pitchfork interviews paul mccartney

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/feature/42799-interview-sir-paul-mccartney

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTuBtVVRrbs

http://assets.pitchforkmedia.com/images/image/30685.mccartneyheader.jpg?
"I FEEL BAD ABOUT MY NECK"

But I read something recently, it was just talking about trees and what they do as machines. The fact that they pump up these thousands of gallons of water, without anything we would recognize as a machine. It's just a nature machine, it's just a green machine. And the trees then convert carbon dioxide into oxygen. And we go, "Yeah, it's just a tree." But Jesus Christ, you try and do that! If only we had some people who could do that, we wouldn't have global warming, we wouldn't have these problems. Hence we're encouraged to plant more trees

christ he sounds like ronald reagan

Liverpool, 1962, at a fortune teller's:

"One day you will be interviewed to talk about an album done for a chain of coffeehouses."

"What?"

ronald reagan claimed the trees were creating the carbon dioxide, though, I think.

"And, like his previous album, 2005's Chaos and Creation in the Backyard, it's a surprisingly revealing and nakedly melancholy turn for someone we'd think couldn't reveal anything more of himself to us."

it is not melancholy at all!

What, this one or the 2005 one?

it's SIR paul mccartney mind you

It's sweet when he goes off on one about the robot hand!

And, like his previous album, 2005's Chaos and Creation in the Backyard, it's a surprisingly revealing and nakedly melancholy turn for someone we'd think couldn't reveal anything more of himself to us had nothing further to say, about anything. Ever. Again

the 2005 one is melancholy, this one is not.

he has some interesting things to say about Ian Macdonald. well kind of.

http://assets.pitchforkmedia.com/images/image/30685.mccartneyheader.jpg?
"YOU MAY LOOK ONLY AT MY BOTOX"

this is all because we are all jealous at him because he is so rich

...this [Memory Almost Full] is my first digital release..."

wow he's got a short memory. almost but not quite full, i guess. his last record was digitally available.

on itunes?

i like paul.

(x-post) on pretty much every digital store except itunes.

i like how you can tell he's squirming a bit when asked about "freedom". at least that's the impression i got. the video for that song is pretty unintentionally hilarious/disturbing.

<i>Liverpool, 1962, at a fortune teller's:

"One day you will be interviewed to talk about an album done for a chain of coffeehouses."

"What?"</i>

Ned you just peaked

I like Chaki.

:)

St John, by Bernard Shaw

Nice one, Pauline.

The fact that they pump up these thousands of gallons of water, without anything we would recognize as a machine. It's just a nature machine, it's just a green machine.

http://www.monkeyheaven.com/lookalike_s_neil_small.jpg

"we sow the seed, nature grows the seed, and then - we eat the seed!"

it's like man's first steps on the moon

http://assets.pitchforkmedia.com/images/image/30685.mccartneyheader.jpg?
http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/8012/urpl9.jpg

wow, that is fucked up.

Sir Paul McCartney needs no introduction.

Cue Lex to come on thread and say he has never heard of him.

I quite like the fact he's picked on two of the ten most bizarre creations on earth - the tree and the human hand - to make a very valid point.

Haven't they launched enough careers?

(PFM, I mean, not hands and trees)

amazing coup for PFM

Good interview, but:

If you're using your imagination, you tend to look into the past for ideas.

Um, I disagree.

You get your ideas from the future?

Hell yeah, if you're using your imagination!

otm. looking into the past for ideas isn't very imaginative, is it?

There is a rhetorical appeal to the idea that some artists get their ideas from the future. If it were literally the case, though, I worry that it implies time runs in reverse. Artists like McCartney, who, on the face of it, would be well qualified to talk about how imagination works, will usually say they get their ideas from things that have actually happened in their lives, or that they have read, or observed, and so on.

Well, yeah but then it was a bad sentence. Let's not read too much into it.

People tend to look into the past for ideas.

If you use your imagination, you could look anywhere.

That's it.

I came up with a saying that applies here: "If you don't know your past, you don't know your future."

im going to come up with a saying in in 6 weeks time. i'll post it then

They didn't ask the urgent and key question, viz. what is Macca listening to at the moment, so that we could get hilarious answers e.g. James Blunt, Men At Work, Scroobius Pip and Anita Harris.

Last time they asked, he said "Talking Heads"

That was in 1983 or so, so fair enough.

Why don't people ask him more often?

everyone gets their ideas from the past - its just about using those ideas to make something that sounds new

In the case of the stunning return to form that is the new McCartney album, he appears to have been listening to quite a lot of Wings.

I think he's mostly listening to lawyers nowadays.

Isn't every new McCartney album is described as a "stunning return to form"?

I'm sure I remember him 'bigging up', Super Furry Animals, Public Enemy, Nitin Sawnhey and um, UB40 in various interviews.

Exactly, just like every new Stones album and every new Bowie album (xpost).

I think the term is "crying wolf."

However it is his Modern Times equivalent since he sings about mortality and sweetcorn, so it may yet get eulogised.

... and every Dylan album (no, I don't believe that either)

There was an ad for some Fall Fontana remasters. With reviews underneath from the NME. Each one read: "Stunning return to form" ..!

Quipped McCartney: "Fall Fontana? Is that Wayne's brother, you know like?"

the first track on the album, "dance tonight," is in fact the best thing he's recorded in years. absolute genius.

No, but is it a STUNNING RETURN TO FORM?

it's a stunning return to neil young's form, in fact. and easily the best thing any living beatle will release this june.

Ringo sonned in Internet beef.

he appears to have been listening to quite a lot of Wings.

i kind of slammed the record on another thread but I listened to it again this morning and really liked the whole thing. it's radically different from the last one (and I would like another album like the last one); I guess it recalls "london town" and "ram" more than anything else.

Is the Wings catalogue posted on iTunes yet??? don't see it.

this album makes me think paul is back on the doobies

hope so

All that tree and robot arm shit has me thinking he's back on the doobies.

I don't think he ever went off the doobies.

Well, yeah but then it was a bad sentence. Let's not read too much into it.

People tend to look into the past for ideas.

If you use your imagination, you could look anywhere.

That's it.

-- Mark G

Not to yank your chain, Mark, but I am a little perplexed by this - and I'm writing a book about the nature of imagination which goes against your claim so I'm curious and a little provoked. If you look somewhere, wherever you look, aren't you looking at either recent or not-so-recent past? For example, if you get an idea from the newspaper article, or from your childhood, aren't these both things that have occurred, and therefore in the past? If there are alternatives to looking into the past, and they don't involve looking into the future, what are they?

Or perhaps you're saying simply that the past is more than just one's childhood- that there are more imaginative resources than that in the more recent past? In that case your disagreement with Sir Paul is that he is being too selective and distal in his use of imagination - he could be using the materials of the recent past to construct more interesting and relevant music and lyrics, instead of constantly disintering the memories of his youth, as old men and women are wont to do.

actually this album kind of reminds me of press to play, but in a good way

OK Moley: You are sort of right with your second paragraph.

Let's alter it slightly.

"If you use your hand, you open that door"

breaks down better into

People tend to open that door.

If you use your hand, you can open lots of doors.

Hmm. Actually, scrap that.

Rereading: You are totally right with your second paragraph.