Log In
Register
Home
Topic RSS
4.53pm
Ok
My moms favorite song is Hey Jude. Its considered by many to be there most essential song, there greatest composition, along with Yesterday and the Pepper Album.
Now im NOT downing on them, i love em. But if you notice, Jude and Yesterday are both by paul. Most of pepper is Paul, and Yesterday only has Paul on it.
This has lead my mother to belive that the Beatles are ment to represent McCartney, hes the leader, the best, has the best voice, is the best musician, and is all around better then the others. This is simply not true!
Paul is a bassist. George and John are much better guitarists, and John is deffinetly the leader. I could go on and on…
what are your thoughts?
6.57pm
13 November 2009
Offline
And you're basing this on what instruments they played? I think it was more of a partnership/ friendly rivalry between Paul and John that gave the group direction. If that makes them the "leaders", then I guess they led the band.
7.18pm
14 December 2009
Offline
For pure musicianship & compositional ability, Paul McCartney stands the tallest. His bass & keyboard skills were unsurpassed, he contributed the finest guitar solos to be heard on a Beatles recording, and "Dear Prudence" shows that he could certainly hold his own with Ringo, drumwise. But I don't think there's any question that Lennon was the leader, even if he did nothing other than start the damn band.
1.39am
21 August 2009
Offline
As much as I'd like to say there isn't one, that everyone had equal footing, it's not true. Personally, for the beginning of their career, I don't think anyone stood out for me as leader, though. Yes, John was the obvious "leader" per se of the group, but I think the fact that they were all new to the game and life of a music career kind of leveled them all a bit. Sure, Paul and John were more leaders than George and Ringo if anything, but at that time, no one really took the stand. They were kind of herded around like sheep, told what to wear and how to act, so, to me, no one really stepped up and took that position. BUT if by leader you mean purely and only "head" of the Beatles, I would say John, because it was him who first started the band/rounded up the members. He got them started, and had the backbone to keep it going.
Post Brian's death, I would say Paul took the lead. All the way until Abbey Road, he was the force behind them. He would rally them, like, "come on, lads" and just remind them of what they were in the first place; the Beatles. So, they carried on with music in their own ways, yes, but under Paul's supervision and guidance, I think. He kept them steady until it was too hard for him to stabilize the band on his own.
I hope that was coherent, I think I rambled for ages!
3.43am
In the early years, John dominated things as Paul never did in the later years. He was the main songwriter for their first six albums, including A HARD DAY'S NIGHT, which is practically a John Lennon solo album. John wrote 10 of its 13 songs as well as parts of two others. Only "Things We Said Today" is a 100% Paul song. Paul never dominated any Beatle album as John did with AHDN.
"Yesterday" may feature only Paul, but so what? "Julia" features only John, and George's Indian-influenced songs feature only George.
Yes, Paul did dominate in the later years, and he was also the group's main arranger throughout its entire history. But his dominance extends to only four albums (Pepper, MMT, Let It Be, and Abbey Road), whereas John dominates the rest (including, by a slight margin, the White Album), except for Revolver, on which he shares equal time with Paul.
John also contributed to Sgt. Pepper more than people tend to give him credit for. He had three songs (Lucy, Mr. Kite, Good Morning), wrote the main part of the album's masterpiece (ADITL), collaborated with Paul on "With a Little Help from My Friends" and contributed a good deal to "Getting Better" and "She's Leaving Home." Yes, Paul had more songs, and the Pepper concept was his, but it was far from a one-man show.
Paul deserves credit for taking up the reins after Brian's death, and he did a rather good job of it musically, although he may have lacked some skills in the diplomacy department. (Then again, I don't know if anyone could have dealt with John, Yoko, and George any better during that period.) And he was dominant during that time as John never was during the early years (save for AHDN). But leadership is about more than writing more songs; it's also about determining the artistic direction of the band, and Paul never had complete control in that area. He came close, perhaps, but if Paul had his way, there'd have been more tours, more movies, and more cornball pop tunes.
A reminder to you and your mother: there were about 200 Beatle songs in addition to "Yesterday" and "Hey Jude," including a long list of classics by John Lennon. (And, no offense, but some of us longtime fans have had quite enough of those two songs, thanks much.) It's true that Paul is one of the greatest of rock singers, and definitely a more versatile vocalist than John. But John is also widely regarded as one of the greatest singers in history, and to suggest that Paul is "better" is beyond absurd.
To argue that either John or Paul was the leader fails to take into consideration the entirety of the Beatles' history. Each was the leader, each in his own way, at one time or another.
John L.
10.49am
31 March 2008
Online
Have a look at this, from 1962: http://www.beatlesbible.com/19…..interview/
"Q: "How do you do? What's your job?"
George: "Uh, lead guitar and sort of singing."
Q: "By playing lead guitar, does that mean that you're sort of leader of the group or are you…?"
George: "No, no. Just… well you see, the other guitar is the rhythm. Ching, ching, ching, you see."
Paul: "He's solo guitar, you see. John is, in fact, the leader of the group."
I think that was certainly the case right up until the mid-60s. John, in one of his angry post-Beatles interviews, pointed out that pretty much all the key early songs had him on lead vocals, from Please Please Me to Help!. I think he dominated the group until around 1965, after which Paul came into his own. That's where I see the balance changing; that John's songwriting peaked with Rubber Soul, and from Revolver Paul gradually took over. Drugs and Yoko Ono both taught John that there was more to life than the band, after which he gradually took his foot off the pedal.
When the band stopped touring John's witty persona in interviews etc became less frequently seen, and the group members became more equal for a couple of years (Revolver, Pepper, MMT were largely group collaborations). Probably from the death of Brian Epstein, though, it was Paul who became the group's leading force, even if he wasn't explicitly acknowledged as such. One of John's complaints about the Let It Be film was that it cast the rest of The Beatles as Paul's backing band, which he felt shouldn't have been the case.
7.03am
From when The Beatles first started to Brian Epstein's death, John Lennon was the leader.
Even Paul himself said so. But When Brian Epstein, their manager, died of a drug overdose, the band wanted to quit. Paul wouldn't let them and told them to keep making music and he slowly started becoming the leader. John was a little mad during Let It Be saying he was just Paul's backup or something. so I suppose John then Paul. They were pretty much the leaders of the group. Even when John was the leader, Paul was sort of too.
9.13pm
I have to agree with everything Henry the Horse said. Very well put.
But I'd like to add that I think it was actually the John/Paul synergy that led the band. Maybe John was dominant at first and then Paul in the later years, but neither one of them could have done it without the other.
6.14pm
Joe said: Probably from the death of Brian Epstein, though, it was Paul who became the group's leading force, even if he wasn't explicitly acknowledged as such. One of John's complaints about the Let It Be film was that it cast the rest of The Beatles as Paul's backing band, which he felt shouldn't have been the case.
John might have felt differently about Let It Be if he had had better material and shown more of an interest in turning the Get Back sessions into a proper live concert to be recorded as an album, which was the plan they had agreed on in the beginning. But the only true classic song John had at that point was "Don't Let Me Down," which was unfairly relegated to b-side status. "Across The Universe" had already been done and "Dig A Pony" was just filler – great filler to be sure but filler nonetheless. Other than that, it's all Paul and for good reason. Like Ringo said, (paraphrasing), "whoever had the best song at the time – that was the track we did." If anyone got short shrift on Let It Be it was George. Why they passed on "All Things Must Pass" I'll never understand…
11.59pm
Well, by Let It Be, John was firmly under the grip of a pretty bad drug addiction. (And, some would say, a Yoko addiction.)
6.36pm
Exactly, which is why Paul naturally fell into the role as leader.
9.18pm
26 January 2010
Offline
Paul is a bassist. George and John are much better guitarists
Paul was as good if not a better a guitarist as John and George when The Beatles started and probably throughout their career too. He only took on the bass because no one else wanted the job. He proved his worth on the guitar many times over the years.
Having said that, i think John was the leader until he no longer wanted the job then Paul took over.
11.03pm
27 February 2010
Offline
I think you are forgetting that "Sgt. Pepper" was a project carried by Paul. I think that both John and Paul were the leaders, with a preeminence of John until "Revolver", and the last albums by Paul.
And for something completely different (as Monty Pyton said), Paul is a better musician and composer, very cerebral, if you let me say. His melodies and harmonies are perfect, no doubt.
But John was more intuititional, and his songs can express deep emotions not only by words, but with music too. He was a genius, no doubt too.
The best of The Beatles is the combination of two genius of different breed, one apollineous, the other dyonisiac.
5.19pm
31 March 2008
Online
US people, particularly those who were around in 1964:
I was watching the first Ed Sullivan Show appeareance and something struck me. The Beatles kicked off their set with All My Loving, which is quite an interesting choice in itself. After that they played Till There Was You, and it's clear the spotlight was firmly on Paul. She Loves You was the third song, and again the director seems to have thought Paul was the lead singer and George and John were on backups.
In the second bit they sang I Saw Her Standing There – a Paul song – and closed with I Want To Hold Your Hand, a duet, but Paul's vocals are mixed way higher than John's (listen for the imbalance in the "And when I touch you…" bits).
Have a look for yourself. I Saw Her Standing There isn't here but the rest are. Bear in mind this was the first time most people in the US saw The Beatles – would most casual viewers have presumed that Paul was the leader? Certainly the way it was filmed seems at odds with how they were shown in the UK at the time.
5.35pm
1 May 2010
Offline
I think John was the obvious choice as leader, just because of who he was as a person. Paul was a perfectionist and left very little, if any, room for improvising on his songs. John was much more experimental in his recordings, thus making it easier for George and Ringo to gravitate towards him because maybe they felt their input was more needed or appreciated. I think John receded his title as leader in about 1967 or so, but by then George and Ringo were much more independent individuals, so no leader was really needed. Paul tried and was successful at times, but he also struggled in that role.
9.10pm
30 May 2010
Offline
Ringo Was secretly pulling all the strings behind the scenes.
Haha, seriously though, I agree with pretty much everything that's been said here. And GnikNus, I agree with you about how George and Ringo probably gravitated towards John because they were able to be more… spontaneous, I guess is the word I'm looking for. Not everything had to be perfectly structured. I get the feeling Paul was kind of a recording Nazi 
(Nothing against his work, though, I still love it!). I didn't really notice it until I played B:RB, and noticed which songs had better drum patterns. It definately seems like they were John's.
11.23pm
12 January 2009
Offline
Joe said:
US people, particularly those who were around in 1964:
I was watching the first Ed Sullivan Show appeareance and something struck me. The Beatles kicked off their set with All My Loving, which is quite an interesting choice in itself. After that they played Till There Was You, and it's clear the spotlight was firmly on Paul. She Loves You was the third song, and again the director seems to have thought Paul was the lead singer and George and John were on backups.
In the second bit they sang I Saw Her Standing There – a Paul song – and closed with I Want To Hold Your Hand, a duet, but Paul's vocals are mixed way higher than John's (listen for the imbalance in the "And when I touch you…" bits).
Have a look for yourself. I Saw Her Standing There isn't here but the rest are. Bear in mind this was the first time most people in the US saw The Beatles – would most casual viewers have presumed that Paul was the leader? Certainly the way it was filmed seems at odds with how they were shown in the UK at the time.
Yes, the cameras were definitely focused on Paul. The little blurb "sorry girls, he's married" under John's name surely didn't help matters for publicity's sake, pretty much saying "Forget him! Check out Paul!" to all the young girls. This is the best band in the world and the fact that the media tried to dissuade everyone's perception of them only made them better. As for leadership? Who cares? If the 4 of them did not come together when they did, we would not be talking now.
1.54am
13 June 2010
Offline
No one, simply as that. But, really I always think as Paul as the leader. He seemed to care more about getting in the studio, and you're right about him singing the most 'popular' songs. 
Most Users Ever Online: 597
Currently Online: Joe, mja6758, aislejodi
10 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
mr. Sun king coming together: 6972
meanmistermustard: 3427
MeanMrsMustard: 2794
Egroeg Evoli: 1528
vonbontee: 1427
Von Bontee: 1369
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 87
Members: 1683
Moderators: 5
Admins: 1
Forum Stats:
Groups: 3
Forums: 33
Topics: 2398
Posts: 73316
Newest Members: fartoons, RIGBY, WilliamCampbell, JQ, Juliana Melo
Moderators: Joe (2702), skye (2295), Ellie (1), Zig (2752), mithveaen (4675)
Administrators: Joe (2702)
