Written 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 is a damn good set of lyrics and I made no contribution to that.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
My favourite McCartney song with the Beatles. Sounds brand new everytime I play it, which is a lot.
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.
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.
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.
The swearword doesn’t seem to belong to the vocal track actually. More probably was captured by the mics during the recordings of the instrumental parts.
George doesnt play anything on this song. Just backin vocals
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.
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.
George plays bass here. The instrument he´s seen on the video of the song is actually the 6-string bass he and John occasionaly used when Paul was on piano.
It´s not a guitar, it´s a bass, Joe ! It needs correcting ! Happy New Year and congratulations for the fine work ! Long live Beatles Bible !
Just because George plays the Bass VI in the video doesn’t mean he played it on the record… the video was lip-synched.
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.
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).
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.
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?
Yes. I think it’s obvious. I also heard that George played that as well.
This would have been amazing! I would have loved for that to happen, George really deserved a larger part in that song. However, as I listened to the song the other day, I realized something fantastic: George is leading the Na-Na’s. I’m sure of it, it’s definitely his voice. I love that. It made the song even better, it really did just knowing that George has a larger part.
Funny you say this Von, I actually did a demo myself of Jude 10 years or so ago in my studio and did an extended guitar fills over the lyrics and adlibbing at the end never thinking someone else thought it a good idea or something George could have done. I always liked it and thought “Why didn’t the Fab4 do this?”
No I Paul was right, the last thing this track needs it widdly guitar playing which serves no purpose.
At 5:37 someone says in portuguese “Pega o Cavaquinho” wich in english means “take the cavaquinho”.
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.
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.”
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.
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.
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.)
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.
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”
“That’s enough about Jude” is what I hear.
It sounds like Paul saying, “Hey don’t go back Jude”
Haha I thought it was maybe that’s enough Paul when john was screaming, because afterwards Paul goes quiet for a bit
And in “Am The Waitress”, from the Tragical History Tour album, someone sings “E burres stigano” which is very bad spanish for “Have you a water buffalo?”
Still, I can’t believe that the song was written for Julian, John Lennon’s son. It’s an amazing song, and a very great inspiration.
Paul Swore
John told the engineers to keep it but Paul swore
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.
Actually, John said after George misfires on his guitar, ” you fucked it up “. This you can clearly hear if you listen closely.
Doubtful. George is barely on the song – he plays during the transitions back into the verses (at 1’23” and subsequent points) only.
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
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.
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)
Haven’t seen it mentioned – “Hey Jude” was loosely based on “Save The Last Dance For Me”.
Come to think of it, it does have similarities.
I have heard McCartney say this but I cant see any similarities myself.
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?
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.
Pretty sure Paul played drums on Back In The USSR during Ringo’s absence from the band.
He did and on Dear Prudence. Ringo is on record talking about one of his pet hates was coming back from the toilet to find Paul playing his drums.
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.
That incident in question was indeed reported in Brown’s “The Love You Make”.
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.
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.
Yeah sure. The other three just stood around and watched Paul do EVERYTHING!
Disagree completely, the long fade out MAKES the song IMO. Gives it an epic quality.
Couldn’t agree more. Most songs of the era were 2:30, The Beatles said, ” yeah? Check this out”. Always rewriting the rule book.
I always thought not just because of the video but George played the Bass
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)
In speaking of performance, I really enjoy Ringo’s solid drumming on “Hey Jude”. The fills are precisely placed for Paul’s possibly best vocal of his life. However, why at that point was he putting the towels all over the drum-skins? I prefer the “Sgt. Pepper’s” drum sound. “Abbey Road”, it seems Ringo ended the towel experiment.
I love his Hey Jude drumming too, apart from one little bit – the CLANG CLANG CLANG on the bell of a cymbal when he begins drumming. Sure, it’s a classic fill, but those three notes really grate my ears.
Yes. Even the cymbals in “Hey Jude” sound like cheap cymbals you’d give a little child with his first kit.
I love the famous Ringo open high-hat “swooshing” sound, i.e “Happy just to dance w/ you”
I guess the lesson is: If you’re drumming in “The Beatles”, & Geoff Emerick is your engineer along with George Martin producing- you let them worry about the sound of your drums.
Here is what I think: One of the great things about McCartney’s songwriting is that he jumps POVs so to speak. A song can start in one point then transition to another. Paul writes indirectly about things, could be influence of old songwriters like Cole Porter or his personal temperament. I think Hey Jude could be read as a song about Julian, John and Paul himself. John was a big brother / father figure to Paul; their relationship has all the hallmarks. So Paul is losing his father figure too and like a scared child in the dark, he is singing to himself: Hey Paul, don’t be afraid, etc.
As far as timings are concerned, the original single releases have Hey Jude at 7:11 & Isn’t It A Pity at 7:10, respectively…
This should have been on the “White album”. It could have replaced “Wild Honey Pie”, “Why don’t we do it in the road” and perhaps one other. Great tune that captures a time period much like “Atlantis” by Donovan with the chanting, repeating chorus. (Harrison also uses it on “Isn’t it a pity” where if I listen closely I can hear the “…na, na, na hey Jude” at the end.) Not sure if I buy the Julian Lennon story. I see many drug references in the song “Let it out and let it in” – the common term for a “Rush” for needle users and “Any time you feel the pain, hey Jude refrain” another words – do it again. To state the obvious, drugs were part of the daily diet of the Beatles at the time of the recording. My issue is that once I have been exposed to the drug references in their songs, I may have become tainted and find things that aren’t there.
I think you’re way off the mark. The Beatles never injected heroin, so I think it’s a wild leap of the imagination to assume they’d drop references to intravenous use into one of their biggest hits. It’s a song about Julian Lennon.
Joe, I really want to believe that it is about Julian but the words just don’t work for me. Julian was a little kid at the time and the advice given doesn’t make sense. John did have a heroin issue. “Cold Turkey” is about his painful and gut-wrenching withdrawl. The confusion on my part is this: Paul sings the song but there is no evidence that he did heroin – but the words of advice to a young boy don’t give any concrete direction. The “Let her under your skin” verse is confusing to me. The Beatles were generally clever about their drug references such as “Got to get you into my life” being about Paul’s new found interest in pot. I would never have guessed that. I am skeptical when it comes to veiled references and clever word choices in their songs.
On another note: I really like this web-site. Joe you do a great job.
I think that many of us don’t take into consideration that, though a song was inspired and build around a specific thought or action, it doesn’t mean the entire song must be wrapped around that one subject. However, this song is very clearly about Julian Lennon.
I do not wish to argue, but just point out that this is by far the most valid point of this song. Paul McCartney himself said that he thought of the song on his way to visit Julian, and then played it later for John. The lyrics explain themselves.”Let her under your skin” is talking about Yoko. He is just telling Julian to accept her into his life. However, John feels that part of that verse is about him. The line “You were made to go out and get her” is the one that made him feel as thought the song was talking about John, in a reference to his love with Yoko. Billy, you said it was a reference to heroin, but John Lennon was the one who was on heroin. I quote:
“Hey Jude is a damn good set of lyrics an d I made no contribution to that.”
If John made no contribution to the lyrics, it wouldn’t make sense for it to be about heroin at all.
The reason Joe says these songs are about what they are, is because the Beatles said that’s what they’re about. I must say, the best source of information would be the lads themselves. You’re very knowledgable about The Beatles, Billy, but I think you’re looking to hard for the lyrics to mean something, when sometimes they’re exactly as they say.
Cheers to such a great band, song, and website!
Thanks Joe and David. perhaps I am looking too hard. It is a great song that pretty much stands as “THE” iconic song of the tumultuous year – 1968. I can hear it replacing “Revolution 1” and “Honey Pie” at the start of side 4 of the White album. ( I like the single released version of “Revolution” better than that one). It would have added an additional punch to the disc without sacrificing much. Check out the You tube video of “Hey Jude”. It is truly a time capsule worth stepping into.
Actually all the points can be true. Hey Jude was inspired and written for Julian but as the song evolved in it’s writing it became more about Julian’s father – John. This is why John felt lyrics were aimed at him – they very likely were. John was doing heroin – and though he denied shooting it – that is pretty much discounted as lie – he and Yoko did shoot heroin – John was trying to manage his image by denying it. Since Paul is singing to Jude – it alternates with Jude sometimes being Julian and sometimes being John. A very common literary technique
Are you sure they shot heroin in 1968/9? I know they denied it, and may well have done in the 1970s, but wasn’t aware they were doing so in this time. Can you help me out with some sources?
Joe, I searched the internet (which is always questionable ) and found many references relating to John’s drug use. I don’t believe much of what I read, but sometimes the truth stumbles to the surface. The Beatles were clever at cultivating their image. They were not always truthful, and to always believe their own words, while although tempting, may be a little too much. For example, I think that they were fully involved and aware of all the PID clues. It was a fabulous marketing ploy that still resonates today. (If the PID rumors are true, it does explain Wings).
I found the site listed here depressing and interesting at the same time. I don’t know the validity of the info, but is remains curious.
Thanks. I don’t want this to go way off-topic, because it’s a page about Hey Jude. But I will say that I doubt Lennon was on heroin in 1966 – he lied and exaggerated a lot in that Rolling Stone interview, and also later said (1980, Playboy) that he hadn’t seen the drug at that time. It was some months later that Robert Fraser brought it into their circle. I wrote a feature on The Beatles and drugs – please post further comments on that page.
Well, we all know they were doing heroin in 68/69 – the only question is when did they start shooting. And since it’s widely believed that John and Yoko lied about shooting heroin – the only question is when did they start lying about shooting it. And no, I am not aware of any direct evidence of this claim – it is that – a claim.
To me given their behavior, the way they looked, the depth of their addiction, the decay in John’s writing, by 69 John and Yoko looked way more like they were shooting heroin rather than just “sniffing it when they were in real pain”. That’s a typical John cop-out kind of line because he didn’t want to come off looking like a heroin junkie – but he was.
To me, given all the circumstantial evidence, I don’t think it’s an unreasonable (yet unsubstantiated) conclusion that John and Yoko were shooting heroin in 68 and that the line in Hey Jude (let it out and let it in) is referencing that act.
To me the assumption that they weren’t is less credible.
They were pretty rich junkies, I believe they could afford to snort it instead of inject it. I can’t think of any direct John/Yoko sources offhand but Clapton says that’s what he did in his autobiography.
Shooting heroin is injecting it. That is not what John and Yoko did. They snorted it and smoked it. Some may see this as semantics but it does validate their denial that they ‘shot’ heroin.
On the other hand someone who gets under your skin is usually someone who annoys you.
Sorry, I disagree completely. The druggier Beatles songs are hazy-sounding, you know? Hey Jude is so sweet and sincere–the Beatles never had that kind of warm affection for drugs, it was a seduction thing. It always is. “Let her under your skin” is “Accept her, accept her love, let her become part of you” Like it says later, “For well you know that it’s a fool who plays it cool, by making his world a little colder.” It’s a song about letting yourself open up and not think it’s cool to be untouchable, just open up and love this person. Some of these people who are posting things are like those people who take an ordinary phrase and make it sound dirty. For pete’s sake, ANYTHING could sound like a drug reference if you think about it. Just let the song be beautiful and honest. About Julian Lennon, I do believe it started with him and then Paul began to think and transition into something else–maybe John, maybe not. But please don’t make this so much worse than it is.
As far as I know John and Yoko never injected heroin. They did however smoke it and that led to a period of addiction which is documented in Cold Turkey.
There are others singin backup on the chorus on the end, Mary Hopkin,Jackie Lomax,Pete Swettenden. Its all written down in various interviews and books
I wish there was a version with just the session players out there – the big orchestras they recorded always sounded superb, their arrangements during these times were top-notch,
I thought George played bass on this one? If it’s Paul, it’s a pretty weak bass line for him.
George plays 6 string Fender bass in the song. check out David Frost’s show.
That’s what I thought as well, but the credits above say Paul.
John Lennon was one of the great geniuses of all time, but his reaction to “Hey Jude”, that it was Paul’s blessing to pursue Yoko Ono, rather than a lullaby to his broken-hearted son Julian, reveals just how narcissistic he can be. The record is pretty clear that he completely ignored his son when he shared a house with him; then, after Yoko he moved out and was content never to see him again. And the one greatest gesture of sympathy which anybody shows the kid (Hey Jude) he wishes to steal for himself. He really thought the world of Yoko, which shows you that even great artists often have no taste outside their own fields.
I completely agree. It actually makes me feel quite angry what John did to his first family and all the hypocritical things he did after he left them. The best excuse I can come up with for him is that he had lost his mind to drugs. I don’t think this is a song about John. Someone else here said Paul never denied it but actually John said in an interview that when he put the idea to Paul he did in fact deny it. I can’t remember where I read this though. However, as much as I hate the idea of this being about John, I almost wish it were as I would quite like the irony of Paul writing a song to cheer up Julian after his parents divorce only to subconsciously write lyrics encouraging John to be with the very woman who caused the divorce. I genuinely would quite like that in a way. I don’t think it is the case though.
I love the Beatles and totally respect John and his music BUT he was flawed. Even the song imagine only serves to highlight his hypocrisy about money. He wrote it shortly before going into tax exile in America. The words possibly are an echo of his inner turmoil about leaving his homeland behind in search of mammon. This makes him interesting.
Absolute favorite song ever. I pity the people who have never heard it.
Lately it seems as if “Hey Jude” incredibly gets overlooked on lists of all-time Beatles songs. In the 70’s at least it was a consensus #1 song of all time on various countdowns. Now it seems to be routinely eclipsed on Beatles’ lists by “A Day In The Life” “Strawberry Fields” etc. In the book Here There and Everywhere it was at #6. (“Martha My Dear” was 18th?!!) Then again making Beatles lists can be self-defeating, how do you quantify so much greatness? I like them all.
Agreed; it’s basically impossible. I stopped bothering long ago. I do have a dozen or so that are particular favourites of mine, but my liking them specially doesn’t mean they’re the best; they just appeal to me, personally.
I used to hear a song and go, Oh, that one’s my favourite, and then I’d find a new one and say, No, I like that one even better. After I did this about 20 times I gave up. They’re all good, each in their own way. 🙂
I just wanted to know what bass was used on it. I can’t believe the 6-string Fender can get that tone so I was wondering if Paul did it on a Fender Jazz bass.
My favorite Paul McCartney composition and obviously there is a lot of competition in making that choice!! From its opening until its great chorus/ fade out. As a kid when I first heard this song and played cousins of mines vinyl copies through to when I got my own in the form of the album Hey Jude in 1978, I have loved this song. Like John Lennons All You Need Is Love it represents all that was good about the spirit of the late 60s.
Obviously this was written for reassurance to Julian after John and Cynthias break up. And what a masterpiece resulted.
I just love the backing vocals on the first section of the song…simply beautiful.
Amazing song and even more amazing is the fact that it spent 9 weeks at number one, and was actually passed on its way down by Wilson Pickett’s cover, which hit #16! Has anything like that ever happened before or after??
ha, that’s amazing. Would be interesting to research other examples of covers hitting the charts like that…doubt you’ll find any.
Actually, in the earlier days of the charts, when acts were getting their songs from professional songwriters (Tin Pan Alley in the UK, the Brill Building in the US), it was quite common to find multiple versions vying for chart supremacy.
A good example of this in the UK charts would be the Guy Mitchell and Tommy Steele versions of “Singng the Blues”, both of which topped the chart at the beginning of 1957. Mitchell’s version spent three weeks at Number One, split up by two other singles, one of which was Steele’s version of the same song.
The most recent example I can think of is Oasis’ Number One “Wonderwall”, which was still in the charts as the Mike Flowers Pops’ version started its rise to Number One.
There are also 35 uncredited backing vocals on the record.
Standing alone, it’s a well written song, and still a thrill to listen to. It’s funny 40+ yrs down the line, people have a need to twist an interpretation out of it like a CNN Special Report: What The Beatles REALLY Meant. Shh, kiddies. Be still and listen and enjoy!
I’ve been wondering. As the song fades and Paul is ranting all kinds of things, he clearly shouts, “Jude, you’re no yellow-brain, now…”
So what is a yellow-brain and is it racial?
Paul was just telling him that he’s not a fungus. Julian no doubt felt that way since John spent so little time with him.
Hey Jude is overrated and boring. MCartney´s music cannot age, opposed to Lennon´s that always is growing.
When The Beatles became famaous 1963 with the Lennon composition Please Please Me, it meant a new expressionistic tension! Lennon composed – nobody knew – most of their hits 1963-1965, or before Yesterday. Lennon composed “the three big singles from 1967”, Srawberry Fields Forever, All You Need Is Love and I Am the Walrus. After 1967 the singles were dominated by McCartney and the new tension disappeared, the development went back to the 1930s, and we got boring things like Hey Jude and Let It Be.
Such bitterness again. Even Lennon thought they were a damn good set of lyrics, though maybe he had a selfish reason to praise “Paul’s song.” Obviously Lennon didn’t feel “Hey Jude” lacked expressionistic tension.
I remember reading somewhere that the reason Ringo comes in later on in this song, on one of the early takes he had to take a pee. He snuck through the booth to the bathroom, Paul didn’t notice. He then snuck pack quietly on his drums and came in on the fill .Not sure if this is true but I read this.
There is A kind of organ
Lennon’s comments about this song do show his level of self-absorption. He thinks all songs in the latter years were awful (except his), or were directed to or about him (or him and Yoko). How could he possibly think this is about him when the author states it’s about his son??
One of Paul’s and the Beatles greatest songs. Absolutely amazing and utterly memorable. Great hook, and Paul was on top of his game with this one.
My all time favorite. I;ll limit my comments to 2 things. The mono mix which is what we all heard on the radio and bought is so much better than what we always hear now.
Secondly, the expletive seems like its most likely because each verse alternates with the ‘ into your heart’,or ‘under your skin’ bit. Just as the tight harmony gets to that point repeating the first verse as the 4th verse and the bits reverse someone says fuck. It seems unikely there’s a wrong chord in this 3 chord song.
I’m from 1954 so I grew up with The Fab Four and their fantastic music. Hey Jude is one of my favorite Beatles-songs because of it’s sing-a-long status. And I love the videoclip with a very enthousiast audience singing and clapping during the fadeout.
Hey Joe, Just to come back to the “shooting heroin” in 1968. In Pete Shotton’s book “In my life” ( first edition 1983 ), Pete clearly remembers the presence of syringes at Montagu square appartment, so it’s quite probable that John and Yoko were heroin users by that time ( Autumn 68 ), nothing to do with “Hey Jude”, of course!
I thought the song was written to St. Jude reaching out to this saint for help in a difficult situation. I think I’ll stick with my interpretation
I would just like to point out that Hey Jude is just one of many Beatle songs that start without an instrumental intro. The first thing you hear is the singers voice. Songs like No Reply, You’re Going To Lose That Girl, and All My Loving. It’s a very interesting and powerful technique. There are many more (not exactly sure how many) but Hey Jude is my favorite of the bunch.
@wksongwriter – this is an excellent point and fun topic. I agree “Hey Jude” is possibly the best example of a voice-only introduction in the Beatles’ catalog, and a favorite among the many that start this way. Paul’s voice starting “Hey Jude”, strikes just the right balance of sincere-caring with urgency and tenderness, that the song requires – especially when believed to be sung for Julian (I believe this to be true).
There are more than a few strong song contenders that also use this voice-only opening technique. “If I Fell”, “No Reply” and “Happiness Is A Warm Gun” are excellent examples of John’s voice in this role. It is John’s voice alone before the awesome John/Paul duet on “If I Fell”. Paul’s voice starting the tender “I Will” is contrasted dramatically with his famous voice-only rave-up on “I’m Down”. George’s voice alone (with plenty of reverb) kicks off “Everybody Wants To Be My Baby” before any instrument makes a sound. And as you said, there are many more!
But back to this song, it’s an excellent point to make. “Hey Jude”, as epic as it becomes, begins with a solitary human voice carrying compassion. And that makes it powerful from the start.
Sung this as my solo audition for choir a couple years back in Grade 6 I believe it was. Feels like an eternity ago. One of my first discoveries of The Beatles.
The music video is fantastic as well. The old guy who they apparently talked to a lot grabbing onto Paul and all. Wonder if the kids there knew they were going to be apart of history.