Paul McCartney - McCartney
That's not really true. Yes he owned a farm, but only because buying property is what wealthy people do instead of paying taxes. They're called liquid assets because you can freely slosh them around when necessary. He let the neighboring shepherd graze the land so it didn't appear vacant, and eventually bought more of the surrounding property to further discourage sightseers. If you follow the documented timeline, they spent 2 or 3 months there after John said adios jerkos. They were back in London before Christmas, and that's where McCartney actually recorded his lo-fi self-titled solo album.
We ignore the fact that he's not some random schmuck, he is a corporate executive. When he walked into the New York offices of Apple Records even Allen Klein had to say "you're the boss." Go ahead, try postponing you're internationally renowned band's next album for your own anger fueled, clandestinely produced solo effort, see how well that works. The history of the Beatles' breakup is so convoluted at this point, that you have to take a step back and evaluate reality.
1) John Lennon quit. Straight up said "i'm not in this band anymore." Sure George had quit before, but George didn't own any of it. There's only one hyphen and it's the one in Lennon-McCartney.
2) Paul had a full book of matches and his American lawyers were actual family. Bye bye bridge.
John broke up the Beatles, but Paul was the one who forced them to acknowledge it publicly. He bought new toys, made an album in his house, booked studio time under an alias to mix and master it, and pushed the release of Let It Be back because anger and viciousness is the first stage of depression. The actual bottom of the barrell didn't hit until everybody, and i do mean everybody, said "this is crap." That's what hurt, and that's why Ram turned out the way it did.
Nobody had any idea that the Beatles were over when McCartney was released, they thought it was going to be a normal old album of Paul McCartney songs, but they got the opposite of the Beatles instead.
So, what are the major criticisms of this album? 1) it's lo-fi, 2) the songs sound unfinished, and 3) "instrumental" music is a cop out. Are those criticisms fair? That depends.
1 - If you were expecting George Martin production on this solo effort, you would have been disappointed. If however, you want to hear an album 100% made by Paul McCartney, then that criticism makes no sense. This is the album he made, you can't argue that it isn't.
2 - Lennon and McCartney were are team, and they relied on each other to give their songs a final form, or at the very least act as a filter, more often than not. Any solo album by McCartney is going to noticeably lack the Lennon part of the equation.
3 - This is just a stupid criticism. 70% of Beatles songs have nonsense lyrics to begin with, and you're really just saying "this album of music has too much music on it." It might not be what you want it to be, but he's not playing fart sounds on a casio keyboard (it's not the 80s yet...).
At the risk of trying your patience, and straining your eyesight reading this monstrosity of a post, i'm going to go track by track.
The Lovely Linda - this is a song fragment (a test recording), and he giggles at the end. You've already heard The Ballad of John and Yoko, so either you make a connection or we just keep going.
That Would Be Something - two tag lines and beat boxing. That's just experimental blues. Silly, but legitimate in it's experimentality.
Valentine Day - It's an instrumental jam that could totally be a demo he might bring to a Beatles rehearsal.
Every Night - This is a great song. Short, but lovely.
Hot As Sun - Yes, it's a series of instrumental interludes. You know who might be able to write some good verses for it....?
Glasses - ok that was pointless. I like it, but i'll admit it serves no purpose.
Junk - perfectly fine song. Again, short, but it doesn't need to be any longer.
Man We Was Lonely - perfectly acceptable song. The most complete song so far, with interesting stereo effects, even.
Oo You - perfectly good blues song. I think you know where this review is going to end up...
Momma Miss America - really interesting instrumental piece. Not a "song" per se, but i've written 50+ eps full of stuff like this. Just saying, it doesn't suck as a piece of music.
Teddy Boy - i'm not going to pretend, this is a crummy song. Still a song, though.
Singalong Junk - an instrumental piece titled exactly how you'd expect the Beatles to actually feel about this song if they went ahead and made it an actual song.
Maybe I'm Amazed - the one track nobody could even begin to pretend was substandard in any way whatsoever. It also says something very specific about what you've been listening to this whole time. It's not absent minded garbage. This song says "i can make this kind of thing whenever i feel like it, but i'm actually trying to do something different."
Kreen-Akrore - a piece named after a Brazilian tribe (now called the Panará) known for killing intruders. Hmmm.
So what's the verdict? You're all idiots. This is fantastic. This is what he would have brought to the next Beatles session if there were going to be one. They would flesh out the instrumentals, John would co-write some lyrics and tweak the music a little, George would play some interesting but subtle side riffs, Ringo would tastefully bang on the drums. Screw those guys.
Everybody gave Paul crap because he was the one who publicly said "the Beatles are over," but he's also the one who suggested they be an actual band again because John and George kept bickering and threatening to quit and being pissy about everything. Ringo was only mad because he sat in the lobby patiently waiting for everyone else to show up every day.
I side with Paul on this one. If the rest of his solo career was this good (it's not) i'd be a die hard fan.
"The Beatles" was a monstrous behemoth pop culture juggernaut, and it makes complete sense that each member had radically different interests outside of that world (i'll talk about George at some point, he just requires a lot more mental energy than i have right now).
I think this album should only be compared to other self made major albums of the time, of which there are none. Paul McCartney is literally the first person rich, powerful, and talented enough to record, publish, and internationally distribute an album he made in his living room. That's insane for 1969, and it's equally insane today. Beck and Dave Grohl are the only people i can think of who've done something comparable, but they still had other people in a real recording studio with professional equipment helping them.
This, of course, is just my opinion: i think it's muchly much much more better than what everyone else says about it.
Next
Comments
Post a Comment