Post by inmylife on Sept 1, 2003 16:07:15 GMT
If I was to accept everything at the website I would be left with a few doubts of the general premise; and these are them:
1) The notion: Paul dies and they find a replacement who looks enough like Paul at glance to dash early suspicion. He then assumes the life of Paul; home, personality, career, family, etc. Then over a process of the next four years they complete his plastic surgery and by chance he happens to also sound exactly like Paul. In the mid'st of this he swiftly learns to be left handed and also becomes a natural with all the writing and singing music. So much to a point to where today you would have to look back and ask yourself if 'Faul' was as or more talented than Paul. Then today 'Faul' still assumes his role as McCartney without anyone ever having revealed the truth.
2) The logic: The government would have to be involved, all band members, producers, people who altered photos, doctors, remaining family would all have to act as if Paul had never died and successfully keep the truth hidden. It is for one, about the most unethical I have ever heard and secondly about the least likely to ever had happen.
3) The necessity: What? A couple hundred fans maybe would have hanged themselves a hundred thousand others shed tears for a week and Yesterday airs over every medium for a month. Or avoid all that trauma and replace him and act as if nothing ever happened to ensure Beatlemania and make more money for the rest of their lives?
--note sarcastic tone in some parts--
--One thing I concede though is that Paul (post 1970), when the beard fell suddenly did look more like the prototypical Paul of the early 60's. What I mean is that he started to look more like Paul than Paul ever looked like himself; as if the features became exaggerated; but it concludes nothing.
1) The notion: Paul dies and they find a replacement who looks enough like Paul at glance to dash early suspicion. He then assumes the life of Paul; home, personality, career, family, etc. Then over a process of the next four years they complete his plastic surgery and by chance he happens to also sound exactly like Paul. In the mid'st of this he swiftly learns to be left handed and also becomes a natural with all the writing and singing music. So much to a point to where today you would have to look back and ask yourself if 'Faul' was as or more talented than Paul. Then today 'Faul' still assumes his role as McCartney without anyone ever having revealed the truth.
2) The logic: The government would have to be involved, all band members, producers, people who altered photos, doctors, remaining family would all have to act as if Paul had never died and successfully keep the truth hidden. It is for one, about the most unethical I have ever heard and secondly about the least likely to ever had happen.
3) The necessity: What? A couple hundred fans maybe would have hanged themselves a hundred thousand others shed tears for a week and Yesterday airs over every medium for a month. Or avoid all that trauma and replace him and act as if nothing ever happened to ensure Beatlemania and make more money for the rest of their lives?
--note sarcastic tone in some parts--
--One thing I concede though is that Paul (post 1970), when the beard fell suddenly did look more like the prototypical Paul of the early 60's. What I mean is that he started to look more like Paul than Paul ever looked like himself; as if the features became exaggerated; but it concludes nothing.
