Wild Life - A New Perspective
-
-
A good article with an interesting slant. Thanks for sharing.
-
I'm not sure why people feel the need to defend Wild Life. It's always been good and always will be. Why have a context? Just listen to the music.
-
And I'm not sure why people keep digging up barely plausible defenses for what is simply not a very good record. Yes, it's true that defying fan and critical expectations constituted an act of artistic/career bravery. Paul and John had that in common, and I'll happily give them both credit for it, even when the results weren't very good. But raw and honest actually can live side by side with competent songwriting and arranging -- see, for example, "Maybe I'm Amazed" or John's "God." All the excuses in the world can't change the fact that most of Wild Life just isn't very good: the title tune rambles and loses focus, "I Am Your Singer" is just incompetent, and several tunes go on way too long, among other things.
-
For crying out loud. That lead singer on Wild Life? I challenge anyone to post someone better. My point is he doesn't have to have a grandiose album of songs with a voice like that, and with a voice like that, just listening to that voice alone can be enough, i.e., if you're listening correctly. And, with a voice like that, subjectivity goes out the window. Also, does anyone really want to criticize Paul McCartney's writing skills? If they do, there's a Wikipedia I can point them to.
-
I have always enjoyed Wild Life. Whether it's his worst work is up to the listener. I love Dear Friend, Some People Never Know, Tomorrow, I Am Your Singer, and I do like the song Wild Life.
-
Good grief. Like anything in art, whether it's good bad or indifferent is a subjective thing. It's in the "ears" of the beholder. What next? 30 years from now some plonker states his case for Pipes Of Peace being under-appreciated... Some people will like Wildlife, others, like me will say it has a couple of decent songs pretty much ruined by Linda's way too up front vocals...as were many songs on RAM. Annoys me a great song like Tomorrow was almost ruined by not only Linda's oohs and aahs, but by Paul's sloppy lead vocal. BUT...on all albums after Wildlife she was mixed down to a more subtle level and I think Linda, of all people gave Wings their unique sound. Linda's vocals are very good (or the use of them) post Wildlife. But Wildlife is pretty much crap to my ears and nothing will change my opinion of it - much less some trendy revisionist write up. From Red Rose Speedway on, Wings were cooking...
-
Tomorrow: wow..sloppy lead vocals and Linda almost ruined it. are you serious? That song is perfect. I love Wildlife for what it is: early days of a band finding its feet. Relaxed, carefree, slight. And so many golden moments: Some People Never Know, Love is Strange, Dear Friend, I Am Your Singer, Wild Life. thanks for the article.
-
Of course everything is subjective in this postmodern world we live in, but if we didn't express our opinions then there would be no point in having a forum like this one. It's interesting to hear why people like or dislike an album. With Wild Life, it was an album that I liked on first listen, but then it grew on me a bit more over time. Maybe most would agree that side one is better than side two (?), but I do enjoy Linda's singing. I think some people have a higher 'pain' threshold than others when it comes to silly lyrics. With McCartney I've grown used to it. It's just what he does sometimes.
-
I quite like the album. Retrospectively. Vocals at time by Paul let rip. Like the rawness. Love the rawness. But I also agree that too much Linda up front and in the ear. No disrespect intended. But it does detract from the finished product. Not exactly melodious. Not in this early venture. But, whilst I might be older than most here, I am also younger than many. When this was released - by a Beatle, and Paul at that - it must've been a big disappointment. A terrible album cover, and hardly the polished record fans of the time would've expected, so close to the dissolution of the greatest band of all time. Some wonderful tracks. Potentially. And listening to it all these years later, many of them take on a breath of their own.... And I love listening to all the flawed/naked aspects of it. In retrospect, the genesis of some great tracks... Tomorrow, in particular. But, I will defer to the fans that were around at the time.... the album would not have been overwhelming at first listen. When I first listened to it, as a second generation Beatle fan, I thought it was a little underwhelming..... I do now take a lot out of it, but it must've been a struggle at the time for any Beatle fan to adopt it.
-
Is a distended LP, with no big ambitions, just the idea of meet each other. I feel nature in that album.
-
Cord:
For crying out loud. That lead singer on Wild Life? I challenge anyone to post someone better. My point is he doesn't have to have a grandiose album of songs with a voice like that, and with a voice like that, just listening to that voice alone can be enough, i.e., if you're listening correctly. And, with a voice like that, subjectivity goes out the window. Also, does anyone really want to criticize Paul McCartney's writing skills? If they do, there's a Wikipedia I can point them to.
No one is criticizing Paul's songwriting skills, simply noting the fact that they aren't always visible. Are you seriously claiming the man's never had a misfire? Really??? And much as I love Paul as a vocalist, and particularly love his wailing mode, his vocal on Wild Life doesn't work for me. This is entirely subjective, but his vocal on this one feels exaggerated and over the top, as if he's trying to overcompensate for the fact that the song itself is rambling and unfocused. If you like it, enjoy. I'd much rather listen to "Nod Your Head."
-
And I'd rather have a root canal than listen to "Nod Your Head!" I LOVE the song "Tomorrow." As they say, "To each his own."
-
Bruce M.:
No one is criticizing Paul's songwriting skills, simply noting the fact that they aren't always visible. Are you seriously claiming the man's never had a misfire? Really??? And much as I love Paul as a vocalist, and particularly love his wailing mode, his vocal on Wild Life doesn't work for me. This is entirely subjective, but his vocal on this one feels exaggerated and over the top, as if he's trying to overcompensate for the fact that the song itself is rambling and unfocused. If you like it, enjoy. I'd much rather listen to "Nod Your Head."
Look at the situation at the time. RAM had just been released, he was putting a band together to soon tour, he wanted to put out a quick album which I think was recorded in a couple of days. My guess is most of the songs were written quickly, and some unfinished - Mumbo doesn't even have lyrics for pity sake. So, yes, it's easy to criticize, but if you look at the bigger picture I would give a little slack - that's all I'm saying. But, I will say this though - I will never criticize the man's voice. When he's 95 years old and sounds like Louie Armstrong, I'll remember back. The greatest singer in the history of recorded sound.
-
Nancy R:
And I'd rather have a root canal than listen to "Nod Your Head!" I LOVE the song "Tomorrow." As they say, "To each his own."
Tomorrow is a cracker. Another example of his wonderful versatility. Even if it feels a little undercooked. Now, I have a sure fire way for you to appreciate Nod Your Head. I call it the Comparative Listening Method (or CLM, as everything these days has to be massaged into an easily digestible acronym). Listen to Hosanna followed by Scared. And then slip on Nod Your Head. When you're done, you will think the latter is a modern day classic!
-
Wings Wildlife is slapdash, thrown together, and sounds like he's not even trying. Certainly not the work of an ex-Beatle! (I guess we could make comparisons with his ex-partner's release around the same time - Some Time in New York City, which some would say was his worst also) Obviously some people like that kind of amateur effort, but it sounds like a demo. Well, it was their first, and they got better after that.
-
toris:
Nancy R:
And I'd rather have a root canal than listen to "Nod Your Head!" I LOVE the song "Tomorrow." As they say, "To each his own."
Tomorrow is a cracker. Another example of his wonderful versatility. Even if it feels a little undercooked. Now, I have a sure fire way for you to appreciate Nod Your Head. I call it the Comparative Listening Method (or CLM, as everything these days has to be massaged into an easily digestible acronym). Listen to Hosanna followed by Scared. And then slip on Nod Your Head. When you're done, you will think the latter is a modern day classic!
-
Wildlife definately has a loose feel to it. As I remember it was basically recorded in about a week or two. Paul's inspiration was he heard Dylan made an album in a week. . Generally I like most of it. A few tracks could of been polished up a bit like Mumbo could have had proper lyrics and Bip Bop should of been scrapped. Three out 5 stars .
-
Is that article saying that you have to listen to the album in the context of Paul's life at the time? A good album should be able to stand up even if you don't know the first thing about the people who made it.
-
HaileyMcComet:
Is that article saying that you have to listen to the album in the context of Paul's life at the time? A good album should be able to stand up even if you don't know the first thing about the people who made it.
Exactly. A good album (or song or poem or play or movie or whatever) should stand on its own, even if knowing a bit about what was going on in the artist's life might enhance the experience. For example, you don't need to know that Run Devil Run was the first album Paul recorded after Linda's death to enjoy it, but knowing that fact does clarify his interpretations of a couple of the songs. But the album works fine even if you don't know jack about what was going on in Paul's life then. Not so for Wild Life, except for maybe a couple tracks.
