Sam Leach - KEEP
-
Hi Mike I don't think you need worry about Yoko being able to dent Paul's image. Most sensible people know her for what she is so if she attacks Paul people will immediately support Macca even more strongly. For example as you know Bill Harry is persistantly attacking me nowadays and recently told a TV crew. "Sam Leach is a fantacist." They laughed at that comment and subsequently Bill lost credibility. So if Y and Norman attack Paul fans will see through that. And people like us will think even more of Paul. The danger is that because of her and Norman's attitude against Paul some may think badly of John which would be very sad. Cheers. Sam.
-
Hi Sam I agree that people don't take Yoko too seriously -- but I think a lot of people don't know her ties to certain people who help her do her dirty work -- and i think they take them seriously. I think my main point is that Yoko and her cronies have had their say a lot more than Paul. It would be nice to see Paul set the record straight. I have to admit as more of a Macca fan it disturbs me a little that he is seen now more often as the 2nd best Beatle -- other Macca fan musicians alas some members of REM, etc -- have also agreed that Macca is seen as the 2nd best Beatle and its absurd -- thanks to the elevation of Lennon when he died -- and the constant bashing that Macca takes by certain quarters of the press. I don't take Lennon completely off the hook because in the 70s he took his own shots at Macca's music and liked to minimize it -- most famously in How Do you Sleep. At the same time, I am sure he'd be amused and pleasantly suprised if he'd discover that today he'd be considered the best Beatle. Especially considering stuff I've read about him where he never really thought he was as good at Macca at writing tunes -- said once that Macca's Beatle songs are more enduring and thereby worried about his own place in history -- and apparently was jealous of Macca's huge success as a solo artists. Macca has the records and more enduring songs. But, many don't consider Macca -- Lennon's equal. I do suspect that if Lennon were alive he'd back Macca as to his contributions to the Beatles -- becuase to me Lennon strikes in the past seem to be coming from insecurity -- he didn't want people I suspect to think that Macca was superior -- a good example at the time was a poll done in the US in the 70s with some kids where they showed them a picture of the Beatles and they said -- who are those other guys with Paul McCartney. in the 70s, although the critics didn't always warm up to them -- Wings at least in America -- were compared at times to the Beatles in terms of success (they actually old sold them) so I am sured it bugged Lennon bit. OK, off my soap box for now. Cheers! Mike
-
Hi Mike. I don't believe for a moment that John was better than Paul...or vice versa. They were equal partners in every way. Each inspired the other. Yet they wrote with differing styles...Paul the romantic...John the realist. Ironically George was somewhere in between. So they simply gelled well. If I get the opportunity I will suggest to Paul he should commision a book to tell the insider dealing that went on in their relationship. But knowing Paul he hates to say anything nasty. Which is to his eternal credit. Cheers. Sam.
-
Hi Sam I know you don't believe that one was superior -- but I think there have been more rock critics (post Lennon's death) that have made that case. Also, I think by virtue of Lennon's personality, indulgence into politics, and general lionizing that takes place when someone dies -- especially as tragically as it happened -- Lennon's rep has eclipsed Macca. Even in Liverpool when I was there I noticed a bit of a bias -- when I came into Liverpool -- the first thing I noticed was the billboard of Lennon by the train station. You go to the Cavern -- and you see the Lennon statute. On Matthew street there is a Lennon bar. The airport is named after Lennon and if you got to the Beatle story -- there is a big section about Lennon's solo career -- nothing -- until just recently this summer -- about Macca's solo career. Would love to see Liverpool do more for Macca -- Jackie who does some Beatle tours in the city -- agreed with my sentiment. I know Macca wouldn't slam Lennon in a book -- and I don't encourage him to do that. It's not his style. However, at the same time, it's too bad that he gets punished by the press for being the nice guy. Funnier, yet -- they turn the nice guy image against him -- by saying that he isn't real becuase people aren't really that nice. Now, having said all that I don't think that people miss Macca's greatness -- but I don't think the majority of people consider Macca being Lennon's equal anymore. According to an interview by one of the people putting together the Beatles Anthology he said -- that Macca is very aware of how over time -- Lennon's image has grown -- and most see Lennon as being the key Beatle -- and apparently that bothers Macca a little -- one of his impetus on the Anthology is to point out his contributions to the band. I think that he just take it a step further and write that book that he always talked about writing. And, I'd love to see the city of Liverpool do a little more to acknolwedge Macca -- I know he's not dead -- and perhaps that's when they will kick in. However, I've gathered based on what I've read that Macca is too classy to complain about it -- but he does notice that Lennon is acknowleged more than him -- and although he isn't worried about his place in history -- he is worried that over time becuase of Lennon's legend -- people will think that Lennon authored most of their songs. He basically said just that. He backed off of his request to reverse the song writing credits -- from what I've gathered not so much becuase he decided that his initial instinct was wrong but more becuase Yoko and her cronies were again successful at turning Macca's request into a PR battle -- pitting Macca against poor John. So, I guess my point is i'd love Macca to write a book (not to demean John but to put the story straight) and to see Liverpool to at least name something significant after Macca while he's alive. Should be easy requests -- just kidding! Cheers! Mike
-
Sam It's funny go to amazon.com and read the reviews about your book -- they love it -- but this person thought there was a movie based on it -- kind of prophetic Reviewer JS from Sydney, NSW, Australia The book is great but can anyone tell me where you can get a copy of the movie? I've seen the movie twice but can't find a copy anywhere - not even on the net.
-
Hi Mike I'll have to go to Amazon and explain to him there was no connection. I had actually had an article called `Birth of The Beatles' published in 16 Magazine in Sept 1965, but decided not to give the producers of that film any problems over the name. I didn't like the film though. Cheers Sam.
-
Hey Sam, I'm glad you don'tt ake sides with John and Paul I wish more people could be that way. I say Paul's style is closer to mine and his personality when it comes to animals and children but when I'm in a bad mood I tend to lean towards John and understand his thnking during Imagine which I also wish for but sadly a peaceful world hasn't happened yet or may not happen especially with Saddam Hussein in the world and Osama Bin Laden. Mike I do agree with you about Paul being bashed for a being a nice guy,In fact most nice guys get teased alot I notice that.
-
Hi Everyone hope you are doing good, i've caught a cold but otherwise i am fine, it is so nice here in Wisconsin today about 50 and sunny, unusual for december, all the snow is gone!!
-
Thanks Sam! I don't take sides, not if I can help it. I have days when I lean more towards Paul, then my John days, then my George + Ringo days. Oooh, did you see Paul in Red Square last night?? It was amazing ... Especially Back in the USSR, obviously. Wow ... All my loving! 'Beaky xxxooo
-
I'm sorry you caught a cold. I have a dry throat as well and had to gargel a few minutes ago. My dad had one too and my mom currently has a cold. IT seems that it is flu season as of now. I hope you get better soon.
-
Thanks Paulfan, i hope you feel better too theres lots going around this time of year unfortunatly!!
-
Hi Sam and everybody. You can vote the MCCARTNEY Awards... or may I say... the best of 2003's music. 1.BEST SONG 2.BEST ALBUM 3.BEST BAND 4.BEST MALE VOCALIST 5.BEST FEMALE VOCALIST 6.BEST GUITAR PLAYER 7.BEST BASS GUITAR PLAYER 8.BEST PIANO/KEYBOARD PLAYER 9.BEST DRUMMER 10.BEST NEWCOMING ARTIST 11.BEST SONGWRITER 12.BEST LIVE TOUR Sam, now it's your turn to Vote too.
-
You're welcome Sara and thank you too. Yes there is alot going around this time of the year which is sad but true. I think even Sam had the cold recently. I hope your family doesn't get it.
-
mikeskapla:
Interesting article about our last year's thread's topic: It's only big business, but I like it By daniel Finkelstein When Paul McCartney decided to claim songs such as "Yesterday", I was entirely on his side DESPITE CENTURIES OF LEARNING and scientific inquiry there are certain questions that human beings are unable to answer. For example, who would buy an anorak in a petrol station? Who listens all the way through to the end of In Our Time presented by Melvyn Bragg? Why did Marty Hopkirk stop in the middle of the road at the beginning of Randall & Hopkirk (Deceased) and allow himself to get run over when he could easily have made it to the other side? Yet if you have ever listened to a record and wondered “who on earth likes that rubbish?”, I have an answer. Me. I like pop music of all kinds and my taste is sufficiently catholic (indeed, it’s the only thing Catholic about me) that I guarantee that I derive enjoyment from at least one song that drives you mad every time you hear it. I used the word pop on purpose, incidentally, rather than talk with faux sophistication of rock. For the music I like best is direct, simple, melodic, commercial and immediate. Naturally, therefore, I idolise the Beatles, because when it comes to pure pop there is no one better. More controversially, it is Paul McCartney, the master of the direct and simple tune, rather than John Lennon, who is my hero. And when McCartney this week decided to assert himself and describe songs such as Yesterday and Eleanor Rigby as composed by McCartney and Lennon rather than Lennon and McCartney, I was entirely on his side. I understand his irritation at the way Lennon casually claimed other people’s work as his own, telling journalists that he’d written 70 per cent of the words of Eleanor Rigby when he’d contributed nothing. I understand too why McCartney might be angry at being told by the ludicrous Yoko Ono how to describe his compositions. Most of all, I can see why the crowning of Lennon by the critics as the greatest Beatle sends him round the bend. This business of swapping the credits round is a tiny way, petty but certainly excusable, to put his point of view. I haven’t always been so sympathetic to McCartney’s attempts to put the record straight. Over the past few years he has tried very hard to suggest that he, rather than Lennon, was the avant-garde Beatle. In extended interviews with Barry Miles for the book Many Years From Now, McCartney told of his years in London dabbling in drugs, experimenting with tape loops and sponsoring modern art while Lennon was spending his time vegetating in Weybridge. I thought that this rather missed the point. McCartney was the greatest Beatle because he was the more conventional of the songwriting duo, not because he was the more avant garde. It wasn’t because he dabbled in drugs that he was great, but because he wasn’t dragged down by them. Lennon became a heroin addict while McCartney kept his head about him. He was great because he was a control freak and a hard worker, because he knew how to look after money, because he wanted the Beatles to do bigger and better things. He was great not because he experimented with tape loops, but because he never allowed experimentation to distract him from making commercial pop. Without McCartney’s bourgeois conventionality there would have been no Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band, no Magical Mystery Tour, no Let it Be, no Abbey Road. Indeed, after the death of Brian Epstein, almost certainly no Beatles. What holds for McCartney is true more broadly. When Mick Jagger accepted a knighthood some fans felt he should have turned it down. They, too, missed the point. Jagger succeeded not despite his hard-headed economics-student establishment instinct but because of it. His genius was not the rejection of middle-class society but knowing how to turn its desire for a little vicarious danger into money. So many rock fans and critics regard commercialism and “selling out” as the deadliest pop sins. Yet “selling out” is the whole point of pop music. Some of the greatest pop of all has been the most manufactured, cynical product. Motown music was composed by employees working office hours. They played cards when no one was looking, then rushed back to the piano when they heard Berry Gordy’s footsteps on the stairs. The results, produced over and over again, were fantastic. I know it’s only big business but I like it, like it, yes, I do. _________________ If God had not meant us to cry, he wouldn't have given us tears. -- Paul, 'Yesterday and Today', pg. 39
Well, I'm gonna comment this article, especially from a Musical point of view. The author says that "selling out" is the whole point of "pop music". This is like saying that the Whole point of life is to be rich. Well, about the famous Lennon/McCartney thing. 1) It seems a surreal discussion. What does it matter that it is John/Paul or Paul/John??? It's the same that Buddy Holly & The Crickets or The Crickets & Buddy Holly. We tend to think that "the first one" is the most important of the pair. It's kind of silly... but we do it. So it's important. When I knew The Beatles I saw under the songs "Lennon/McCartney" "mmm... that means that John was the "most important" of the two in songwriting". I though this too. Some time after I knew who wrote every song. But until then John was for me "the big genius" and Paul was not at that level. Just because the songs credits. ! Think of twist (Jagger/Richards) for (Richards/Jagger) for instance. 2) Paul and John agreed to sing their songs together just like other couples of songwriters they admired (Rodgers/Hammerstein)(Lieber/Stoller). But not always has been Lennon/McCartney. The whole album Please Please Me is signed (McCartney/Lennon). So... I don't know if there was a kind of signed contract to fix the order into L/M or maybe it was an EMI or Brian Epstein demand. If it was signed, judges will decide. If it not was signed you can twist it. 3) The famous "Composed By Paul Mc and John L." on the Back In The World CD. If you notice that aren't exactly "song credits" it says "composed by..." ´To be accurate most of the Beatles songs in the CD would be "Composed by Paul McCartney with a little help from John Lennon and with a little help from George Martin". Or it should explain... "Yesterday, words and music by Paul McCarteny. But words inspired by John Lennon and string arrangement written by George Martin" But it's just written as "McCartney/Lennon" 4) I've never seen an attitude of Paul of trying to delete John legend or so. Paul said he twisted the credits just because people use to think he was quite less "important" or "talented" than John, because of this. (JUST LIKE I DID) Most of people name John Lennon when they're asked for their fav songwriter of the Beatles, but also most of the people fav Beatles songs are McCartney ones. Hey Jude, Let It Be, Yesterday... So the statement that Paul was just "a kind of nice guy" has no sense. Then comes the discussion about who was the best of the two songwriters. It's like deciding into Beethoven and Mozart. You can have your personal favourite but you can't say that the other one is "a mediocre one" or almost a "studio musician" or so. They both were genius. None of them was... not talented. They knew it from the beginning so they "shared" the songs. They both knew how great was the other. So didn't mind to share. And they kept competing and collaboring with each other till the end. Lennon/McCartney or McCartney/Lennon it's the best thing a song can have under its title.
-
hehe maybe i got the cold from Sam through the computer!!
I havent been around anyone who has been sick otherwise.
-
Hi Everyone. Mass post coming up as I'm off to bed having been up since 5.00am. We won this time period by over 80 votes aso thank you one and all for that great suppport. Let's do it again !! Sara (Starr) My computer has had a flu jab, heh, heh. Oliver Macca will be my vote for all those. Beaky (Buckbeakbabie) Yes I'm the same sometimes I'll put John on the player, other times it's Macca. But lately I've been playing more of George which is natural. Paulfan You take a hot toddy (Whisky and warm water) to get rid of your cold. You too Sara. Mike You've started a good topic there. Goodnight all. Sam. Cheers. Sam.
-
hmm, i would Sam but i dont drink!
So just water for me!!
-
Hey Sam i am listening to Dick Clark's Rock Roll and Remember on the oldies station and he always does a featured artist and he is doing George Harrison!! How cool!!
-
Sam Leach:
Hello I_am_Hymm. Thanks for asking about the screenplay. I'll keep you posted. For the last few weeks I've been pre-occupied but I'm getting back to it in the New Year after one other big project I'm involved in is confirmed.
Hi Sam... that's great to hear... best of luck with all your projects in 2004... I hope to start a music based project myself... so I guess we'll both be busy... a screenplay huh?... sounds interesting... are you looking to get it published as a movie or a theatre production?
Have a great Christmas and a successful New Year. Cheers. Sam.
You do the same Sam... hope this new screenplay project really works out for you... take care, Hymn.
-
Starr:
Hi Hymn!! Nice to see you posting on the thread!
I hope everyone had a nice Christmas!!
Glad to be here participating Starr.