Posted on 12/16/2008 10:37:20 AM PST by weegee
He's already painted himself as the most avant garde Beatle, now in what seems like another attempt to rewrite history, Sir Paul McCartney claims he was responsible for radicalising their their political views
In a statement that forces us to read Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da as a commentary on American neo-colonialism, Sir Paul has said that it is he who turned the Beatles on to politics, introducing John, Paul and Ringo to the evils of the Vietnam war.
Whereas John Lennon is widely considered the "political one", penning songs like Revolution and Give Peace a Chance, sweet Sir Paul is now presenting an alternative history. In a forthcoming interview with Prospect magazine, McCartney claims to have been the catalyst for the group's anti-war position.
"...someone said to me: 'Bertrand Russell is living not far from here in Chelsea, why don't you go and see him?'" McCartney said. Russell, then in his 90s, was a prominent philosopher and activist. "So I just took a taxi down there and knocked on the door."
"He was fabulous. He told me about the Vietnam war – most of us didn't know about it, it wasn't yet in the papers – and also that it was a very bad war."
That, McCartney explained, was enough. Filled with idealism, conviction and, er, a smattering of current events, "I remember going back to the studio either that evening or the next day and telling the guys, particularly John, about this meeting and saying what a bad war this was...."
While it's John Lennon who has retained the reputation for rabble-rousing, "I politicised the Beatles," McCartney insisted. And now he has passed the "megaphone" to a new generation of political artists, he said. People like Bono...
Somewhere in England, Paul McCartney is squeaking: "Me too!"
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
Absolutely! I stated my earlier post incorrectly. I should have said Paul was the most successful Post Beatle NOT the only successful Beatle. George and John both had success after the Beatles as did Ringo. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.
I would say there are many people who would agree with you about Ray.
I think that Rick Wright got mistreated by Gilmour even in the later post-Waters Floyd.
Beyond the lyrics of Money was the lavish lifestyle that Waters and Gilmour actively pursued. Making gobs of money was always the motivation for those two. Play a lot of shows and make a lot of money. Syd Barrett’s drug fueld art rock experiments were an obstacle to commercial success and frankly the band was glad to move beyond them.
Both Gilmour and Waters are proud Socialists.
Would you still be willing to “stick by the charts” as a measure of who’s a good songwriter? Have you seen the charts today?
Have you heard the music that doesn’t make the charts?
Agreed. The Who are not bad.
Sorry but The Beatles put Dave Clark out of business in four years.
Was Rick in the beatles?
“ki-nigget”
Python alert!
What, is Macca trying to stay relevant and kick up the sales? Shame. Strange. He’s got his accomplishments, whatever they are, why try to gain favor with the overpoliticized vaudeville crowd.
Really. I thought he and Gilmour got on okay but I could be wrong. Wright seemed like a very decent and quiet man. Wright supposedly wrote hundreds of songs but was too insecure or bullied by Rog to present them. His Paint Box was quite good after Syd lost it and the others were not up to songwriting yet. Paint Box was the B-side to Apples and Oranges which was pretty lame. Modern UK band Blur sounded like Apples & Ornages.
I think Mason was above a lot of it because his family owned part of Floyd because they came up with money early on when the band was not a commercial sucess post-Syd.
The only reason these popular songwriters may be good is because they never listened to themselves thinking themselves great! They listened to people most of their worshippers never heard of, and never bothered looking up. The same is also true of writers - best writers don’t read James Michener and Danielle Steel.
"He was fabulous. He told me about the Vietnam war – most of us didn't know about it, it wasn't yet in the papers – and also that it was a very bad war."
So the idiot high school drop out from Liverpool got propagandized by senile old crackpot.
Yes, Vietnam was a 'very bad war.' And those rock 'n roll idiots took the side of the bad guys.
Yes I would. I have been a musician and writer for 35 years. People not in the business don’t look at song writing as a craft but that is exactly what it is. There are reasons songs are hits and others are not and yes there are always exceptions. But for the most part pro songwriters stick to their craft and go about business as usual just like any other business. It’s not romantic but that’s the way it is.
Now we can agree. Ray Davies was and still is a great songwriter. Paul is a huge fan of Ray’s writing as is Townsend.
George was a nice man. It was such a shame when he was stabbed multiple times by an intruder just a year (or two?) before he died of cancer. I guess that it was always a fear of his after what happened to John.
I think Rick Wright was the least money grubber in the band. Nick Mason has one of the most impressive Ferrari collections in the UK and also has business that owns planes for movies. He is a huge F1 and racing fan. Possibly one of the most middling drummers even compared to Ringo.
George was too and owned a McLaren F1 road car.
Socialist Gilmour gave away a rather expensive Ferrari a few years ago for charity. Waters is a very unpleasant man. His “tribute’ for Wright after he died was somewhat insulting.
“Well, they did not start out as lefties. I believe it was McCartney who wrote “Taxman”.”
That would be Harrison.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxman
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.