Times you've been disappointed in Paul?
-
DrBeatle:
I think what it all goes to show is that whether you're an average schmoe like all of us here on this board, or a famous person like Paul, etc, we've all got flaws and virtues. I will say I was disappointed when Paul remarried so soon after Linda passed...I understand he was lonely and sad and it was most likely a rebound thing, but still, it never sat right with me. The only good thing to come out of it was his youngest daughter.
i agree . It's like family members even through we may not understand or like what they do at times but we still accept and love them. but maybe PAUL is the type of guy who doesn't like to be alone. so we all know that relationships are very important to him. maybe that explains it i guess. oh well it is what it is now
-
maclover2013:
DrBeatle:
I think what it all goes to show is that whether you're an average schmoe like all of us here on this board, or a famous person like Paul, etc, we've all got flaws and virtues. I will say I was disappointed when Paul remarried so soon after Linda passed...I understand he was lonely and sad and it was most likely a rebound thing, but still, it never sat right with me. The only good thing to come out of it was his youngest daughter.
i agree . It's like family members even through we may not understand or like what they do at times but we still accept and love them. but maybe PAUL is the type of guy who doesn't like to be alone. so we all know that relationships are very important to him. maybe that explains it i guess. oh well it is what it is now
I agree also, and I guess I was wrong about the drugs in the 70's too
-
maclover2013:
DrBeatle:
I think what it all goes to show is that whether you're an average schmoe like all of us here on this board, or a famous person like Paul, etc, we've all got flaws and virtues. I will say I was disappointed when Paul remarried so soon after Linda passed...I understand he was lonely and sad and it was most likely a rebound thing, but still, it never sat right with me. The only good thing to come out of it was his youngest daughter.
i agree . It's like family members even through we may not understand or like what they do at times but we still accept and love them. but maybe PAUL is the type of guy who doesn't like to be alone. so we all know that relationships are very important to him. maybe that explains it i guess. oh well it is what it is now
Exactly. I'm not sure why we all care so much for someone who just about none of us have ever met or are going to meet, but still, it is what it is
-
The day he released "Mary Had a Little Lamb" as an A-side. Rock gods - Zeppelin, Stones, the Who, Bowie, Lennon - were at their peak & Macca releases a nursery rhyme as a single???
-
JoeySmith:
The day he released "Mary Had a Little Lamb" as an A-side. Rock gods - Zeppelin, Stones, the Who, Bowie, Lennon - were at their peak & Macca releases a nursery rhyme as a single???
Yeah, bad decision for sure. He made up for it with Hi Hi Hi soon after, though.
-
JoeySmith:
The day he released "Mary Had a Little Lamb" as an A-side. Rock gods - Zeppelin, Stones, the Who, Bowie, Lennon - were at their peak & Macca releases a nursery rhyme as a single???
That's one of the things I like about Paul. He marches to his own drummer. Always has. And anyway, John Lennon sat eating chocolate cake in a fricking bag and mailing out acorns for peace. Was that deep thinking? Or just deeply silly and deeply pointless? Yet Lennon gets credited for making a "big statement" by those acts. People go, "Oh he was so cool, so edgy, so contrarian. He didn't care what people thought when he did these crazy things." So Paul does something crazy and silly and contrarian by releasing Mary Had a Little Lamb -- in order to make a statement of his own about the silliness of BBC censorship practices -- and he gets maligned. : : In the end, it was just a children's song. And a good little version at that.
-
Love MHALL! The only time I was disappointed with anything was the quality of performance on that last SNL. Otherwise never!
-
Michelley:
JoeySmith:
The day he released "Mary Had a Little Lamb" as an A-side. Rock gods - Zeppelin, Stones, the Who, Bowie, Lennon - were at their peak & Macca releases a nursery rhyme as a single???
That's one of the things I like about Paul. He marches to his own drummer. Always has. And anyway, John Lennon sat eating chocolate cake in a ****ing bag and mailing out acorns for peace. Was that deep thinking? Or just deeply silly and deeply pointless? Yet Lennon gets credited for making a "big statement" by those acts. People go, "Oh he was so cool, so edgy, so contrarian. He didn't care what people thought when he did these crazy things." So Paul does something crazy and silly and contrarian by releasing Mary Had a Little Lamb -- in order to make a statement of his own about the silliness of BBC censorship practices -- and he gets maligned. : : In the end, it was just a children's song. And a good little version at that.
I like the song as well...I just think he needed something a bit better as the big single from Wings, especially as his standing in the UK press was probably at an all-time low at that point, right after the Beatles break-up. Also agree on John...I love John, but that late 60s/early 70s stuff he did with Yoko is so embarrassing it's funny.
-
oobu24:
No matter if it's nonsense or not he should have been there. He could have said yeah & thanks for suing me. Sue me sue you blues... 1988
Why? He`s bigger than the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. His image? Funny that his fans actually seem more bothered about that than he is.
-
-
oobu24:
No matter if it's nonsense or not he should have been there. He could have said yeah & thanks for suing me. Sue me sue you blues... 1988
I effin' love Ringo!
-
Can't say he's disappointed, he doesn't owe me anything. He's given his all during his long glorious career. He himself has said he regrets "nothing" about his career.
-
femaleanimal:
oobu24:
No matter if it's nonsense or not he should have been there. He could have said yeah & thanks for suing me. Sue me sue you blues... 1988
Why? He`s bigger than the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. His image? Funny that his fans actually seem more bothered about that than he is.
and you know this how??? : for the record I did not say anything about his image.
-
oobu24:
No matter if it's nonsense or not he should have been there. He could have said yeah & thanks for suing me. Sue me sue you blues... 1988
sueing? why? i probably miss something
-
The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is nothing compared to the enormity of the Beatles and Paul's careers. I never understood why music lovers make such a big deal out of the Rock n' Roll Hall of Fame.
-
No, one cannot be compared to the other...and who would?
-
I compared them, it wasn't a big deal to me personally that Paul didn't show up there to honor the Beatles, or that it took the Rock Hall of Fame a long time to finally honor Paul on his own. That didn't disappoint me. That's all. The Hall of Fame doesn't mean anything to me.
-
Of course, it's a big deal. However, that doesn't mean that he did anything wrong.
-
DrBeatle:
Michelley:
JoeySmith:
The day he released "Mary Had a Little Lamb" as an A-side. Rock gods - Zeppelin, Stones, the Who, Bowie, Lennon - were at their peak & Macca releases a nursery rhyme as a single???
That's one of the things I like about Paul. He marches to his own drummer. Always has. And anyway, John Lennon sat eating chocolate cake in a ****ing bag and mailing out acorns for peace. Was that deep thinking? Or just deeply silly and deeply pointless? Yet Lennon gets credited for making a "big statement" by those acts. People go, "Oh he was so cool, so edgy, so contrarian. He didn't care what people thought when he did these crazy things." So Paul does something crazy and silly and contrarian by releasing Mary Had a Little Lamb -- in order to make a statement of his own about the silliness of BBC censorship practices -- and he gets maligned. : : In the end, it was just a children's song. And a good little version at that.
I like the song as well...I just think he needed something a bit better as the big single from Wings, especially as his standing in the UK press was probably at an all-time low at that point, right after the Beatles break-up. Also agree on John...I love John, but that late 60s/early 70s stuff he did with Yoko is so embarrassing it's funny.
Yoko thought that sheet up. Part of her conceptual art, known in some circles as con art.
-
maclover2013:
DrBeatle:
I think what it all goes to show is that whether you're an average schmoe like all of us here on this board, or a famous person like Paul, etc, we've all got flaws and virtues. I will say I was disappointed when Paul remarried so soon after Linda passed...I understand he was lonely and sad and it was most likely a rebound thing, but still, it never sat right with me. The only good thing to come out of it was his youngest daughter.
i agree . It's like family members even through we may not understand or like what they do at times but we still accept and love them. but maybe PAUL is the type of guy who doesn't like to be alone. so we all know that relationships are very important to him. maybe that explains it i guess. oh well it is what it is now
You are totally correct. Paul is the kind of man who simply cannot be alone and needs a woman/wife in his life. There's not anything inherently wrong with that, unless you're like my cousin who keeps marrying the wrong men (married 1st husband twice, then 4 other men, then almost married another!) And Maclover2013, I agree about Beatrice.