What if There Had Been No "Wings" Band?
-
Just weighing in... I'm a huge fan of Wings, Linda and Bip Bop and the whole Wildlife album. Linda was awesome, she had a lot of chutzpah to just jump into the band and run with it. The charm for me, was that it was clearly about family back then. I always admired how the McCartney's all went on the road as a family and some of the songs were about their children, or family life. I even love Cook of the House...it's about a woman who loves to cook for her family...something that I think women can relate to. For the record, I love Linda's voice and harmonies. They are sorely missed! Wings were just amazing in my book!
-
graystoke:
moptops:
Linda's biggest contribution is not musical, it's family. She was a magnificent rock for Paul and a loving mum, who in spite of being married to a Beatle, was determined to raise her kids and be a partner to her husband as solidly and normally as possible and she did that. Regarding Wings: although she was no singer, her backing vocals largely along with the hapless Denny Laine became the signature sound of Wings. The Wings sound really began at Red Rose Speedway and with every album onwards, she and Laine proved more than adept at stylised vocalising.
Linda and the Rat. Now there's a title!
-
love2travel:
Just weighing in... I'm a huge fan of Wings, Linda and Bip Bop and the whole Wildlife album. Linda was awesome, she had a lot of chutzpah to just jump into the band and run with it. The charm for me, was that it was clearly about family back then. I always admired how the McCartney's all went on the road as a family and some of the songs were about their children, or family life. I even love Cook of the House...it's about a woman who loves to cook for her family...something that I think women can relate to. For the record, I love Linda's voice and harmonies. They are sorely missed! Wings were just amazing in my book!
-
I have a younger co-worker who's becoming a pretty good friend. He keeps referring to Wings as "The Wings."
-
audi:
I have a younger co-worker who's becoming a pretty good friend. He keeps referring to Wings as "The Wings."
I can see you have your work cut out for you
-
love2travel:
audi:
I have a younger co-worker who's becoming a pretty good friend. He keeps referring to Wings as "The Wings."
I can see you have your work cut out for you
Yepper.
-
audi:
I have a younger co-worker who's becoming a pretty good friend. He keeps referring to Wings as "The Wings."
The opposite of Yoko who always called The Beatles just Beatles and Paul would say "It's The Beatles!"
-
Nancy R:
audi:
I have a younger co-worker who's becoming a pretty good friend. He keeps referring to Wings as "The Wings."
The opposite of Yoko who always called The Beatles just Beatles and Paul would say "It's The Beatles!"
Or as John said...I don't believe in Beatles.
-
Nancy R:
audi:
I have a younger co-worker who's becoming a pretty good friend. He keeps referring to Wings as "The Wings."
The opposite of Yoko who always called The Beatles just Beatles and Paul would say "It's The Beatles!"
Of course he would... :
-
audi:
love2travel:
audi:
I have a younger co-worker who's becoming a pretty good friend. He keeps referring to Wings as "The Wings."
I can see you have your work cut out for you
Yepper.
Like many of us who still call Pink Floyd, THE Pink Floyd.
-
I love Jethro Tull! He's my favorite!
-
RMartinez:
I love Jethro Tull! He's my favorite!
I know, right? And remember the glee on Jethro's face when the Grammy peeps gave him that Best Heavy Metal Award back in the '80s? A happy night for the entire Tull household that night, I'm sure!
-
Bruce M.:
The critical negativity toward Paul's '70s work began with "Ram," before the name Wings was used. And let's be honest, some of that negativity was earned. Paul's '70s work had great moments and not-so-great moments. "Wild Life" wouldn't have been a good album or gotten good reviews if it had the Pope's name on it.
wow! yeah, when i first heard "WL" i didn't really care for it either but the more i listened the more i liked. one of my faves now. and yes, we've been down this road before, but there is always someone new joining and posting and asking the same questions. he got slammed because he was blamed for the beatles break up. yada yada yada... i'm glad he created wings and having the band gave him some sort of continuity even though there was almost always some sort of bandmate turn around. would the music had been the same if he hadn't formed wings... eh, who knows? that would seem to lend itself to more folks coming in and out of the studio and that in itself would create change and different musical insight/influence. so... maybe?
-
These questions are impossible to answer. What if there were no Beatles? Would the lads have still had successful solo music careers? We will never know for sure, all one can do is speculate. It's easy as a fan to say, "Paul would still have been famous and successful no matter what." But you never really know. A lot of things have to happen to become famous. There are a LOT of really talented people out there who will never be famous because so many of the other pieces never fell into place. Not sure how Paul's music would have been different had there been no Wings, since he exerted so much control over things in that band. He may have wanted it to be a real band, but it was how HE saw a band, ie him in control. That's one of the reasons the Beatles broke up, the other three were not going to let Paul do that. So, IMO, Paul's 70s music would have been about the same.
-
If there had been no The Wings, "Wings Over America" would have been a strange title.
-
HaileyMcComet:
If there had been no The Wings, "Wings Over America" would have been a strange title.
Paul McCartney Over America?? Hmmmm....
-
Paul At the Speed of Sound
-
Perhaps he would have had more critical respect (perhaps not), but the name and ?look? of a band earned him more popular success imo, which counts for more anyway. I think the loathing he got from critics had a lot to do with him not exactly being what a "cool rock star" was supposed to be. Releasing Mary Had a Little Lamb as a single, having his wife on the band, etc. Not "cool", is it?. But then Paul was always above that kind of thing anyway. Just look at songs like When I'm 64 and Honey Pie. It's just that then he had the Beatles image, which included John
Quote of the year - lol. I would rather have root canal done than listen to something like "Bip Bop" !!!
You do notice there are other songs on the album. Bip Bop isn?t any worse anyway than some Beatles songs. Wild Honey Pie as someone mentioned. Don?t Pass Me By ffs. I?m not at all a fan of Bip Bop (nor of Mumbo) and would prefer it not to be on the album, but I LOVE most of the songs on it. Tomorrow, Dear Friend, Wild Life, Some People Never Know and the duet with Linda I Am Your Singer (LOVE it). Love is Strange is a great cover as well. Linda had a particular voice, but that?s also why it was such a big part of Wing?s sound. I for one think it worked just fine.
-
BTW, I totally agree with whoever said (long ago lol) it was ballsy of Paul to form another band instead of running on his name alone.
Not sure how Paul's music would have been different had there been no Wings, since he exerted so much control over things in that band. He may have wanted it to be a real band, but it was how HE saw a band, ie him in control. That's one of the reasons the Beatles broke up, the other three were not going to let Paul do that.
That's hardly a reason The Beatles broke up. Probably more to do with John being unable to handle being on the losing end of their little competition with each other.
-
crisstti:
BTW, I totally agree with whoever said (long ago lol) it was ballsy of Paul to form another band instead of running on his name alone.
Not sure how Paul's music would have been different had there been no Wings, since he exerted so much control over things in that band. He may have wanted it to be a real band, but it was how HE saw a band, ie him in control. That's one of the reasons the Beatles broke up, the other three were not going to let Paul do that.
That's hardly a reason The Beatles broke up. Probably more to do with John being unable to handle being on the losing end of their little competition with each other.
You actually think that's why the Beatles broke up? Wow.