Paul McCartney

Byrnzie
Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
edited November 2008 in Other Music
What do people here think of him? A music journalist friend of mine interviewed him last week and when I told him I thought McCartney was a cunt he didn't like it.
I said he's just a washed-up old irrelevance who's in the same league as Phil Collins or Brian May - Muso's like him but he's done nothing of any interest or importance since leaving the Beatles. With all his millions and talent he could have done so much in the past 40 years but instead he's just sat on his wealth and produced the odd record of bland, pointlessness for 50 year old men with goatee beards and tweed jackets.

Am I wrong?

Edit: Also, what was the recent trip to Israel all about? My journalist friend said it was because his children are Jewish. Is that true? Either way, what does his children being Jewish have to do with him playing in Israel and celebrating the ethnic cleansing of Palestine at a time when Palestinians are still being killed and oppressed?

Paul McCartney is pointless.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13456

Comments

  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    walrus wrote:
    yes..you're wrong

    Care to elaborate? I don't have time for soundbites.
  • justam
    justam Posts: 21,415
    Byrnzie wrote:
    What do people here think of him? A music journalist friend of mine interviewed him last week and when I told him I thought McCartney was a cunt he didn't like it.
    I said he's just a washed-up old irrelevance who's in the same league as Phil Collins or Brian May - Muso's like him but he's done nothing of any interest or importance since leaving the Beatles. With all his millions and talent he could have done so much in the past 40 years but instead he's just sat on his wealth and produced the odd record of bland, pointlessness for 50 year old men with goatee beards and tweed jackets.

    Am I wrong?

    Edit: Also, what was the recent trip to Israel all about? My journalist friend said it was because his children are Jewish. Is that true? Either way, what does his children being Jewish have to do with him playing in Israel and celebrating the ethnic cleansing of Palestine at a time when Palestinians are still being killed and oppressed?

    Paul McCartney is pointless.

    This post sounds as silly as me saying that I don't see why people thought Edison was an important inventor because "What has he done LATELY?!" :p
    &&&&&&&&&&&&&&
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    justam wrote:
    This post sounds as silly as me saying that I don't see why people thought Edison was an important inventor because "What has he done LATELY?!" :p

    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.
  • justam
    justam Posts: 21,415
    Byrnzie wrote:
    As far as I'm concerned Lennon was the driving force behind the Beatles. McCartney was no Keith Richards, and he's proven that be being completely irrelevant since the Beatles broke up.

    Many people seem to feel that it was the two of them together that made them great.
    &&&&&&&&&&&&&&
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    justam wrote:
    Many people seem to feel that it was the two of them together that made them great.

    I'm not talking about the past. I'm talking about what he's done as an individual in the past 40 years. The fact is, he's done nothing of any worth.
  • justam
    justam Posts: 21,415
    Byrnzie wrote:
    I'm not talking about the past. I'm talking about what he's done as an individual in the past 40 years. The fact is, he's done nothing of any worth.

    It almost doesn't matter though. What he did during the peak of his career is more than most people do in a lifetime. He could have retired entirely and it's more.

    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.
    &&&&&&&&&&&&&&
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    justam wrote:
    It almost doesn't matter though. What he did during the peak of his career is more than most people do in a lifetime. He could have retired entirely and it's more.

    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.

    I just find him to be totally uninteresting, and so I fail to understand why people still get gushy about him.
    Lennon was in a totally different class altogether. They're like the equivalent of Ali and George Foreman.
  • g under p
    g under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,252
    PM is sort of OK, George Harrison then Lennon were much better and comes nowhere close to David Bowie.

    Peace
    *We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

    *MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
    .....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

    *The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


  • Evacuation Rules
    Evacuation Rules Posts: 2,162
    Byrnzie wrote:
    As far as I'm concerned Lennon was the driving force behind the Beatles.

    That statement alone proves that you don't know shit about the Beatles. You're just another one of those people who is completely oblivious to anything McCartney has done and feels the need to bash him because he isn't as cool as Lennon or as spiritual as George. PAUL was the driving force behind the Beatles, the glue that held the band together, and he was easily the most musically talented member. This is a fact, not an opinion. He was also very involved in the production of their records and he did just as much producing in the later years as George Martin did. He is a legend amongst serious musicians for his revoultionary bass playing alone, forget the fact that he is a world class songwriter. I would be surprised if you've even heard one of his albums all the way through. His last few have been excellent. So maybe you should spend some time expanding your musical knowledge instead of spouting off negative and stupid rhetoric.
  • RolanBolan
    RolanBolan Posts: 36
    I would say that yes, some of McCartney's solo work isn't very good. However, his work with The Beatles is absolutely irrefutable.

    I actually just listened to his new solo album. Speaking as someone who has not been a big fan of McCartney's previous solo efforts, I must admit this new album is a turn in the right direction. It's a good album and you should listen to it if you haven't.

    Like it or not, the guy is kind of a music legend. I think that it's fine to not like someone who is considered a legend and I hate it when people will give artists credit for their latest albums just because they are "legends." But in this case, with this new album, the credit is well-deserved. IMO
  • Julien
    Julien Posts: 2,457
    Byrnzie wrote:
    What do people here think of him? A music journalist friend of mine interviewed him last week and when I told him I thought McCartney was a cunt he didn't like it.
    I said he's just a washed-up old irrelevance who's in the same league as Phil Collins or Brian May - Muso's like him but he's done nothing of any interest or importance since leaving the Beatles. With all his millions and talent he could have done so much in the past 40 years but instead he's just sat on his wealth and produced the odd record of bland, pointlessness for 50 year old men with goatee beards and tweed jackets.

    Am I wrong?

    Edit: Also, what was the recent trip to Israel all about? My journalist friend said it was because his children are Jewish. Is that true? Either way, what does his children being Jewish have to do with him playing in Israel and celebrating the ethnic cleansing of Palestine at a time when Palestinians are still being killed and oppressed?

    Paul McCartney is pointless.

    I agree... i don't really like this guy. he always seem to behave like he thinks he's god.
    2006: Antwerp, Paris
    2007: Copenhagen, Werchter
    2009: Rotterdam, London
    2010: MSG, Arras, Werchter
    2012: Amsterdam, Prague, Berlin
    2014: Amsterdam, Stockholm
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    JWBusher wrote:
    That statement alone proves that you don't know shit about the Beatles. You're just another one of those people who is completely oblivious to anything McCartney has done and feels the need to bash him because he isn't as cool as Lennon or as spiritual as George. PAUL was the driving force behind the Beatles, the glue that held the band together, and he was easily the most musically talented member. This is a fact, not an opinion. He was also very involved in the production of their records and he did just as much producing in the later years as George Martin did. He is a legend amongst serious musicians for his revoultionary bass playing alone, forget the fact that he is a world class songwriter. I would be surprised if you've even heard one of his albums all the way through. His last few have been excellent. So maybe you should spend some time expanding your musical knowledge instead of spouting off negative and stupid rhetoric.

    I couldn't give two shits about the Beatles.

    I also couldn't give a shit about his supposed musicianship. If I did then I'd probably be into jazz and/or classical music.

    Paul McCartney is pointless.

    By the way, nice username. It speaks volumes.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    RolanBolan wrote:
    I would say that yes, some of McCartney's solo work isn't very good. However, his work with The Beatles is absolutely irrefutable.

    I actually just listened to his new solo album. Speaking as someone who has not been a big fan of McCartney's previous solo efforts, I must admit this new album is a turn in the right direction. It's a good album and you should listen to it if you haven't.

    Like it or not, the guy is kind of a music legend. I think that it's fine to not like someone who is considered a legend and I hate it when people will give artists credit for their latest albums just because they are "legends." But in this case, with this new album, the credit is well-deserved. IMO

    Thanks. I'll give it a listen.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    JWBusher wrote:
    That statement alone proves that you don't know shit about the Beatles. You're just another one of those people who is completely oblivious to anything McCartney has done and feels the need to bash him because he isn't as cool as Lennon or as spiritual as George. PAUL was the driving force behind the Beatles, the glue that held the band together, and he was easily the most musically talented member. This is a fact, not an opinion. He was also very involved in the production of their records and he did just as much producing in the later years as George Martin did. He is a legend amongst serious musicians for his revoultionary bass playing alone, forget the fact that he is a world class songwriter. I would be surprised if you've even heard one of his albums all the way through. His last few have been excellent. So maybe you should spend some time expanding your musical knowledge instead of spouting off negative and stupid rhetoric.

    When was the last time Paul McCartney ever rocked the boat, said anything interesting, or even just voiced an opinion of any kind?
    With his millions and his clout is he not someone who is able to take a few risks?

    He may be the greatest musician in the world for all I care. He's pointless.
  • dunkman
    dunkman Posts: 19,646
    Byrnzie wrote:
    As far as I'm concerned Lennon was the driving force behind the Beatles.


    any weight your argument had was lost when you typed this... Lennon was lazy.. Paul drove them forward all the time... Paul was into Stockhausen and was much more avant-garde with his musical progression through the sixties. John used to say things like "make it sound like an orgasm" to George Martin and then he and Paul would produce John's songs.. Lennon has the kudos he has these days because he was murdered... the real Lennon was that he was a belligirent junkie who punched his wife

    But saying Paul has done fuck all for 40 years might be true... who cares... he was one of the 2 most influential musicians/songwriters ever.. he and john broke the mould, set the world alight and their legacy is enough for him to waste his next 40 years if he so wished... The Beatles were that important.

    p.s. listen to his new album The Fireman, i think you'll change your opinion (even slightly)
    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.
  • JordyWordy
    JordyWordy Posts: 2,261
    Byrnzie wrote:
    When was the last time Paul McCartney ever rocked the boat, said anything interesting, or even just voiced an opinion of any kind?
    With his millions and his clout is he not someone who is able to take a few risks?

    He may be the greatest musician in the world for all I care. He's pointless.

    You should listen to his newer albums. Also, he's incredible stamina in live shows for an old guy, and his voice has lasted incredibly well in his older age.

    The "musicianship" aspect of him is pretty central to the Beatles' sound and the general development of modern recording methods.

    Its funny, cos I dont really rate Lennon's solo stuff that greatly, certainly not much greater than McCartneys. Lennons solo work was more social & popular, but in general there was nothing adventurous about it either. I also believe if Lennon was still alive he'd not be nearly as cool as he's remembered as being.


    If McCartney is no good then nobodys any good. The man helped invent modern rock.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    So your argument rests on the following:
    dunkman wrote:
    Paul was into Stockhausen


    Lennon has the kudos he has these days because he was murdered
    Lennon was lazy
    Lennon was that he was a belligirent junkie who punched his wife

    Sorry, but you haven't built up much of a case here.

    dunkman wrote:
    saying Paul has done fuck all for 40 years might be true... who cares

    I care that people regard him as some sort of untouchable and that the light shines out of his ass.

    I just don't see it myself.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    walrus wrote:
    hmm..activism?
    Concerts for the People of Kampuchea
    Band Aid
    Live Aid
    Ferry Aid
    The Concert for New York
    PETA
    Adopt-A-Minefield

    These aren't examples of activism. They're examples of someone playing music in front of millions of people on live t.v megathons. Everyone and his dog jumped on that band[aid]wagon.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    JordyWordy wrote:
    If McCartney is no good then nobodys any good. The man helped invent modern rock.

    I'm not saying he isn't a talented musician. I'm just saying that I don't care.
    Phil Collins is also a talented musician. So were Status Quo.
  • iamica
    iamica Chicago Posts: 2,628
    Saying that he's done nothing of worth in the past 40 years is pretty harsh. I may not like everything he's done, but I think he's put out some decent stuff.
    Chicago 2000 : Chicago 2003 : Chicago 2006 : Summerfest 2006 : Lollapalooza 2007 : Chicago 2009 : Noblesville (Indy) 2010 : PJ20 (East Troy) 2011 : Wrigley Field 2013 : Milwaukee (Yield) 2014 : Wrigley Field 2016

Categories