris Hilton gets more hits than Barak Obama, then she should be president as she is more popular and can therefore win the election) is someone who's here to argue as opposed to doing what I have stated: allowing reasonable people to state their opinion as I have and to allow others the right to their own tastes.

I see where I made my mistake here was in trying to JUSTIFY my opinion on my musical tastes. I will remedy that by no longer responding to these posts. I will say that justifying the weight of art by using hits from internet browsers shows a lack of understanding of how statistics and statistical grouping works.

[AndreaCG]

228. Now there's FINALLY a sensible statement from you

I think you're probably correct to question my methodology re Google and ask.com.

But to go and say that I am only here to argue when you have posted 73 times in this thread, many being conversational but many others being argumentative is highly disingenous.

From far down on the thread: "I don't think I got indignant until the first McCartney fan called me a "Pretentious Blowhard" and "A musical Snob" for not subscribing to what they felt was the public and universal acclamation of the man. "

Your second post of the thread read: "Watching him bob his head and prance like he's 20 again...
I was too busy screaming and scratching at my eyes'

The next commentator replied So, tell me, at what age am I not "allowed" to bob my head and dance? 40? 50? Tell me, oh wise one.

Now, you may think these are fighting words, but I suspect the person who posted it felt your above post was too, denigrating, not just of McCartney but of people in general who are older and like to bob their head and pretend they're 20.

Your response: Oh please now.

If His Grace Sir Paul wants to be considered an artist, perhaps he should behave with a little more panache and a little less "Barney the Dinosaur." The argument here is he has passed his prime as an artist, and if he wants to act SILLY, then there are many children's shows on TV.

Once again THESE ARE OPINIONS.

This is a reasonable response from you. You are talking about an opinion about a particular song, one which pretty much everybody agrees sucks.

In the future however, you started replying in a far more provocative manner, like the quote I posted earlier "Why can't you find someone better to worship? Like maybe the Rev. Moon." Hyperbole? In your opinion. A dire and vile insult? In my opinion.

People started really arguing with you when you went beyond opinion to question McCartney's legacy and role in the musical pantheon. You said "When ONE of his "tunes" carries enough long term musical weight as say, Irving Berlin or Rimsky-Korsakov, then you've got a hot horse in the race." , you went beyond one man's opinion to stating that McCartney was an insignificant figure in musical history. If you were to examine the CONTENT of the millions of articles on McCartney and The Beatles, even the first 20 or 30 as a miniscule percentage, you would find an almost unanimous opinion that, along with Elvis Presley, they were the most influential performers in the rock era. Regardless of whether Paris Hilton has more articles written about her, I seriously doubt they will call her one of the great talents of the age. But McCartney and the Beatles are. The majority of serious critics and mere musical consumers will agree. You may think McCartney is insignificant. The rest of the world doesn't and it is demonstrable.

I stand by my earlier statement: "YOU don't have to like the Beatles or McCartney. To say his tunes don't carry long term musical weight is as ignorant of musical history as if I said the same of Mozart." I notice you didn't choose to answer that. Perhaps you in good conscience couldn't as it is irrefutable.

Do yyou know what I think? You are a trained musician who apparently never got successful, so you are bitter at what you see as "lesser talent" (McCartney/Beatles) being one of the most beloved and respected, indeed iconic, bands of the 20th century. I feel sad for you.

[AndreaCG]

169. McCartney's song in the commercial is appropriate for 4 year olds BUT

If you really think "ONE" of his "tunes" doesn't carry as long term weight as a Rimsky-Korsakov song you are deluded. I recognize R-K's name, sure. Can I hum one of R-K's songs. God, no. I don't think that makes me a complete musical illiterate either. Can you claim R-K carries the long term musical weight of Mozart? Ot Tschiakovsky? Or Beethoven? Or Bach? Or Wagner? Or the Rolling Stones for that matter?

YOU don't have to like the Beatles or McCartney. To say his tunes don't carry long term musical weight is as ignorant of musical history as if I said the same of Mozart.

[Left Is Write]

68. I felt the same way...

when there was a thread about a year ago complaining about Jimmy Buffet and how ridiculous he looks in his Bermuda shorts, and how he should hang it up and retire.

Why should he? He enjoys performing. People enjoy seeing him. What's the problem, right?

[ForrestGump]

107. I agree 100% with you

Jimmy is cool. He is who he is -- he's also a truly savvy businessman, unusually so for a recording star -- and he has released some great, great stuff. I hope he keeps going forever...like Paul McCartney, I think he's likely to still be treading those boards (sand, perhaps, too) until he just cannot physically do it any more.

People need to lighten up, quit being so stodgily (and jealously, sometimes) judgmental of people who're out there having fun doing what they love (and, sure, getting rewarded well for it), and not begrudge other people their right to have that fun and make or listen to good tuneage accompanied by good vibrations.

:hi:

[mitchum]

79. Forrest, I also saw him on that tour and I was blown away by the man's...

musicianship and the body of work that he presented.
Granted, there has been a LOT of McCartney material that I find to be wretched (I may be one of the few who despise "Yesterday"), but I also agree with you that it is rather silly to refuse to acknowledge McCartney's talent and contribution to the Beatles.
Hell, I think that there were THREE genuises in the Beatles. Unfortunately, George just wasn't quite as prolific as the other two.

[ForrestGump]

109. Why the Ringo hatred?

:P

You said it. Even if you don't particularly like the man's music, or his persona does nothing for you, his staying power, his musical legacy, and his excellence as a stage presence are all undeniable. I, for example, have never liked most of Madonna's musical output, and she's -- for the most part -- just one of those people who does nothing for me, but I will not deny her place in pop history or her considerable ability to remain a huge star when she could so easily have faded away along with most of her peers from that moment in time. Good for her. Should she retire? To my mind, that's up to nobody but her, and as long as she's continuing to make people happy with new releases and concert tours I think she should keep right on along doing what she's doing.

Paul was pretty amazing live, though, wasn't he? :D

:hi:

[SouthoftheBorderPaul]

39. "McCartney was NOT the genius of the Lennon/McCartney partnership"

:eyes:

I think you're seriously underestimating Macca's contribution to the Beatle's success, impact and greatness. I'm off the unpopular opinion that McCartney was MORE talented than Lennon. Maybe he didn't have the vision that Lennon did, but to lump him in with "studio" musicians for his facility with melody, harmony and musicianship is fucking blasphemy.

[Tyler Durden]

40. Just an opinion. Don't get riled.

Both could do music, but Lennon's lyrics were poetic, and yes, sometimes banal.

I'm not a Paul fan. Having lived through the era, I do have my opinions. He was very talented at what he did: writing "pop" songs. He is no god, so "blasphemy?" Sorry. I'm classically trained, so my "gods" have got a much longer track record.

Who the hell is "Macca?" I thought I was reading "Macaca" for a minute there.

[mitchum]

85. And McCartney was actually the one who brought the avant garde influences...

into the Beatles. He became familiar with the work and innovations of the avant garde when he was with Jane Asher.
I think people who assume John was responsible, just because he went to art school, aren't familiar with the purpose of art school in 50s and 60s England. Also, John's ignorance of that world is probably what led to his being so impressed by the hack work of Yoko Ono.

[Tyler Durden]

91. Yoko Ono is not ALL THINGS to ALL PEOPLE....

But she did one HELL of a demonstration piece on the lawn of the Detroit Institute of Art:


"Freight Train" 1999

http://www.dia.org/exhibitions/yoko.asp

If art can disturb and unsettle, this was true art. My 10 year old (at the time) said "This Yoko Ono is really something."

[mitchum]

92. I agree; I think her later work is far superior to what she was doing in...

the 60s. Back then, she was little more than an "avante garde cover band"

[Tyler Durden]

93. Scared the shit out of ME.

I walked away shaking. My Daughter Cailee was very impressed. She's from China, and when I told her Ono was Asian, she said "Naturally." Then I told her Ono was Japanese she said "Well...All Asians can't be Chinese you know."

[fishwax]

193. yoko impressed a ten-year-old? So whereas Paul's work is suitable for teletubbies, Yoko's is fit for

what, Hannah Montana or Even Stevens?

Only kidding. :) (And I agree with you about the song in that advertisement--blech!--though I greatly admire a lot of his stuff pre-mid-70s.)

[edbermac]

118. Everyone knows that Ringo was the genius of the Beatles.

Pete Best was the drummer for 2 years and they did nothing but play strip clubs and bingo halls. The first 2 years Ringo joined, they made a few million selling albums, a hit film, and were a world wide phenomenon.

I rest my case.

[Tyler Durden]

176. Actually, Mr. Starkey was once listed very high in the top drummers of the 20th century.

No lie.

They called him precise, steady, complementary yet always a necessary part of the music.

[MAGICBULLET]

55. I hear you and

Lennon's always seemed more profound but come on! McCartney wrote "Hey Jude" you gotta be crazy to not call that genius. Also, the last medley on Abbey Road has such an incredible line he wrote
And in the end, the love you take
is equal to the love you make
That's pretty good, ya gotta admit.

[Tyler Durden]

75. I gave him until "WINGS"

I think "Admiral Halsey" was running down the curtain on the McCartney Phenomenon as far as I (and a lot of others) was concerned.

[Bake]

67. Maybe "anyone can 'do' the Beatles"

But there are only TWO of the REAL ones left, and Ringo can't quite sing Hey Jude or Let It Be. And some of us who were AROUND in the 60s still love the old stuff.

And don't go knockin' the mandolin either.

A little respect for your elders might be in order ... just sayin'.

Bake

[Tyler Durden]

76. I turn 55 shortly. And I LOVE the mandolin.

There are symphonies written for it, and Bluegrass ROCKS...infinitely more than "Everybody Gonna Dance Tonight"

IN MY OPINION.

[Bake]

80. Damn, TD! My apologies!

I had no idea you were so freakin' old! Sheit, dude, you're older than me (I hit 52 in a few months ...).

My apologies, sir (because I always try to respect my elders ...). :rofl:

And to tell you the truth, you're right, Paul hasn't done anything new worth a crap in decades ... but I still love the old stuff.

Bluegrass does indeed rock! In fact, my band does a whole set of Beatles stuff grassed up!

Bake

[Tyler Durden]

83. SOMEBODY has to be old.

Beats being DEAD. Or OBSOLETE.

By the way, the next time you have some kid hold a door for you and say "Age before Beauty," you reply "And Pearls before Swine."

Boy does that get some looks.

[Bake]

84. It sure as hell beats the alternative!

Pearls before swine! I LOVE IT!!

Bake

[DancingBear]

94. And who doesn't love Dorothy Parker?

One of my favorite quotes of hers, but it ain't as good as this one:

After talking with Parker with for some time, an exasperated acquaintance finally said "Enough! I can't bear fools!", to which Parker replied "That's funny, your mother could."

From one old guy to another. :)

[mr blur]

141. You think Lennon was a GENIUS?!

as opposed to a self-centred, self-pitying, whining bore?
Whatever...

[ProfessorGAC]

230. McCartney Was INDEED One Of The Geniuses

I loathe that nonsense about Lennon being a genius. He wrote just as much crap as McCartney but because it was angrier, people thought it was "deep". Rubbish.

It was the partnership of them with George Martin that created the genius of that group.

He was not a "yeoman" musician. He had vision. You're just not seeing it.
GAC

On Edit: I do agree that the little ditty in the commercial is annoying crap.

[LanternWaste]

17. I saw him in '95...

I saw him in '95 and have to admit it was one of the better concerts I've seen. Culling music from his Beatles, Wings and solo periods into a masterful show that, like your lasted the better part of three hours.

The guy's an absolute showman and *still* holds a good tune...

[Tyler Durden]

19. So is Barry Manilow I understand.

Doesn't make him Aaron Copeland, Irving Berlin or Dmitri Shostakovich.

[LanternWaste]

44. Wasn't Berlin considered...

Wasn't Berlin considered just as kitsch in his day (as were all tin-pan alley songwriters) as Manilow or McCartney is today?

I don't think I made any implications that made out to be him more or less than what I said-- an entertainer whose music I like, and who I think gave a wonderful, well-crafted show at the concert I saw him at.

[Tyler Durden]

46. ONE McCartney concert can support an entire season of a major symphony orchestra.

I guess it's just a matter of perspective.

For the record, I feel the same way about the Rolling Stones and Rod Stewart among others.

[ForrestGump]

134. Some of us would rather see one Mccartney concert

than an entire season of a major symphony orchestra.

It's just the way it is.

[Tyler Durden]

49. And no, Berlin wrote for Broadway....

Very Highly respected at the time. The point is there are SO MANY artists who never get their props because PROMOTERS Promote McCartney and others like him.

Here's another couple of GIANTS:

"Just the Way You Look Tonight"
music by Jerome Kern and lyrics by Dorothy Fields

Someday,
When I'm awfully low
And the world is cold,
I will feel a glow just thinking of you
And the way you look tonight.

Yes, you're lovely
With your smile so warm
And your cheek so soft.
There is nothing for me but to love you
Just the way you look tonight.

With each word your tenderness grows,
Tearing my fear apart.
And that smile that wrinkles your nose,
Touches my foolish heart.

Lovely,
Never, never change.
Keep that breathless charm.
Won't you please arrange it, 'cause I love you
Just the way you look tonight--
Just the way you look tonight.

[LanternWaste]

72. Yet he did get his start in tin-pan alley, yes?

Yet, from what I've read he did get his start in tin-pan alley, yes? And weren't even his Broadway hits were considered low-brow by the elite? Not that that's a bad thing mind you, as Gershwin was also considered by many to be low-brow.

I'm the first to say that I like kitsch music, penny operas, pulp-fiction from the 40's and 50's, and even painters like Charles Roka and Norman Rockwell-- so I'm certainly neither a valid nor knowledgeable critic of the arts.

Disclaimer-- the only peer-reviewed source I can both point to and remember off hand is the book "Tin Pan Alley" by David Jansen.

[Tyler Durden]

78. And the Beatles started in working class Liverpool.

I'm talking LONGEVITY here.

If they're still playing "Everybody Gonna Dance Tonight" or "Smile Away" when I'm 80 (in 25 years), I'll admit I'm wrong.

I think they'll still be playing tunes like this though:

"Just the Way You Look Tonight"
music by Jerome Kern and lyrics by Dorothy Fields

Someday,
When I'm awfully low
And the world is cold,
I will feel a glow just thinking of you
And the way you look tonight.

Yes, you're lovely
With your smile so warm
And your cheek so soft.
There is nothing for me but to love you
Just the way you look tonight.

With each word your tenderness grows,
Tearing my fear apart.
And that smile that wrinkles your nose,
Touches my foolish heart.

Lovely,
Never, never change.
Keep that breathless charm.
Won't you please arrange it, 'cause I love you
Just the way you look tonight--
Just the way you look tonight.


or this one:

Cheek to Cheek
Words and music by Irving Berlin

Heaven, I'm in heaven
And my heart beats so that I can hardly speak
And I seem to find the happiness I seek
When we're out together dancing cheek to cheek

Heaven, I'm in heaven
And the cares that hung around me through the week
Seem to vanish like a gambler's lucky streak
When we're out together dancing (swinging) cheek to cheek

Oh I love to climb a mountain
And reach the highest peak
But it doesn't thrill (boot) me half as much
As dancing cheek to cheek

Oh I love to go out fishing
In a river or a creek
But I don't enjoy it half as much
As dancing cheek to cheek

(Come on and) Dance with me
I want my arm(s) about you
That (Those) charm(s) about you
Will carry me through...

(Right up) To heaven, I'm in heaven
And my heart beats so that I can hardly speak
And I seem to find the happiness I seek
When we're out together dancing, out together dancing (swinging)
Out together dancing cheek to cheek

[LanternWaste]

98. Absolutely...

Absolutely Gershwin and his cohorts will most likely be getting airplay and as silly as it sounds, the tune 'Slow Boat to China' might even be considered a classic in 500 years. However, I've the feeling McCartney will be getting airplay, also.

Yet since we're all still in the here and now, our opinions become much more subjective and prone to bias.

And one of the wonderful things is that even in eighty years, our opinions will still probably be subjective and biased.

The great, common denominator of music: one man's kitsch is another man's art.

Not that there's really any argument here. You don't like a performer that I do. I suppose it would be just as silly to argue over the fact that you may like pineapples and I don't. There's simply no one authoritative voice to say that Pineapples Are Bad & That's That. Same goes for our musical tastes. Now if you don't mind, I think I'm going to get on a Slow Boat to China and indulge in more musical guilt.

:)

[AndreaCG]

181. They won't be playing "Yesterday" either, will they?

Or numbers 1, 3, 5, 8, 10,11,16, 18, 20,21,24,25,26,28,29,30,32,33,34, 35 and 36 on the following list:

1) Magical Mystery Tour
2) Flaming Pie
3) Jet
4) I'll Get You
5) Drive My Car
6) 'Til There Was You
7) Let Me Roll It
8) Got To Get You Into My Life
9) Fine Line
10) Maybe I'm Amazed
11) The Long And Winding Road
12) In Spite Of All The Danger
13) I Will
14) Jenny Wren
15) For No One
16) Fixing A Hole
17) English Tea
18) I'll Follow The Sun
19) Follow Me
20) Blackbird
21) Eleanor Rigby
22) Too Many People
23) She Came In Through The Bathroom Window
24) Good Day Sunshine
25) Band On The Run
26) Penny Lane
27) I've Got A Feeling
28) Back In The USSR
29) Hey Jude
30) Live And Let Die
31) Yesterday
32) Get Back
33) Helter Skelter
34) Please Please Me
35) Let It Be
36) Sergeant Pepper Reprise/The End

[AndreaCG]

194. The irony is I'm defending McCartney and The Beatles' legacy

When I don't own a single Beatles album. OTOH I used to own about 2 dozen Who albums before they were ruined in a flood (Sob!) Nevertheless I can sing along to many, many Beatles songs, despite the fact that I was 9 when they broke up. And if you asked me which of the "big 3" British 60s bands was most influential I would have to say The Beatles rather than The Who, even though The Beatles broke up in 1970 and The Who is touring in 2007.

It is what it is.

[1monster]

189. In order for one's music and legacy to be considered, one must be comparable

Copeland? Irving Berlin was prolific, but much of his stuff is not better than (or even as good as) McCartney. (I probably need an asbestos suit after posting this, but) God Bless America is one of the most banal songs I've ever heard or sung...music and lyrics both.

[Tyler Durden]

209. God bless america is BANAL.

Note that not every song every composer writes is a "winner."

I won't go into my opinion of McCartney again. Leave it to say it is MY OPINION but I will say one thing: when Paul McCartney writes an internationally acclaimed SYMPHONY as Aaron Copeland has ("Appalachian Spring," "Rodeo" to name only two), then and only then will I put them on any sort of level playing field for comparison.

I will say also that comparing McCartney to Berlin is like comparing Dairy Queen to Hagen Das, but once again and for the record:

THIS IS MY PERSONAL OPINION, AND I AM ENTITLED TO HOLD IT.

[ForrestGump]

100. Exactly

He's a masterful showman.

He loves it. And with a love like that, you know it can't be bad. :D

I first saw him in '89, which was probably my favorite of the three tours I've seen him on (the other was also '95) if only because, quite apart from it being the first time, he ended with the full "The End" medley from Abbey Road, that was abridged for subsequent outings. I think that medley's one of the best things anyone has ever recorded and his live iterations, with extended guitar duel, were sheer magic.

[johnnie]

7. I got to hear the whole album Saturday

I was impressed with it and personally think it is one of his best in many years. His bass playing is still superb and the production is interesting and really pretty cool.

I don't think he is humiliating himself, I think he is doing what he loves to do.

[Tyler Durden]

8. I'm glad you enjoyed it.

Many musicians play wonderfully well into their twilight years.

His "adventures in music" for the sake of him doing "...what he loves to do..." will have to pass me by.

Tell me truthfully though: you can't watch his photoshopped little prance and bob to "Everybody Gonna Dance Tonight" as an Itunes commercial with a straight face, can you?

[johnnie]

12. Honestly

The only thing that bothers me with it is that the effects they use makes him look like The Joker. Other than that, it just seems to me like McCartney being McCartney. I guess silly things like that doesn't do as much damage to me as they seem to do to you.

What did you think of the new album?

[Tyler Durden]

14. Clips I've heard leave me blank.

I haven't liked much he's done in many, many years. Shoot, I didn't like "Let it Be."

[johnnie]

16. I haven't really followed him since the 70s

I'll pick up a thing or two, but I haven't been a die-hard fan of his stuff for a while. I just thought the new album sounded pretty good and I enjoyed listening to it.

I just don't understand where people get "angry" with musicians or artists when they personally don't like the work that they do. Telling artists they should retire because they no longer are useful in their chosen professions just seems a bit over the top.

People make me laugh when they try to come across as music know-it-alls. Not you specifically, just everyone else.

[Tyler Durden]

18. Comes from being a Pianist cut short.

I come from a family of artists and musicians. I was the Pianist. I almost destroyed my right hand 7 years into intensive training. Sure made going to Interlochen that summer sort of moot. Spent the next two years in phyisical therapy learning how to write again. Never got back the dexterity.

Maybe I'm jealous, just a little; I don't begrudge him his fame and fortune...I just wish I'd had a couple more years. Maybe the fact that he's had almost 50 years to play is a hard thing for me.

Who can say?

But I was classically trained, and McCartney does not impress me as a composer.

[jpgray]

203. Not impressive? Try to write pop songs that are as endlessly engaging as his were from 65-71

You'll be fabulously rich!

[Tyler Durden]

206. See, I don't find them endlessly engaging...

Just as it is your right to find them endlessly engaging.

I'm certain there are many people who find ABBA or Celine Dione endlessly engaging. That is also their prerogative.

Why is it necessary that I do so too? That is how I started this mess...with MY OPINION. I view the people who are conflicted with this as trying to change MY OPINION. When that happens, any justification they get from me is just as subjective to my personal tastes and MY OPINION as their words are.

The tobacco companies got rich selling cigarettes; seems to me that whether or not they sell a "good" product depends on your perspective.

[jpgray]

210. I'm just saying it's difficult. Try to write a pop song as catchy as "Getting Better"

There's a reason only a very few are allowed in the top echelons of memorable pop songwriters--they have a combination of musical inventiveness within the limited structures of pop, tied to charisma and innate wild talent, that can't be taught in any school. You can understand a pop song in technical terms very easily--which inversions are used for the harmonies, etc. None of that will allow you to match the achievement of writing a good one.

[Tyler Durden]

213. NOW you've got it.

Compare "Getting Better" to "Everybody Gonna Dance." Better yet, compare the new album to "Band on the Run" (not MY cup of tea, but hey, compared to the new album, it's MOZART.)

[Frank Cannon]

11. That Dance Tonight song makes me want to jam screwdrivers

in my ears.

And watching him skip around with that stupid mandolin makes me want to claw my eyes out.

And it seems like he's EVERYWHERE.

[Tyler Durden]

15. You either love him/hate him or you're evil for being indifferent.

Personally, I never saw the talent other than the playing ability. He always struck me as a reincarnation of a failed dance hall singer.

I picture him in front of some dance band, circa 1920, doing "Honey Pie" while they dance the "Lambeth Walk."

[vi5]

13. The stupidest part about that commercial...

Those itunes/ipod commercials have never blatantly listed the artist and song name like they do in that jerkwad's commercial with that idiotic song. Even though in some cases (u2) it's been very obvious, half of what's been cool about those commercials has been "Hey who does this song?" and having to find out.

I guess old Paul couldn't be bothered to leave it up to the listener to figure it out and be bothered enough to care.

[LTR]

231. The Lexus commercial a couple years ago didn't credit him

They used the song "Fine Line" from his last album (many older artists license for commercials to promote their newer music - Sting partnered with Jaguar a few years back to promote "Desert Rose", which his label refused to release, and it got a lot of positive response). Unfortunately, it took a fine-tuned ear to realize it was McCartney's work.

Perhaps he learned from this. I have to say, he's been doing a good job of promoting his new album. The Starbucks label signing looks to be a smart move.

[Philosoraptor]

20. Tiny Tim did it better

[Tyler Durden]

21. Oh. My. God.

And they said I was being mean...

Good comment.

[begin_within]

22. He should have stopped after "Band on the Run."

In my opinion, his songwriting career started with the Beatles and ended with "Band on the Run." Nothing after that is any good.

[El Fuego]

26. It's ironic that John Lennon was at least spared this humiliation.

He was bloody brilliant enough to get himself shot before he turned into a weird pathetic old guy who refuses to go away.

[Tyler Durden]

28. You know what I thought first time I saw it?

"Brave Sir Robin ran away, He Bravely ran away, away..."

[RandomKoolzip]

29. The first time I heard the chorus of "Dance Tonight," I said, "Uh....that's it?"

It sounds unfinished. The melody is underfed and bone-simplistic, almost like a trifle Sir Pablo made up while sitting on the toilet. I mean, this is the guy who wrote "Martha My Dear," "You Never Give me your Money," "Too Many People," "Listen to What the Man Said," et al. - some of the richest, most exquisitely constructed pop compositions ever birthed. And he HONESTLY thinks "Dance Tonight" is a single?!

I'm not one of these dudes who automatically slights Paul out of some knee-jerk revulsion arising from his decision to continue living after John died, or one of those myopic know-it-alls who refuse to listen to the distinctive melodicsim and superb craft (not to mention the always-amazing vocal talent) on diplay on the Wings albums. Then again, i haven't heard any of his other solo stuff since 1989, when I last gave up on McCartney...and my friend Adam, a major power Pop fan, tells me there's some great songs on each of those albums. But if "Dance Tonight" is setting the bar, I will take a pass and fire up some of his great mid-70's Wings stuff, like "Jet," instead.

[Tyler Durden]

32. How about something from "Red Greenback and the Blue Boys?"

Not TOO obscure a reference for YOU I trust?

[RandomKoolzip]

35. I know it SHOULD, but I'm at a loss. Is it

from one of the FT's "later albums?" Cuz I never really bought anything after "Lawyer's Hospital."

:shrug:

[Tyler Durden]

41. They're the band for "The Television Mission"...

Phil Austin's "Roller Maidens from Outer Space." Their first tune on the album "C'mon Jesus!" leads into "CARHOOK!":

"In the last powerful days of another way of life when everything happened in CARS and solemn, desperate men would do ANYTHING for a tankful,

"In those days of the "100 Year Gas War" and the terrible "Food Insurrection" when armies mixed mustard and gas and RELISHED war,

"In those frightened times, private citizens had to do the terrifying work of REAL POLICE...apprehending criminals, and solving tricky moral problems:

"They had Private Hands but Public Fists!
"Full Tanks but Clean Consciences...and tonight's story is only typical........

"'CARHOOK!' starring Dirk Yogurt as Dick Private, Private Dick!

"Tonight's CHILLING story: 'ROLLER MAIDENS FROM OUTER SPACE!!' "

[johnnie]

34. "Dance Tonight" is a week cut

But as I said above, there are some highlights on this new one. I pretty much stopped listening to him too for a while, but his last studio release was pretty strong and in my opinion, this one is even better. Being a "producer" myself, I took note of the production on this album because it had a really different sound to it. A lot of compression on things, but other than that it was interesting to listen to.

I'm sure that most people are in the opinion that McCartney's best work was in the past, but I think he is still a valid songwriter and has a few years left in him.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me when people in music need to stop because they are too old. Or is it only in "rock" music that this needs to be done?

[RandomKoolzip]

38. Yeah, it's mainly a Rock thing, and it's also a boomer thing.

You know, lots of self-proclaimed Rock scholars got on their high horses in the late 60's and declared that Rock is not just the single most important aesthetic development since the printing press made large-scale book publication feasible, but that it can ONLY be made by young people. Live fast, die young, blah blah blah, that whole bullshit cult of death. I don't agree, but then again the evidence has DEFINITELY slid toward that end of the opinion spectrum for me, if I were to base my judgement solely on the products of the boomer generation. Rod Stewart, anyone?

It's not just an integrity thing or a way of wiping out accusations of being a hypocrite ("Hope I DIE before I get old"), either - I will give all aging rockers an open ear, since my behavioral criteria isn't congruent with that template - but none of these jokers has given us anything to rave about (not just grudgingly accept with a shrug of the shoulders, RAVE!!) since hitting 50, and none of them seem willing to give up the spotlight. A notable exception is Van Morrison, who releases some of the grumpiest damned music year after year and writes the same song over and over. He HAS written some decent tunes in the last twenty years though, and still sings them well.

In any event, I think most musicians reach their stride as composers and performers somewhere around 35-42. Robert Pollard is a prime example of this.

But when one of the most creative melodicists since the invention of the Victrola, Sir PM, cannot be bothered to write a song with more compositional integrity than the latest stuff I heard from him, what we'e dealing with here is an ego addicted to its own celebrity who refuses to bow out gracefully (he still DYES HIS HAIR! Does this fool anyone?!) and is pathetically chasing demographics rather than a burning muse.

[johnnie]

42. But there is still an audience for them

I hear a lot of bitching about mainstream music or "music today", but then I hear just as much about the "old timers" that suck now and should bow out. I guess people are just crabby.

Personally, I still like to hear people I have listened to for years and I feel confident in myself that I can make my own decision on what I want to listen to or not. I don't really listen to what armchair wanna-be rock stars have to say about who is good now and who sucks.

I will admit that when I was young, I was like that too. I thought I knew what was good and bad and I voiced my thoughts on it. But as I grew up I realized that there is room for everyone out there and I feel I have no right to say what people should listen to when it comes to music.

An opinion is fine, but when it is an obvious bashing because someone thinks they are being "brave" by trying to take down a person who was/is regarded as a musical legend, it looks as silly as the person they are saying is looking silly. I guess that's human nature though.

As I have said, I think there are some brilliant tunes on McCartney's new cd, but people who have taken the time to listen to 30 seconds of one of the cuts on a tv commercial seem to know better of what I should want to hear. Sure McCartney hasn't written "Yesterday" again, but who really gives a shit? He has proven himself I think and if he wants to make the music he feels he needs to make, then i say good for him. And that goes for anyone who creates some sort of art. If you don't like the art, then just don't buy it.

[Tyler Durden]

45. When music in the schools goes begging and THIS STUFF gets major espensive airplay....

...well, (IN MY OPINION) it's far past time for a shift in paradigm.

If you want ART, I can recommend several excellent symphony orchestras and MANY truly talented people like Brubeck, Laws, etcetera.

[johnnie]

50. That may be the type of art you like...

It isn't mine.

I guess this is where the problem is. A lot of people can't understand the possibility that other people may have different tastes in things. Even if a person hasn't had any formal musical training, they are still allowed to like what they like.

[Tyler Durden]

52. "I don't know if it's ART, but I know what I LIKE."

IN MY OPINION McCartney is not ART. Treating him like ART IN MY OPINION diminishes art in general.

I do not say this to offend you: I'm merely tired of art in this country being trivialized, and POP being deified.

[johnnie]

62. I don't think art is trivialized, it is just appreciated at different levels

I'd like to see the guidelines of what makes any art better than any other art. Some people take their own personal opinion of art a little (or a lot) more seriously than others, but all in all it is just expression. It seems a bit presumptuous to tell people they aren't qualified to express themselves because they don't have enough talent to do so.

I understand your frustration at something you take seriously looking like it is being pissed on, but it is just something that has to be. I am a musician also and have spent time learning my craft so to speak. I was frustrated too and got pissed off. But the day I accepted myself and what I do, then all that frustration went away. I write and perform when I want to and I don't bust my ass to do anything beyond making myself happy with my art.

I have no problem with people in the music world doing what they are doing because I know that there are more than enough of musicians who aren't winning little statues that I can listen to when I want to.

[Tyler Durden]

113. I take ALL music very seriously...

From HIPHOP to HAYDEN. I just don't like SCHLOCK passed as ART. If McCartney is the greatest on stage since who knows who, I could care less. Manilow and Wayne Newton are considered STAR performers on stage. I would have to pass on seeing them.

[johnnie]

119. Oh well

You have the right to be bitter I guess.

[ForrestGump]

135. johnnie speaks the truth

As he is wont to do.

:loveya: <-- platonic, "You Can't Stop The Music*," admiring, shaka-flinging, air-guitar-playing man-love




* = perhaps not the best choice of song, given the smiley...so how 'bout them Browns, huh?

[johnnie]

136. Thank you sir

I think the Cavs would have worked this time. :)

I lost interest in this discussion about 2 minutes into it, but I gave it my best shot because I was bored at work. I find myself not really giving a shit about pissing contests anymore as the years pass. :hi:

[tigereye]

97. Bowie?

he still seems like an innovator to me.

[RandomKoolzip]

115. Yeah, but who goes to Bowie's concerts and yells for something off

of "Earthling" or "Outside?" When he does one song half as excellent (as a rock song, as a composition, as a piece of production) as "D.J." or "Ziggy Stardust," I'll come around. He keeps changing, which is indeed admirable, but more than anything, that seems to be just a calling card rather than an aesthetic necessity.

[Tyler Durden]

121. That's another thing. McCartney's doing the SAME THING he did in the 70's.

Nice, VERY simple, completely formulaic.

Seen ONE, Seen 'em all.

[tigereye]

143. I like him more and more every year

I didn't like him when he was a big deal in the 70s, but his songs really, really hold up. I think the man is a marvel. Many, many innovative pop gems.

:hi: RKZ! How are ya, my friend?

[RandomKoolzip]

191. Wonderful, Tigger! How's by you?

:hi:

[mitchum]

144. Hell, I've gone and yelled for "The Laughing Gnome" just to wind him up...

and The Duke was not amused

[no name no slogan]

57. You know they're screwed when they whip out a lute and/or mandolin

Just look at Sting: out comes the lute, and out goes the record sales. Perfect timing for a Police reunion, don't you think?

[deutsey]

59. It kind of reminded me of Harrison's "I Got My Mind Set on You"

Just empty fluff I can do without. If other people like it, so be it.

[RandomKoolzip]

77. At least the melody to "Got My Mind Set On You" was set to an

odd harmonic climate. It was catchy without being insultingly simplistic, and the rythym swung. (It was a cover, too. Harrison didn't write it.) This new Paul tune sounds like a sketch, a rough outline at best.

[piesRsquare]

198. My friends and I in college had a joke version of that song...

During the chorus, instead of "I've Got My Mind Set On You" we would sing, "This song's only six words long!"

Try it...it's catchy! And yeah, we were (and still are) pretty nerdy, so we thought it hilarious...

[RandomKoolzip]

223. "I've Got My Mind Set On You" is seven words.

[SouthoftheBorderPaul]

129. "And he HONESTLY thinks "Dance Tonight" is a single?!"

There's a minor entity called "the record company" that oftentimes make this call. :)

[RedStateShame]

30. C'mon, that's not Paul!

Everybody knows that Paul died early in his career, and he was replaced by actor Billy Shears. What?!

[elehhhhna]

33. Saw it immediately after hearing something or other by Lennon

and was embarrased & ashamed for Paul.

Ouch.

[Zavulon]

36. He should have been forced to stop at gunpoint the second he

released that wrteched "Uncle Albert / Admiral Halsey" song. That garbage was a violation of my basic human rights.

[deutsey]

60. Just WTF is that song about, anyway? n/t

[Zavulon]

71. I believe it's a non-violent albeit horrifying instrument of torture.

It was written during the Cold War. You capture a Soviet with access to classified, you force him to listen to the song 10-12 times, and even your toughest Spetznaz soldier will spill his guts without you spilling his blood.

[Tyler Durden]

73. Don't ask.

It's "art."

[mockmonkey]

37. If it makes him happy to keep recording then, why not?

As I quietly wait for Yoko's new album.:crazy:

[Tyler Durden]

43. As a confirmed Socialist, conspicuous waste gets on my nerves.

McCartney with this stuff becomes (IN MY OPINION) just another member of the "Let's do something NEW, EXPENSIVE AND FUN!" crowd.

Silly. (IN MY OPINION).

[Starbucks Anarchist]

51. You're kidding, right?

[Tyler Durden]

53. Nope.

I've watched too many truly talented ARTISTS be trivialized to favor the Pedestrian of Pop.

Maybe if we TAUGHT REAL MUSIC in Schools, indignation like mine would disappear. You could still do "POP MUSIC" but as I said above, for what one live McCartney concert goes for, you could fund an entire YEAR of a major symphony orchestra.

Now THAT is waste. IN MY OPINION.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

58. Teaching music doesn't necessarily lead to great music.

Many brilliant artists had little or no formal training.

[Tyler Durden]

64. True, but EXPOSURE leads at least to TOLERANCE.

Try spending your life after having your vocation as a budding pianist dashed trying to get a little classical music on the radio where you work. JUST ONCE.

NOPE. It's ALL COUNTRY ALL THE TIME WITL "WHITTLE" RADIO! or something similar.

Shoot. My taste in music and art has been trivialized my whole life. To those on this thread who say there tastes are being trivialized, I SAY:

TAKE A NUMBER.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

66. Not necessarily.

I've been exposed to some shitty music that I still can't remotely tolerate.

Try spending your life after having your vocation as a budding pianist dashed trying to get a little classical music on the radio where you work. JUST ONCE.

Little confused here. Were you trying to be a classical pianist and couldn't get classical music on the radio?

I have very eclectic taste in music myself, maybe 1% of which would still get played on the radio today, which is probably why I don't listen to the radio in the first place. Easy.

[Tyler Durden]

69. I have very eclectic tastes in music also.

I come from a family of artists and musicians. My vocation was permanently interrupted by my right hand being horribly (for a pianist anyway) injured.

I was remarking that my exposure and upbringing left me with a little wider appreciation for music than the local Country station. And that getting some of what they call "Longhair" music played is always met with much derision.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

74. Oh, okay.

But I disagree that exposure to different types of music must come from the schools or the family.

In my case, I just took it upon myself to discover all this great music, no family tastes or formal schooling necessary.

[MilesColtrane]

106. No, but it leads to a greater appreciation of music.

I'm not concerned about creating more brilliant artists. I'm concerned about more recognition and support for the brilliant artists that are currently out there that nobody's heard of.

The reason nobody's heard of them is that a huge percentage of people can't discern quality when they hear it, probably because they have never heard it.
The classroom used to be the only place a child would hear anything that wasn't on the radio. (at least until arts funding in public education was cut)

When you take the further step of teaching a kid how to play a musical intrument his appreciation for quality is raised even higher, and you've created a consumer who will demand that later in life, whether he continues to play or not.

[Tyler Durden]

112. BRAVISSIMO!

I caught Ronnie Laws live on stage in Houston about 1995 or so. Halfway through the set, who hits the stage with Ronnie? Hubert.

You cannot imagine the session they played. I can actually REMEMBER most of it, it was such and impression.

[jpgray]

205. Greater understanding. Not necessarily a greater appreciation

A beautiful work of art in any form can be appreciated as is, without any significant technical knowledge. Knowing which chord inversion is used in a song, what pigments are used in a painting or what acid-resist is used to treat a copper plate may give you a technical awareness of the art, but you can appreciate the beauty without such things. People can appreciate Shakespeare without extensive knowledge of Plutarch, meter, and figurative language. Popularity can be forced, but truly beautiful works of art don't need extensively trained audiences to be appreciated.

[Tyler Durden]

221. What I object to, is OPINION touted as DOGMA.

But I also feel if all you get is Beatles or Toby Keith, then the easiest and most SECURE thing for you to do is to disparage the choices of others.

Negative opinion is fine, but not personal attack. Music EXPOSURE not some class in school is what we need, but it won't happen as long as the common taste is held to be the CORRECT taste, and others are criticized for theirs.

I believe in this thread (excepting when I lost a little bit of my temper), my chagrin was direct at Paul McCartney, not his fans or others on this thread. On the other hand, from the very first I was vilified as a snob because I felt McCartney was repetitive and formulaic pop, and not even good pop. MY OPINION. I'm not required to change it.

[LynneSin]

47. Would Sir Paul please take Sir Mick and Sir Dead-Dad-Ash-Sniffing Keith with him

And if they happen to grab Aerosmith - take them too

[Tyler Durden]

54. That's just ONE of the reasons I love you. n/t

[LynneSin]

96. Awww shucks!!!

:woohoo:

[no name no slogan]

56. You leave Keef out of this

As one of the undead, Keef will live forever and ever, as long as he gets enough fresh baby blood and daddy ashes. He cannot be killed, so don't even bother.

Now Mick and Aerosmith, OTOH, have an eternity of hellfire and damnation ahead of them. And none too soon, I might add.

[ceile]

63. Saw the iPod commercial last night.

Sad, oh so sad....
Who told him that song was good and that he didn't look like a scary old child molester in that commercial?

[Tyler Durden]

65. Oh I REALLY like that one.

Is there anything sadder than a 65 year old "Rock Star?"

[speedoo]

142. Dylan is now 65.

I can think of many things, and people, sadder than him. In fact, there's nothing remotely sad about Dylan. Just my opinion, of course.

[Tyler Durden]

147. Of course he isn't sad.

He shows a certain level of dignity. He always did.

[speedoo]

164. Not always.

Certainly a lot of undignified behavior back in the 60's. And some would say in the 70's as well. He was using drugs heavily back then, but by all accounts no longer.

You might be interested to know that Dylan holds McCartney in very high regard.

http://beatle.wordpress.com/2007/05/16/according-to-dylan-mccartneys-still-got-it/

(snip)

“I’m in awe of McCartney. He’s about the only one that I am in awe of. He can do it all. And he’s never let up… He’s just so damn effortless.”

(snip)

[ForrestGump]

170. Shhhh

Stop muddying the waters with facts, and stuff.


Because, you know, he'll be checking your ID next, to see how old you are.

[speedoo]

179. Hey, buddy, you already know how old I am.

As you will recall from our conversation a while back, I saw this live:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=sdmNx3_0oEE

:hi:

[ForrestGump]

183. Yep!

And I'm younger but can tell you off the top of my head that that clip's from October 28, 1956. Kinda throws awry someone's thesis that if you weren't there at the time you'll never understand it or know what you're talking about -- this is good news for medieval historians everywhere, of course. :D


:yourock:

[Tyler Durden]

172. Dylan is allowed his tastes, too.

France thinks Jerry Lewis is a GENIUS. It doesn't diminish my love of impressionism.

[speedoo]

184. Bob must be very relieved you said that.

He was probably beginning to think no one was allowed to like McCartney, if you had anything to say about it.

[piesRsquare]

199. Disagree with you on that one...

Agree with many of yer points on this thread (esp the title of it), but Dylan has not always shown dignity.

I saw him once at a music festival in 1995 and was disgusted. And I was far from the only one in the crowd who was relieved when he finally got off stage.

[Flaxbee]

70. lol - for some reason, the Converse tennies did it to me, too

pissed me off for some incomprehensible reason. I don't mean to be unkind but I saw the commercial and just thought he looked like a silly, saggy-faced old fart - something about the commercial is really degrading, and he obviously doesn't see that. I mean, we'll all be silly, saggy-faced old farts one of these days, but hopefully not bopping around with a mandolin on a fakey rainbow in stupid looking shoes.

[Tyler Durden]

81. Maybe that was it...the lack of DIGNITY.

He doesn't have to act like one step from the grave, but skipping along in Converse All-Stars?? That's one step beyond, sort of like Fred Thompson marrying the 20 something year old daughter of a friend.

[Flaxbee]

87. you know, I mentioned it to my husband, who has also seen

the commercial wayyyyy too many times (must they inundate us with it?!?) and he said Paul has always, always been a hard-core capitalist, doing anything for the almighty dollar (or pound) and so he (husband) isn't surprised at the very blatant commerciality of the song or the ad. Perhaps that's why Yoko (or was it John?) so condescendingly commented on Paul's lyrics.

I just think he looks like he's totally pandering - no dignity, as you said. I thought it was an ad for Disney when I first saw it, until the very end when you realize it's all "Sir Paul"


Yeah - I think "acting one's age" is sort of a stupid concept, but really - one doesn't have to be a fool, either. Paul looks a fool, and Fred Thompson just looks like a desperate, insecure wanker that all other desperate, insecure wankers admire b/c he bagged himself a young'un.

edited for clarity

[Radical Activist]

82. What bothers me

is that the commercial is the only way he can get his music to the public. We really need to break up the media conglomerates.

[MilesColtrane]

103. Just remember that Paul could buy, or start his own media company.

He could create a billion dollar portal directly to music fans and still have about 500 million dollars to keep himself in guitar strings for the rest of his life.

McCartney is cooperating with the trusts because he wants to. It's an easy buck.

[Tyler Durden]

114. THAT is another thing that pisses me off.

If he's such an "artist," then let's see some support for the arts. Even TRUMP occasionally places a painting or a statue somewhere.

Damned right it's an easy buck. I personally think "rockin' on stage to his 'oldies'" is the same kind of art as a strippers': exhibitionism to a crowd that is there for that particular show for the money.

[MilesColtrane]

140. Indeed. That's why, even though I love the Police and have almost all of their stuff..

...I have zero interest in going to see them in this reunion tour.

Now if they write and record a new album then book some gigs, I would probably go see that.

[skygazer]

86. Not a McCartney fan and haven't seen the commercial

But I don't really understand the level of irritation you're showing on this thread. McCartney was a member of one of the most popular groups ever, was a co-writer of most of their best-known music and has been writing songs (whether you like them or not) all his life. It's what he does.

Since you seem to know something about music, you have to know that people who write music are going to write music. It's like breathing. If he's writing it, he's going to record it. If he's recording it, he's going to perform it. If he performs it, a whole lot of people want to be there.


You don't. Cool. I don't either. But I'm not going to get my panties in a wad over it, either.

[Tyler Durden]

88. I just object to having my FACE rubbed in it.

That was why I subscribed to cable in the first place. Now they have this all over everything from Court TV to the Science Channel.

Talk about saturation bombing..

[skygazer]

90. Oh, well that makes perfect sense

You expected thoughtful, tasteful, meaningful production values from cable TV. :rofl:

[MilesColtrane]

101. It's just profoundly dissapointing and irritating...

...when an artist stops being an artist.

Paul seems to have lost the ability to edit himself. Not that everything he did in the past was gold, but at least, up til now, there seemed to be a standard above-

Everybody gonna dance tonight
Everybody gonna feel alright
Everybody gonna dance around tonight

Everybody gonna dance around
Everybody gonna hit the ground
Everybody gonna dance around tonight

(Chorus)
Well you can come on to my place if you want to
You can do anything you want to do

Everybody gonna dance tonight
Everybody gonna feel alright
Everybody gonna dance around tonight

(Whistling)

Well you can come on to my place if you want to
You can do anything you want to do

Everybody gonna stamp their feet
Everybody's gonna feel the beat
Everybody wanna dance around tonight

(Bridge)

Everybody's gonna dance tonight
Everybody gonna feel alright
Everybody gonna dance around tonight

Everybody gonna jump and shout
Everybody gonna sing it out
Everybody gonna dance around tonight

Well you can come on to my place if you want to
You can do anything you want to do

Everybody gonna dance tonight
Everybody gonna feel alright
Everybody gonna dance around tonight
Everybody gonna dance around tonight
Everybody's gonna feel alright tonight

[no name no slogan]

102. But somehow, "she loves you yeah yeah yeah" was less banal?

Everybody writes a few clunkers now and then. But when you're already a household name, they let yours slide.

[MilesColtrane]

110. "She Loves You" certainly had something.

...maybe not deep lyrical content.

It had enough of something so that we are referencing it forty four years after it was written.

In regards to "Everybody Dance Tonight", I'll get back to you in 2051.

[Tyler Durden]

117. How about next year?

Hey you know what I did? I went out in the plant and asked 4 workers to name a song by the Beatles. NOT ONE of them could do it, and when I mentioned about 20 titles, the universal response was "I don't know that one."

On the other hand, two of them knew who Tchaikovsky was and all of them could place the the first four notes of Beethoven's 5th.

Maybe there's hope after all.

[ForrestGump]

137. I detest the crass commercialism of acts like this

Tchaikovsky fellow (sounds like a commie, to me, too) and this Beethoven character. See, this is exactly the result you expect when all the masses hear is overproduced pop like "A Fifth of Beethoven" and so on.

Give me an obscure strings-based quartet like the Beatles, any day, I say. I don't care if nobody but we few who are in on the secret recognize their works. Their art.







Seriously, where the hell are these people from that they can't name one Beatles song? :eyes:

[Tyler Durden]

145. Try the 25-35 year age group.

By the way, they could name a whole SLEW of Country stars, too.

The Tchaikovsky they named was "The Nutcracker" and "something to do with 'Sleeping Beauty', right?"

[Tyler Durden]

116. OH MY. e e cummings, move over. There's a NEW POET in town.

You have got to be kidding. THIS is what people are defending? Haven't they ever read Huckleberry Finn? They've been conned into attending "The King's Cameleopard or The Royal Nonsuch." They are painting the fence for Tom Sawyer.

[ForrestGump]

138. My guess is that you need a good massage

All that vigorous patting yourself on the back has probably taken its toll.

[Tyler Durden]

148. I get them frequently.

From my SO. I give them to her, too.

Funny. I thought your "working class hero, I ain't no music snob" attitude was a little pretentious myself.

[Joe Fields]

89. I sooooo want to comment on this thread, but sometimes .......

discretion is the better part of valor. Behave, Joe.....behave...

[Arugula Latte]

95. I find that commercial embarrassing, too.

He's trying so painfully hard to look like little happy-go-lucky silly-love-songs Paul, the boy Beatle.

I love ya, Paul, but, really ...

[MilesColtrane]

99. I think that crappy song and it's promotion by Paul has to do with his divorce.

"See how that bitch is not affecting me? I'm still the richest person in the UK, after the queen, and I'm still a former Beatle who can make a fresh million off of something it took two minutes to write."

Just don't take it out on us Paul.

[NewWaveChick1981]

104. Yes, it is.

I heard a couple of tracks from his new album, and when I did, I screamed, "ENOUGH! Stop it, Paul!" :yoiks: There is nothing sadder than an aging rock star who thinks he still sounds just as good as he did way back when and really sounds like crap. I think he's delusional, and he is DEFINITELY humiliating himself. :(

[Tyler Durden]

149. You catch some of the cultists here?

You know me...I'm old enough to have been at Shea Stadium. I LOVE these kids who want to defend the fading remnants of 60's culture that they've only seen in books.

Personally NWC, I think the Beatles and their music died when Lennon died.

[Initech]

108. His new album sucks, but he still puts on a good show.

No really, I saw him on the "Chaos & Creation" tour, it was about 90% Beatles, 5% Wings, 5% new material. And he had some fucking sweet visuals.

[Tyler Durden]

120. So go see him. I'm not stopping you.

Personally, I'll take Emmanuel Ax at the piano in September at the Detroit Symphony Orchestra for Beethoven's 5th piano concerto, "The Emperor."

My TWO seats will cost less than your ONE, I'll be 20 feet from the cellos and able to see the expressions on Ax's face.

Just to show I swing a lot of ways, I've seen ELO in 1975, Ronnie Laws twice, Tull Twice, a rare Robin Trower, Joni Mitchell, Neil Young, Stevie Wonder, Archie Shep and Roswell Rudd CJQ, Dave Brubeck, Stan Getz, KISS, Slade, Rush, Van Halen WITH Dave, Aretha Franklin, Count Basie, Duke Ellington, B.B. King, the Neville Brothers...

[Deep13]

122. Maybe he's better live as someone noted.

As far as his studio stuff, he should have called it quits in 1971.

[no name no slogan]

124. "Band on the Run" (1972) had its moments

The title track and "Jet" come to mind. And "1985" and "Bluebird" weren't half bad, either.

[Tyler Durden]

125. Do you really want to go see someone relive his past onstage...

...Playing mostly songs he didn't write but half of, and songs he's played SO MANY TIMES on stage that he could play them in a coma?

[Deep13]

127. Me? No, I would not. Of course for me...

...it would be the first time I have heard any of those songs in concert. I did see Sarah Brightman twice and there was some overlap. She did not write any of her songs.

[Tyler Durden]

130. Neither did Beverly Sills: I'd have KILLED to hear her. N/T

[ForrestGump]

139. Just for the record, ignoring for a moment the rest of the crap you're spouting,

almost all of the Beatles songs that Paul McCartney has performed on stage since the Beatles were songs that he was the sole or primary author of. He did two 'John songs' -- "Help" and "Strawberry Fields Forever" in Liverpool (I think) during the '89-'90 tour, as a tribute to John (along with "Give Peace A Chance") -- but otherwise he sticks to the songs that he wrote or to which he was the primary contributor. He has an impressive chunk of the Beatles recordings to his credit in that respect.

You further demonstrate that you know not of what you rail against by suggesting that the man could play the songs in a coma...sure, he undoubtedly could (how is that for musicianship?), but when he sings some old song from 1962 or 1963 he keeps it fresh and attacks it with full commitment, which is decidedly not the case for a great many of other rock and pop legends, some of whom number among my favorite performers. He does not ever slack around on stage...not once, and n0obody expects him or is forcing him to do the long sets that he does. He does it because he loves it -- sure, the money's good, but even now he hardly really needs it -- and because he needs to do it. Your apparent failure to understand this says more about you than it does Paul McCartney.

[Tyler Durden]

150. Oh give it a rest. Your cult is calling.

I have never heard such defense of culture you probably weren't even PART of in my entire life.

I would wager you were shitting your diaper when the Beatles play the Ed Sullivan show. I saw it LIVE. This isn't your past; it's MINE, and it's IN THE PAST.

And by the way, you have been rude throughout this whole thing. You made it PERSONAL to me, and that made it nonsensical from your end.

[johnnie]

154. You do know that many of the composers you have talked about here..

...died hundreds of years ago?

Just to get this straight, if someone was shitting in their diapers when The Beatles were on your TV, they have really no say so about things, but you are an expert on composers that were around hundreds of years before you ever became a musical elitist?

[Tyler Durden]

160. You know, you're not listening (or reading) either.

I am in the majority here, and I have expressed my widespread musical tastes. I said that someone not of my era had no right to lecture me on my feelings about things of my past.

Go worship the Beatles if you wish. Preach that Paul is a Genius. I don't feel so, it is my RIGHT to feel so, it is my RIGHT to feel that the appreciation of music is diminished by McCartney and his "showmanship over content."

If you don't mind, I'm going to end this conversation with you, too.

[johnnie]

167. Tyler

It's not about worshiping The Beatles. You just don't get it and don't know it. That's what is funny.

[ForrestGump]

173. You heard the man: he's in the majority

Just like Republican politicians were for so long in this country. So I guess they really did know what they were talking about, then.

Besides, it'll come as no surprise at all to him that you and I are almost exactly the same age and didn't go to Julliard.

Let's hope he doesn't find out we're the same person.

[johnnie]

177. The majority

Imagine that? People whining about a "major" music star that sucks now. Such a new concept around here. :rofl:

:yourock: <------ actually that should say, "You Jazz"

[ForrestGump]

185. If the majority doesn't like him, does that revoke his status as a sell-out?

Can we be terribly hip and impressed with ourselves now, embracing Sir Paul now that he is a fringe act, spurned by the masses?

We few. We lords of good musical taste.

Cool.

:yourock: <------ "You Pummel The Bongos While Reciting Your Poetry, Daddy-O"

[hyphenate]

123. I saw that

but I'm proud of him wearing those sneakers! Since he is a passionate animal rights activist, it's only proper he spurned leather in choosing them.

I wouldn't say he's jumped the shark. Rather, he is re-inventing himself again. It's funny--I had talked with some people in their late 30s and early 40s who immediately associate Paul with Wings, and not the Beatles. It's a whole 'nother generation out there, and since he is now a grandfather, perhaps he is aiming his music toward a younger generation.

Too much music nowadays has gone over the top with bells and whistles, and I know I'm happier with some pure, simple music that comes from the heart, and not from the largest MF amp or pimped out instrument. Give me someone like John Denver, Jim Croce, Don McLean or other such singer, and I won't just be happier, I'll be ecstatic. Paul has had it rough the past ten years--give him a break! :hi:

[Tyler Durden]

126. Somehow, it's hard to believe that aging billionaires have a bad decade.

You know what? I'VE had it rough. Where's my break? Frankly if you want to watch him sing or buy a record that has a song where every line begins with EVERYBODY GONNA....

Be my guest. I choose not to, and since his concerts are 90% Beatles and 5% Wings (by his own fans' admissions on this thread) I will have to pass.

[AngryAmish]

131. He should check his diapers for leaks

[jpgray]

132. He's still enormously talented as a performer, though his voice isn't what it used to be

I won't buy any of his solo albums, but his the consistency of his songwriting at his peak is pretty formidable. I don't know anyone who measures up well in comparison--Lennon and Dylan had higher points, for example, but not as much consistency. How he made a songs as simple as "Good Day Sunshine" or "Paperback Writer" captivating is kind of miraculous.

[Tyler Durden]

151. Oh GOD. The fucking thing is playing again.

What a cliche. If I were in his position, and did not have his obvious ego, I'd quit and go back to India.

[BlueJazz]

174. God Bless You !!! (and I'm an Atheist) I just saw this thread and....

...you've put some wise words down in your posts.

Snob assholes with perfect pitch, like myself, have fought many battles about music in the
achieves of DU.
I don't even know what to say any more... LOL...I'm always reminded of the old Musicians Joke:

Jim: How was the Band, down the street, last night.
Joe: Oh Man...The Crowd LOVED them and thought they were the best!!
Jim: Shit..They really Sucked that bad..huh? ..I'll go to a movie instead tonight then...

[Tyler Durden]

180. I have "the curse" as well....

It KILLS me to listen to most live music. 1/4 tone off sounds to me like fingernails on a blackboard.

[BlueJazz]

202. I think most People don't truly understand the trained Musicians...

..point of view.
I mean, when we hear a song we KNOW what's going on and how much talent it takes to perform the
...um..."Act".

I've put it this way to some folks:

"Look, imagine a world where trained automobile mechanics are substituted for Musicians.
These Mechanics know all the Vectors....all the Cam angles...all the combustion traits
of engines and can generally hear an engine and tell you EXACTLY what's going on inside
the engine block without even opening the hood."
"Now, also...imagine how these super trained Mechanics would feel if they
constantly saw (in the Media) how there were groups of people who were making
huge amounts of money and Fame because they Changed the oil on a Ford...and daily heard
some new accolades of a "up and coming" Act that could actually ....
Change Spark Plugs!!!!!...and when these trained mechanic said even the SLIGHTEST
thing about these new acts being Phony, everybody said "Oh..You're just being Snobs"


Some people will say "Well ..that's not the same thing"

I say: "Well Yeah..It rather IS the same thing"

[jpgray]

204. Your contempt for pop songwriting is probably matched by your lack of ability in the field

Comparing pop songwriting to a soulless mechanical exercise emphasizes that point. The totally miraculous combinations of catchiness, performance quality and personality that is created by the best pop songs can be technically understood, but that understanding is empty and does not allow one to create similarly amazing works. I have a Wood Guthrie collection that's essentially four hours of the same three chord progressions played on the same four instruments, and yet the variety and possibilities are endless. There's no theoretical explanation for it, it's something you either have or you don't. I think many people are frightened by that concept, and therefore overreact with blind contempt. You may know more theory than most famous popsters, but you'll never be able to write a song as good as "Paperback Writer" or "With a Little Help from My Friends." If you could, you'd be making yourself fabulously wealthy, rather than arguing these points on a message board. Maddening, isn't it? But that's the magic of it.

:D

[BlueJazz]

208. Well..Actually ..I like Woody and the songs you mentioned.

Look...I even Love Fats Domino but I'm certainly not under the false impression
that he's a "Great Piano Player".
I mean, even Trained Folks like some stuff that's rather trashy.

also...there are great songs that are written every day...even I have written a few Catchy songs... but in Music, (Like any other field) it's the "Who you know" thing.

I usually only "Get Down" on the whole scene when somebody Famous like Paul
Puts out some Garbage like the one that's being run 300 times a day on the airwaves...
:)


I guess My bottom line is ...if all this junk like Paul's song wasn't being rammed down the publics throat then maybe a few more great song writers (and God NO..Not Me!) would have more exposure.

Oh..and one other thing..Just because I like Fine Wine doesn't mean I don't drink a Pepsi Sometimes. :)

[jpgray]

212. It's true Paul's exposure now is due to his past legacy of great songs

He hasn't produced anything great that I've heard in many years. It's also true that boomer nostalgia shunts a lot of people off into trying to repeat past successes rather than creating their own--I just get pissed off when I think people are belittling pop as simplistic. :P Sorry I misread your post.

[Tyler Durden]

214. Misread MINE too.

I have said that I don't care for MOST of McCartney's work...That does not mean that there are not certain early works I appreciate.

As I said down the thread; compare, say, "Getting Better" to "Everybody Gonna Dance Tonight" and tell me who's resting on laurels.

I don't hate POP, I hate formulaic, repetitive and poorly written pop. About the only "music" I have no appreciation for is "Gansta" Rap, although I do have recordings of "The New Poets" (see "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" or other works.)

[jpgray]

216. I'm with you there, but you basically called McCartney a glorified drone even when in the Beatles

('twas somewhere upthread)

In terms of bass-playing or singing there were doubtless hundreds of session people that could match him or do better (though he was doing very well with both by pop standards from '66 or so), but as for the songs I'd argue the endless pile of mediocre British popsters at the time showed just how good the real thing was. You'd think somewhere in the horde of people trying to supplant him as one of the britpop masters of that time more would be able to write with the same quality if it were so easy to do. Aside from Ray Davies and a few others, no one could crack that style quite as well--and there were thousands of talented imitators like the Hollies who just didn't have that extra mysterious piece to make it all wonderful.

I guess what I have a problem with is the dismissal of his past work as somehow not requiring any significant talent to produce. I have no problem with someone disliking any musician--that's taste. But on a purely objective level what he accomplished forty plus years ago was very rare.

That his work lacks the same quality today is a shame, but it doesn't tarnish those past achievements in my mind.

[Tyler Durden]

219. Don't take this phrase the wrong way: I grant you your opinion.

100% of his work has not been dreck. I have even liked one or two of his songs. But what we are dealing with here is TASTE and OPINION, of which I have mine and you have yours.

I don't think I got indignant until the first McCartney fan called me a "Pretentious Blowhard" and "A musical Snob" for not subscribing to what they felt was the public and universal acclamation of the man. I don't have to agree; it's not in the rules. They don't have to agree with ME, but neither do they have the right to belittle and badger me. If they don't agree with an OPINION, and want to fight about it, there's always General Discussion.

[BlueJazz]

222. Yep...My words exactly.

Boy..You Know, (When I worked as a studio Musician...cbs...6 years), I met some truly great Singers
and Bands that, although were Pop, had some pretty cool tunes....and was saddened to NEVER hear
anything more about them (Probably) because of all the Crap that was being filled up by either
no-talent folks or worn-out "Stars" trying to recapture their youth.

One other thing (That I dare not post... specifically) is, I knew some sensational composers and song writers that have told me....

"You know, George...there are people who can hear a song and tell you who wrote it, if they're at all Famous and conversely, these Composers can say: I'm pretty sure they DID NOT write that song....well, George, I'll bet my ass that (insert Stars name here) did not write that song or else did not write the songs that made them (Him/Her)famous in the first place"

I'm not quite hip enough to tell the difference but I HAVE wondered why when certain groups break up and their members go out on their own, that the "Song-Writing" seems to change Dramatically ...

Just Wondering, just wondering..You being in the Music world, know what I'm talking about :)

[ghostsofgiants]

227. You sound like my music history professor.

:thumbsup:

[Robeson]

152. Thanks Tyler. Just saw this thread.....

...it's a blast...:rofl: :yourock:

[johnnie]

155. Yeah

He is cracking me up too.

[ForrestGump]

157. What would you know, you whippersnapper...

You're too young to even retroactively appreciate music made when you were a baby and you weren't classically trained, and I bet you don't know who wrote Flight of the Intruder, or Flight of the Clusterfuck, or whatever the hell it is. You know, the classical version of 1972's "Popcorn."

Also, your head hurts, your feet stink, and I can tell from here that you never loved Jesus.

[johnnie]

163. Hey dude

I was there when Brahms did his first gig. Although I remember when Ein deutsches Requiem came out, he was wearing far out clothes and I thought he had sold out. He did a few sonatas later on in life, but he should have quit in 1868. I thought he looked like an idiot after that.

[ForrestGump]

166. That whole Ein Deutsches Requiem thign was just a

ploy to get on Dick Clark's show. Really, when you view it in that context, it's forgivable.


At least he wasn't shot by F. Murray Abraham, like poor martyred Amadeus, though. Sure, Mozart will be forever young and beyond criticism of the waning of his writing talents but, still...what might have been...

[johnnie]

171. Well, I think Amadeus faked his death

I hear he is living with Elvis and Morrison in France. It's a good thing though, I hear he was writing a thing called "Mandolin in C sharp major minor 7th in three parts" before he "died".

[ForrestGump]

182. You mean...

he wrote "Free Bird"?!? :o


Well, I never.

I'm happy to hear about the Big Three though, living in unAmerica. I'd like to think they sit around jamming, with kazoos...

[Robeson]

161. I could tell....

...:D

[Joe Fields]

158. Time for this thread to retire....

[johnnie]

159. Oh c'mon

It's funny.

"Experts" always crack me up.

[Joe Fields]

162. it has been sort of funny. but enough is enough. the ax has been ground...

I take exception to anyone dissing the Beatles, but it isn't worth getting into an argument with someone who knows so little about them, and the impact that they had on the world.

As far as I'm concerned, Sir Paul could make a dozen more crappy albums and still stand head and shoulders above anyone else, living or dead. He's earned his stripes, and STILL puts on a fantastic concert.

[ForrestGump]

168. No, Ax was some kind of piano player

Apparently. I learned that in this very thread.

And all this time I thought he was a heavy metal dude.

[ForrestGump]

165. My favorite part is the bit when they,

in trying to insult someone of perceived inferior taste/age/experience/whatever they manage to, in the process of laying on the smackdown, show everyone just how pathetic and beset with false feelings of superiority they are (and, in doing so, handily reinforce the critique that drove them to counter in the first place).

It's like the one-step-forward-and-two-steps-back thing. It's kind of fascinating. Like watching Michael Jackson moonwalk. How does he do that so naturally?

[SeattleGirl]

186. I agree!!!

Goodness, I cannot believe how long this thread has gotten! :eyes:

[speedoo]

187. Awww, you're just pissed, SG.

I mean, this thread has touched on all kinds of music.

But no Kurt!

No Jimi!

Crap, the Seattle music scene is forgotten!

:P

[SeattleGirl]

188. Ha! That must be it!

:7

[Robeson]

190. Geez, SeattleGirl....

...You think this one is long, ever seen the Kudzu thread? Whoops, damn, wish I never opened that can of worms back up....:evilgrin:

[SeattleGirl]

195. Oh, you are SOOOOOO bad!!!!

:spank: :spank: :spank: :rofl:

I hid that damned Kudzu thread, had forgotten about it, and now you REMIND me of it????? Evil is what you are! :rofl:

[A-Schwarzenegger]

196. Contempt is what's old.

[Tyler Durden]

215. As in what is MY OPINION and what is YOUR OPINION.

I hold MOST of McCartney's work since early 70's to be variations on a repetitive and formulaic theme.

YOU may hold whatever opinion you choose but do not expect ME to convert to it.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

224. I have no desire to separate you from your contempt.

[Tyler Durden]

225. then why bother "stirring the pot"?

I'd just as soon let this damn thing DIE at this point. You just kicked it up to the top again. Thanks a lot.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

226. Well, youre certainly welcome a lot.

[dEMOK]

197. In a phrase -- I Heartily Disagree...

I'm a professional musician who grew up with the Beatles.

Granted, I'd much rather see John carrying on today as well, but Paul still has something very special. I saw some recent live footage of Paul in concert & let me tell you -- he still has the goods.

I would have been singularly unimpressed if he were lame, and I would have had no problem saying so; but he was surprisingly strong vocally & musically as well.

[Tyler Durden]

207. As I said, this is your opinion.

And I have mine. Originally (and I think, to this moment) I have not been trying to win converts. However, the other view appears not to be happy unless I adopt their opinion.

Why is that?

[jpgray]

201. Call Capitol Records. RIGHT FUCKING NOW!

[Tyler Durden]

211. Why?

They don't listen to my opinion any more than they listen to yours.

By the way...LOVE Bo. Try some Fats Waller: excellent boogie-woogie and predecessor to many like Bo.

[LostinVA]

217. I agree -- I said this same thing last night while watching "Top Chef"

The ad came on and I was like, "Doesn't he have enough money already?!"

[Tyler Durden]

220. WE are entitled to OUR opinion.

Some around here aren't affirmed in the security of their egos if you don't hold THEIR opinion.

[LanternWaste]

229. Did you have any idea at all

Did you have any idea at all that this would become a two-hundred plus thread? I can only assume this was all part of some nefarious plan on your part to bog us down and prevent us from getting our mid-late week work done.

Bravo, Sir Durden! Bravo, indeed.

:)