George's criticisms of Macca
-
SusyLuvsPaul:
You guys obviously haven't listened to all his albums.
I've listened extensively to all of his albums. Have the originals and have the remastered ones and boxed set, which includes his extremely lackluster Japan concert. Even Eric couldn't prompt him to put some personality into it. I'd say that other then the Beatles and Paul, George is probably in the top 10 of people I have listened to throughout the years, and my sentiments haven't changed at all. In fact I just finished listening to ATMP on a road trip this weekend and with the exception of a few songs it is not a pleasant album to listen to. It's loud and grating and as someone pointed out, that third disc doesn't have any redeeming value.
-
Macsback:
I guess we can safely say, George & Ringo's best years in the UK charts were from around 70-74 John's UK chart career was very much the same as his best period was during the same years, George did tho, make a couple of mini comebacks in the 80's John also had a surge in chart hits in the early 80's, sadly, we all know why..
With all due respect to the British or English Charts, In the English Speaking world, The US charts account for about six times more volume than the UK charts. And in the USA Harrison had 16 top forty hits after the Beatles, not counting what he did for Ringo, which would make it about 20 To Say Harrisons career waned after the mid seventies, totally ignores the huge success of the Traveling Wilburys, Cloud Nine and Brainwashed. The majority in the UK< and elsewhere, don't think much of George according your argument. I think sixteen top 40 hits ten gold or platinum studio albums plus the WIlburys and the Beatle/Anthology reunion, is pretty good. Not disparaging McCartney, haven't even gotten into his great work and achievements, but I can tell you with no reservation, most succesful recording artists dont have 16 top forties, a Dozen gold or Platinum albums to their credit. And Thats just sales, which often don't reflect someones true popularity, talent or measure, Maybe in the UK you folks don't appreciate all your native sons. I think just the nature of this thread illustrates, why Harrison may have carried some resentment, most people with those kind of success's don't have to defend themselves. And he cant he's dead! Personally I think George Harrison 79, CLoud Nine and Brainwashed are all first class, as well as both Wilburys albums thats five great albums in 28 years...in that same span McCartney has maybe 6-7 great albums by my count...and three or four average albums great ones since 79 Tug Of War FLowers in Dirt Flaming Pie Run Devil Run Chaos MAF not so good. Pipes Peace broadstreet Press To Play Off Ground Driving Rain Now is there valid cool tracks on those five "average" albums sure...Pipes of Peace "the Track" is a masterpiece to me. all those albums have some good songs...Cosmically conscious, Lonely Road Off The Ground.. They all have some good tracks... but really over a given span McCartney has perhaps more great work...but not that much more not really...more work.. but only a bit more great work Now if you are one of those people who thinks "Looking for Changes" "Rinse the Raindrops" are masterpieces. you are probably a McCartney-ista and there really isin't any reasoning with you because you have an irrational belief or preference to McCartneys work no matter what it sounds like.. and thats ok too. but to a musician or someone trying at least to be objective.. McCartney may be the greater talent, but not to the extent you portray it, Three good songs etc etc etc
-
And in the USA Harrison had 16 top forty hits after the Beatles
So we're using Billboard top-40 charts as a measure of their success? So if Paul, as a solo artist, was in the Billboard top 40 charts 35 times, and George was on those charts 16 times, by my math, that makes Paul twice as good a solo artist as George.
Or do we still need to keep beating this dead horse? I'm not sure I remember what the point of all this was? Oh, yes, why was George so crabby about Paul all the time? Jealousy? Resentment? Who knows? But I for one wish George had practiced what he preached a bit more when it came to commenting on Paul's work.
-
whobeatle:
In the English Speaking world, The US charts account for about six times more volume than the UK charts.
What on earth are you trying to say with this??? US charts are more important?
:
-
whobeatle:
Macsback:
I guess we can safely say, George & Ringo's best years in the UK charts were from around 70-74 John's UK chart career was very much the same as his best period was during the same years, George did tho, make a couple of mini comebacks in the 80's John also had a surge in chart hits in the early 80's, sadly, we all know why..
With all due respect to the British or English Charts, In the English Speaking world, The US charts account for about six times more volume than the UK charts. And in the USA Harrison had 16 top forty hits after the Beatles, not counting what he did for Ringo, which would make it about 20 To Say Harrisons career waned after the mid seventies, totally ignores the huge success of the Traveling Wilburys, Cloud Nine and Brainwashed. The majority in the UK< and elsewhere, don't think much of George according your argument. I think sixteen top 40 hits ten gold or platinum studio albums plus the WIlburys and the Beatle/Anthology reunion, is pretty good. Not disparaging McCartney, haven't even gotten into his great work and achievements, but I can tell you with no reservation, most succesful recording artists dont have 16 top forties, a Dozen gold or Platinum albums to their credit. And Thats just sales, which often don't reflect someones true popularity, talent or measure, Maybe in the UK you folks don't appreciate all your native sons. I think just the nature of this thread illustrates, why Harrison may have carried some resentment, most people with those kind of success's don't have to defend themselves. And he cant he's dead! Personally I think George Harrison 79, CLoud Nine and Brainwashed are all first class, as well as both Wilburys albums thats five great albums in 28 years...in that same span McCartney has maybe 6-7 great albums by my count...and three or four average albums great ones since 79 Tug Of War FLowers in Dirt Flaming Pie Run Devil Run Chaos MAF not so good. Pipes Peace broadstreet Press To Play Off Ground Driving Rain Now is there valid cool tracks on those five "average" albums sure...Pipes of Peace "the Track" is a masterpiece to me. all those albums have some good songs...Cosmically conscious, Lonely Road Off The Ground.. They all have some good tracks... but really over a given span McCartney has perhaps more great work...but not that much more not really...more work.. but only a bit more great work Now if you are one of those people who thinks "Looking for Changes" "Rinse the Raindrops" are masterpieces. you are probably a McCartney-ista and there really isin't any reasoning with you because you have an irrational belief or preference to McCartneys work no matter what it sounds like.. and thats ok too. but to a musician or someone trying at least to be objective.. McCartney may be the greater talent, but not to the extent you portray it, Three good songs etc etc etc
Thats your opinion if you think "George Harrison 79, CLoud Nine and Brainwashed" are great albums, IMO they're not, at least we agree on the McCartney albums, even if you did, miss out a few. McCartney is the greater talent by a country mile, i don't know if your a musician or not but if you are, you should consider a career change if you think a few songs seperate them.
-
This is what I'm talking about George
Thats what I'm talking about. Great track. George's version of 'Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea' is also amazing off Brainwashed. I listened to that album this morning. Very good actually. Not Lennon or McCartney, but I was impressed with some of it. The singing drags down some of the songs. But some good lyrics in some, some good music in others. But George puts it together IMO on 'P2 Vatican Blues (Last Saturday Night)'. -
its a bit like comparing partick thistle to celtic and rangers.
you see at least i admit im speaking my own opinion only. ive got a feeling 'whobeatle' thinks he/she is writing for 'rolling stone'. and how did he/she know i was american
[very astute]. we all love george just like we love ringo. george was everthing i wanted him to be in the beatles.he contributed immensly. lennon or mccartney he wasnt though ,not even close. i wouldnt be suprised actually if he got more help from either of them on his 2/3 great songs.it certainly would make sense to me because after that period [late 1960s] he showed absolutely no sign at all of being able to write anything close to the excellance of 'something' or 'here comes the sun'. the usuall revisionist bullshit that comes with death try to paint him out to be a kind of genius he wasnt. he was a lucky man to have been so close to such majestic genius[lenn/mac] he had a front row seat to the greatest musical minds of populist culture on a creative tidle wave that would never be surpassed. like i said he may have been actually given much more of a leg up in the songwriting dept than any of us are aware of.
-
While I'm over here OD'ing on George, if anyone else wants to listen to Somewhere In England, I posted all the links to it a while back, enjoy
http://maccaboard.paulmccartney.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=77893&highlight=england actually come to think of it I did basically the same thing with All Things Must Pass... yes, I'm quite the mad YouTube seek and destroy poster. and time waster. and lover of it
http://maccaboard.paulmccartney.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=78748&highlight=things+pass I'll be the first to admit I could use a brushing up on George's material. I gave it a try back in college and quickly tired of it. but there's some good stuff in there for sure. on our father 3 hail mary's.. each Saturday night.. I like that.
-
beatles1909:
Macsback:
CMackbird:
Most people are given him his due as a talent. He's not on the same level as Lennon/McCartney tho because nobody is.
George had a great talent, nobody would dispute that but to put him in the same league as Lennon & McCartney is total nonsense.
Because he never showed it. Im not saying he is or isnt as good but I dont think he ever had as much chance to shine with the beatles like Lennon and McCartney. He had his moments but he could of had more but was pushed back.
If his songs were good enough they would have made the album. Lennon/McCartney - Champions League Harrison League 1
-
lazydynamite88:
he had a front row seat to the greatest musical minds of populist culture on a creative tidle wave that would never be surpassed. like i said he may have been actually given much more of a leg up in the songwriting dept than any of us are aware of.
and while I'm having fun at the moment diving into the back catalogue of George Harrison, to the above, you'll get no arguement from me on that
-
FYI, I just read on Beatles examiner that George Harrison's Web site will be streaming -- for free -- the video for the Concert for George to celebrate what would have been his 68th birthday. Here's the link: http://www.examiner.com/beatles-in-national/free-birthday-video-stream-for-concert-for-george The Concert for George has a nice mix of his music and one of the highlights is Paul singing a gorgeous version of All Things Must Pass. And Ringo does a few tunes, Eric Clapton, etc., etc. It's a good concert and this Friday it's free.
-
I don't think there's any point in us all arguing about our musical taste. (I find the instrumental sessions of ATMP some of my favorite music ever and I'm not apologizing for it. It's so early 70s and the dated feel of it is part of what attracts me to it). Back to the topic of George's snarky public comments about Paul, there has been much speculation that the song and video to Paul's This One was sort of an apology to George for whatever it was that had come between them. No one but Paul himself can really say, but it was shortly after that video premiered that Paul, George and Ringo discussed how they felt closer again to each other realizing that only the others could understand what each of them has been through. (I know I keep bringing that interview up, but I think it's valid)
-
IMO if anything George benefits from Lennon/McCartney because IMO Lennon and McCartney were held to much higher standards in the aftermath of the Beatles, not just by critics but by fans. Harrison just plain never had that problem, either within or outside the Beatles.(I mean with fans and critics). He was NEVER held to the same standards as Lennon/McCartney were.
-
high_wilusa:
IMO if anything George benefits from Lennon/McCartney because IMO Lennon and McCartney were held to much higher standards in the aftermath of the Beatles, not just by critics but by fans. Harrison just plain never had that problem, either within or outside the Beatles.(I mean with fans and critics). He was NEVER held to the same standards as Lennon/McCartney were.
good point.
-
I think the clash between George and Paul is a little bit more personal and none of us will ever understand it but only between the two of them.The way I look at it,its more like a brotherly quarrel,even siblings have their own rivalries and thats I think what happened to Paul and George.Well Paul do love George and I guess George too without getting too much emotional. "Wah Wah" was written by George about Paul's constant whining in the studio by the way..its more of a personal sibling rivalry..well nobodys perfect Im sure all of us had our feud with our own brothers and sisters,thats the way I see it between Paul and George
-
Keith Adagio:
I think the clash between George and Paul is a little bit more personal and none of us will ever understand it but only between the two of them.The way I look at it,its more like a brotherly quarrel,even siblings have their own rivalries and thats I think what happened to Paul and George.Well Paul do love George and I guess George too without getting too much emotional. "Wah Wah" was written by George about Paul's constant whining in the studio by the way..its more of a personal sibling rivalry..well nobodys perfect Im sure all of us had our feud with our own brothers and sisters,thats the way I see it between Paul and George
I wouldn't call it "whining".. more his perfectionistic tendencies, some thing they all had at one point or another..Give Macca some props, he performed on "Wah, Wah" at the Concert For George... George never would have ate crow for him....It's ok to forgive Clapton for stealing your Mrs, it's ok to expect Ringo to forgive you for messing with his Mrs. but you can't forgive John and Paul, especially Paul for being overbearing in the studio...Please..At least Paul contributed to George's songs during the last few years of the Beatles, something John didn't do much of, but Macca deserved to be kicked in public, bs.. I love George Harrison, I really do but his treatment of Paul whenever a camera got put in front of him was WRONG and sad too!! I hope they truly made peace in the end!!
-
luigiram:
Keith Adagio:
I think the clash between George and Paul is a little bit more personal and none of us will ever understand it but only between the two of them.The way I look at it,its more like a brotherly quarrel,even siblings have their own rivalries and thats I think what happened to Paul and George.Well Paul do love George and I guess George too without getting too much emotional. "Wah Wah" was written by George about Paul's constant whining in the studio by the way..its more of a personal sibling rivalry..well nobodys perfect Im sure all of us had our feud with our own brothers and sisters,thats the way I see it between Paul and George
I wouldn't call it "whining".. more his perfectionistic tendencies, some thing they all had at one point or another..Give Macca some props, he performed on "Wah, Wah" at the Concert For George... George never would have ate crow for him....It's ok to forgive Clapton for stealing your Mrs, it's ok to expect Ringo to forgive you for messing with his Mrs. but you can't forgive John and Paul, especially Paul for being overbearing in the studio...Please..At least Paul contributed to George's songs during the last few years of the Beatles, something John didn't do much of, but Macca deserved to be kicked in public, bs.. I love George Harrison, I really do but his treatment of Paul whenever a camera got put in front of him was WRONG and sad too!! I hope they truly made peace in the end!!
Paul was a perfectionist in the studio and like you say, contributed not only to George's songs but to John's to, one of the prime examples of this is "The Ballad of John and Yoko" considering the strain in John & Paul's relationship at the time, it was Paul who put all the shite aside to accommodate his buddy, he even done a sleeve-note for " Two Virgins" its been said Paul was pushy in the studio, so what!! that's the mark of a man striving for excellence, maybe by pushing George that little bit harder, Paul gave George the kick up the arse he needed to go on and write better songs, if that was the case, it certainly worked, Paul's contribution to non McCartney songs is well documented, the guy was and still is a workaholic, remember this, John was out of his head most of the time and more interested in Yoko while George had all his mantra stuff going on, it was left to McCartney to keep the greatest band ever alive, Paul was 2 years younger than John and managed to bridge the age gap with him to become his equal, George was about 2 years younger than Paul and kept all his frustrations inside himself only to start slagging off Paul once The Beatles split, maybe George was jealous of the John/Paul relationship, it certainly looks that way when you consider the snide remarks George would make against Paul in the years to follow, later George would have his fall out with John too, it makes you wonder what was really going on in George's mind, maybe one day the real truth about the whole sorry affair will come out.
-
another point is that George always felt like Paul (and in some cases John) treated him like he was a little kid. that is why some took Paul's 'baby brother' comment in a negative way when George died though to me it was endearing. I suspect George felt like that when Paul was driving him in the studio to push his work. Paul probably came off as an overbearing parent. (i'm not saying this is wrong on Paul's part, just how Georg might have reacted to it).
-
Maybe George got sick of playing someone elses music,John and Pauls. in a rock star head they think they can say anyting and think its ok. I agree , George was lucky in one way is that he was not held accountable as much as John and Paul.George would say something and it was not scrutinised. This John had noted himself.
-
Just for the record, George was only 8 months younger than Paul.