|
|
Post by IanSingleton777 on Dec 3, 2003 13:36:45 GMT
WOW- The lyrical content..or lack of, I should say, has always been a point of contention with me. The obvious sheer GENIUS of the REAL Paul McCartney, in my humble yet experienced opinion, would NEVER churn out this sort of brain-dead, meaningless, repeatitious CRAP. A 10 year-old writing his first song would come up with drivel like this...and FAUL has literally dozens of songs like this. An audio crime! GUILTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by xpt626 on Dec 3, 2003 14:05:47 GMT
... still, i like some of his music.  I do, too, LongJohn. Mine will not be a popular opinion here, but I like the later solo music from each of the four much more than I like "Beatle music". It isn't neccessary for everything in my life to be "Shakespeare". |
|
|
|
Post by IanSingleton777 on Dec 3, 2003 16:26:09 GMT
second time i get the same answer from you... alright... so you don't like faul's music.... ok, now everyone knows.... ;D ;D ;D ;D still, i think it's interesting how with his "little" talent, he's still able to write using one of his main subjects which is carrying someone elses weight, and receiving visits from dead people (like "let em in") .... and i've said hundreds of times i know faul's talent is nothing compared to paul's or any of the beatles... still, i like some of his music. So I gather by your reply, and by your general posting output, that you sort of advocate Faul, and hold him at some level of esteem. Which, candidly, strikes me as quirky since the mandate of this site is to expose the imposter and expose the cover-up of Paul's demise. But, hey, your opinions "carry the same weight" (pun on thread) as all of ours do. Just don't post some pot-headed, third-rate throwaway lyrics and NOT expect to encounter some negative feedback. It's nothing personal against you, unless you wrote that song, and/or the other four dozen like it. ;D As an aside, I personally think it's great that the lyrics and songs of Faul "interest" you. More power to ya!  |
|
|
|
Post by SilverBeatle on Dec 3, 2003 17:10:52 GMT
Let me say first I hope not to offend with what I'm about to type (I can sense everyone now getting up their guard)  Regarding McCartney's lyrics, I'm curious which ones Ian considers to be such genius? I always felt that if McCartney HAD a fault it was with his lyrical content -- certainly not with his bass playing, overall musicianship, and talent for melody. To me, Lennon was always the more inventive wordsmith. McCartney's lyrics (minus "Rigby" and a small handful of others) never really struck me as being exceptional. Not horrible mind you, just not exceptional. I'm not flaming folks, just expressing opinion. Just a Beatle fan's opinion here, nothing more and nothing less. |
|
|
|
Post by Darkhorse on Dec 4, 2003 0:24:12 GMT
Ian is right though, LJ. Most of what Faul wrote, or should I say was written for him, was not good.  Now, don't get me wrong I am somewhat a fan of Faul's and like some of his songs. That song could have been written by a 10-year, though or, I am thinking, anyone in 5th grade English class. But hey I've never heard the song. It might have a good melody. |
|
|
|
Post by xpt626 on Dec 4, 2003 0:40:43 GMT
....That song could have been written by a 10-year, though or, I am thinking, anyone in 5th grade English class. not neccessarily a bad thing, Darky ;D...a big hit record in the 60's was written by an 8-year old kid ;D ;D (honestly!) |
|
|
|
Post by Darkhorse on Dec 4, 2003 0:44:10 GMT
Really? Which one?  |
|
|
|
Post by xpt626 on Dec 4, 2003 0:44:33 GMT
....don't post some pot-headed, third-rate throwaway lyrics (your opinion)....interesting....a lot of people here have openly discussed their past / present drug use....I have been lucid every day of my life, so that's not my attraction to Faul's songs... ....and NOT expect to encounter some negative feedback. sadly, most "feedback" from you seems to constantly be negative lately. |
|
|
|
Post by xpt626 on Dec 4, 2003 0:57:13 GMT
....you sort of advocate Faul, and hold him at some level of esteem.  what's wrong with enjoying him for what he is? I no longer think of him as James Paul, but that doesn't stop me from liking some of his songs...as for "holding him at some level of esteem", that, to me, implies admiration for him as a person....I do admire the work he has done on behalf of animals. I disagree with his stance on drugs. Simply put, there are things I like about him and things I don't. Why is that a basis for criticism? "To each their own".... |
|
|
|
Post by unrepentant on Dec 5, 2003 4:36:38 GMT
that song has always appealed to me melodically, to the point that the lyrics were of little importance. but yes, they are limp.
then again, i sensed a vague, sinister quality to them...
as if the character in the song is carrying something his lady friend might find a bit.... hard to accept.
|
|
|
|
Post by xpt626 on Dec 5, 2003 5:10:30 GMT
Really? Which one? "The Birds & The Bees" by Jewel Aikens (a #3 hit).... not that I'm saying writing like an 8-yr-old should be anyone's professional goal, mind you ;D ;D ;D LOL |
|
|
|
Post by Fwings on Dec 5, 2003 8:39:07 GMT
I'm a fan of ALL FIVE Beatles. I'd like for the truth to come out because James Paul deserves it, but I hold no ill will towards Faul. In fact, I respect him for promoting vegetarianism and his work against landmines.
Faul's lyrics were never really an issue to me, because even when I thought he was JP, I found his post-Beatles stuff to be catchy and melodic. Plus, in defense of Faul, how deep are some of the Beatles early lyrics? Love Me Do, anyone? That doesn't stop anybody from holding them in high regard.
Finally, when concerning "Silly Love Songs" (Faul's most lambasted work), I've always felt that it was nothing more than a highly sarcastic response towards Lennon and other critics. Come on, repeating "I love you" ad naseum? For me, it was always a hilarious song in that light.
There's no room in this world for two Paul McCartneys. However, I think there is room for Paul McCartney and William Shepperd.
|
|
|
|
Post by yellowmatter on Dec 5, 2003 11:08:18 GMT
I reckon SilverBeatle and Wings are right Ian - we must separate Musical quality from lyrical genius: Paul was undoubtadly the better musician wheras it was John who concentrated on the lyrics (but you know this). You remember the story with Hey Jude? "The movement you need is on your shoulder" This was a "throwaway line", a line to fill in the gap before he thought of a better one. Turned out he liked the line and the way it sounded right? (and coincidentally so did Lennon) So he included it anyway - doesn't have to be about the lyrics, just the way it sounds. And yes, i like Faul's work too |
|
what's wrong with enjoying him for what he is? I no longer think of him as James Paul, but that doesn't stop me from liking some of his songs...as for "holding him at some level of esteem", that, to me, implies admiration for him as a person....I do admire the work he has done on behalf of animals. I disagree with his stance on drugs. Simply put, there are things I like about him and things I don't. Why is that a basis for criticism? "To each their own".... 