Wednesday, March 23, 2005
The Beatles
I'm a huuuge Beatles fan. I love their music, and I'm intrigued by the stories of their lives and music. The Lennon-McCartney song writing partnership is one of the most interesting intellectual partnerships. They both had unique gifts to offer the world through their music.
Lennon's voice was the more strident of the two. Perhaps because of his chaotic life while growing up, John has the gift of the outsider. Unlike someone immersed in a particular way of life, John is capable of seeing through the lie that is this type of life. This self-styled "working-class hero" saw through the desire for a comfortable, middle-class suburban life after World War II as ultimately spiritually deadening. (This is reflected in such songs as "Strawberry Fields Forever," "Help!" "Day Tripper," "Nowhere Man," "The Word," "All You Need Is Love," "Imagine," etc.) Lennon's more "intense" approach to life can be reflected in the contrast between two early songs: "Please, Please Me" and "Love Me Do." The former, Lennon's, seems much more insistent on its approach to love--and also much more directly physical. The lyrical stance of McCartney's "Love Me Do" seems more relaxed. But in a way, also, more passive aggressive and manipulative ("You know I love you; I'll always be true" etc.) (It it's not already apparent, I favor Lennon over McCartney.)
If the appeal of Lennon's songs sometimes leans more toward the thoughtfulness of the lyrics at the expense of the melody, then McCartney's sheer genius when it came to the tune was a good balance to John. If Lennon's questioning spirit sometimes took him down sterile avant-garde dead-ends artistically ("Revolution 9" springs to mind), McCartney sometimes errs on the side of a certain naive sentimentalism. ("Yesterday," "Penny Lane," "Let It Be," etc.)
As they developed musically, two such strong personalities were bound to chafe against one another. And the pop music scene was the beneficiary of this struggle. Many of the songs written by one seems to be speaking to the other. In such rockers as "Helter Skelter" and "Why Don't We Do It In The Road?" Paul seems to be saying to John, "Hey, I can be just as raucous as you!" Meanwhile, John comes up with the quiet, melodious "Dear Prudence" or "Julia." Sometimes this game of one's-up-manship resulted in bad moves muscially. (My completely unscientific theory about Paul's song "Hello Goodbye" is that McCartney was trying to say something profound and interesting following John's "All You Need Is Love," but what come out was shallow and stupid.)
In the midst of this fertile partnership developed the wonderful talent of George Harrison. At first, maybe one or two of Harrison's clunkers was included grudgingly on each album. Harrison's interest in eastern mysticism seems to have helped him musically ("Within You Wthout You," "The Inner Light," etc.). By the end of the Beatles, Harrison's songwriting prowess had developed to such an extent that his first solo album was a triple album. Lennon and McCartney limiting Harrison to only a couple songs per album was ridiculous considering he was writing such songs as "Here Comes the Sun" and "Something." His "I Me Mine" is a brilliant statement on the quickly imploding band under the pressures of their collective egos. Sometimes this ego-driven conflict seems very petty. Can you imagine Harrison's "All Things Must Pass" on their Let It Be album? I think it would have come close to eclipsing McCartney's "Let It Be" as a statement on the end of the band. I think John and Paul's attitude toward George was bound to be rather patronizing as he was sort of the "younger brother" figure of the band.
Of the four, Ringo is the most difficult to discuss. He had less of his ego invested in the band's music than the other four. Hence, he emerged from the band the least drained. Of the four, he seems the most earthy. Ringo's songs tend to have a nice country twang to them.
Lennon's voice was the more strident of the two. Perhaps because of his chaotic life while growing up, John has the gift of the outsider. Unlike someone immersed in a particular way of life, John is capable of seeing through the lie that is this type of life. This self-styled "working-class hero" saw through the desire for a comfortable, middle-class suburban life after World War II as ultimately spiritually deadening. (This is reflected in such songs as "Strawberry Fields Forever," "Help!" "Day Tripper," "Nowhere Man," "The Word," "All You Need Is Love," "Imagine," etc.) Lennon's more "intense" approach to life can be reflected in the contrast between two early songs: "Please, Please Me" and "Love Me Do." The former, Lennon's, seems much more insistent on its approach to love--and also much more directly physical. The lyrical stance of McCartney's "Love Me Do" seems more relaxed. But in a way, also, more passive aggressive and manipulative ("You know I love you; I'll always be true" etc.) (It it's not already apparent, I favor Lennon over McCartney.)
If the appeal of Lennon's songs sometimes leans more toward the thoughtfulness of the lyrics at the expense of the melody, then McCartney's sheer genius when it came to the tune was a good balance to John. If Lennon's questioning spirit sometimes took him down sterile avant-garde dead-ends artistically ("Revolution 9" springs to mind), McCartney sometimes errs on the side of a certain naive sentimentalism. ("Yesterday," "Penny Lane," "Let It Be," etc.)
As they developed musically, two such strong personalities were bound to chafe against one another. And the pop music scene was the beneficiary of this struggle. Many of the songs written by one seems to be speaking to the other. In such rockers as "Helter Skelter" and "Why Don't We Do It In The Road?" Paul seems to be saying to John, "Hey, I can be just as raucous as you!" Meanwhile, John comes up with the quiet, melodious "Dear Prudence" or "Julia." Sometimes this game of one's-up-manship resulted in bad moves muscially. (My completely unscientific theory about Paul's song "Hello Goodbye" is that McCartney was trying to say something profound and interesting following John's "All You Need Is Love," but what come out was shallow and stupid.)
In the midst of this fertile partnership developed the wonderful talent of George Harrison. At first, maybe one or two of Harrison's clunkers was included grudgingly on each album. Harrison's interest in eastern mysticism seems to have helped him musically ("Within You Wthout You," "The Inner Light," etc.). By the end of the Beatles, Harrison's songwriting prowess had developed to such an extent that his first solo album was a triple album. Lennon and McCartney limiting Harrison to only a couple songs per album was ridiculous considering he was writing such songs as "Here Comes the Sun" and "Something." His "I Me Mine" is a brilliant statement on the quickly imploding band under the pressures of their collective egos. Sometimes this ego-driven conflict seems very petty. Can you imagine Harrison's "All Things Must Pass" on their Let It Be album? I think it would have come close to eclipsing McCartney's "Let It Be" as a statement on the end of the band. I think John and Paul's attitude toward George was bound to be rather patronizing as he was sort of the "younger brother" figure of the band.
Of the four, Ringo is the most difficult to discuss. He had less of his ego invested in the band's music than the other four. Hence, he emerged from the band the least drained. Of the four, he seems the most earthy. Ringo's songs tend to have a nice country twang to them.
