Log In
Register
11.32am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline
Beg to differ, @Billy Rhythm. Whilst they may have hoped that I Want To Hold Your Hand would reach #1 in the US, there were no guarantees, and there was certainly no guarantees that if it did top the US charts, it would do it before they arrived there in February 1964. In fact, there are many accounts closer in time to the event, including by Paul, that recount their shock, surprise and amazement on learning they were on top of the Billboard chart while in Paris.
Find me a ’60s quote from any of them that says what Paul says now and I’ll agree with you. In fact, it’s not a version of their first US trip that I heard Paul give before the 1988 BBC Radio One series McCartney on McCartney, since when he has stuck to it firmly.
The reality is that they were going to the US in February 1964 whatever position IWtHYH had reached in the US charts by that time, and that Paul’s post-88 version of the story is revisionism on his part. Given the lack of success of UK artists in the US before them, while they hoped for a hit, they were as surprised as everyone else by the level of their success before landing there.
There are too many contemporary accounts, including from Paul, that contradict the line has been giving out since 1988.
Why are some people so willing to point at John and say he did a lot mythologising while ignoring the facts, but get antsy when it’s pointed out Paul does/has done the same?
"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
11.45am
22 December 2013
Offline Ron Nasty said
Find me a ’60s quote from any of them that says what Paul says now and I’ll agree with you.
Here we go again… So because it’s not documented it didn’t happen… Perhaps Brian’s first attempts at securing them an American visit happened way back when ‘Please Please Me ‘ hit Number 1… There’s no document of it because the notion was promptly rejected by The Beatles, just as Paul claimed…
Don’t you think that the “his constant trotting out of certain stories about The Beatles history that are plainly wrong” is a little over the top? I mean, I’m no Paulette around here… Anyone can check out the American Tour 2017 thread that’s referenced earlier here and read exactly what I think of his singing voice… There’s no “right” or “wrong” or, if you prefer “correct or incorrect” here… Paul was there… and that means a helluva lot more than what just about anyone else says…:-)
11.58am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline 
You’re missing the point, @Billy Rhythm. The point I’m making is that Paul’s post-1988 statements contradict his own earlier statements, made closer to the time, and nor are there any quotes from John, George or Ringo (who were also there) which support his claim that they were not going to America until they had a #1. I’m comparing what Paul has said post-’88 with what he had said previously, and with John, George and Ringo’s accounts of the same events, none of whom have ever said they were not going until they had a #1.
Paul is alone among the four Beatles in making that claim, and contradicts his own earlier statements in the process.
"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
1.37pm
26 January 2017
Offline Ahhh Girl said
I merged posts 49 to 58 into this thread. The forum isn’t big enough for two threads on Paul’s ego. LOL.Related thread: https://www.beatlesbible.com/f…..story/
So apparently his ego is bigger than the forum
The following people thank sir walter raleigh for this post:
Ahhh Girl, The Hole Got Fixed"The pump don't work cause the vandals took the handles!"
-Bob Dylan, Subterranean Homesick Blues
"We could ride and surf together while our love would grow"
-Brian Wilson, Surfer Girl
1.44pm
26 January 2017
Offline Ron Nasty said
You’re missing the point, @Billy Rhythm. The point I’m making is that Paul’s post-1988 statements contradict his own earlier statements, made closer to the time, and nor are there any quotes from John, George or Ringo (who were also there) which support his claim that they were not going to America until they had a #1. I’m comparing what Paul has said post-’88 with what he had said previously, and with John, George and Ringo’s accounts of the same events, none of whom have ever said they were not going until they had a #1.Paul is alone among the four Beatles in making that claim, and contradicts his own earlier statements in the process.
Sorry, my anthology book is across the nation so I cannot double check the quote, but I remember Paul saying something closer to “we wanted a #1,” not “we weren’t going without one” I think Paul is simply recalling the state of mind at the time, and see no problem.
"The pump don't work cause the vandals took the handles!"
-Bob Dylan, Subterranean Homesick Blues
"We could ride and surf together while our love would grow"
-Brian Wilson, Surfer Girl
2.13pm
11 June 2015
Offline https://www.beatlesagain.com/h…..erica.html
This article by Brian Spizer appears to be a well researched and contains a few laughs as well. 
The following people thank sigh butterfly for this post:
sir walter raleighYou and I have memories
Longer than the road that stretches out ahead
3.33pm
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline What appears in Anthology (both book and documentary) is, to a large extent, a compromise between what they could agree on, and what they could agree to disagree on.
My reference is to Paul talking in a solo capacity since the 1988 interview series I referred to, rather than Paul talking in the setting of an official Beatles/Apple project.
There has always been the suggestion that they didn’t want to go to America until they had a hit there. Paul often supported that view before 1988. Where it changed in 1988 is that Paul changed the nuance on what he was saying, and has often repeated it since.
He went from saying that he and John wanted an American hit before they went, to saying they refused to go until they’d had a #1 (something I cannot think of a single quote by any of the other three saying).
There are commentators who have attempted to find a way to make those repeated post-1988 comments fit the facts by doing a “What Paul Meant…” bit, suggesting he is referring to touring America, and the February 1964 visit was not a tour. To me though, they were still going to America.
Perhaps Paul’s account of John saying how much he loved Here, There And Everywhere while listening to their latest recordings during the filming of Help ! would have been a better example as it’s far less nuanced, and it’s easy to show his very uncertain first telling of the story in a 1984 (?) Playboy interview to it becoming a far more certain telling over the years, despite the fact that it doesn’t fit the timeline.
Something even Joe has to find a way around in his article on the song, by claiming Paul is talking about a demo, although there is never anything in any of Paul’s quotes about the incident that indicate he’s talking about a demo.
The trouble is that, to my mind, Paul is rarely challenged in interviews. What I’d like to see is an interviewer really take him on, and drill down into some of his comments that don’t make sense, asking him if he might not be misremembering.
While I don’t doubt the essence of the Here, There And Everywhere story, that John praised it while they were sharing a room, I have no belief that it was during the filming of Help !. It just doesn’t make sense to me that it wouldn’t be released until two albums later.
"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
9.01pm
10 April 2018
Offline Emmett said
I stand by my comments completely. I can see that your adoration has blinded you. Paul probably thinks his voice sounds “good enough.”As for other rockers whose voices have gone, they should retire too. I only know of one who still sings all songs in the original key and hits all notes, though not quite as easily as he used to. Oh, and he’s 73 now. His name is Gary Brooker of Procol Harum. Check him out. But, he has a real voice, much stronger than McCartney’s ever was. Listen to ‘A Salty Dog’ or ‘A Whiter Shade of Pale.’ Not easy to sing, by any means. However, he still does it.
No one commented on how Paul would never say George’s song was the best on Abbey Road . Sure, it’s a hypothetical, but I’d bet his fave tunes on each album are his own. And ‘Something ‘ IS the best song on that LP. That, and ‘Here Comes The Sun .’
Never mind, I’m sorry I brought the topic up. I should’ve known better.
Again, that’s your issue, IMO, not Paul’s nor any of those other rockers whose voices have aged. Why do you care how they sound? No one is forcing you to listen. He does sound “good enough” as the amazing time thousands of people have at his shows every years proves. I’m sure Gary Brooker’s fans are very pleased but, not really sure what that has to do with anything.
As for John and George’s songs – yeah and at the time he was making sure George was on his “team” to stay with crooked Allen Klein as management. I’m not doubting he loved the songs, they are amazing songs, but it’s not like he didn’t have reasons keep George on his good side. On the other hand once all that was over John could sometimes be quite patronizing towards George in many ways and clearly did not consider him his equal, whereas he did with Paul as some of the interviews published prior to his death shows. (As I recall one thing George got upset about, re Lawsuit era, is that John had gotten George and Ringo to agree to basically lie in the depositions regarding Paul’s assertion that prior to Klein they’d had an agreement anyone of them could veto an idea–in other words it wasn’t majority rules, it was if one person doesn’t want to do it, we don’t do it, if I recall correctly this idea was put in place when Ringo joined, because the other three had been together so long and he was concerned his opinion wouldn’t hold as much weight–so Ringo let’s just say was not exactly truthful and George was not exactly truthful and then when John was deposed, he ended up admitting, well yeah they sorta did go about things in that way previously after all LOL, it’s almost funny when you think about it but it probably didn’t make George and Ringo feel great).
Ultimately John still put himself and Paul above George, there was John, Paul, George and Ringo and within that there was John and Paul and John and Paul were a thing unto themselves too. So I don’t know – is it better to be like Paul, where George was under no illusions about ever being a partner, or better to be like John, who sort of dangled it in front of George but then would throw it in his face when he felt George wasn’t treating him as he deserved? Paul still made some pretty amazing instrumental and vocal contributions to some of George’s Beatles songs in the studio, more so than John did, IMO, esp after 1967. So Paul thought enough of them to bring his “A” game when recording them.
As for Ringo everyone loved Ringo but in 1973, they were STILL at odds with the Beatles lawsuits, the dissolution wasn’t put through until 1975, so why would Paul be talking up any of his former bandmates albums, especially when they said such terrible things about some of his. For example Ringo insulted RAM, and Paul himself, when asked about it. Ringo said “I don’t think there’s one [good] tune on the last one, Ram … he seems to be going strange.”, but hey, that’s fine, it’s only Paul he’s insulting publicly after all–they can all do that and frequently did, but heaven forbid Paul does it, even though he didn’t. (I love Ram and loved it before it’s critical re-assessment starting in the 2000’s when a new generation of critics who didn’t have an ax to grind because “Paul broke up the Beatles” started listening to it). In 1973 John, George and Ringo were now in lawsuits together against Allen Klein, who as they discovered, was pretty much what Paul claimed him to be.
And yes it is hypothetical regarding what Paul would say, something completely from your own imagination. It doesn’t actually exist. That’s fine but I don’t think that means anyone else needs to consider it a valid criticism “In my own imaginary scenario, Paul McCartney did, or did not do something, that I don’t like, therefore he’s a terrible person”.
And welcome to the forum @wilusa
that was a very well written and well thought out response.
Thanks. 🙂
The following people thank wilusa for this post:
sir walter raleigh, Ahhh Girl1.06pm
22 December 2013
Offline Emmett said
he is so eager to state how much he helped John on his songs. But, gives John little to no credit on the help he received from John on his own songs. Hmm…
I can think of one example straight off where Paul credits John for a line in his Best Song that John didn’t even come up with! Paul shared with us how “the movement you need is on your shoulder” was intended as filler lyrics until he worked out something “better” afterwards… John insisted that it was the best line of the song and it not to be changed… Paul didn’t have to share this moment (or, “movement”) with us at all… a movement that he could’ve taken sole credit for (he did come up with the lyric, after all) and no one else would’ve known any better of it, but instead he tips his hat to John… There’s also the fact that he’s credited John’s oldest son numerous times for the inspiration behind the entire piece…
Emmett said
And, there’s a comment by John just prior to the release of Abbey Road . John told a reporter, “George wrote the best song on the album. It’s called ‘Something .'” I cannot imagine Paul saying such a thing…not in a million years!
Apologies for not supplying the original quote, but Paul was very complimentary of George’s ‘The Inner Light ‘ released over a year before ‘Abbey Road ‘… He said something to the effect of “forget the Indian music… just listen to the melody, it really is such a lovely melody”…
Emmett said
John was a more genuinely humble guy. He was very critical of many of his songs. Not Paul, ever.
Ever read what Paul says about his unreleased song ‘Etcetera’?
Look… All four Beatles live with a “Massive Ego”… a prerequisite for the job of Taking Over The World… They wouldn’t have set out to become “Bigger Than Elvis” had they not truly believed it to be so… Why you chose to zero in on Paul’s “Massive Ego”, in particular, is the real question here…:-)
The following people thank Billy Rhythm for this post:
SgtPeppersBulldog, Ahhh Girl, wilusa1.26pm
26 January 2017
Offline And what about George’s critisism of McCartney in his 1970 WABC after its initial release?
Q: “I guess you’ve heard Paul’s album.”
GEORGE: “Yeah.”
Q: “What did you think?”
GEORGE: “‘That Would Be Something ‘ and ‘Maybe I’m Amazed ‘ I think are great. And everything else I think is fair, you know — is quite good — but umm, a little disappointing. But I don’t know. Maybe I shouldn’t be disappointed, maybe… It’s best not to expect anything and then everything’s bonus, you know. I think those two tracks in particular are really very good. And the others, I mean, just don’t do much for me. Because I can hear other people play better drums and guitars and things. And the arrangements of some of these songs like… ‘Teddy Boy ,’ and ‘Junk,’ and stuff — with a little bit more arrangement they could’ve sounded better. I suppose it was the only thing he felt he could do at the time, you know, and he started off just testing his machine. Eddie Cochran did something like that, though, didn’t he. ‘Summertime Blues’ and ‘Come On Everybody’ he played bass, guitar, drums.”
Q: “I wonder whether it can work again with you guys — with Paul having gone off and done that kind of album and everything, and the way you used to decide how to get songs on the album. I find it very hard to imagine you all staying in a studio again for the months that it takes to produce the record. How are you going to just work it all out?”
GEORGE: “Well, it’s easy. You know, it’s really quite easy. It’s just easy. We’ve done it for years. We all know that we’re all separate individuals, and if all we have to do is accept that we’re all individuals and that we all have as much potential as the other… It’s like, if we were all perfected beings we wouldn’t be here in the physical world. The fact that we’re all here in these bodies means that we’re not perfected. So having accepted we’re not perfected, we can allow for each others inadequacies or failings with a little, you know, with a little compassion. I’m certainly ready to be able to try and work things out with whoever I’m with. But if whoever I’m with is full of hassles then I’m not going to be with him, am I. I’m gonna go with somebody else. I mean, that’s really how things happened for me when I got tired of being with the Beatles. Because musically it was like being in a bag and they wouldn’t let me out the bag, which was mainly Paul at that time. The conflict musically for me was Paul. And yet I could play with any other band or musician and have a reasonably good time.”
Q: “What was the conflict with Paul? I don’t understand.”
GEORGE: “It’s just a thing like, you know, he’d written all these songs for years and stuff, and Paul and I went to school together. I got the feeling that, you know, everybody changes and sometimes people don’t want other people to change, or even if you do change they won’t accept that you’ve changed. And they keep in their mind some other image of you, you know. Gandhi said, ‘Create and preserve the image of your choice.’ And so different people have different images of their friends or people they see.”
Q: “So what was his image of you?”
GEORGE: “Well, I got the impression it was like, he still acted as if he was the groovy Lennon/McCartney. Because there was a point in my life where I realized anybody can be Lennon/McCartney, you know. ‘Cuz being part of Lennon/McCartney really I could see, you know, I could appreciate them — how good they actually are. And at the same time I could see the infatuation that the public had, or the praise that was put on them. And I could see everybody’s a Lennon/McCartney if that’s what you wanna be. But the point is nobody’s special. There’s not many special people around. And somebody else… If Lennon/McCartney are special, then Harrison and Starkey are special, too. That’s really — What I’m saying is that I can be Lennon/McCartney too, but I’d rather be Harrison, you know.”
Q: “There seems like there’s so much animosity between Paul and…”
GEORGE: Yeah.”
Q: “So you don’t think there’s any great anger between Paul and John?”
GEORGE: “No, I think there may be what you’d term a little bitchiness. But, you know, that’s all it is. It’s just being bitchy to each other, you know. Childish. Childish.”
It isn’t as nasty as John was towards Paul, but to claim Paul is the only one talking this way about former bandmates in the press is kind of absurd.
The following people thank sir walter raleigh for this post:
SgtPeppersBulldog, wilusa"The pump don't work cause the vandals took the handles!"
-Bob Dylan, Subterranean Homesick Blues
"We could ride and surf together while our love would grow"
-Brian Wilson, Surfer Girl
1.31pm
26 January 2017
Offline And yes I do realize a huge part of the rift between Paul and George had to do with Paul’s constant self interest during the LIB rehearsals.
The following people thank sir walter raleigh for this post:
wilusa"The pump don't work cause the vandals took the handles!"
-Bob Dylan, Subterranean Homesick Blues
"We could ride and surf together while our love would grow"
-Brian Wilson, Surfer Girl
4.41pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline sir walter raleigh said
And yes I do realize a huge part of the rift between Paul and George had to do with Paul’s constant self interest during the LIB rehearsals.
John was just as dismissive of George’s work during the January 1969 sessions and there are the stories of a heated argument/fight between the two which got in the papers, but whereas George could bitch towards Paul as he saw as more his equal, John was always the one he looked up to more.
I think a lot of the 1970 comments towards Paul were more down to his siding with Eastman over Klein and the resulting lawsuit, possibly a sense of betrayal.
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
wilusa, Richard"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
12.00am
7 November 2022
Offline I get these Quora notices in my gmail, and one of them is a thread “Is Paul McCartney a Jerk?”. So far among the ones I’ve read from people who apparently have had personal encounters with him, it’s good news. Like this one:
The following people thank Sea Belt for this post:
Ahhh Girl, Richard, Rube, BeatlebugNow today I find, you have changed your mind
8.47pm
Moderators
15 February 2015
Offline 
That’s so sweet. What a supportive husband, came along for moral support but didn’t want to steal the spotlight. 
Show that one to the folks who think Paul and Linda had an unequal relationship or Linda was taken advantage of or something because he asked her to be in Wings.
The following people thank Beatlebug for this post:
Richard, Sea Belt, Rube([{BRACKETS!}])
New to Forumpool? You can introduce yourself here.
If you love The Beatles Bible, and you have adblock, don't forget to white-list this site! 
2.32am
7 November 2022
Offline I forgot to add that I saw basically the same thing occur on another TV show — the Regis Philbin & Kathie Lee morning show in America, probably early 90s. Linda was their guest talking about her new cooking book. Regis then spotted Paul in the wings — “Paul!” — he shouted and tried to wave him over with a beaming smile, repeatedly. One of the cameras then peered over there, but he must have hid behind the curtain because there was no sight of him. Finally Regis relented and gave up. I realized even then that’s exactly what Paul was doing — respecting Linda’s time.
The following people thank Sea Belt for this post:
Richard, Ahhh Girl, Beatlebug, RubeNow today I find, you have changed your mind
11.29am
2 May 2013
Offline If Paul had a massive ego he’d be entitled to it due to the success he’s had. However, I’ve heard it described differently, as ‘controlling’ – three examples:
- The Get Back sessions where Paul is trying to cajole the rest into taking part and having to be de facto ‘leader’ as John has abdicated/become disinterested
- Maxwell’s Silver Hammer where he drove the rest to distraction ‘getting it right’
- The ‘My Love session where Henry McCullough is quoted as saying something like: ‘Are we a real band or just Paul’s backing group’ in getting his own way over the live guitar solo
These could be interpreted as controlling, but I’d more characterise it as chasing perfectionism and maybe being a little ‘over the top’ in that desire to impose his vision which he’s focussed on. If people have occasionally encountered a bad day tell me anyone who doesn’t have those.
The following people thank Old Soak for this post:
Ahhh Girl, Richard, Rube, oldfannz, Sea Belt, Timothy, forn7.30am
7 November 2022
Offline We music lovers can be grateful Paul was so assertive all those years!
The following people thank Sea Belt for this post:
Ahhh Girl, Rube, oldfannzNow today I find, you have changed your mind
1 Guest(s)