your opinion carries weight within yourself... everyone else thinks you excrete from your fingertips
No, like I said, you are the one who thinks I think a lot of myself. If you think you know someone from a message board, you probably need to get out more mate
I'll just say I'm pretty sick of having everything I post disregarded as "arrogance" and "elitism" by a person who embodies these character traits with delight and vigour.
"I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
Most people who diss Paul McCartney don't have the slightest understanding of anything he's accomplished, as this thread proves.
Right. Because he 'was the brains and ears behind the tape loops on John's Tomorrow Never Knows', and he liked to listen to Stockhausen.
Wow! Sir Paul McCartney. How rock 'n roll. He's an establishment fossil and is probably on personal terms with Prince Charles and the Queen.
Sorry, but that shit just isn't impressive.
Right. Because he 'was the brains and ears behind the tape loops on John's Tomorrow Never Knows', and he liked to listen to Stockhausen.
Wow! Sir Paul McCartney. How rock 'n roll. He's an establishment fossil and is probably on personal terms with Prince Charles and the Queen.
Sorry, but that shit just isn't impressive.
If you "don't care" about his accomplishments, this only proves that you are proud to be an ignoramous. What's the fucking point of this stupid thread then? To prove what an arrogant ass you are when it comes to one of the greatest, most accomplished musicians who has ever lived?
It has nothing to do with George Bush, moron. Stick to writing your lame critique threads. It's fun to watch people act stupid.
Whatever you say tough guy.
JWBusher has nothing to do with George Bush? Interesting.
Uh huh but Lennon wasn't going around talking about how innovative and avant-garde he was, I'm sure he knew damn well his Two Virgins type albums were pure shite. McCartney thinks he's a genius. He's not, he wrote some good pop songs over 40 yeard ago. He's actually preparing to release a song that was neither good enough for release at the time, nor was it good enough for inclusion on their odds-and-sods Anthologies, because the other members deemed it to be self-indulgent crap. Now he thinks it's worthy of release because it will, in his own words, show how experimental he has always been.
He's so far up his own arse it's unreal.
Several things I'd respond with; first, Lennon talked about how innovative and avant-garde often. Reading his interviews pre- and post-the breakup of the Beatles, it's pretty clear he has an ego the size of New York State. Which I don't begrudge; tons of incredible performers also had massive egos. But he was by no means Mr. Modesty. I also don't think Lennon thought his Two Virgins stuff, as well as Revolution 9 and his other avant-garde experiments was shit, or was unwilling to stand behind him. Otherwise, why would he have released them at all? I think he loved them and decided to release them, and from what we hear he had almost as large a part in Carnival of Light as McCartney did.
And while it's entirely opinion, to limit Paul McCartney's role in the Beatles to having written "some good pop songs over 40 years ago" is a hard position to defend. I mean, it works if that's all you think the Beatles were worth, but Paul had as much impact on the masterpieces that band made as much as Lennon and Harrison to a degree. It was the creative conflict of the group that created the music.
I mean, Paul is up his own ass. Every Beatle was and is, besides possibly Ringo. I mean, they were the Beatles.
As far as I'm concerned Lennon was the driving force behind the Beatles. McCartney was no Keith Richards, and he's proven that by being completely irrelevant since the Beatles broke up.
So what you're saying is that we should all be reverential and admiring of him because of what he was a part of 40 years ago? Maybe he deserved that kind of attention back then but now he's just a has-been.
He's had 40 years in which to cement his own individual legacy, and what's he done? Fuck all.
Lennon and McCartney co-piloted the Beatles. John was not the only driving force. To say McCartney is irrelevant nowadays is utter bullshit. Who is still headlining the largest of major music festivals worldwide? Paul McCartney
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
No, like I said, you are the one who thinks I think a lot of myself. If you think you know someone from a message board, you probably need to get out more mate
i'm not the only one, i'm sure. So you dont think your opinion matters. You dont post on here and debate with people unless you think highly of your own opinions. Or at least have confidence and belief in what you are posting.
I'll just say I'm pretty sick of having everything I post disregarded as "arrogance" and "elitism" by a person who embodies these character traits with delight and vigour.
maybe you should get out more, you seem to think you know me?
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
I'm not talking about the past. I'm talking about what he's done as an individual in the past 40 years.
you're not talking about the past... but you want to know what he's done as an individual in the past 40 years?
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
"I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
'The past' I was referring to was specifically that of the Beatles.
yeah i know that... i thought it was funny how you said you werent talking of the past and then asked someone to explain what he's done in the past.
seems like you dont like him because he doesnt rock the boat or his friends are establishment figures? nothing to do with his music... which you probably havent heard since since the Frog Chorus... what difference does it make if has an interview and says the queens a slag and he hopes Judy Finnigans tits fall off... if you want 'scandal' then you'll love Doherty, personally i think he's a talentless cunt though
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
I've been a long time fan of Mccartney and the Beatles for over 40 years. However IMO he wandered well into cunt territory when he started charging $250 for tickets (not necessarily even excellent seats) for his concerts. Sure supply and demand says he can get it. But when you are worth way over a billion dollars it sucks. Like some oil producing countries are finding out right now just because you can suck the last fucking dollar out of people doesnt make it a particularly smart thing to do. I also haven;t been overly keen on his last 2 cd's despite tehir receiving substantial critical acclaim and some Grammy nods.
That was a great kids' tune. I could never understand why people disparaged it. Critics looked like imbeciles who were unable to determine when a song is written for youngsters. What were they expecting? Proust?
That was a great kids' tune. I could never understand why people disparaged it. Critics looked like imbeciles who were unable to determine when a song is written for youngsters. What were they expecting? Proust?
Yes, it will take nothing less than an ascension to the heights of Proust to make me appreciate McCartney.
"I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
Unfortunately, some people do their best work early rather than at the end of their lives. It probably sucks for him to know that too.
It's opinion though isn't it? Paul might think performing with his wife was as important and personal as performing with John Lennon & co. I don't buy into this juvenile tom-foolery of "best work". Paul McCartney more than likely views his solo projects as being different and equally unique to him as anything he did as a band member of The Beatles.
haven't read the whole thread, but i'm sure someone somewhere mentioned how awesome the new fireman album electric arguments is. and it just came out. so...sir paul is still rockin'...
It's opinion though isn't it? Paul might think performing with his wife was as important and personal as performing with John Lennon & co. I don't buy into this juvenile tom-foolery of "best work". Paul McCartney more than likely views his solo projects as being different and equally unique to him as anything he did as a band member of The Beatles.
What the hell is "juvenile" about appraising a musician's material? Those that expect their work to be treated as equally valuable and important would do well to never let anyone but themselves hear it. I'm sure every note McCartney recorded had a function for him. That which he has deemed necessary to release is public domain and entirely deserving of criticism if it is slipshod crap and praise if it is awesome.
"I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
It becomes a pointless exercise of moronic stupidity of the highest degree! It becomes an argument based on "fact" not "opinion" and then the topic becomes locked, someone cries wolf amongst the sheep and the Admin has a power trip and starts banning backsides with immediate effect citing a lack of obedience to the forum decree.
I have to confess that I thoroughly enjoyed Mull of Kintyre, this in my humblest opinion is as legendary as any of Ringo Starr's hits with The Beatles. I can see the mist rolling in from the sea.
It becomes a pointless exercise of moronic stupidity of the highest degree! It becomes an argument based on "fact" not "opinion" and then the topic becomes locked, someone cries wolf amongst the sheep and the Admin has a power trip and starts banning backsides with immediate effect citing a lack of obedience to the forum decree.
I have to confess that I thoroughly enjoyed Mull of Kintyre, this in my humblest opinion is as legendary as any of Ringo Starr's hits with The Beatles. I can see the mist rolling in from the sea.
Can I assume you are not a musician yourself?
Criticism does not serve to undermine or devalue art but to strengthen the critic's understanding of it and, if the critics are artists themselves, to strive towards a satisfactory version of art in their eyes. I wonder if you think that critics as important in their respective fields as T.S Eliot (literature), Lester Bangs (music) and Roger Ebert (film) engage only in "pointless exercises of moronic stupidity" and assuming you do, I wonder if you have wholly failed to grasp the point of criticism in the first place.
This is a discussion board, and a music discussion board no less. I wonder what kind of discourse you would have here if not this kind. The day when the users of a music message board lose the passion to virulently attack or defend music according to their own set of values as only they can understand them will be a sad day indeed. Everything here is indeed just opinion but since when did opinions have to be half-hearted and communal? Take them with a pinch of salt certainly but don't ever think that you're not allowed to sacrifice objectivity for the sake of passion. It's the internet after all. Hardly serious business
"I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
You assume whatever you like, I do play the piano, but I don't consider myself a musician, I wouldn't treat a beautiful creation with utter contempt and disrespect.
Criticism is designed to bring a person's well being into disarray and to plunge their future into a sea of a dark and morbid abyss. Why would I care what the Rolling Stones Magazine or some douchebag from the New York Times thinks about an album or an artist I like? I forge my opinion(s) and I keep it to myself without the need to gain attention for my non-benevolent cause.
The latter paragraph made my heart weep endlessly, it was a speech as fitting as one echoed by Winston Churchill. "We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in the record stores, we shall fight on the streets and in the classroom, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our right to criticise someone's efforts arrogantly and pompously, whatever the cost may be,we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the homes of every non passionate man, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender and if, we may lose this fight then our friends in Uzbekistan will launch heavy artillery into upper quarters of the Strumming Gnome's dwelling.
You assume whatever you like, I do play the piano, but I don't consider myself a musician, I wouldn't treat a beautiful creation with utter contempt and disrespect.
Criticism is designed to bring a person's well being into disarray and to plunge their future into a sea of a dark and morbid abyss. Why would I care what the Rolling Stones Magazine or some douchebag from the New York Times thinks about an album or an artist I like? I forge my opinion(s) and I keep it to myself without the need to gain attention for my non-benevolent cause.
The latter paragraph made my heart weep endlessly, it was a speech as fitting as one echoed by Winston Churchill. "We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in the record stores, we shall fight on the streets and in the classroom, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our right to criticise someone's efforts arrogantly and pompously, whatever the cost may be,we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the homes of every non passionate man, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender and if, we may lose this fight then our friends in Uzbekistan will launch heavy artillery into upper quarters of the Strumming Gnome's dwelling.
You're a curious individual. I never said, by the way, that you have to care what anyone thinks about your favourite music, I merely said that they too have views and have the right to express them. You can disregard them if you like but it is wishful thinking to assume that a piece of music is beyond reproach because YOU find it beautiful. This discussion board was not created for those with your insular approach to musical appreciation so don't come in here telling people that critiquing music is moronic, whether you feel that way or not. Just don't contribute, it's fine.
Your second paragraph, which I would address in depth but I have only so many years left to live and have to pick my fights according to how worthwhile they are, is one for the ages. I mean that. You're quite the dark poet.
"I remember one night at Muzdalifa with nothing but the sky overhead, I lay awake amid sleeping Muslim brothers and I learned that pilgrims from every land — every colour, and class, and rank; high officials and the beggar alike — all snored in the same language"
Comments
I'll just say I'm pretty sick of having everything I post disregarded as "arrogance" and "elitism" by a person who embodies these character traits with delight and vigour.
He he he! Hilarious.
Right. Because he 'was the brains and ears behind the tape loops on John's Tomorrow Never Knows', and he liked to listen to Stockhausen.
Wow! Sir Paul McCartney. How rock 'n roll. He's an establishment fossil and is probably on personal terms with Prince Charles and the Queen.
Sorry, but that shit just isn't impressive.
You're an IDIOT.
Whatever you say tough guy.
JWBusher has nothing to do with George Bush? Interesting.
I've been called worse.
You realise this isnt the MT right?
.........
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xz7_3n7xyDg
come on now. where would we be without c moon?
http://www.myspace.com/brain_of_c
Several things I'd respond with; first, Lennon talked about how innovative and avant-garde often. Reading his interviews pre- and post-the breakup of the Beatles, it's pretty clear he has an ego the size of New York State. Which I don't begrudge; tons of incredible performers also had massive egos. But he was by no means Mr. Modesty. I also don't think Lennon thought his Two Virgins stuff, as well as Revolution 9 and his other avant-garde experiments was shit, or was unwilling to stand behind him. Otherwise, why would he have released them at all? I think he loved them and decided to release them, and from what we hear he had almost as large a part in Carnival of Light as McCartney did.
And while it's entirely opinion, to limit Paul McCartney's role in the Beatles to having written "some good pop songs over 40 years ago" is a hard position to defend. I mean, it works if that's all you think the Beatles were worth, but Paul had as much impact on the masterpieces that band made as much as Lennon and Harrison to a degree. It was the creative conflict of the group that created the music.
I mean, Paul is up his own ass. Every Beatle was and is, besides possibly Ringo. I mean, they were the Beatles.
i'm not the only one, i'm sure. So you dont think your opinion matters. You dont post on here and debate with people unless you think highly of your own opinions. Or at least have confidence and belief in what you are posting.
maybe you should get out more, you seem to think you know me?
you're not talking about the past... but you want to know what he's done as an individual in the past 40 years?
'The past' I was referring to was specifically that of the Beatles.
yeah i know that... i thought it was funny how you said you werent talking of the past and then asked someone to explain what he's done in the past.
seems like you dont like him because he doesnt rock the boat or his friends are establishment figures? nothing to do with his music... which you probably havent heard since since the Frog Chorus... what difference does it make if has an interview and says the queens a slag and he hopes Judy Finnigans tits fall off... if you want 'scandal' then you'll love Doherty, personally i think he's a talentless cunt though
That was a great kids' tune. I could never understand why people disparaged it. Critics looked like imbeciles who were unable to determine when a song is written for youngsters. What were they expecting? Proust?
It's opinion though isn't it? Paul might think performing with his wife was as important and personal as performing with John Lennon & co. I don't buy into this juvenile tom-foolery of "best work". Paul McCartney more than likely views his solo projects as being different and equally unique to him as anything he did as a band member of The Beatles.
I have to confess that I thoroughly enjoyed Mull of Kintyre, this in my humblest opinion is as legendary as any of Ringo Starr's hits with The Beatles. I can see the mist rolling in from the sea.
Criticism does not serve to undermine or devalue art but to strengthen the critic's understanding of it and, if the critics are artists themselves, to strive towards a satisfactory version of art in their eyes. I wonder if you think that critics as important in their respective fields as T.S Eliot (literature), Lester Bangs (music) and Roger Ebert (film) engage only in "pointless exercises of moronic stupidity" and assuming you do, I wonder if you have wholly failed to grasp the point of criticism in the first place.
This is a discussion board, and a music discussion board no less. I wonder what kind of discourse you would have here if not this kind. The day when the users of a music message board lose the passion to virulently attack or defend music according to their own set of values as only they can understand them will be a sad day indeed. Everything here is indeed just opinion but since when did opinions have to be half-hearted and communal? Take them with a pinch of salt certainly but don't ever think that you're not allowed to sacrifice objectivity for the sake of passion. It's the internet after all. Hardly serious business
Criticism is designed to bring a person's well being into disarray and to plunge their future into a sea of a dark and morbid abyss. Why would I care what the Rolling Stones Magazine or some douchebag from the New York Times thinks about an album or an artist I like? I forge my opinion(s) and I keep it to myself without the need to gain attention for my non-benevolent cause.
The latter paragraph made my heart weep endlessly, it was a speech as fitting as one echoed by Winston Churchill. "We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in the record stores, we shall fight on the streets and in the classroom, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our right to criticise someone's efforts arrogantly and pompously, whatever the cost may be,we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the homes of every non passionate man, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender and if, we may lose this fight then our friends in Uzbekistan will launch heavy artillery into upper quarters of the Strumming Gnome's dwelling.
The Internet is a very serious business indeed, it can be a life and death situation. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1079348/British-man-shot-dead-ex-husband-woman-met-internet.html
Your second paragraph, which I would address in depth but I have only so many years left to live and have to pick my fights according to how worthwhile they are, is one for the ages. I mean that. You're quite the dark poet.