Log In
Register
5.26am
1 May 2010
Offline
Ok first of all, FIRST OF ALL. I love Paul McCartney . I love him. I saw him live and I was totally blown away. I was in a cloud for many weeks. Heck for many months.So if you plan to attack me, forget it. SunKing says We’re family so I know I can share my thoughs about Paul.
So having said this, I must admit this: After that discussion with Anderson and Paulsbass ardient defense of Ob-la-di, I thought “Why I don’t like it?”. So I decided to I scroll over Beatles’s to figure out think which classic ones I’m always like “mhhh..” a and my “less” favorite of him are Paul’s nice ones. Ok, please forgive me for categorize them in “nice” but I can’t find another word. I’m not including early Paul, example And I Love Her or Michelle .
Now I listen to the albums in order. I hardly ever shuffle the Beatles. But now my mp3 is broken, I don’t listen to albums that much anymore, because it takes too many steps to do so (I just sometimes choose all the songs and that’s it) And this morning I decided to play my less favorite Paul songs and I realized the problem. I don’t like them in the albums.
Revolver . We have that cheeky sexy Taxman . The amazing Eleanor Rigby . The bitter I’m Only Sleeping . The crazy Love You To . And then you give me Here There And Everywhere ?? A romantic song? I was always like “Okey…. Not until I heard an acoustic version of Here there and Everyhere I was blown away by it and now it’s one of my favorite Paul’s romantic songs.
Another example? Penny Lane . 
What? Mith didn’t like Penny Lane ? Yes, I love it. But I had to learn to do it. We have Strawberry Fields Forever,the song I said it was my favorite one when I was a kid. So I have Strawberry Fields.. and then Penny Lane . I recognize how brilliant the song is. But having it after Strawberry Fields.. was like.. no no. But after I started listening my Beatles in my stupid cellphone, I press “P”, I go to Penny Lane , and I love it at 100%
The same happens with Ob-la-di Ob-la-da. We have Back to the USSR, sexy Paul. Then we have the soulful John with Dear Prudence . Then we have kinky John with Glass Onion . And then Paul gives me a “nice” song?. That’s my problem. When I’m in the White Album , I want Paul to give me Helter Skelter , not Ob-la-di Ob-la-da. That’s why I don’t like Good Night that much either.
So what did I do? I started playing Ob-la-di Ob-la-da outside the context of the album and I think I’m digging it. It’s a nice song.. (see??) I found myself tapping the desk with the drums. So that was my problem. I guess next time I listen to the White Album , I won’t skip it.
So that was my problem with Paul’s nice songs. It’s a personal taste, and I’m not saying the Beatles were wrong with putting them in that order. I’m not going to presume I know better than them (Yes Paulsbass I learned my lesson). I think that it's easy for me to love John when he's sexy and dirty. Paul, being nice and clean, takes more time*.
Now, before someone points at me and say “You don’t like Paul”, think whatever you want. Everytime I listen to the intro Band On The Run I get the chills in my spine and the man gets me on his hand. Paul is one of the greatest musicians of all time, and I learned to love bass because of him. 
*Mhh I think I know what the problem with my love life is. Mith, stop looking for John 
Get a Paul!! 
LOL!! Or even better.. get George!! 
Here comes the sun….. Scoobie-doobie……
Something in the way she moves…..attracts me like a cauliflower…
Bop. Bop, cat bop. Go, Johnny, Go.
Beware of Darkness…
12.59pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline Im the opposite with ob-la-di. Outside the White Album its just ok, nothing to get excited about, eg on the Blue Album where its sandwiched between While My Guitar and Get Back . And its not something to decide to play. Yet on the White Album it works far better. Kind of like a bridge between Johns strange Glass Onion and the filler (tho not bad) Wild Honey Pie , as well as keeping the pace of the album going with Johns great piano intro (which makes the song).
As for Penny Lane i've tried to love it, see the acclaimed beauty that is there to nearly everyone, but it never transpires. Maybe its because Strawberry Fields always captivates. But then its on 1 and its not any more loveable. Its got better as its now not a 'oh no' moment, more an ok – its 'nice' (to steal a phrase).
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
1.29pm
16 February 2011
Offline I can see your point, Mith. It sometimes annoys me too how “nice” some of Paul's songs are. That is to say, I love Here There And Everywhere . But they are so sugary. If you listen to them too much, you will go out of your mind. Well, at least I will. But there's something different about Obladi. It just cracks me up. Obladi oblada life goes on brah! What does “brah” even mean? I have no idea. The whole song sounds like a musical parody to me. And that's why I like it.
3.33pm
1 December 2009
Offline
Haha, you have to ask about “brah” but apparently already know the meaning of “ob”, “la”, “di” and, perhaps “da” as well! 
GEORGE: In fact, The Detroit Sound. JOHN: In fact, yes. GEORGE: In fact, yeah. Tamla-Motown artists are our favorites. The Miracles. JOHN: We like Marvin Gaye. GEORGE: The Impressions PAUL & GEORGE: Mary Wells. GEORGE: The Exciters. RINGO: Chuck Jackson. JOHN: To name but eighty.
5.04pm
20 December 2010
Offline The thing with McCartney is that he writes a lot of 'Cute' songs that don't have a lot of depth. He is the master of writing catchy hooks in his songs which is pleasant and does cause you to sing along or tap your foot.
Harrison and Lennon wrote songs with a lot of emotion and feeling and pain. I guess it just depends on what kind of a song you like.
That is what was great about the Beatles. You have such a great mix of different styles.
The further one travels, the less one knows
6.03pm
1 May 2010
Offline I think there are many examples of a great “album” song versus a great song in general, especially on the White Album . I Will was always like that for me, I never really liked it that much because it's so buried on the White Album that I was too exhausted by the time it came on. Same thing with Mother Nature's Son, it just isn't placed very well behind the ferocity of Yer Blues . Now these two are probably my two favorites of Pauls.
Ob-la-di is a fun song, and I enjoy the sillyness of it, the “arm” and “leg” parts, the funny harmonies, the bizarre lyrics. Not a whole lot of substance there, but it's still fun.
I posted in Anderson's thread that I thought Lucy was their best song and I think that With a Little Help is one of the reasons why it's so great. I can't help but have a huge smile plastered on my face after listening to Ringo extend his range to its very limit at the end of that song, so the journey into Lucy is always shaped in that positive, happy mindset.
I think song placement is one of the least talked about important factors about how songs are viewed within the context of the album.
I sat on a rug, biding my time, drinking her wine
8.15pm
1 May 2010
Offline 
Phew good to know I'm not alone! I guess we would take DAYS discussing how to re-arrange the White Album .
BTW I did a little experiment today. I put Penny Lane before Strawberry Fields and it works beautifully. And that of Ob-la-di Ob-la-da as a parody… yeah I can see that…
Here comes the sun….. Scoobie-doobie……
Something in the way she moves…..attracts me like a cauliflower…
Bop. Bop, cat bop. Go, Johnny, Go.
Beware of Darkness…
8.16pm
4 December 2010
Offline I don't like Penny Lane much either. Weird right considering the name. But I realize I like a few of Paul's songs out of context, like Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da . Like when he plays it in concert or it plays by itself on my iPod, I love singing along. So cheery and uplifting and cheesy. Paul is very cheesy. Like nacho cheese cheesy. The same goes for songs like Your Mother Should Know and Got To Get You Into My Life . In context, his songs sometimes falls flat.
Ob-la-di isn't a bad song though.
Well we all shine on like the moon, the stars, and the sun.
8.18pm
4 September 2010
Offline I don't like “Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da “, because it's crap.
You all will have read that Dave Dee is no longer with us. But Mickey and Titch and I would like to carry on the good work that's always gone down in number two.
8.22pm
1 May 2010
Offline Well let's put it this way : If I need to have silly love songs in your life, why don't you get them from the best?
what's wrong with that? 
Here comes the sun….. Scoobie-doobie……
Something in the way she moves…..attracts me like a cauliflower…
Bop. Bop, cat bop. Go, Johnny, Go.
Beware of Darkness…
1.09am
23 January 2011
Offline mithveaen said:
Ok first of all, FIRST OF ALL. I love Paul McCartney . I love him. I saw him live and I was totally blown away. I was in a cloud for many weeks. Heck for many months.So if you plan to attack me, forget it. SunKing says We’re family so I know I can share my thoughs about Paul.
Mith…I feel bad that you feel you might have to censor yourself for me (or anyone else)! Plain and simple…don’t feel that need. I understand, and so do others, not liking a song. I don’t think you don’t like Ob-la-di just because it’s by Paul. That’s the reason I got so defensive with Anderson…because it seemed like he thought just because a song was by Paul or George that it COULDN’T POSSIBLY be first rate. Hon, I like Strawberry Fields Forever better than Penny Lane , too. It’s just too good of a song…one of John’s absolute best. I do enjoy Penny Lane and Ob-la-di, though. (I don’t think Ob-la-di is a masterpiece, but I like to sing it.)
On the issue of Paul being too sugary…a long time ago, I would have agreed with you. I used to hate love songs, but when they're by Paul, no matter how seemingly cheesy, I seem to like them, anyway (except My Love…don’t really like that one a lot). I was blown away the first time I heard Here, There, and Everywhere, much more so than the first time I heard Eleanor Rigby (strange, I know). I love the soft Mother Nature’s Sun and I Will . Maybe I wouldn’t if they weren’t done SO well, but they are done well, so I love them.
As for Paul not having any depth in his songs…it’s true there are some that have little to no depth (just like that is true of John and George. Savoy Truffle , anyone? Or Meat City?). I don’t think that is a bad thing, though. Sometimes it’s nice to just have a breather with a great song that you don’t have to think through. Just let the music (which is most always great, in Paul’s case) wash over you. There are, however, a lot of songs by Paul with lyrical depth in them (just like with John and George). The thing is, Paul’s most popular songs are the songs with little to no depth, making it seem as if there is none there at all. Another thing about depth with Paul is that it’s often buried in a nice tune, making it seem as if the song is a happy-go-lucky song. I think Paul is too subtle for most people to think he has any depth. He likes to hide it away and appear like he has no problems (except for a certain period in the 80s when he sings about domestic problems, with the help of Costello). If you don’t like that subterfuge, if you’d rather have in your face emotion, chances are, you’ll like John or George’s compositions better. And that’s OK. I just happen to be a little uncomfortable sometimes with all the naked emotion (especially during John’s primal scream therapy period. I recognize The Plastic Ono Band’s brilliance, but that doesn’t mean I’d put it on repeat like I would Band On The Run .).
I think the problem most Paul fans have with people who are strictly John or George fans, is that some of them (note I didn’t say ALL, because that is certainly not true! There are obviously many people here who celebrate the work of all four Beatles…as a group and solo) dismiss Paul’s work as being less than simply for the fact that the majority of it is happy. I like being happy. I don’t see why that’s a bad thing. I read somewhere the other day that Paul might as well be Justin Bieber…How???? can someone even suggest that?!?!?! Maybe if Bieber was a great melodist, multi-instrumentalist, and singer, and a good-great lyricist.
Anyway…I can totally see liking songs out of the album’s context (or in the album’s context). I used to not like Back In The USSR until I heard it open the White Album and realized it fit in very well. The thing with the White Album is that all the songs are so different that it’s hard to have a context. So I’ll talk about Sgt. Pepper ‘s instead. I don’t really care to listen to Good Morning Good Morning alone…but I don’t think I would skip it on the album. It fits in with the overall mood and psychedelia of the album. Same with Lucy. I don’t really care for that song, but it sounds great on Pepper. Back to the White Album …I wouldn’t choose Wild Honey Pie on its own, but I like it on the White Album because it shows that the album is just a hodgepodge of different songs…nothing on it sounds like something before it. Also…it’s just crazy! I dig crazy! I’m with you on Good Night , though. I wish John had sung it. I do refuse to listen to Rev. 9. I hate it with a passion. If they were going to make a sound collage, they could have at least made one that sounded pretty good. Rev. 9 just doesn’t, to me.
"You can manicure a cat but can you caticure a man?"
John Lennon- Skywriting by Word of Mouth
1.55am
20 September 2011
Offline I don't like Ob-la-di Ob-la-da most of the time because for some reason Paul's singalong-type “kiddie” songs, like Yellow Submarine and All Together Now , really irritate me. It's just a personal preference, and I know he's trying to be whimsical, but I wish he'd stick to things that take more obvious talent, because he IS a great songwriter and I really don't see that as much on the “cheesy” stuff. Funnily enough, when I saw him live I sang along to Ob-la-di at the top of my lungs like everybody else. That's probably why these sorts of songs are still very popular. People just can't help singing along.
"Now and then, though, someone does begin to grow differently. Instead of down, his feet grow up toward the sky. But we do our best to discourage awkward things like that."
"What happens to them?" insisted Milo.
"Oddly enough, they often grow ten times the size of everyone else," said Alec thoughtfully, "and I’ve heard that they walk among the stars."
–The Phantom Tollbooth
2.44am
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline Paul could and still can write a hook in a song that will grab you. Why on earth is Uncle Abert such a brilliant song? Because it brings you in and youre wrapped up in singing it without knowing, same with ob-la-di, Hello Goodbye , yellow submarine, Your Mother Should Know . There is nothing to the lyrics but why should it matter. I dont think anyone else could ever write so many little bits, stick them together and come up with something good.
If anything its why the beatles are so unique. Which band can go from taxman to eleanor to im only sleeping to love you etc yet make the album flow effortlessly? And even more so with an album that contains 30 songs which have very little to do with each other.
Unfortunately there is nowadays the idea that everything John ever wrote was piled deep with emotion and worldy and free talking or simply incredible (I Am The Walrus ), and Yoko perpetuates that idea. Whilst everything Paul wrote was simply catchy. But John was honest enough to say songs like Its Only Love, And Your Bird Can Sing , When I Get Home were garbage (so bad he laughs and plays with the words in the song because the lyrics are so terrible), empty and filler respectively (by the way i love all three), plus that by the time of 1973 he was writing and recording because he thought that was what he was (and a reason why he stopped recording).
Regarding Good Night i doubt John could have saved it, probably the weakest song of the 30, the weakest closer on any beatles lp and Ringo's worst beatle song (worse than With A Little Help which really grates on me)
.
Revolution 9 doesnt bother me, apart from when played loud in earphones. I dont get any urge to play it but im not sure youre meant to. Actually The White Album works really well as 28 songs ending with Pauls Can You Take Me Back snippet (and yes im aware of what i said above).
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
5.20am
1 May 2010
Offline Oh no no no no no Kedame I didn't say that for you trust me.
You have to understand that despite I'm an English teacher, sometimes I get lost when I try to express my ideas in written English. (And even more when I'm not wearing my glasses 
) That's why I edit a lot my messages.
I knew the message I was going to write was going to sound as a critic to Paul's work. But it was not at all like that. That's why I wrote that loong disclaimer.
And don't think I worship all John's songs. “Good Morning Good Morning ” is a perfect example. Good one to wake up with though. 
Here comes the sun….. Scoobie-doobie……
Something in the way she moves…..attracts me like a cauliflower…
Bop. Bop, cat bop. Go, Johnny, Go.
Beware of Darkness…
5.33am
4 November 2010
Offline As has been mentioned earlier, Paul was a genius at writing incredibly catchy tunes, with most of them (but by no means all) having less serious* lyrics, while John's songs are more raw and may be more intense. This in no way means that Paul is the inferior songwriter! In fact, when you think about it, whose songs do you think of when you think of the Beatles? Hey Jude . Penny Lane . Let it Be. And what do all of these songs have in common? The fact that they were written by Paul.
It's the same with solo work- even as a big-time Beatles fan, until recently I was highly unfamiliar with all but Paul's solo work. Band On The Run , anyone? That album is filled entirely with light-hearted fun. And this is a good thing!!!
I will always be more of a John fan than a Paul fan, but they are geniuses in their own respective ways. And of course George, too, but that's a slightly different debate.
*I can't say that they're any less meaningful, because they are-just in a different way.
5.40am
23 January 2011
Offline CranberrySauce said:
As has been mentioned earlier, Paul was a genius at writing incredibly catchy tunes, with most of them (but by no means all) having less serious* lyrics, while John's songs are more raw and may be more intense. This in no way means that Paul is the inferior songwriter! In fact, when you think about it, whose songs do you think of when you think of the Beatles? Hey Jude . Penny Lane . Let it Be. And what do all of these songs have in common? The fact that they were written by Paul.
It's the same with solo work- even as a big-time Beatles fan, until recently I was highly unfamiliar with all but Paul's solo work. Band On The Run , anyone? That album is filled entirely with light-hearted fun. And this is a good thing!!!
I will always be more of a John fan than a Paul fan, but they are geniuses in their own respective ways. And of course George, too, but that's a slightly different debate.
*I can't say that they're any less meaningful, because they are-just in a different way.
Yes, yes…great thoughts all. See…it's possible to respect one's talent while liking another more! I love this post. I feel the exact same way, but opposite…more of a Paul fan but understand John's genius.
Also, Mith, I'm sorry I misunderstood you. Sometimes I feel like a broken record…”Paul. Paul. Paul. Paul. Paul.” I can understand how it must get annoying, but I just love his music so much that I want to share it with everyone! And don't worry about having to edit…I edited that last post like three times!
"You can manicure a cat but can you caticure a man?"
John Lennon- Skywriting by Word of Mouth
5.47am
1 May 2010
Offline Well Kedame all my family is like “Why you're always like “George George George George George..”
Umb. I think we got our mantras LOL!! 
Here comes the sun….. Scoobie-doobie……
Something in the way she moves…..attracts me like a cauliflower…
Bop. Bop, cat bop. Go, Johnny, Go.
Beware of Darkness…
6.04am
1 May 2010
Offline DoctorRobert said:
I don’t like “Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da “, because it’s crap.
I wouldn't say Ob-la-di is crap, Birthday might be crap because it was written purely as a sort of “hit piece” to be played for birthdays. And, sure enough, go to most sporting events and whenever birthdays are being announced, you'll hear that riff, which is a cool riff btw. But in the same respect Power To The People or even Give Peace A Chance could be viewed as crap because they essentially have the same motive. Ob-la-di is an attempt at a fun song, and I let it go because it's not trying to fill some other purpose, even if it isn't exactly one of my favorites.
I think lyrical depth is a point a lot of people are trying to get across in their posts, and I suppose we should define what we think lyrical depth actually means. To me, when something has depth lyrically, there is a level of self truth and honesty in the words. Art is just a reflection of culture, and so the lyrics that I really like hold a mirror up to society and show its reflection from a unique perspective. My problem with some of Paul's lyrics is that he tries to mask them way too much. An example would be Blackbird which Paul repeatedly explains was written for the civil rights movement. But my problem is that he has to continue repeating this, he repeated this at the concert I attended a year ago which would lead me to believe that he repeats this story at other concerts. So the question has to come, why does he have to keep repeating what he meant in the song? Simple answer, his message was not clear enough in the song and the lyrics are misinterpeted from his perspective. Had I not read on this site who Paul wrote that song for, not in a million years would I have thought that song was meant for anyone other than a sad, lonely Blackbird . I'm not trying to take anything away from the song, it's a beautiful song with really nice guitar playing and I love it.
Now I realize that the counter-argument will be that Paul individualizes his messages and each listener can get a different sort of inspiration from his songs and I accept and respect that. But, I don't know, it's just hard because John and George were so far the opposite way. We all came to the Beatles in a different way and grew with them and our tastes eventually evolved because of those guys. But at a certain point, you tend to lean in a particular direction and it's just natural because we all like different things. So because of my love of John's unbelievable ability to express emotion in his songs, I have a deep appreciation for people like Otis Redding, Ray Charles and Billie Holiday because they all have that same emotional ability and they are more about feeling than anything. I can feel them and I like their songs because they aren't about fictional characters, they are “Look At Me ? Who am I supposed to be?” and this is the type of music that affects me. It doesn't mean that they are sad and depressed all the time, but, you know, singing the blues will never go out of style because there will always be something going wrong.
So I just think the differences come because of how the styles of these guys are almost polar opposites and this makes it difficult for certain people to appreciate someone at the other end of the emotional spectrum. I love Paul because he is who he is, he's a musician at heart who loves to make music and will hopefully do so for as long as he's alive. If he wants to write a silly love song then fine, a whole bunch of people enjoy those songs because we all have different tastes and have been shaped differently.
I sat on a rug, biding my time, drinking her wine
11.43am
4 September 2010
Offline I tell you what though, I don't mind the Anthology acoustic guitar heavy version, so I guess my main problem lies within the sort of boppy ska-knock off backing. Also, John's remarks crack me up on the Anthology version.
You all will have read that Dave Dee is no longer with us. But Mickey and Titch and I would like to carry on the good work that's always gone down in number two.
5.41pm
4 December 2010
Offline DoctorRobert said:
I don’t like “Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da “, because it’s crap.
I was holding off from making a very similar post.
I prefer the Anthology version, but I’m not sure if that’s actually because the Anthology version is any good or because it’s a familiar song played in a less bad way. The faster tempo hides some of the lyrical weakness, I prefer Paul’s vocal, and the saxophone is better than anything in the original.
I told her I didn’t
