The merits of McCartney 2
-
Totally agree with ewanme!
-
It's funny how many people think the critics are idiots when they disagree with the reviews, but then miraculously decide the critics have suddenly become wise when the reviews change. I guess reappraisals are always correct when they match what you already think.
-
It's funny how many people get upset when the critical assessment of an album changes over time, especially when that reappraisal no longer matches what they think.
We could play this game all day. Whether people value what the "critics" say or not is up to each individual. I happen to enjoy a thoughtful critique, even if it's negative. What I don't enjoy: critics who take cheap shots. But the idea that the critical assessment of an album -- or a movie, or a book -- is locked in stone and doesn't change over time is nonsense. Sometimes the early critics are wrong. There are many, many examples of famous novelists who got terrible reviews in their day and, 100 years later, their books are considered classics. Sometimes, 40 or 50 years later, a different set of critics comes to the work fresh and can evaluate it in a new way. The important point is whether the work feels/sounds dated or whether it still speaks to people, 40 or 50 years later. And in the case of Ram, McCartney, and McCartney 2 -- for example -- all 3 albums resonate with many critics and listeners today for a lot of different reasons. We'll have to see if that will still be the case another 40 years from now. Who knows? Back in 1972, no one thought Ram would be viewed with the great critical respect with which it's viewed today. Culture is a changing, shifting thing. -
Michelley:
It's funny how many people get upset when the critical assessment of an album changes over time, especially when that reappraisal no longer matches what they think.
We could play this game all day. Whether people value what the "critics" say or not is up to each individual. I happen to enjoy a thoughtful critique, even if it's negative. What I don't enjoy: critics who take cheap shots. But the idea that the critical assessment of an album -- or a movie, or a book -- is locked in stone and doesn't change over time is nonsense. Sometimes the early critics are wrong. There are many, many examples of famous novelists who got terrible reviews in their day and, 100 years later, their books are considered classics. Sometimes, 40 or 50 years later, a different set of critics comes to the work fresh and can evaluate it in a new way. The important point is whether the work feels/sounds dated or whether it still speaks to people, 40 or 50 years later. And in the case of Ram, McCartney, and McCartney 2 -- for example -- all 3 albums resonate with many critics and listeners today for a lot of different reasons. We'll have to see if that will still be the case another 40 years from now. Who knows? Back in 1972, no one thought Ram would be viewed with the great critical respect with which it's viewed today. Culture is a changing, shifting thing.Some excellent points there
-
One of the great things about the "Remasters" is that it gets Macca fans discussing Paul's full catalogue again. Hopefully, we'll have Venus and Mars / At the Speed of Sound coming sooner than later. Lots of good discussion about Mc 2 here. As with most of Paul's albums, there are varied opinions both good and bad. While I personally look at reviews, I will (if financially able) buy all of Macca's new releases (including remasters) regardless of what any critic says. Like most of us here, we're fans of Paul's music generally. That's not to say we like every Paul song but we surely like many or most. In the case of Mc 2, I am so glad it was given an early Remaster treatment. It was one of the few Macca albums, I had never bought. Despite remembering many negative reviews at the time of its release, this remaster many years later gave me a chance to decide for myself. For me, it was almost like having another new Macca album. I guess what has surprised me the most is that to my ears Mc2 isn't a "way out" McCartney album at all. As I am driving in my car, I find Mc2 to be a very "mellow" album. After a few listens, I found that I liked almost all the songs and they flowed well. The only exception was Bogey Music. I just didn't like the vocals with all the echos and I just found the melody to be a little monotonous. Other than this one track, Mc2 is full of classic Paul melody. Would I list it in the top half of Paul's studio albums? Probably not but Mc2, in my opinion, is not an embarrassment in any way. It continues to show the quality and diversity of his total catalog and what a great vocalist he was in 1980. Love those howls in Nobody Knows. And is "one of these days" a great unknown McCartney song.
-
I bought the album in the late '90s -- I had been a solid fan for several years at that point, from the Flowers era on. Yes, I knew "Coming Up" (it was the first Paul McCartney hit that I really liked as a kid). And, yes, I was pretty versed on all the Wings hits and solo albums like Tug Of War and Press To Play (the album that made me a fan in the first place). Somehow, though, McCartney II was the album that missed my radar; I just hadn't gotten around to it yet. I'll also add that, before hearing the album, I wasn't aware of any critical assessments on the album -- good or bad -- so, for me, my first time hearing McCartney II was a genuine experience. By the time "Temporary Secretary" started, I knew I was hearing something adventurous and highly inspired and totally unguarded. It hit me right away that Paul was keeping up with what was happening with new wave and early electronica music. And, yes, there are many moments of genius on the album. And I agree that it is the prototype for Electric Arguments. I'm not one of those fans who pretends that all there is to Paul are the ballads and radio-palatable tracks -- Paul is a musical spelunker. And thank goodness for that!
-
a musical spelunker... 
-
Bruce M.:
Nah. About a third of the album is pretty good and the rest is nearly unlistenable. The negative reviews were mostly right.
100% with you, Bruce. If instead of McCartney the album was by John Doe it would have sunk without a trace.
-
oobu24:
a musical spelunker... 
-
Ram is no classic an average album really!what like most about that album is that wonderful McCartney voice in Mokberry moon delight for example but i stick with McCartney II any day!
-
javilu:
Bruce M.:
Nah. About a third of the album is pretty good and the rest is nearly unlistenable. The negative reviews were mostly right.
100% with you, Bruce. If instead of McCartney the album was by John Doe it would have sunk without a trace.
Not quite. A few years ago, DJ's in the UK rediscovered McCartney II and started playing Temporary Secretary and it proved popular. No one on the dance floor knew it was Macca; in fact, they were shocked it was him. They just thought it was a great track. His name had nothing to do with them thinking it was a great track. And really your argument ("it would have sunk without a trace without McCartney's name attached") ignores two facts: (1) It did sink without a trace in the 80's when his name WAS attached; it's only been in recent years that the album has caught on because the music sounds current (at times). and (2) you could make that argument about the work of any famous artist, including some Beatles songs that would have "sunk without a trace" without the Beatles name attached. But there's no point in speculating because we can make them unfamous. We'll never never know.
-
With all due respect, I don't mind how many people adore "Temporary Secretary" and the like, to me it will always be Macca at his embarasing worst.
-
Sometimes -- when folks complain that a movie is too slow for them... ...perhaps they're too slow for the movie?
-
audi:
I bought the album in the late '90s -- I had been a solid fan for several years at that point, from the Flowers era on. I'll also add that, before hearing the album, I wasn't aware of any critical assessments on the album -- good or bad -- so, for me, my first time hearing McCartney II was a genuine experience. t!
Worth pointing out back in the day, before the Internet and all the technical stuff available now, it was the same for my age group. The reviews were only print, and those would appear well after the album was released, mainly. Until I spun the record, I had no idea what my ears would soak in...every album on first listen, up until the Internet, was a "genuine experience." I like the album. Although Temporary Secretary is Paul doing Dury, no question.
-
javilu:
With all due respect, I don't mind how many people adore "Temporary Secretary" and the like, to me it will always be Macca at his embarasing worst.
Not while Pipes Of Peace remains on this Earth...
-
moptops:
javilu:
With all due respect, I don't mind how many people adore "Temporary Secretary" and the like, to me it will always be Macca at his embarasing worst.
Not while Pipes Of Peace remains on this Earth...
Word.
-
moptops:
audi:
I bought the album in the late '90s -- I had been a solid fan for several years at that point, from the Flowers era on. I'll also add that, before hearing the album, I wasn't aware of any critical assessments on the album -- good or bad -- so, for me, my first time hearing McCartney II was a genuine experience. t!
Worth pointing out back in the day, before the Internet and all the technical stuff available now, it was the same for my age group. ... Until I spun the record, I had no idea what my ears would soak in...every album on first listen, up until the Internet, was a "genuine experience." ...
Agreed. The joy of enjoying an album is a bygone thing, and the Internet revolution is the sole culprit.
-
Michelley:
javilu:
Bruce M.:
Nah. About a third of the album is pretty good and the rest is nearly unlistenable. The negative reviews were mostly right.
100% with you, Bruce. If instead of McCartney the album was by John Doe it would have sunk without a trace.
Not quite. A few years ago, DJ's in the UK rediscovered McCartney II and started playing Temporary Secretary and it proved popular. No one on the dance floor knew it was Macca; in fact, they were shocked it was him. They just thought it was a great track. His name had nothing to do with them thinking it was a great track. And really your argument ("it would have sunk without a trace without McCartney's name attached") ignores two facts: (1) It did sink without a trace in the 80's when his name WAS attached; it's only been in recent years that the album has caught on because the music sounds current (at times). and (2) you could make that argument about the work of any famous artist, including some Beatles songs that would have "sunk without a trace" without the Beatles name attached. But there's no point in speculating because we can make them unfamous. We'll never never know.
I have to correct your nonsense that the album did 'sink without trace' IT WAS A NUMBER ONE ALBUM IN THE UK, AND A NUMBER 3 ALBUM IN THE U.S I guess you perhaps read a review which stated this completely false information and repeated it, so no hard feelings. This is how if something false is repeated often enough it becomes 'fact'. Happens all the time. I always do my own research.
-
ewanme:
I have to correct your nonsense that the album did 'sink without trace' IT WAS A NUMBER ONE ALBUM IN THE UK, AND A NUMBER 3 ALBUM IN THE U.S I guess you perhaps read a review which stated this completely false information and repeated it, so no hard feelings. This is how if something false is repeated often enough it becomes 'fact'. Happens all the time. I always do my own research.
Goodness why are you shouting? I can hear you just fine. And there was nothing false in what I wrote. You were confusing high initial sales with the album's longterm status. Just because an album is No. 1 or No. 3 doesn't mean it has a lasting legacy. And McCartney II did not have a lasting legacy in the 80s. It wasn't considered an important album of that year and as the decade progressed it DID sink without a trace. It was only years later that the album began to be played and resurrected by new listeners.
-
audi:
moptops:
javilu:
With all due respect, I don't mind how many people adore "Temporary Secretary" and the like, to me it will always be Macca at his embarasing worst.
Not while Pipes Of Peace remains on this Earth...
Word.
Double word.
