Hey Dullblog article: Plea to Paul: Let it be when it comes to claiming credit | Page 4 | Paul McCartney | Fab forum

Please consider registering
Guest

Log In Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —

  

— Match —

   

— Forum Options —

   

Wildcard usage:
*  matches any number of characters    %  matches exactly one character

Minimum search word length is 4 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

Hey Dullblog article: Plea to Paul: Let it be when it comes to claiming credit
22 January 2014
8.10am
Musketeer Gripweed (kezron9)
Coldspring Harbor, NY
Carnegie Hall
Forum Posts: 208
Member Since:
17 January 2014
Offline
61

Billy Rhythm said
It carries "the whole rhythm track" because there's not much else there but circus music and a basic drum track, it sticks out more because there's no guitars, just because it's "One of the hardest baselines he's done" doesn't automatically qualify it for "ownership" of the song, nobody's EVER disputed that Paul contributed the bass part for this song, so there's no need to "reclaim ownership", Ringo contributed the drum part, should he also make a similar statement on his next tour?  The irony is that John himself distanced himself from "ownership" by admitting that he copied the lyrics word for word from the poster, the song was all ready credited to Lennon AND McCartney, sorry but I missed the part where Paul didn't get proper credit for his work on that song.  There's very few Beatles' songs where Paul didn't contribute a great bassline (and many of them are "hard to play") so by this logic he has a lot of "ownership to reclaim" for future shows, 'Everybody's Got Something To Hide Except For Me & My Monkey', 'Glass Onion', 'I Want You (She's So Heavy)', the list goes on.  Ringo had best get started straight away as well, yikes…:-)

I dont agree with Paul taking credit, but yes EXACTLY its only really Paul who plays the instruments for the rhythym and melody.  I am trying to figure out why he feels the need to say it was a very collaborative song. So my bet it would be because on this track he plays bass, lead guitar, and piano. 

22 January 2014
8.30am
Billy Rhythm
Shea Stadium
Forum Posts: 453
Member Since:
22 December 2013
Offline
62

Again, Paul played multiple tracks on many Beatles' recordings, he's trying to focus on the fact that he was there during its creation in John's work room.  No different from the 'I Feel Fine' example I used where George was also present during its creation, if you missed the quote on the other page, here it is again:

 

I'll tell you exactly how that came about. We were crossing Scotland in the back of an Austin Princess, singing 'Matchbox' (Carl Perkins) in three-part harmony. And it turned into 'I Feel Fine.' The guitar part was from Bobby Parker's 'Watch Your Step,' just a bastardized version.
—George Harrison, Musician Magazine, March 1990, p. 34, 1990

 

All of them could've easily played the "rewriting history" card by using the same logic Paul uses, it's not like Paul is underrated or anything, but he's beginning to sound a bit overrated by the stroke of his own brush here…:-)

22 January 2014
2.29pm
Musketeer Gripweed (kezron9)
Coldspring Harbor, NY
Carnegie Hall
Forum Posts: 208
Member Since:
17 January 2014
Offline
63

Yeah so John nicked the Riff and did all the lyrics and George was sitting there…I don't think Paul would simply make something up. I think hes just trying to take credit that is due that he never received. I would take Pauls account that he helped with the lyrics and was a major part in shaping the song. But who knows his memory could be shot it was during there crazy period. I don't think Paul feels he gets enough credit he deserves for Peppers. The meter swings towards Paul on this album but he doesn't get credit bc he didnt write the trippier/weird songs. Paul basically came up with the guitar sound (stolen from Jimi Hendricks) and plays possibly the finest bass ever recorded for an album. George really wasnt even needed for this album. So Pauls playing brought the album to life but gets over shadowed by John who wrote the weirder  tracks. Petty because real musicians can tell but the average ear can't.  

22 January 2014
4.02pm
Billy Rhythm
Shea Stadium
Forum Posts: 453
Member Since:
22 December 2013
Offline

Yeah, I have to disagree on Paul not getting "enough credit he deserves for Peppers" as well.  It's long been established (even before Lennon's tragic death) that Paul was the driving force behind the 'Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band' album, George Martin & John Lennon's interviews on the subject all largely credit Paul for the idea, or "concept" behind it, and in the case of 'Being For The Benefit of Mr. Kite' he was given writing credit on the original album.  Perhaps it's just Paul's wording that makes this not sit so well with many, after all, despite his pension for great music & lyrics, he's not the best interview in the world really.  The phrase "reclaiming ownership" in particular is a poor choice of words, it implies that the song was taken from him and given to somebody else which wasn't the case, and as others have stated in this thread, Paul "setting the record straight" on Lennon/McCartney's history when the other isn't around anymore to confirm/refute his claims doesn't help his cause.  It's not like 'Being For The Benefit of Mr. Kite' is the only example of Paul "reclaiming ownership", check out these seemingly contradicting quotes involving three Lennon/McCartney 'Rubber Soul' songs:

 

 

IN MY LIFE(Lennon/McCartney)

JOHN 1980: "It was the first song I wrote that was consciously about my life. (Sings) 'There are places I'll remember/ All my life though some have changed…' Before, we were just writing songs a la Everly Brothers, Buddy Holly -- pop songs with no more thought to them than that. The words were almost irrelevant. 'In My Life' started out as a bus journey from my house at 250 Menlove Avenue to town, mentioning every place I could remember. I wrote it all down and it was ridiculous… it was the most boring sort of 'What I Did On My Holiday's Bus Trip' song and it wasn't working at all. But then I laid back and these lyrics started coming to me about the places I remember. Paul helped with the middle-eight. It was, I think, my first real major piece of work. Up till then it had all been sort of glib and throw-away. And that was the first time I consciously put my literary part of myself into the lyric."

PAUL 1984: "I think I wrote the tune to that; that's the one we slightly dispute. John either forgot or didn't think I wrote the tune. I remember  he had the words, like a poem… sort of about faces he remembered. I recall going off for half an hour and sitting with a Mellotron he had, writing the tune… which was Miracles inspired, as I remember. In fact, a lot of stuff was then."

 

GIRL(Lennon/McCartney)

JOHN 1980: "That's me, writing about this dream girl-- the one that hadn't come yet. It was Yoko."

PAUL circa-1994: "It was John's original idea, but it was very much co-written. I remember writing 'the pain and pleasure,' and 'a man must break his back.' …It was amusing to see if we could get a naughty word on the record. The Beach Boys had a song out where they'd done 'la la la la' and we loved the innocence of that and wanted to copy it but not use the same phrase. So we were looking around for another phrase-- 'dit dit dit dit,' which we decided to change it in our waggishness to 'tit tit tit tit.' And it gave us a laugh. It was good to get some light relief in the middle of this real big career that we were forging. If we could put in something that was a little bit subversive then we would. George Martin would say, 'Was that dit-dit or tit-tit you were singing?' 'Oh! dit-dit George, but it does sound a bit like that, doesn't it?' Then we'd get in the car and break down laughing."

 

Norwegian Wood(Lennon/McCartney)

JOHN 1980: "'Norwegian Wood' is my song completely. It was about an affair I was having. I was very careful and paranoid because I didn't want my wife, Cyn, to know that there really was something going on outside of the household. I'd always had some kind of affairs going on, so I was trying to be sophisticated in writing about an affair… but in such a smoke-screen way that you couldn't tell. But I can't remember any specific woman it had to do with."
PAUL 1985: "It was me who decided in 'Norwegian Wood' that the house should burn down… not that it's any big deal."

 

 

 

23 January 2014
12.32am
Musketeer Gripweed (kezron9)
Coldspring Harbor, NY
Carnegie Hall
Forum Posts: 208
Member Since:
17 January 2014
Offline
65

I think his quote has been blown out of proportion. In my life chords are definitely more Johns style but the melody definitely has a Mccartney influence. Paul simply made a suggestion for the ending for Norwegian Wood…and says it wasn't a huge contribution himself. I think Paul is just trying to say it was a real collaborative partnership. I've heard even George Martin say they didnt really write together past '64 which is B.S. John also played down the partnership after the break up. Paul also did the intro for Lucy and Strawberry Fields. John did the intro for Ob La Di. I think Paul is just trying to say it was a real partnership. There are very few songs with no input from the other. John did later admit that they were definitely working together in one interview about two days before his death, think it was the great Playboy interview. John also claims that I Saw Her Standing There was a song by his estranged fiance, but Paul says it is one of the first they wrote together. So they clearly had different views on what qualifies as a contribution to writing a song. 

23 January 2014
1.04am
meanmistermustard
Moderator



Forum Posts: 9765
Member Since:
1 May 2011
Offline
66

I think John's comment on I Saw Her Standing There was more about Paul singing it than who wrote it, and ISHST being thought of as one of Paul's signature songs in the Beatles.

"Well, probably we'll sell less records, less people'll go to see the film, we'll write less songs, and we'll all die of failure" (John Lennon 8/64)
23 January 2014
1.52am
Musketeer Gripweed (kezron9)
Coldspring Harbor, NY
Carnegie Hall
Forum Posts: 208
Member Since:
17 January 2014
Offline
67

Yeah Mustard hard to tell what he means can't remember if its mentioned in the Playboy interview. Wish Elton would release video of it. Apparently all his shows were recorded on video. Also uncle was there and confirmed there was a video crew. Anyone see Johns Sir Lew Grade performance? Its hilarious how he has backing band dressed.

23 January 2014
11.30am
meanmistermustard
Moderator



Forum Posts: 9765
Member Since:
1 May 2011
Offline
68

kezron9 said
Yeah Mustard hard to tell what he means can't remember if its mentioned in the Playboy interview. Wish Elton would release video of it. Apparently all his shows were recorded on video. Also uncle was there and confirmed there was a video crew. Anyone see Johns Sir Lew Grade performance? Its hilarious how he has backing band dressed.

A fan recorded some of that nights show, managed to capture John's entrance and some of the performance, and put it on youtube a year or two back. Sadly it was snapped up by either Yoko or Elton and taken down.

We do have the audio of that Thanksgiving Concert however so can hear John's "finance" intro. 

"Well, probably we'll sell less records, less people'll go to see the film, we'll write less songs, and we'll all die of failure" (John Lennon 8/64)
23 January 2014
4.34pm
Billy Rhythm
Shea Stadium
Forum Posts: 453
Member Since:
22 December 2013
Offline

kezron9 said
John did the intro for Ob La Di.

There's a line here though that you're crossing, 'Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da' was "written" BEFORE the song entered the studio and John had nothing to do with its creation.  According to George Martin, they had been working on 'Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da' for quite some time in the studio and were "having a bit of difficulty with it" (witness the 'Anthology' version which took 3 days) before "John walked in, slightly stoned, and went over to the house piano and said, 'O.K. here we go, 1, 2, 3, 4!'" and started banging away on the piano.  Session musicians do this kinda stuff all of the time for people's songs and don't get "writing" credit, Ringo "did the intro" for 'Birthday' and doesn't get, nor does he expect, "writing" credit.  The point here that I'm trying to get across is that Paul DOES get a lot of credit for his contributions, but evidently it's not enough for him.

 

Perhaps the problem stems from the fact that John's name always came first in the Lennon/McCartney "branding" and Paul's insecure about this being mistranslated by people as John being the "chief" writer, who knows, but if anyone has a legit beef about not getting enough credit for his contributions to the songs it would be George, or even Ringo.  Paul has often been labeled as the most prolific songwriter in history, and much of that "body of work" is comprised of John Lennon songs where he didn't have so much a hand in creating but simply played on, just as George and Ringo did.  Like the original article says, "Let it be when it comes to claiming credit", there's enough contradicting interviews from various sources all ready that Paul doesn't need to further add to the confusion, in my opinion…:-)

23 January 2014
5.34pm
Ron Nasty
"Where have you been?" "I'm not telling you..."
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 3032
Member Since:
17 December 2012
Offline
70

I do dislike the claim for Paul being the "most prolific" songwriter of all time, and it's not a claim I really seen made for him. He is often cited, quite rightly, as the "most successful" songwriter of all time. The "most prolific" though? I would say that Dylan outstrips him easily. And it wouldn't surprise me if someone like Zappa outstrips both of them.

kezron9, a bit of a correction on Mr. Kite. Paul does not play lead guitar, bass guitar, and piano. There is no lead guitar on Mr. Kite. Paul played acoustic guitar and bass. All the keyboard parts (piano, harmonium, and Hammond organ) were played by George Martin, with the exception of the Lowrey organ which was played by John.

"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
23 January 2014
6.38pm
acmac
Carnegie Hall
Forum Posts: 231
Member Since:
1 August 2013
Offline

I think y'all are missing the crucial bit of context of this quote from Paul. He wanted to add the song to his live show, and therefore felt the need to preemptively defend himself from those who would have sprung up all HOW DARE HE PERFORM ONE OF JOHN'S SONGS, so he wanted to say, hey, I was there in the room, I contributed a bit to the melody/arrangement/whatever ("it's partly mine") and so I have a right to sing it. That he went overboard and got a little bit overly defensive is unfortunate but not surprising and, IMO, not something we should hold against him, considering all the unfair criticism he's taken for a very long time. 

23 January 2014
7.17pm
Ron Nasty
"Where have you been?" "I'm not telling you..."
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 3032
Member Since:
17 December 2012
Offline

Context is, indeed, everything. I agree with you there, acmac. However, you can pick and choose your context. You can approach it as an isolated incident, or you can see it as the latest in a string of events where Paul has tried to altar and redefine his contribution to the Lennon/McCartney songwriting partnership.

As I have said before, the big mistake that Paul made, that made people cynical about his motives, was the McCartney/Lennon credit change he tried to make on some songs. Yes, songs we know were wholly or mainly his, but something that broke the agreement they had made all those years ago.

That one poor decision, acting as if we didn't know Yesterday was his without him reversing the credit, has sadly left his motives under legitimate question – especially when one half of the partnership is no longer here to challenge the assertions of the other half.

"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
23 January 2014
10.45pm
Musketeer Gripweed (kezron9)
Coldspring Harbor, NY
Carnegie Hall
Forum Posts: 208
Member Since:
17 January 2014
Offline
73

 

There actually not sure who was on Piano, more Paul or Johns style. I could be wrong but I thought it was Paul playing an electric guitar at 1:16. But he could still play lead on accoustic. Billy Johns Piano intro continues throughout the whole song and altered the whole track. I do not consider all intros to qualify them as a writer but in some cases like Ob la di and Lucy in the Sky the intros carry throughout the songs while altering it musically. There is a drastic difference musically after Johns intro. I think some of the contradictions have to do with John and Paul having different opinions on what qualifies as contributing to the writing and authorship of a song. John is not as detailed so if John contributed a single line he wouldnt feel it was co-written, while Paul is always quoted saying 80-20. John Im guessing would feel 20 % wasn't a worthy enough contribution to consider it co-written. Overall though I love he added it to set anyone here news on a 2014 tour? I hope he plays Madison Square Garden or Barcalys if he doesss

Also, Acmac I completely agree. Paul has a history of poor choice of words. They had a very unique partnership as in both could contribute to any and every part of a song.They worked together to create the best music possible. I don't think he should have to defend or explain why he is singing a song that was Johns original idea.

A little off topic but, MJA you referenced Pauls Picassos Last Words, that was a song ordered on request which is what John wasnt about. John said he could write a song about anything, but that would make him a crafts man which he was not interested in being. Its in one of his last interviews maybe Playboy.  He was interested in writing about himself and writing inspired music, which really made his songs and style unique. Thats why I guess he considered himself to be in a funk in 66-67. Thats my last statement on that topic.

23 January 2014
10.52pm
Billy Rhythm
Shea Stadium
Forum Posts: 453
Member Since:
22 December 2013
Offline
74

kezron9 said
Billy you also thought George created the riff for I Feel Fine. Apparently it was done in studio while they were recording Eight Days A Week I believe.

That's John's recollection, but George's version tells a completely different tale from the quote that I supplied earlier, they were nowhere near the recording studio when the song was first created according to George.  'I Feel Fine' is a good example of the point I was trying to make, Ringo & George did significantly more to make that song what it is than Paul did, their contributions "continue throughout the whole song and effect the rhythm track" (Your "theory") yet they received no writing credits, but Paul does for a bass line that's about as simple and basic as any he'd ever played, for every song that Paul feels duped by the general public's perceptions ("John wrote that"), there's another song where he's given writing credit for doing the same, or in the case of 'I Feel Fine', less than what George and Ringo did and got no writing credit.

acmac said
I think y'all are missing the crucial bit of context of this quote from Paul. He wanted to add the song to his live show, and therefore felt the need to preemptively defend himself from those who would have sprung up all HOW DARE HE PERFORM ONE OF JOHN'S SONGS, so he wanted to say, hey, I was there in the room, I contributed a bit to the melody/arrangement/whatever ("it's partly mine") and so I have a right to sing it. That he went overboard and got a little bit overly defensive is unfortunate but not surprising and, IMO, not something we should hold against him, considering all the unfair criticism he's taken for a very long time. 

 

Paul puts himself into this position by treading into "sacred territory", he was most careful in selecting Beatles songs to perform at a Paul McCartney show while John was still alive, look at 'Wings Over America', 'The Long And Winding Road', 'Lady Madonna', 'I've Just Seen A Face', 'Blackbird' & 'Yesterday', 5 Beatles' songs which are undisputedly his and absolutely no objections from John or anybody else for that matter.  Of course he has "a right to sing it ('Being For The Benefit of Mr. Kite&#39a-hard-days-night-george-10", but he could just as easily have "defended" the choice by saying that he really likes this song and thought that the fans would enjoy hearing it performed live by a Beatle for the very first time, in addition to his words about the "challenging bass line", even the most hardened Lennon supporters would've accepted this explanation and no more questions would've been asked.  It's like the 'Norwegian Wood' quote by him I posted, "not that it's any big deal", well if it wasn't "any big deal" then why bother even mentioning it for he must realise by now that every little word that comes out of his mouth is going to be viewed under a very high powered microscope…:-)

 

 

 

23 January 2014
11.40pm
Musketeer Gripweed (kezron9)
Coldspring Harbor, NY
Carnegie Hall
Forum Posts: 208
Member Since:
17 January 2014
Offline
75

Billy I Feel Fine was Johns Riff and his lyrics. Its actually Johns and Pauls recollection that it was mostly done in Studio while everyone was working on another track. I was simply trying to suggest ideas as to why Paul feels so strongly to add this to his set. I feel fine is a riff driven song, which already had the melody and lyrics done that George and Ringo did not contribute to creating. My theory was for this track(Maybe you'll understand if you listen to the isolated bass track). I was getting at since Paul is really the only one playing on Kite he must of composed the majority of the music and melody. Contributing to the creation is way different then being a supporting player which is all George and Ringo were. They were supporting players period. They did not contribute to the creation of the melody and lyrics of Mr Kite or I feel fine (George played tamboura on Mr Kite LOL)   John had lyrics and no idea  how to put music to it he described a circus atmosphere. Paul claims to have helped with the lyrics and was huge in creating the music for Mr. Kite (hence playing most the instruments) Definitely helped with the arrangement. Thats different then being told what to play which is why George was unhappy in the group. It is also known that Paul would over dub the drum tracks most of the time. I was trying to use reason to figure why he feels somewhat possessive over this track opposed tracks. So Billy do you understand the difference between composing and a supporting musician now?

24 January 2014
12.27am
Billy Rhythm
Shea Stadium
Forum Posts: 453
Member Since:
22 December 2013
Offline
76

kezron9 said
My theory was for this track(Maybe you'll understand if you listen to the isolated bass track). I was getting at since Paul is really the only one playing on Kite he must of composed the majority of the music and melody.  

Haha, why don't you give this a read  http://www.beatlesbible.com/so…..f-mr-kite/  and maybe I'll take you a little more seriously after that, even Ringo did more tracks than Paul on 'Being For The Benefit of Mr. Kite'…:-) 

24 January 2014
12.32am
Musketeer Gripweed (kezron9)
Coldspring Harbor, NY
Carnegie Hall
Forum Posts: 208
Member Since:
17 January 2014
Offline
77

More tracks doesnt mean he composed the melody….

24 January 2014
12.47am
Musketeer Gripweed (kezron9)
Coldspring Harbor, NY
Carnegie Hall
Forum Posts: 208
Member Since:
17 January 2014
Offline
78

His drumming is echoing Pauls bass line….who do you think most likely composed it to have Ringo echo there bass line. This track is of a different bread. You have to have a musical background and knowledge to under stand how this track was composed musically. You also have to have an in depth knowledge of the Beatles and there production techniques. Plus even John said Ringo wasn't even the best drummer in The Beatles. I wouldn't be surprised if Paul did some of the drumming. Plus more tracks on one instrument means Ringo was having a hard time on this track or needed many tracks to get the drumming the way they wanted. It has a tough off beat but Iam not personally impressed with the drumming.  It is known Ringo couldn't do a drum roll. Doing a fill echoing the bass in noway means that Ringo contributed to composing the melody and music. I am a John fan, but it is clear musically this track has more of a Paul influence. I don't understand the hate on Paul, Peppers was his baby. 

24 January 2014
12.56am
Ron Nasty
"Where have you been?" "I'm not telling you..."
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 3032
Member Since:
17 December 2012
Offline
79

kezron9 said 
My theory was for this track(Maybe you'll understand if you listen to the isolated bass track). I was getting at since Paul is really the only one playing on Kite he must of composed the majority of the music and melody.

kezron9 said
More tracks doesnt mean he composed the melody….

So, which is it? We all know Paul suggested lead guitar lines to George, and drum tracks to Ringo, are you suggesting that John could not have said to Paul on Mr. Kite, "This is what I want you to play for me"…?

Were those George guitar lines, and Ringo drum parts, because they played them, or Paul's because he said what he wanted. You are arguing that John could not have told Paul what he wanted Paul to play because he considered Paul the person to play it!

You are contradicting yourself! I am losing sight of your argument!

"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
24 January 2014
12.59am
Billy Rhythm
Shea Stadium
Forum Posts: 453
Member Since:
22 December 2013
Offline
80

mja6758 said 

I love Paul. One of my favourite songwriters ever, I just wish he'd stop telling us about his huge contributions to Lennon songs that he wasn't claiming when John was alive to challenge him. There are McCartney that I hear Lennon twists in, that John always said were all Paul, whatever we as fans might think. I just have a problem with Paul's statements since John's death, when there is no longer any credible challenge, being taken as gospel.

Especially when I have heard Paul make two statements, one about an event and another about a song, that were palpably wrong, but that he was not challenged over because he was Paul McCartney.

The easiest one to address is a remark he made to the BBC Radio One series McCartney on McCartney, and it's something he said in other arenas as well, that the intelligent decision The Beatles made was not to go to America until they had a Number One there. Except we all know that things like the Ed Sullivan contract was signed long before they had a sniff of a Number One in America. If they were not Number One in America in February 1964, they would not be turning around and saying, "Sorry, Brian, you promised us, we're not getting on the plane."

I would like to see Paul sit down and be interviewed by someone happy to ask hard questions and be challenged.

But that's stopped happening, and so I say it is the responsibility of places like here to question his version of events.

 

This pretty much gets at the root of the problems stemming from these claims, and the Brian Epstein example that you give is suspect for the same reasons in that Brian isn't around to confirm its authenticity…:-)

Forum Timezone: Europe/London

Most Users Ever Online: 597

Currently Online: Expert Textpert, Ahhh Girl, Annadog40, Mr. Kite, Beatleva, Bulldog
52 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

meanmistermustard: 9765

mr. Sun king coming together: 6916

parlance: 5109

Ahhh Girl: 4956

mithveaen: 4651

Annadog40: 4148

Zig: 4100

Mr. Kite: 3679

Ron Nasty: 3032

fabfouremily: 2934

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 88

Members: 2594

Moderators: 4

Admins: 2

Forum Stats:

Groups: 3

Forums: 34

Topics: 3159

Posts: 134039

Newest Members: Mazza, AllMyLoving, KenO, mrneil2, macdog

Moderators: Ahhh Girl (4956), meanmistermustard (9765), Zig (4100), Joe (3452)

Administrators: Joe (3452), Ellie (1)

Members Birthdays
Today: None
Upcoming: None