Why did John dominate the Hard Day's Night album?
-
John wrote 10.5 (John wrote the middle 8 of 'And I Love Her') of the 13 songs! Was Paul's skills not up to par yet? Was he too intimidated? For the most part, all the Beatles albums had a rough split between the two of them, expect this one.
-
The story I've heard is that John was very upset because Paul wrote Can't Buy Me Love without any input from him. And then it became a huge hit. So when the producer of A Hard Day's Night came to see them about writing the songs for the soundtrack, it was like the gauntlet was being thrown down. John "went for it", and pretty much wrote the whole album. You didn't upstage Lennon and get away with it, even Paul (You will also notice Paul didn't have another A-side on a Beatles U.K single until Paperback Writer 2 years later - while John had 5 straight number ones!).
-
Paul really started to fire in 66/67...
-
I wish John and George were around today...because after all these years, I see they were right...
-
moptops:
I wish John and George were around today...because after all these years, I see they were right...
About what specifically? -
beatlesfanrandy:
The story I've heard is that John was very upset because Paul wrote Can't Buy Me Love without any input from him. And then it became a huge hit. So when the producer of A Hard Day's Night came to see them about writing the songs for the soundtrack, it was like the gauntlet was being thrown down. John "went for it", and pretty much wrote the whole album. You didn't upstage Lennon and get away with it, even Paul (You will also notice Paul didn't have another A-side on a Beatles U.K single until Paperback Writer 2 years later - while John had 5 straight number ones!).
There may be something to that theory, but keep in mind that most of the album was already written and recorded (and filming of the movie was in full swing) by the time "Can't Buy Me Love" came out in March. After that, five songs were recorded to finish the album, and it's true that four out of five of them were John's (Paul contributed "Things We Said Today"). But John had always dominated so far, and as you say, he would continue to dominate for a while, but you're forgetting "Day Tripper"/"We Can Work It Out," a double A-side #1 for Paul in the UK before "Paperback Writer." Of course, it should be noted that overall Paul did much better in the U.S. than the U.K., with "Yesterday" also hitting #1, and even "I Saw Her Standing There" hit #14 as the B-side of "I Want To Hold Your Hand" in early '64, not to mention "P.S. I Love You" at #10 and "And I Love Her" at #12 and "She's A Woman" at #4. Come to think of it, maybe this partially explains why Paul tours so much here in the U.S. We had given him a lot more love on the charts than the Brits did!
-
favoritething:
beatlesfanrandy:
The story I've heard is that John was very upset because Paul wrote Can't Buy Me Love without any input from him. And then it became a huge hit. So when the producer of A Hard Day's Night came to see them about writing the songs for the soundtrack, it was like the gauntlet was being thrown down. John "went for it", and pretty much wrote the whole album. You didn't upstage Lennon and get away with it, even Paul (You will also notice Paul didn't have another A-side on a Beatles U.K single until Paperback Writer 2 years later - while John had 5 straight number ones!).
There may be something to that theory, but keep in mind that most of the album was already written and recorded (and filming of the movie was in full swing) by the time "Can't Buy Me Love" came out in March. After that, five songs were recorded to finish the album, and it's true that four out of five of them were John's (Paul contributed "Things We Said Today"). But John had always dominated so far, and as you say, he would continue to dominate for a while, but you're forgetting "Day Tripper"/"We Can Work It Out," a double A-side #1 for Paul in the UK before "Paperback Writer." Of course, it should be noted that overall Paul did much better in the U.S. than the U.K., with "Yesterday" also hitting #1, and even "I Saw Her Standing There" hit #14 as the B-side of "I Want To Hold Your Hand" in early '64, not to mention "P.S. I Love You" at #10 and "And I Love Her" at #12 and "She's A Woman" at #4. Come to think of it, maybe this partially explains why Paul tours so much here in the U.S. We had given him a lot more love on the charts than the Brits did!
Thanks for the input. I didn't "forget" Day Tripper/We Can Work It Out, and I said U.K. only.
-
JoeySmith:
John wrote 10.5 (John wrote the middle 8 of 'And I Love Her') of the 13 songs! Was Paul's skills not up to par yet? Was he too intimidated? For the most part, all the Beatles albums had a rough split between the two of them, expect this one.
I said something similar to this a while back and was jumped all over for it.
But facts are facts. John dominated this LP. John and Paul were obviously very creative and even competitive, but I think another factor to consider is the Beatles were essentially John's band. Paul was not a co-leader, though he certainly exerted his influence on the group. As talented and as good looking as Paul was, he was second in command to John, whose charisma, raw talent, and sensitivity could never be overshadowed by Paul. Please note. This is in NO WAY a criticism of Paul, just a fact that John was running the show up until around 1967. Then things started shifting when Brian Epstein died and John started to focus his attention in the direction of Yoko. But it was only because John left open a power vacuum that Paul was able to start dominating in the Beatles. Even then John was able to rise up and produce amazing pieces like I Am The Walrus, Don't Let Me Down, Come Together, and so many other songs. One could also argue when John was in charge, it was a much more harmonious and smoother running ship than when Paul started to direct things. -
Actually, I hadn't really given it that much thought, I guess, but you're right. I do recall reading somewhere that John said he didn't really want Paul on the title cut....except he needed him for the high parts which he couldn't reach. It's much better for it, however,....the two of them trading off the lead vocal.
And the competition between the two made for better music...one trying to top the other.... and all. So, I guess I have no problem with it. It's natural for two people who are both great at what they do to be very competitive. -
beatlesfanrandy:
favoritething:
beatlesfanrandy:
The story I've heard is that John was very upset because Paul wrote Can't Buy Me Love without any input from him. And then it became a huge hit. So when the producer of A Hard Day's Night came to see them about writing the songs for the soundtrack, it was like the gauntlet was being thrown down. John "went for it", and pretty much wrote the whole album. You didn't upstage Lennon and get away with it, even Paul (You will also notice Paul didn't have another A-side on a Beatles U.K single until Paperback Writer 2 years later - while John had 5 straight number ones!).
There may be something to that theory, but keep in mind that most of the album was already written and recorded (and filming of the movie was in full swing) by the time "Can't Buy Me Love" came out in March. After that, five songs were recorded to finish the album, and it's true that four out of five of them were John's (Paul contributed "Things We Said Today"). But John had always dominated so far, and as you say, he would continue to dominate for a while, but you're forgetting "Day Tripper"/"We Can Work It Out," a double A-side #1 for Paul in the UK before "Paperback Writer." Of course, it should be noted that overall Paul did much better in the U.S. than the U.K., with "Yesterday" also hitting #1, and even "I Saw Her Standing There" hit #14 as the B-side of "I Want To Hold Your Hand" in early '64, not to mention "P.S. I Love You" at #10 and "And I Love Her" at #12 and "She's A Woman" at #4. Come to think of it, maybe this partially explains why Paul tours so much here in the U.S. We had given him a lot more love on the charts than the Brits did!
Thanks for the input. I didn't "forget" Day Tripper/We Can Work It Out, and I said U.K. only.
Yes, and Day Tripper/We Can Work It Out was #1 in the UK six months before "Paperback Writer," so John's dominance didn't last quite as long as you said, but I still think your overall point is correct! Also RM, mentioning that it was always John's show from the beginning is correct, I think, but I would add that John started getting distracted by drugs before getting distracted by Yoko.
-
favoritething:
beatlesfanrandy:
favoritething:
beatlesfanrandy:
The story I've heard is that John was very upset because Paul wrote Can't Buy Me Love without any input from him. And then it became a huge hit. So when the producer of A Hard Day's Night came to see them about writing the songs for the soundtrack, it was like the gauntlet was being thrown down. John "went for it", and pretty much wrote the whole album. You didn't upstage Lennon and get away with it, even Paul (You will also notice Paul didn't have another A-side on a Beatles U.K single until Paperback Writer 2 years later - while John had 5 straight number ones!).
There may be something to that theory, but keep in mind that most of the album was already written and recorded (and filming of the movie was in full swing) by the time "Can't Buy Me Love" came out in March. After that, five songs were recorded to finish the album, and it's true that four out of five of them were John's (Paul contributed "Things We Said Today"). But John had always dominated so far, and as you say, he would continue to dominate for a while, but you're forgetting "Day Tripper"/"We Can Work It Out," a double A-side #1 for Paul in the UK before "Paperback Writer." Of course, it should be noted that overall Paul did much better in the U.S. than the U.K., with "Yesterday" also hitting #1, and even "I Saw Her Standing There" hit #14 as the B-side of "I Want To Hold Your Hand" in early '64, not to mention "P.S. I Love You" at #10 and "And I Love Her" at #12 and "She's A Woman" at #4. Come to think of it, maybe this partially explains why Paul tours so much here in the U.S. We had given him a lot more love on the charts than the Brits did!
Thanks for the input. I didn't "forget" Day Tripper/We Can Work It Out, and I said U.K. only.
Yes, and Day Tripper/We Can Work It Out was #1 in the UK six months before "Paperback Writer," so John's dominance didn't last quite as long as you said, but I still think your overall point is correct! Also RM, mentioning that it was always John's show from the beginning is correct, I think, but I would add that John started getting distracted by drugs before getting distracted by Yoko.
Good point!
-
In my opinion, I don't think that Lennon/McCartney were intimidated by each other at all. I think it was the fact that George's songwriting was blossoming better and better as time moved on. I also think that Lennon/McCartney were intimidated by George's songwriting and would not allow many of his songs on BEATLES albums until later. Thinking about it now, its only fitting that George would blossom into a great songwriter, he learned from the greatest songwriting team of all-time. George thought of the acoustic beginning of "And I Love Her" and didn't get any credit for it.
-
...and if you look or listen to any Beatles concerts from '64 to '66, Paul does the bulk of the introductions between songs. If I remember correctly, during their very first U.S. concert in Washington, D.C., Paul introduced every song...seemed very odd that John (the leader of the group) didn't say a word.
-
DrivinFan:
...and if you look or listen to any Beatles concerts from '64 to '66, Paul does the bulk of the introductions between songs. If I remember correctly, during their very first U.S. concert in Washington, D.C., Paul introduced every song...seemed very odd that John (the leader of the group) didn't say a word.
Are you saying that because Paul played the straight man to John's comedy act he was the leader of the Beatles? John knew that was Paul's strength, and usually, John took the piss out of Paul while he introduced songs. It was almost a comedy act!
-
I'm not saying that Paul as the spokesperson was the "leader" of the group. It may have been John's group when Paul joined, but IMO once he did they were equal. Washington, D.C. video:
-
DrivinFan:
I'm not saying that Paul as the spokesperson was the "leader" of the group. It may have been John's group when Paul joined, but IMO once he did they were equal. Washington, D.C. video:
Well, in a sense so was George and Ringo. But I disagree they were equals. I think it was John's group and he lead them and inspired them. I don't think Paul always did in the same way.
-
RMartinez:
JoeySmith:
John wrote 10.5 (John wrote the middle 8 of 'And I Love Her') of the 13 songs! Was Paul's skills not up to par yet? Was he too intimidated? For the most part, all the Beatles albums had a rough split between the two of them, expect this one.
I said something similar to this a while back and was jumped all over for it.
But facts are facts. John dominated this LP. John and Paul were obviously very creative and even competitive, but I think another factor to consider is the Beatles were essentially John's band. Paul was not a co-leader, though he certainly exerted his influence on the group. As talented and as good looking as Paul was, he was second in command to John, whose charisma, raw talent, and sensitivity could never be overshadowed by Paul. Please note. This is in NO WAY a criticism of Paul, just a fact that John was running the show up until around 1967. Then things started shifting when Brian Epstein died and John started to focus his attention in the direction of Yoko. But it was only because John left open a power vacuum that Paul was able to start dominating in the Beatles. Even then John was able to rise up and produce amazing pieces like I Am The Walrus, Don't Let Me Down, Come Together, and so many other songs. One could also argue when John was in charge, it was a much more harmonious and smoother running ship than when Paul started to direct things.John was certainly NOT "running the show up until around 1967." He didn't make the band decisions alone. He AND Paul consulted each other constantly. Many many Beatles books and John himself have said that. Sure, John was the charismatic leader of George and Ringo, who did pretty much whatever John decided. But Paul often went his own way -- refusing to move to Weybridge when John and the others did, refusing to do acid when John and the others did. Paul refused, in short, to be treated like one of John's followers. He was John's equal. If John was the leader of George and Ringo, then in many ways, Paul was the leader of John -- i.e., the one often influencing John and controlling things behind the scenes, the one John found impossible to control. Even when John thought he'd made a decision -- like refusing to record I Want to Hold Your Hand in German -- it was Paul who found a way to talk John into doing it. And so they recorded it in German. And as the Beatles first engineer, Norm Smith, was widely quoted as saying, Paul was the leader in the studio from the very beginning. He was the band's musical director and, as Norm Smith said, usually had most of the musical ideas. The leadership of the band in the early years was a very complicated partnership between John and Paul. And so long as they were getting along, the band ran smoothly. When they stopped getting along, the band dynamic didn't work. As for why A Hard Day's Night has so many John songs, Paul was clearly enjoying his social life in London with Jane Asher and not spending as much time writing songs as John was. I'm not sure there's much more to it than that. Paul was out and about in London, seeing and being seen. Personally I think John's dominance on AHDN is the big weakness of the album. Side 1 of AHDN is perfection. But Side 2 drags with way too many "John" songs that all sound the same. That's why Paul's Things We Said Today is the most memorable song on Side 2, which could have used another Paul song or a George song for more diversity that is a hallmark of the best Beatles albums.
-
Michelley:
RMartinez:
JoeySmith:
John wrote 10.5 (John wrote the middle 8 of 'And I Love Her') of the 13 songs! Was Paul's skills not up to par yet? Was he too intimidated? For the most part, all the Beatles albums had a rough split between the two of them, expect this one.
I said something similar to this a while back and was jumped all over for it.
But facts are facts. John dominated this LP. John and Paul were obviously very creative and even competitive, but I think another factor to consider is the Beatles were essentially John's band. Paul was not a co-leader, though he certainly exerted his influence on the group. As talented and as good looking as Paul was, he was second in command to John, whose charisma, raw talent, and sensitivity could never be overshadowed by Paul. Please note. This is in NO WAY a criticism of Paul, just a fact that John was running the show up until around 1967. Then things started shifting when Brian Epstein died and John started to focus his attention in the direction of Yoko. But it was only because John left open a power vacuum that Paul was able to start dominating in the Beatles. Even then John was able to rise up and produce amazing pieces like I Am The Walrus, Don't Let Me Down, Come Together, and so many other songs. One could also argue when John was in charge, it was a much more harmonious and smoother running ship than when Paul started to direct things.John was certainly NOT "running the show up until around 1967." He didn't make the band decisions alone. He AND Paul consulted each other constantly. Many many Beatles books and John himself have said that. Sure, John was the charismatic leader of George and Ringo, who did pretty much whatever John decided. But Paul often went his own way -- refusing to move to Weybridge when John and the others did, refusing to do acid when John and the others did. Paul refused, in short, to be treated like one of John's followers. He was John's equal. If John was the leader of George and Ringo, then in many ways, Paul was the leader of John -- i.e., the one often influencing John and controlling things behind the scenes, the one John found impossible to control. Even when John thought he'd made a decision -- like refusing to record I Want to Hold Your Hand in German -- it was Paul who found a way to talk John into doing it. And so they recorded it in German. And as the Beatles first engineer, Norm Smith, was widely quoted as saying, Paul was the leader in the studio from the very beginning. He was the band's musical director and, as Norm Smith said, usually had most of the musical ideas. The leadership of the band in the early years was a very complicated partnership between John and Paul. And so long as they were getting along, the band ran smoothly. When they stopped getting along, the band dynamic didn't work. As for why A Hard Day's Night has so many John songs, Paul was clearly enjoying his social life in London with Jane Asher and not spending as much time writing songs as John was. I'm not sure there's much more to it than that. Paul was out and about in London, seeing and being seen. Personally I think John's dominance on AHDN is the big weakness of the album. Side 1 of AHDN is perfection. But Side 2 drags with way too many "John" songs that all sound the same. That's why Paul's Things We Said Today is the most memorable song on Side 2, which could have used another Paul song or a George song for more diversity that is a hallmark of the best Beatles albums.
Yeah. Sure.
: -
^ That was extremely rude. I think Michelley made quite a few valid points.
-
Nancy R:
^ That was extremely rude. I think Michelley made quite a few valid points.
Many Lennon fans wear blinders about him, and are so attached to this myth of him as "the leader" that they can't consider that the truth was far more complicated and subtle. Notice I didn't claim that John wasn't the leader. I simply showed that he wasn't the band's only leader. And in the case of the Beatles, the leadership of the band was collaborative, involving both John and Paul. They both led in different ways. They were both effective (and ineffective) in different ways. But neither one made any decision about the band without consulting the other. They were a team. A good example of Paul's influence, from the very beginning, can be seen in quotes from the Quarrymen (people like Rod Davis and Colin Hanton) who talk about how, sure, John was "the leader" but it wasn't until Paul joined the group that a band that had been purely about having fun became a career goal for John and Paul. It wasn't until Paul joined that the group got "professional." So you can cling to the notion of John as "the leader" but it was Paul who was the mover and shaker behind the scenes, and the person he most influenced was John. They were clearly co-leaders who played off each other to keep the band moving forward.
