John Lennon right or wrong?

The Dark Elf wrote: Put it another way, how much longer do you think John could stand listening to any more of Paul's "granny music"?

Whoah!

I dare you to say that at Hoffman Music Forum.
They will crucify you en mass.


....
By the way, Cynthia just passed on.

deafmoon wrote: This topic was recently brought up again in America, so I am asking your thoughts on this... Was it 'cool or uncool'  when John included Yoko into the Beatles band meetings, song-writing, recording and rehearsals? I for one, think Lennon was uncool to do this. John was very insecure and Yoko gave him comfort, love and security. I get that. But to bring her into the mix and start pushing her opinions into his; just turned the kettle up to boil. How long was Paul expected to go along with this?

Edited by earlyprog - April 03 2015 at 12:46

^ Yeah, pretty childhish.

The good old debate but honestly, I don't care.

All a matter of taste, as always.

(what's wrong with silly love songs? *scratching head*)    

The Dark Elf wrote: Barbu wrote: The good old debate but honestly, I don't care. All a matter of taste, as always. (what's wrong with silly love songs? *scratching head*)       You're right, of course, all a matter of taste (or lack thereof ).   But if you look at the vast compendium of McCartney music, one has to regard his lyrics as bordering on the infantile, or, at least, simply ignoring word meanings and stringing nonsense together.   So I sat in the attic, a piano up my nose, And the wind played a dreadful cantata. Sore was I from a crack of an enemy's hose And the horrible sound of tomato. Ketchup, Soup and puree, Don't get left behind.   Deep, Paul, very deep.

Yet had this same pseudo surrealistic s.h.i.t.e come from Lennon (ditto Beefheart, ditto Morrison) it would have been lauded as the 'innovative and visionary signature of stream of consciousness genius'

Yellow matter custard, dripping from a dead dog's eye.
Crabalocker fishwife, pornographic priestess,

We mean it maaan.....Goo goo g' joob.


Edited by ExittheLemming - April 03 2015 at 17:43

ExittheLemming wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: Barbu wrote: The good old debate but honestly, I don't care. All a matter of taste, as always. (what's wrong with silly love songs? *scratching head*)       You're right, of course, all a matter of taste (or lack thereof ).   But if you look at the vast compendium of McCartney music, one has to regard his lyrics as bordering on the infantile, or, at least, simply ignoring word meanings and stringing nonsense together.   So I sat in the attic, a piano up my nose, And the wind played a dreadful cantata. Sore was I from a crack of an enemy's hose And the horrible sound of tomato. Ketchup, Soup and puree, Don't get left behind.   Deep, Paul, very deep.     Yet had this same pseudo surrealistic s.h.i.t.e come from Lennon (ditto Beefheart, ditto Morrison) it would have been lauded as the 'innovative and visionary signature of stream of consciousness genius' Yellow matter custard, dripping from a dead dog's eye. Crabalocker fishwife, pornographic priestess, We mean it maaan.....Goo goo g' joob.

The Dark Elf wrote: Yes, oobla-di oobla-da life goes on, bra, but if one looks at a greater compilation of lyrics, honey pie, that is quite a different case. Reviewing McCartney's dubious contribution to lyricism, the jailer man and sailor Sam went searching everywhere for more substantial lyrics from Paul, but jet thought that the major was a lady suffragette; ergo, the butter wouldn't melt so I put it in the pie.

Rather than string together a collection of inane McCartney lyrics (who we both agree had practically nothing to say, but this clearly does not suit your purposes) Why not actually offer a cogent honest argument?
I'll set the ball rolling (tiny steps wee beige pixie) e.g.

I believe that Lennon's lyrics were deeper, more profound and will continue to resonate for generations to come (read BETTER*) than McCartney's because:

1 - he's dead
2 - he's not Paul
3 - through no fault of his own, a botched electro shock therapy session rendered him a self pitying hippy t.o.s.s.e.r
4 - getting your hair cut and wearing a beret makes you a committed Marxist
5 - Only a genius or celebrity chef is allowed to write songs containing the words pilchard, onion, cornflake, semolina and marshmallow
6 - many of his lyrics do not make any conventional narrative sense so they are weird and weird is hip, so by virtue of it being impossible to actually make a formal mistake when writing free association gibberish, they must be good (and his biographers say so)
7 - the nude photo that accompanied the Two Virgins album scotched any subsequent career in Porn
8 - he's dead

All caustic ribaldry aside, Lennon has written several lyrics that I think are quite brilliant, off the top of my head say, Norwegian Wood, You've Got to Hide Your Love Away, Nowhere Man and I'm So Tired
He's also not been averse to creating more conventionally beautiful melodic songs where the lyrics share the same naive hippy trite sentimentality of Macca, say Happy Christmas: War is Over, Imagine, Woman etc

For the sake of clarity (solely for your benefit) I think Lennon's lyrics are '*better' (see above, terms and conditions apply) than McCartney's but not by the sort of considerable distance as is routinely inferred. How hard is that to understand?


Edited by ExittheLemming - April 04 2015 at 04:49

I'm not a massive Beatles lover, I only have a few of their albums.
Don't know the ins-and-outs behind the scenes.
I've never liked anything Lennon did post-Beatles, Harrison did some interesting things along the way, Ringo isn't an exciting drummer (at least he's better than Charlie Watts......), and McCartney did some very good things throughout his life after that band.
I haven't a clue how Yoko affected the band chemistry. I think they would've folded either way when they did. John was neither right or wrong in my eyes........
(Pointless post, but thought I'd put my 2 cents-worth in)

The Dark Elf wrote: Barbu wrote: The good old debate but honestly, I don't care. All a matter of taste, as always. (what's wrong with silly love songs? *scratching head*)       You're right, of course, all a matter of taste (or lack thereof ).   But if you look at the vast compendium of McCartney music, one has to regard his lyrics as bordering on the infantile, or, at least, simply ignoring word meanings and stringing nonsense together.   So I sat in the attic, a piano up my nose, And the wind played a dreadful cantata. Sore was I from a crack of an enemy's hose And the horrible sound of tomato. Ketchup, Soup and puree, Don't get left behind.   Deep, Paul, very deep.

It always amazes me that Paul bashers conveniently forget the lyrics to Eleanor Rigby or Let it Be.

Its very puzzling to me: