4 February 2014
All four band members were perfect for each other, all thier techniques were complimentary to each other while being completely amazing individually. Without any one of them they wouldn't have been The Beatles. George's lead was amazing and not too flashy, fitting perfectly with the others. His songwriting while even great in the beginning, was amazing towards the breakup of the band, I can't imagine Something , While My Guitar Gently Weeps , and Here Comes The Sun not existing. The Beatles without George would not have been the same, would not have been the Beatles.
The following people thank Mr. Kite for this post:Vera Chuckandave, Beatlebug, Timothy
1 November 2013
14 November 2017
1 May 2011
Father McKenzie said
They would have been the fab 3. A poorer band without George's contributions. The guy was phenomenal, I've always said that
George was instrumental in getting Ringo in so it would have been the fabulous Nerk Twins.
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:Beatlebug, Father McKenzie, SgtPeppersBulldog
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
1 November 2013
Would Pete Best of continued with the band?
25 December 2017
9 December 2017
Difficult to give a definitive answer here but I feel that the whole Beatles sound that we know and love would never have been. George's guitar work is subtle and his genius lies in how simplistic his work sounds when it is actually quite technical; there was always something damn inventive happening on his fretboard......Oh....and in Something , WMGGW and I Want To Tell You , he, in my opinion, wrote some of the greatest ever Beatle tracks.
The following people thank Vera Chuckandave for this post:Beatlebug, Pineapple Records, BeatleSnut, SgtPeppersBulldog
And my bird can't sing......!!
14 May 2015
14 June 2016
The Beatles wouldn't have been as magical.
Agreed. His guitar ability and perspective on life was integral to the band. And as mentioned above, his harmonies.
1.The Beatles 2.Sgt. Pepper 3.Abbey Road 4.Magical Mystery Tour 5.Rubber Soul 6.Revolver 7.Help! 8.Let It Be
9.A Hard Day’s Night 10.Please Please Me 11.Beatles For Sale 12.With The Beatles 13.Yellow Submarine
9 December 2017
14 April 2010
I posted my initial answer 4 years ago. To expand upon that...
If George had tired of taking a backseat to J&P earlier than he did, the band could quite easily have gone through a parade of lead guitarists. Then, if he had the guts to leave, would Ringo have been far behind?
These "what if" scenarios both fascinate and make me shudder at the same time.
The following people thank Zig for this post:Beatlebug, Timothy
To the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
12 May 2015
This is an interesting question. Paul and John to a large degree didn't realise how lucky they were in having George a player who selflessly gave himself to their songs and made such key contributions to the bands work. But his personality was key too, in taking a back seat to the Lennon/mccartney thing. Why didnt they appreciate him more ? They never appreciated him enough for a variety of reasons I think. His youth, his lack of assertiveness and probably because they were working in the era of the 60s guitar gods and possibly felt a bit frustrated at times with him. The Beatles as a band would have been horrible with a virtuoso like Clapton involved though. Georges tasteful playing was far more appropriate, not to mention how well his vocals fitted in the groups arrangements.
His contribution was huge, its just a shame that Lennon and Mccartney couldn't give him the approval as a peer he so desperately wanted from them (particularly Paul). In its own way it led to the break up of the band because he never, ever got over it. Although Paul supported his songwriting musically he never really gave him what he needed as a guitarist or a songwriter and if he had I'm sure George would have fought harder to keep the group together.
Ironically this forced him towards John in the breakup of the band and someone who was so self absorbed that they would never give George what he needed. He obviously felt in the early 70s that he would work more with John and prove to Paul that he could play well without him around. And on 'how do you sleep' he certainly proved that, but he learned pretty soon that John really didn't care about him as an artist. It was incredibly painful for him and something that John regretted later on but didn't really know how to fix.
I feel really sorry for George, in a lot of ways he went through the same pain and humiliation twice, But he really WAS important to the groups sound, especially pre 1966. After that point Paul could do it all himself and John became less and less accessible. He became a prisoner really, as he realised after the 'White Album '. Paul paid special attention to him during 'Abbey Road ' to try and make some amends but by then it was too late.
You can see in parts of 'anthology' that he'd never really gotten over it, but in a way he was the architect of his own downfall.
The following people thank castironshore for this post:Ahhh Girl, Hello little quarrygirl, Beatlebug
26 September 2020
I can't imagine what the band would have been like without George, it's like wondering what the band would have been like with Pete Best as the drummer (which is a curious thought) but I know George did add a lot to songs such as We Can Work It Out and And I Love Her . In an analysis over his songs Paul says that the song wouldn't be anything without the riff that George came up with, which makes me think that it had to be those four, for them to be successful.
The following people thank Hello little quarrygirl for this post:Beatlebug
1 November 2013
I wonder how the hamburg dynamics would play out with Paul being the youngest and not having George their to be older than.
The following people thank Starr Shine? for this post:Ahhh Girl, lovelyritametermaid