The Beatles' Solo Careers Poll - Voting and General Discussion Thread

Anyone voting for Pete Best rekkerds?

https://sonicmoremusic.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/ringo-starr-and-john-bonham1.jpg

?? i didn't say it was "mccartney's problem," i said it was weird to praise paul for (supposedly) releasing more good stuff in lennon's lifetime like that was especially impressive considering that lennon didn't make any music for most of the last five years of his life.

Lennon may not have released any new music 1976-1979, but it still doesn't make my statement any less true. Arguably, Lennon was washed up by '73, but still managed to hit upon the occasional stunner.

By comparison, McCartney was just beginning to get started again in '73, after spending 1970-1972 just enjoying himself with the pressure off - but even then he put out Ram, plus gems like 'Maybe I'm Amazed', 'Another Day' etc.

Wouldn't call either of those "gems" tbh.

They just had different approaches resulting in different rates of output imho. Lennon driven more by inspiration and his own emotional ups and downs, Macca driven by a protestant work ethic. AndLennon was on fire from '69-'73 in a way that Macca was not imho. When he stopped, Macca just kept rolling on (mostly as before).

idk again ram is fucking awesome

lol @ plastic ono band being "pitchforkcore"

that was def some outstanding nonsense

Not denying Ram's awesomeness!

Xp

when Pitchfork discovered Ram and McCartney II my heart died. They can't touch Press to Play or Flowers in the Dirt.

(actually, it's not true – just about every Macca album has equal proportion to good vs terrible)

lol @ plastic ono band being "pitchforkcore"

― marcos, Thursday, May 17, 2018 8:36 PM (one minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

that was def some outstanding nonsense

― flamenco drop (BradNelson), Thursday, May 17, 2018 8:37 PM (fourteen seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Nope, it made perfect sense. I would apply exactly the same term to McCartney II.

Alfred's last comment v otm which is one of the things that's so frustrating about Sir Paul.

Has Pfork ever actually reviewed JL's POB? I know they reviewed Yoko's.

Xp

This review seems p otm about MII's strengths and weaknesses imo https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/15536-mccartney-mccartney-ii/

The point is that John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band and McCartney II both appeal to a hipsterselfawareindiebellend audience that must have some sort of "angle" to their music and wouldn't be caught dead listening to Flowers in the Dirt or the more saccharine John songs from Double Fantasy and Milk and Honey.

The former's angle of course being "multimillionaire pop star whining about his issues over REAL RAW STARK BACKING which is really REAL. REAL love, REAL rock, REAL John." and the latter's angle is "stoned multimillionaire pop star pissing about" ...

...which of course must be better than the stoned multimillionaire pop star recording songs in a proper studio with big production because he recorded it at home and wasn't chasing hits and that's really real, man.

Coolstrawmanningbro

must have some sort of "angle" to their music

albums with narratives around them tend to draw ppl to them, weird

must be some hipster fascination

Same thing applies to The Beatles, too.

Shocking

What other brave challenging opinions do u have

Albums with good music on them tend to draw me in, personally.

Same thing applies to The Beatles, too.

― Le Baton Rose (Turrican), Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:05 PM (one minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

oh god am i trapped in the narrowing matrix of turrican's opinions

Turrican only listens to compositions that adhere strictly to twelve-tone serialism

Where does he get these insights into how other ppl listen to 50 y.o. music

This review seems p otm about MII's strengths and weaknesses imo https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/15536-mccartney-mccartney-ii/

― Οὖτις, Thursday, May 17, 2018 9:45 PM (four minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

And yet McCartney doesn't really tell us much about McCartney. As a songwriter, he wasn't (and still isn't, really) the confessional type. To a degree, McCartney is an actor whose medium is his songs ... When presented with the opportunity to let his guard down and show us his unvarnished self, Paul McCartney never did-- even in this intimate setting, his songs remain extroverted and devoted to achieving some measure of pop accessibility.

I think this is sort of true, but at the same time the more random McCartney stuff feels revealing in its own way - it kind of reminds me of the bits in Alan Partridge where he's rambling on about some banal subject and meanders onto a really morbid area, or something that indicates all the weirdness and anxiety that's lurking just below the surface - that quality of being sort of dull and conventional but deeply odd all at the same time

Definitely

His apparent vacuousness is revealing in its own way

.. and the same is true for Paul McCartney.

I think that McCartney has actually got more personal over the years ('The End of the End' and 'Early Days' spring to mind) and certainly more of his songs are more personal than people think. 'Little Willow', 'Calico Skies', 'From a Lover to a Friend' etc.

I've never gotten the fascination that many critics have for the "confessional," as if that's what songwriters are supposed to do.

I don't understand why Shakey finds it so difficult to believe that people may actually like McCartney's music and have their reasons for doing so, but hey!

It's more yr arguing against other ppl's opinions in bad faith that's obnoxious

I think McCartney is probably no more odd than the average person tbh (and neither is Alan Partridge, if it makes any sense to judge a fictional character in that way), it's just that most people are deeply odd when you get to know them, Partridge and McCartney reveal more of their oddness than the average person, Partridge because he has no filter or self-awareness, and McCartney because he's successful enough to turn every random idea he has into a song that gets put on a widely released album (and is maybe also lacking in self-awareness to an extent)

I've never gotten the fascination that many critics have for the "confessional," as if that's what songwriters are supposed to do.

― morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, May 17, 2018 9:17 PM (one minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Indeed, many of The Beatles' earlier tracks like 'Thank You Girl', 'From Me to You', 'I Wanna Hold Your Hand', 'She Loves You' etc. weren't about anyone in particular. It was just Lennon-McCartney trying (and succeeding) to write a catchy tune with a relatable lyric.

I absolutely dont subscribe to the confessional = better formula! And it tends to really irritate me when ppl do.

With Macca its not that he's not confessional its that his songs are often so literally empty, expressing either the most trite sentiments (love is great!) Or total nonsense. Sometimes both! And sometimes that combo is charming and disarming, other times its just stupid and lazy. That this is the m.o. he's chosen is somewhat revealing, was all i was saying.

I think it's a limited view of McCartney's catalogue, though. Yes, it's true that McCartney has put out some tracks over the years that are completely fucking dumb, but just as often he'll pull a 'Distractions' or a 'Put It There' out of the bag.

I don't recall people having a problem with McCartney's "nonsense" on 'She Came In Through The Bathroom Window', but I do remember people having a problem with the relatively direct 'Maxwell's Silver Hammer' ...

Partridge and McCartney reveal more of their oddness than the average person

Has Partridge been smoking dope for 50-odd years too?

i listened to Ram last night. parts of it are great. parts of it grate. like i was enjoying "Monkberry Moon Delight" for the first minute or so but the longer it goes on (and the more out of tune he gets) im like, okay Paul, i get it. there are lots of patches on this record where things are going greatly but something inevitably rubs me the wrong way, like as soon as "Long Haired Lady" starts the album takes a dive into absolute dopiness. album's overrated, like a lot of Paul's stuff.

Turns out love is reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaally long

"Uncle Albert" should have gotten McCartney sent to The Hague.

Nah that one's great

Paul goes on a silly naval adventure! V british

See? Consensus!

the pitchforkcore, the heart music, plastic and the ono band

"Uncle Albert" should have gotten McCartney sent to The Hague.

― morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, May 17, 2018 3:11 PM (two minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

ok this puts all of your mccartney opinions into question

yeah even I'm gonna vote for Uncle Albert

prob at #57 or so, but hey

seriously why are we even doing this discussion again, we've had this *exact* one, revolving around turrican's definitive marble-chiseled takes, in the last few months. like I get that solo beatles poll is an obvious place to try and rank the beatles versus each other but it could be a lot of other less shopworn things, like celebrating less-loved tracks (instead of shutting people down for doing so), or finding connections/comparisons to non-beatle music of the same period, or identifying themes across these huge discographies, or virtually ANYTHING but john vs. paul which I'm sure was actually a cautioned-against thread topic in usenet FAQs.