Sam Leach - KEEP
-
Hi Sam Look forward to the fim, am sure it would be great considering that you are passionate about your subject matter. Paulfan Although as you know I sometimes share your frustration about Macca not getting his due compared to Lennon -- I think we depart on the issue to some degree. I read a ton of interviews and reviews like yourself -- and yeah there are definitely more people elevating Lennon at Macca's expense -- however even considering the snobby critics I would say on average Macca is considered a legend and one of the all time greats -- some critics give him the lofty spot of being either the all time greatest or at least Lennon's equal -- more critics consider him great but not Lennon's equal. FEW IF ANY CRITICS DON'T CONSIDER MACCA AS A SUPER STAR LEGEND. I don't think it's black and white when it concerns Macca's rep with the critics -- it's more like some critics consider Macca at the top versus those that consider him among the elite just not the top elite. Those that knock Macca knock him like any critic would a top sports team, actor, etc. -- they take a wide swipe. You have to take a wide swipe to knock down someone big. I've used this analogy with you before -- the Yankees are arguably a great team but those sports writers who don't like them take vicious shots -- the very famous/big selling artists alas Elvis, Madonna, U2, etc -- seems like critics either love them or hate them -- it just comes with the turf. You cannot take down a larger than life figure like Macca without taking a good shot at him. The bigger the shot -- in a sense the more the critics accord respect to that figure -- the opposite of love isn't hate but indifference. Why do good artists like lets say Peter Gabriel not elicit too much emotion one way or another -- it's because critics are indifferent because they don't see him elevated by the masses as a legend. Macca clearly is adored by the masses -- artist like that are targets. Thoses artist that are dead alas Hendrick, Buddy Holly, John Lennon, Elvis -- are immune from this nonsense. Critics respect the dead -- which is great. If you notice now that Macca isn't a big selling singles artist anymore alas his music isn't all over popular radio -- critics have become nicer to him. His albums sell decently -- critics are ok with that but seem to like artists that don't have their music played on the radio as much. So Macca is having a renaissance with critics. Flaming Pie was nominated for a grammy -- Driving Rain got good reviews as did his Rock and Roll albums. David Bowie is adored by critics partly becuase his music is so to speak too cool for mainstream radio. Macca lost a lot of critics when he became the popular Beatle post Beatles -- it made him target #1. Macca's rep is coming back very strong. It's not up there with Lennon with most casual critics -- he's Lennon's equal i would say with critics who are Beatle savvy. I suspect over time Macca's rep will inch back to Lennon's status. Like you, am impatient and would like to see it happen while Macca's alive. However, am glad he's around and pumping out music. Lennon paid a dear price for being elevated -- and knowing everything that I've read about him he didn't care much about fame at the time so it's shame that he was taken from us so early. Having said all that, I wouldn't ever worry about Macca not considered a legend he clearly is by most -- the looming question is he considered up there with Lennon, Dylan, Elvis, etc. I think definitely but that's the current debate by some snobby critics. I think their argument is ludicrous but it usually again doesn't center on whether Macca is great -- the snobby critics concede that he's great it's usually about whether he's is the upper echeleon greatest category. When you take some of the critics to task like I have you will basically almost always have them acknolwedge that Macca is great -- a few reposnded to me by saying that the fact that Macca is great goes without saying -- and then they will go off on their criticism about why he isn't as good as Lennon or his post Beatles work was sub par, etc. Thereby if you see a critic take down Macca a peg it generally isn't really about them thinking that Macca isn't one of music greats -- they won't say he is in the article becuase that will detract from their attack -- but generally what they are trying to do is either make the point that Macca isn't the greatest and give examples why or they are just doing what critics feel they are paid to do and that is criticize. They don't generally criticize figure that are not worthy they criticize the greats -- that's what attracts readers. If a critic published an article attacking Tear for Fears for the latest album versus lets say Macca's latest live album or wanting to switch song credits -- what do you think readers are more likely to read? For that reason, Macca is always going to be a prime target -- I'd worry more about the day when critics leave him alone. The fact that critics take shots just speaks to Macca being a super celebrity even in his early 60s. Cheers! Mike
-
Hi Sam, I promised that I would stop by and say hi so here I am ops: I hope all is well with everyone and that you are enjoying the weekend. I have been quite busy so I have not had time to participate on this thread in quite a while. Mike, I read your post and agree with most of it. I must say though, that the case Paulfan is referring to is very different. This was not an article trashing Paul, like the Mike Seely one, but it was a submission to a Q&A column. The answer given to the question asked was basically the columnist's opinion of Paul being presented as fact. The person who wrote in now has an answer to his question that is not only completely inaccurate but will probably also leave him with a very negative view of Paul. If you go into the Broadcast section, there is a thread which will provide you with the details. ~Tashi
-
Well said Tashi. Mike, I know youv'e used the anolgy of being at the top you will likely get knocked and Macca is a legend. The things is that people may actually believe what is written about Paul. I also wonder why I don't see readers come to Macca's defense like they do on here? I know that people lke to read attacks and all but whenever I see an article on Paul I rarely see people write good letters to the editor about him. On here I read lots of positive stuff about him but in magazines,newspapers etc I hardly see any praise of Paul or defense of him. Even in Uncut magazinepeople wrote nasty letters to the editor about him. Is is not just critics who says stuff about him but fans fo the Beatles as well. I understand the critics since that is what they are paid to do but also fans such as my friend's sister say bad stuff about Paul. i would love to see people defend Paul in magazines or see good letters to the editor about him.
-
By the way I just e-mailed Wlater Scott at Parade magazine. I hope I put him in his place. The only thing is that I misspelled some words so it may make me look bad.
-
dB:
Hello Kathy Thanks for sharing your post Cool, sounds like you had a great time I seen the photo's too looks good I hope they like the guitar pick lol Your message read like a movie script, I'm sure it will be a box office hit
*Greg*, Hey! Well, I did have a great time. *tee hee hee* Movie script...*falls off chair*. Yeah, me and Gary's romance....sure..... Hope everything is going well for you.
-
Sam Leach:
Hello again iNa: I meant to say card....not car, heh, heh.
Hi sam, I'm glad you got that car I'm sending you a BMW tomorrow Hope you're fine!! Many hugs, Ina
-
stylegurl Yes, I know that the column was going in a different direction -- I was more responding to a summary all of the other posts Paulfan has made on this subject. Paulfan Macca clearly has his detractors as do most big artists -- Macca has more because he was in the biggest band of all time, it comes with the turf. In terms of fans though -- you just have to go to his shows to see that he has legions of fans. the media is again more likely to print negative letters or editorials because that's what sells. If you recall when a bunch of us wrote letters to the Rolling Stone concerning thier coverage of the song writing credits -- the magazine didn't print any of our letters. Having said all that, I don't discount the fact that Macca is an occassional whipping boy of the press -- among the Beatles he has clearly taken the most shots. I think a good part of it has to do with the fact that it was him against the other 3 Beatles when they dissolved consdiered the legal wrangiling. Macca & Wings were super sellers which make them the easier target of comparison to the Beatles and who can stack up against the Beatles. Crtics generally perfer Lennon's sardonic personality and lyrics as opposed to Macca's sunny personality and sometimes light lyrics. All this was compounded when Lennon died -- which lionized Lennon at the very time when Macca was derided for light pop hit songs alas Ebony and Ivory in the early 80s. Now, a lot of critics like to say that Macca is bitter at how he's regarded in comparison to Lennon -- to some degree I think that's true (I would be) but I think that Macca has mixed emotions about it -- at least that's how he seems reading his interviews. The ironic thing I think is that the media has propagated the Lennon versus Macca thing -- and created the Lennon is king image -- at the same time they criticize Macca for having issues about the comparison -- even though the issues are created by the media in the first place. In a lot of this coverage, Macca can't seem to win becuase if he says something or stands up for himself than the media is all over him for picking on a dead artist. However, to me it doesn't look like Macca is concerned as much about his rep compared to Lennon but just his own rep in general. Macca wanting Yesterday to be credited to him -- seems to have nothing to do with Macca taking Lennon down but only to do with taking credit for a song he wrote. It's the media that creates this image. My point is that the media likes to create the Lennon versus Macca thing -- and yeah I think they have been successful at moving Macca down from Lennon's equal to someone who isn't and is jealous about it. However, if you pin down most of these snobbby critics they will admit that Macca is one of music's all time greats -- they just are fiesty about ensuring that Macca isn't regarded the same respect that Lennon has -- and most of them accomplish that goal by being nasty.
-
Responded to the column I read your column yesterday concerning a reader's question for why McCartney is not performing Lennon songs at his concerts -- you responded by saying that it has to do with McCartney resenting the fact that he doesn't get equal attention to Lennon. Your response actually reads pretty silly to anyone who actually follows McCartney and Lennon. First of all you you state things as fact as if you actually know first hand McCartney emotions on the subject -- while clearly you never interviewed him on the subject. Secondly, McCartney dedicated a song every night of his show to Lennon. Yes, when Lennon died he was lionized as most artists are -- but as solo artists, McCartney outsold Lennon by a mile and received a lot more attention than Lennon while they were both alive. I think you reached the height of comedy when you threw in a quote from Yoko about McCartney as if she represents an impartial view point on this subject. It's like asking Michael Moore or Rush Limbaugh for their impartial (ha ha) view of the presidential election. Your readers deserve better than your biased response on McCartney.
-
Hey Mike i just posted a thread about a letter John wrote to Paul and Linda in 1969... Check it out i think you'll find it intresting
-
OK Nick, I'll check it out, thanks!
-
mikeskapla:
OK Nick, I'll check it out, thanks!
No problem
-
mikeskapla:
stylegurl: Yes, I know that the column was going in a different direction -- I was more responding to a summary all of the other posts Paulfan has made on this subject. Paulfan: Macca clearly has his detractors as do most big artists -- Macca has more because he was in the biggest band of all time, it comes with the turf. In terms of fans though -- you just have to go to his shows to see that he has legions of fans. the media is again more likely to print negative letters or editorials because that's what sells. If you recall when a bunch of us wrote letters to the Rolling Stone concerning thier coverage of the song writing credits -- the magazine didn't print any of our letters. Having said all that, I don't discount the fact that Macca is an occassional whipping boy of the press -- among the Beatles he has clearly taken the most shots. I think a good part of it has to do with the fact that it was him against the other 3 Beatles when they dissolved consdiered the legal wrangiling. Macca & Wings were super sellers which make them the easier target of comparison to the Beatles and who can stack up against the Beatles. Crtics generally perfer Lennon's sardonic personality and lyrics as opposed to Macca's sunny personality and sometimes light lyrics. All this was compounded when Lennon died -- which lionized Lennon at the very time when Macca was derided for light pop hit songs alas Ebony and Ivory in the early 80s. Now, a lot of critics like to say that Macca is bitter at how he's regarded in comparison to Lennon -- to some degree I think that's true (I would be) but I think that Macca has mixed emotions about it -- at least that's how he seems reading his interviews. The ironic thing I think is that the media has propagated the Lennon versus Macca thing -- and created the Lennon is king image -- at the same time they criticize Macca for having issues about the comparison -- even though the issues are created by the media in the first place. In a lot of this coverage, Macca can't seem to win becuase if he says something or stands up for himself than the media is all over him for picking on a dead artist. However, to me it doesn't look like Macca is concerned as much about his rep compared to Lennon but just his own rep in general. Macca wanting Yesterday to be credited to him -- seems to have nothing to do with Macca taking Lennon down but only to do with taking credit for a song he wrote. It's the media that creates this image. My point is that the media likes to create the Lennon versus Macca thing -- and yeah I think they have been successful at moving Macca down from Lennon's equal to someone who isn't and is jealous about it. However, if you pin down most of these snobbby critics they will admit that Macca is one of music's all time greats -- they just are fiesty about ensuring that Macca isn't regarded the same respect that Lennon has -- and most of them accomplish that goal by being nasty.
Mike, I understand Macca having detractors. Of course being big will also cause people to knock you as well as praise you. They build you up then tear you down. I remember when we wrote to Rolling Stoen and none of our letters got printed. It is funny how all the negative stuff sells. I always wonder why critics prefer Lennon's personality over Macca's? IS it because they aren't happy with themselves or are jealous that they don't like a shiny personality? I wouldn't be surprised if Macca would worry about his rep. He may not worry so much but I think he does want his place in history like Lennon has his. I agree with you that because Macca was against the other three in a lawsuit that people hate him. IT is funny how the media has elevated Lennon at Macca's expense. Didn't Paul make up with John and George bfore they died? IF so I wonder why critics are still bitter at him for the lawsuit? You are rigth when you say that if Macca sticks up for himself the media will be all over him. Lennon's death has given rise to their bias against Paul. When Goerge was alive I don't recall as many nasty things written about him. In fact my cousin who is 21 said a few years ago that she liked John and Gorge. I said I liked Paul and she said he was girly and had an annoying voice. This was the year before Goerge died. Even my friend's sister has said she likes John and doesn't like Paul and Paul needs to go away. She said John got wierd near the end of his life but made good music and said Paul doesn't amke good msuic anymore. On a happier note my best friend used to think Paul's music was too soft when No More Lonely Nights came out. We were 12 and 13 back then. Now at age 32 he realizes what a mistake he made and apologized to me an year or two ago and realizes how tlaented Paul i.s I hope that other people will come around like he did.
-
By the way Mike, My e-mail to Walter Scott is in the broadcast section if you want to read it. It is hard for me to remember all of it and post it here so if you want to see it go to my thread in the boradcast forum called Parade magazine article on Paul.
-
Actually it is called Parade magazine piece about Paul. sorry about that.
-
Hello Everyone have a good week!
-
Paulfan Read your posts on the Broadcast section, etc. Heck in terms of people I personally know more people pick Macca as their favorite Beatle - I think fans are mixed between Lennon and Macca as their favorite artist. Where Macca loses (BUT FAR FROM WITH EVERYONE) is with critics -- more critics prefer Lennon, some prefer Macca and some are mixed. While I agree with you that Macca isn't regarded as much as he should be -- I depart a little from your sentiment that things are dire and too many people loathe Macca. Macca is doing superb in the department of having doting fans -- it's one of the reasons why he out sold all the other Beatles combined as a solo artist, it's the reason why his concerts break records around the world -- it's the reason why he is so big that the networks put his music specials on prime time TV, Macca has the record of having the most Internet questions thrown at any artist when he had his Internet web chat duing the Flaming Pie. VH1 dedicated a whole week to Macca's music as far as I can recall 3 different times. When Macca appeared on Leno a few years back he was one of the few artists ever to have the whole show dedicated just to him. On just about every big gig including Live Aide -- Macca is the close -- last act showstopper. Bob Geldof said in his book when he was preparing live aide that the one act that he knew would bring in millions of views that otherwise wouldn't watch -- was Paul McCartney. Now to me its very obvious that Macca arguably has more fans that any other artist on the planet. If he's not #1 (I think he is) he's pretty darn close to the top. Thereby, I wouldn't worry one whit about Macca not having enough adoring fans -- just becuase some of the people in your circles don't care for him or you read an attack by a snobby critic. In my view the place of concern is that I'd like to say Macca for once ranked first in music survey's as the biggest artist ever opposed to somewhere from #2 to #10 in these magazines. Again reading between the lines even the magazines like Rolling Stone that bash Macca accept his greatness -- that magazine gave Tug of War 5 stars -- a better rating than anything they gave Lennon. Mojo ranked the best Beatle solo albums and ranked McCartney #1. Q magazine ranked the best song writers of all time and gave McCartney #2 right behind Lennon. Beyond the bashing he takes, McCartney does relatively well with critics but they do enough to ensure he's not on top by taking shots at him. Critics Macca needs a little lift with -- in terms of fans, Macca is doing superb. Cheers! Mike
-
Just wanted to pop in and say a quick hello. I hope that everone had a good weekend.
-
mikeskapla:
Paulfan: Read your posts on the Broadcast section, etc. Heck in terms of people I personally know more people pick Macca as their favorite Beatle - I think fans are mixed between Lennon and Macca as their favorite artist. Where Macca loses (BUT FAR FROM WITH EVERYONE) is with critics -- more critics prefer Lennon, some prefer Macca and some are mixed. While I agree with you that Macca isn't regarded as much as he should be -- I depart a little from your sentiment that things are dire and too many people loathe Macca. Macca is doing superb in the department of having doting fans -- it's one of the reasons why he out sold all the other Beatles combined as a solo artist, it's the reason why his concerts break records around the world -- it's the reason why he is so big that the networks put his music specials on prime time TV, Macca has the record of having the most Internet questions thrown at any artist when he had his Internet web chat duing the Flaming Pie. VH1 dedicated a whole week to Macca's music as far as I can recall 3 different times. When Macca appeared on Leno a few years back he was one of the few artists ever to have the whole show dedicated just to him. On just about every big gig including Live Aide -- Macca is the close -- last act showstopper. Bob Geldof said in his book when he was preparing live aide that the one act that he knew would bring in millions of views that otherwise wouldn't watch -- was Paul McCartney. Now to me its very obvious that Macca arguably has more fans that any other artist on the planet. If he's not #1 (I think he is) he's pretty darn close to the top. Thereby, I wouldn't worry one whit about Macca not having enough adoring fans -- just becuase some of the people in your circles don't care for him or you read an attack by a snobby critic. In my view the place of concern is that I'd like to say Macca for once ranked first in music survey's as the biggest artist ever opposed to somewhere from #2 to #10 in these magazines. Again reading between the lines even the magazines like Rolling Stone that bash Macca accept his greatness -- that magazine gave Tug of War 5 stars -- a better rating than anything they gave Lennon. Mojo ranked the best Beatle solo albums and ranked McCartney #1. Q magazine ranked the best song writers of all time and gave McCartney #2 right behind Lennon. Beyond the bashing he takes, McCartney does relatively well with critics but they do enough to ensure he's not on top by taking shots at him. Critics Macca needs a little lift with -- in terms of fans, Macca is doing superb. Cheers! Mike
Mike, I know Paul has fans and is doing well. The thing is that some people think he is only popular because he was in the Beatles. What I mean to say is that people act like he wasn't any good without Lennon and when I try to explain to people he old the most records as a solo artist they think it was because he was in the Beatles and mostly women like his music. I mean some people act like Silly Love Songs is a woamn's type of song. I even mentioned that his concerts sold out and they think it is because he sings Beatles songs. Some act like he wasn't any good without Lennon. IT is good to see Bob Geldoff say good things about him and see Vh1 and Leno dedicate shows to him and him be the last act at Live aid and other benefit shows. Of course not everyone can like Paul I understand that but the thing I hate is that people who are meaner than him get praised more than he does. Some people t hink just because he sells lots of records and has lots of number ones doesn't amke him good and will say stuff like Britney Spears sells lots of albums but has no talent. My problem is not so much people not being Macca fans but when nasty articles are written about hima nd people may start to believe it and say I don't see why you like Macca and think we blindly like Macca and look at him with rose colored glasses. I was also worried that if something bad came up about macca people will say see I told you so. They think we are aprtial to Macca and agree with everything he does and says. I also would like to see him be number one in music surveys. Forgive me for complaining about this alot but I'll wind up doing it again. I hope one day I won't feel bad about Macca being picked on and next time I will stand strongg if I hear him get picked on.
-
Hi Tashi how are you doing?
-
Hi Giri, I am doing fine, thank you. I should be in bed because I have work tomorrow! How are you doing?