Hey Jude

Hey Jude single - United KingdomWritten by: Lennon-McCartney
Recorded: 29-31 July, 1 August 1968
Producer: George Martin
Engineers: Ken Scott, Barry Sheffield

Released: 30 August 1968 (UK), 26 August 1968 (US)

Paul McCartney: vocals, piano, bass
John Lennon: backing vocals, acoustic guitar
George Harrison: backing vocals, electric guitar
Ringo Starr: backing vocals, drums, tambourine
Uncredited: 10 violins, 3 violas, 3 cellos, 2 double basses, 2 flutes, 2 clarinets, 1 bass clarinet, 1 bassoon, 1 contrabassoon, 4 trumpets, 2 horns, 4 trombones, 1 percussion

Available on:
Past Masters
1
Anthology 3
Love

Hey Jude, the first release on The Beatles' own Apple Records label, was a ballad by Paul McCartney. It was written to comfort John Lennon's son Julian during the divorce of his parents.

Hey Jude - Past Masters, Vols. 1 & 2


Hey Jude is a damn good set of lyrics and I made no contribution to that.
John Lennon, 1980
All We Are Saying, David Sheff

It was written in June 1968,as McCartney drove his Aston Martin to Weybridge to visit Cynthia Lennon and her son. On the journey he began thinking about their changing lives, and of the past times he had spent writing with Lennon at the Weybridge house.

I thought, as a friend of the family, I would motor out to Weybridge and tell them that everything was all right: to try and cheer them up, basically, and see how they were. I had about an hour's drive. I would always turn the radio off and try and make up songs, just in case... I started singing: 'Hey Jules - don't make it bad, take a sad song, and make it better...' It was optimistic, a hopeful message for Julian: 'Come on, man, your parents got divorced. I know you're not happy, but you'll be OK.'

I eventually changed 'Jules' to 'Jude'. One of the characters in Oklahoma is called Jud, and I like the name.

Paul McCartney
Anthology

McCartney recorded a piano demo of Hey Jude upon his return to his home in Cavendish Avenue, London. On 26 July 1968 played the song to Lennon for the first time.

I finished it all up in Cavendish and I was in the music room upstairs when John and Yoko came to visit and they were right behind me over my right shoulder, standing up, listening to it as I played it to them, and when I got to the line, 'The movement you need is on your shoulder,' I looked over my shoulder and I said, 'I'll change that, it's a bit crummy. I was just blocking it out,' and John said, 'You won't, you know. That's the best line in it!' That's collaboration. When someone's that firm about a line that you're going to junk, and he said, 'No, keep it in.' So of course you love that line twice as much because it's a little stray, it's a little mutt that you were about to put down and it was reprieved and so it's more beautiful than ever. I love those words now...

Time lends a little credence to things. You can't knock it, it just did so well. But when I'm singing it, that is when I think of John, when I hear myself singing that line; it's an emotional point in the song.

Paul McCartney
Many Years From Now, Barry Miles

The lyrics struck an immediate chord with the record-buying public, who related to the hopeful sentiments. Its universality was demonstrated when John Lennon later revealed that he felt the song had been directed at him.

He said it was written about Julian, my child. He knew I was splitting with Cyn and leaving Julian. He was driving over to say hi to Julian. He'd been like an uncle to him. You know, Paul was always good with kids. And so he came up with Hey Jude.

But I always heard it as a song to me. If you think about it... Yoko's just come into the picture. He's saying, 'Hey, Jude - hey, John.' I know I'm sounding like one of those fans who reads things into it, but you can hear it as a song to me. The words 'go out and get her' - subconsciously he was saying, Go ahead, leave me. On a conscious level, he didn't want me to go ahead. The angel in him was saying, 'Bless you.' The devil in him didn't like it at all because he didn't want to lose his partner.

John Lennon, 1980
All We Are Saying, David Sheff

It wasn't until 1987 that McCartney came to discuss Hey Jude with Julian Lennon, after a chance encounter in a New York hotel.

He told me that he'd been thinking about my circumstances all those years ago, about what I was going through. Paul and I used to hang out a bit - more than dad and I did. We had a great friendship going and there seem to be far more pictures of me and Paul playing together at that age than there are pictures of me and dad.
Julian Lennon
Mojo magazine, February 2002

The recording notes for Hey Jude were bought at auction by Julian Lennon in 1996 for £25,000. In 2002 a sale of the original handwritten lyrics was announced by Christie's in London, with an estimated price of £80,000. Paul McCartney took out a court order to prevent the auction, saying the paper had disappeared from his London home.

Anthology 2 contained take two of Hey Jude, recorded on 29 July 1968. The Love album, meanwhile, contained a subtly remixed version of the final version.

Although by 1968 The Beatles had stopped performing live, Hey Jude's anthemic ending was perfect for crowd participation. It was fitting, then, when later years McCartney made it a key part of his live shows.

Related articles:

41 Responses to “Hey Jude”

  1. Andrew Leonard

    It might be their most commercially successful single but not their best seller. That is I Want To Hold Your Hand. See Wikipedia, Beatles.com or any list of world top selling singles.

    Reply
  2. Joseph Brush

    My favourite McCartney song with the Beatles. Sounds brand new everytime I play it, which is a lot.

    Reply
  3. BeatleMark

    Right after the lyric "Remember, to let her under your skin.."
    at 2:57 you can faintly hear a "OHHH!" followed by "Wrong chord! Fucking hell!"

    'Scuse my language, but I think it's fun to listen for.

    Reply
    • Joe

      Hi Mark. On page two of this article I mentioned that:

      "Hey Jude contains an unedited expletive, which is often played by radio stations to this day. In the final verse, John Lennon sang "Let her into" instead of "Let her under your skin". His cry of "Oh!", followed by "Fucking hell", remains in the final mix."

      Was it a wrong chord or a wrong lyric? I can't make out the words "wrong chord", but listening to it again, I'm not convinced he gets the lyrics wrong either.

      Reply
      • Niemand

        My understanding is that it is Paul McCartney who utters the expletive because he got the piano part wrong. Because John was regarded as the "rebel" he was rather amused by this and asked the engineers to leave it in. However, they mixed it very low and you can hear it only if you listen closely. Wikipedia says that Paul says "Hit the wrong chord!" before he utters the expletive. The cited source for its information is Geoff Emerick in 2006, one of the audio engineers present during the recording. I think this should be researched because this site is the first time I've read that it was John who said it.

        Reply
    • Joe

      Not true - he's there, playing his Telecaster, though it's only a minor part. You can hear him between 1'23 and 1'28, and playing subsequent fills, though his pride was hurt when McCartney told him not to play the answering lines in the verses. That's why he took a back seat during rehearsals on 30 July (he was in the control room with George Martin while the other three worked on the song), and only played a small role in the recording.

      Reply
      • Tweeze

        And I have seen a video of this session. Just John, Paul and Ringo - and it sounded great. Those boys could really nail it when they wanted to.

        Reply
  4. Von Bontee

    George really should've been given an extended solo so he could wail away with Paul for the last two minutes or so of the track. I'm thinking of something like the solo on the Velvet Underground's "Oh, Sweet Nothin'" - or, closer to home, Clapton's gently weeping solo. That would've fit nicely, and George really could've used the ego boost. As it is, it really does get a bit tedious, but I guess Paul didn't think so, since he had the full structurea all mapped out beforehand.

    Reply
    • Deadman

      George did give himself the opportunity to "wail away" on the extended fade-out of the not completely dissimilar Isn't It a Pity (which, coincidentally, is just a couple of seconds longer than Hey Jude).

      Reply
      • Von Bontee

        Yeah, that's a good comparison, but George was certainly entitled to indulge himself on his own album! My point is that it would've been a nice gesture if Paul had been less control-freaky and devised some way of allowing George to make some kind of notable contribution. Even if there was no room for a lead guitar at all in the arrangement, George was certainly capable of handling the bass guitar duty while Paul stuck to piano, if Paul had thought to ask.

        Reply
        • Jake

          I think George did play bass guitar. They talk about the right handed 6 six string fender bass in the studio on the Anthology. George also mentions in interviews that he played bass for some Paul songs. Also, on the Hey Jude Video It looks to me George is playing that big Bass. I haven't listen closely to hear bass on the record. Is there?

          Reply
  5. Henrique

    At 5:37 someone says in portuguese "Pega o Cavaquinho" wich in english means "take the cavaquinho".

    Reply
    • Giovi

      OMFG. I speak portuguese, and I never noticed this, but now, I listened it again, and I noticed it too. It's SO weird. Maybe it's just a bunch of indecipherable words in english, we listen to it and it seems something that our mind assimilates to a word we know.

      Reply
    • Deadman

      At 5:37 Paul says, "The pain won't come back Jude.” In English (which is far more likely to be uttered by an English singer) this means "the pain won't come back, Jude."

      Reply
      • Giovi

        It makes sense, but I think that my mind is already used to "pega o cavaquinho", so I just can't hear what you said.

        Reply
        • brian

          Paul does seem at times to have been too bossy in the studio but I think the writer of a song does have the right to final say as to how it should be done. Axing the answering back guitar idea was a good one.

          Reply
          • Vonbontee

            Yeah, that answering wouldn't have worked well at all in the verses. I still think it would've worked really nicely during the final minutes, though, right to the fade-out. It's a free-for-all, Paul's testifying, George joins in - it'd be just like what George and Eric Clapton did during the "...Gently Weeps" fade, except the mood is celebratory rather than mournful. (Think of George's Leslie-speaker soloing in "Let It Be" - that's very close to the sound I'm thinking about.)

            Reply
          • Tobias Talock

            Well, someone had to fill the leadership void left by Lennon, and Paul was the better equipped to do it. A group without a leader or moderator gets nothing accomplished.

            I also agree with you in that the writer of a song should get the final word. I mean, no one could have talked George out of all the sitars.

            Reply
      • victor

        At 5:37 I hear John's voice. For years i have listened trying to figure out his words...it sounds like "Aint lookin back,Jude"

        Reply
  6. Joel A Jacobson

    If you watch the video of the david frost show. I think it's pretty clear, George is playing 6 string Fender Bass. Now, thats probably not the released recorded version of the song, But we now know that Paul played alot of lead guitar, Drums, both George and John played Bass on some records.

    Reply
  7. Tony

    Actually, John said after George misfires on his guitar, " you fucked it up ". This you can clearly hear if you listen closely.

    Reply
    • Joe

      Doubtful. George is barely on the song - he plays during the transitions back into the verses (at 1'23" and subsequent points) only.

      Reply
  8. Schminking of gin

    I've never heard Paul comment on John's belief that the song was written about him, though I know Paul has always insisted its about Julian. But looking at the lyrics, the song makes a lot more sense being about John, talking about movements and "go out and get her" and "remember to let her into your heart." Doesn't make much sense as a message to a 6 year old boy.

    I always think of John anyway when I hear this

    Reply
    • brian

      I see it as Paul speaking to both Julian and John. The "sad song" being the parting of Julian's parents... "anytime you feel the pain" are more comforting words to him from Paul. Then it sounds like Paul turns to focus his attention toward his long-time friend John with the all too obvious "you were made to go out and get her" and other lines on Lennon's quickly blossoming relationship with Yoko.

      Reply
      • Jake

        Pauls inspiration and creativity is much different than Johns. Take "Martha My Dear" & "Jet" both songs about his dogs! But not really about his dogs. Maybe a line or two and then he just goes off the reservation. So, Hey Jude could start out about Julian, then about John, maybe even his girl friend Franny Schwartz. (Which she says in her book)

        Reply
  9. Tweeze

    As I understand it, Ringo had essentially just returned from his self-imposed exile from the Beatles in time to film the David Frost show. Ringo has made what I think is a peculiar comment about "Hey Jude" that always made me wonder what his thinking is. I can't be verbatim right now, but he has stated that he has no interest in playing 'Hey Jude" again because he has already played it once. I find this odd because in concert Ringo is found playing a number of songs that he has already played dozens of times. Why is he hostile toward "Hey Jude"? My belief is that it stems from some grudge he'd had with Paul, a frequent afterhours studioholic, coming in and redubbing some of Ringo's drumming. Of course, this song being manifested during the legnedary "White Album" period where Paul was overbearing in the studio and would frequently forsake the group concept to cover all instruments on his own if he could get away with it. Any other ideas?

    Reply
    • JP

      You know, I read the same thing (though not specifying which song) that claimed Paul had overdubbed drum on a song in '68 and Ringo had to pretend that he did not notice during the playback the following day. I think it was a Peter Brown book. Not sure. I commented about it somewhere, and was responded to by someone with an emphatic "never happened." No details, so who knows. Obviously, it is a rumour at least, perhaps the reason Starr walked out. If true, I don't blame him at all.

      Reply
    • Jake

      Paul was already "overbearing". The White Album became every man for himself. 3 separate camps. My guess is Ringo was the odd man out. He was probably treated like one of the EMI staff. Think about this, only 2 months later, Paul pulled them altogher to do the Let it Be project...Being filmed in the studio. It turned out badly, but the music was great! John & Paul worked together/sang together on the music and it was George who walked out. John's advice was to get Eric Clapton to take his place.

      Reply
  10. Bronx Boy Billy

    I used to think the long fade out was cool
    (as a rebellious idea) but now it's kinda tiring having to listen all the way through. This song should have been 4:30.

    Reply
    • Jake

      In hindsight, george should have got the guitar solo on Hey Jude instead of the long fade out. But, Paul gave George the solo on Let It Be and it wasn't very good. George knew enough to re-do the solo for the album version. The Lads wanted to stop touring. Paul didn't. Paul took advantage of all the studio time to create great music. Paul was the Beatles from Revolver to Abbey Road. Maybe even from mid - 1965.

      Reply
      • Joseph Brush

        Yeah sure. The other three just stood around and watched Paul do EVERYTHING!

        Reply
  11. GeorgeTSimpson

    It was paul on bass but it should have been George, then it would have been more of a group performance (george's instrumental part is so small)

    Reply

Leave a Reply