Log In
Register
3.57am
25 August 2012
Offline
Indeed, I’ve never wanted kids, so the main purpose of the act is largely lost on me. Sure, it’s pleasurable, but it’s also incredibly temporary. I’d much rather listen to a great album or two or watch a great movie. 
5.27am
21 March 2018
Offline Penny Lane said
Ron Nasty said
[… Paul couldn’t keep his pants zipped, and then we’re on “Why couldn’t Paul keep his pants zipped when he had Jane?” ]A question you could ask about all of them I suppose, especially George with Maureen. At least Paul had the excuse that Jane wasn’t there for a lot of the time, even when she was, I think the relationship seemed too well behaved and tame to keep him from straying.
Paul Newman is quoted as replying when asked about all the temptations on offer, why go out for hamburger when you have steak at home. Not sure many stars live by that maxim.
When you look at all of Paul’s songs of love and angst about his relationship with Jane, and how often it was described as tempestuous, well behaved and tame would be the last words I’d call it. I’d say homely would be a better fit for Paul and Linda if anything. Paul probably didn’t cheat when he was actually with Jane, and likely not to have given much thought to other women. He didn’t seem prepared to give her up for any of them, including Linda.
The following people thank Saltie for this post:
Beatlebug, Lisa0016.13am
21 March 2018
Offline SunKing said
You make a good point @Ron Nasty and I defer to your more knowledgeable opinion which you’ve laid out well. It does seem odd that the relationship with Asher accelerated toward the end with an engagement. There are many ways to speculate – that faced with the feeling they were drifting they instead tried one large gesture to keep going, thinking marriage may resolve it, or perhaps they felt their years together deemed they get engaged. Maybe Paul even pulled out a proposal to make amends after a previous infidelity.The John/Yoko situation always seemed more understandable to me because the marriage to Cynthia was driven to some extent by the pregnancy, and Yoko was so unique as to be tantalizing to John in way that probably made Cynthia appear conventional by unfair comparison, and John’s looking for the next big thing is well known. But the Paul/Jane/Linda doesn’t seem to have such a stark difference. And it’s unclear even to this day how much of this was Paul’s decision and how much was Jane’s.
I’m sure Paul and Jane got engaged because they wanted to. It’s been said that the Beatles never properly went through the last stages of growing up during the years of Beatlemania and that they felt old before their time. I would say Paul desperately wanted to start a family. Paul must of thought that life really was passing him by and may have been putting considerable pressure on Jane, just 22, to finally give up her career and start producing babies. The relationship seemed to implode at the same time the Beatles also started unravelling.
The following people thank Saltie for this post:
Ahhh Girl, Beatlebug1.45pm
18 September 2016
Offline Saltie said
When you look at all of Paul’s songs of love and angst about his relationship with Jane, and how often others described it as tempestuous, well behaved and tame would be the last words I’d call it. I’d say homely would be a better fit for Paul and Linda if anything. Paul probably didn’t cheat when he was actually with Jane, and likely not to have given much thought to other women…]
Jane was also unfaithful when she was worked at the Bristol Old Vic. Paul had one night stands and a long term relationship with Maggie McGivern while being with Jane.
Paul reports ‘liking’Jane and that they got on well (not the most inspiring description of the love of your life) but that they never really clicked. They were a golden couple for the media and Paul’s need for approval prolonged it. I think he enjoyed the relationship with her family too. Marianne Faithfull observed his and Jane’s relationship as quite tense and almost like an act. Linda’s “womanliness” and skills as a single mother as well as her work was something he admired. He came from a loving family and wanted that for himself. I think he made the right choice.
The following people thank penny lane for this post:
Ahhh Girl, Beatlebug, star1262, Lisa001
“I know, Jerry, that you are as human as the rest of us, if not more so."
7.09pm
21 March 2018
Offline Penny Lane said
Jane was also unfaithful when she was worked at the Bristol Old Vic. Paul had one night stands and a long term relationship with Maggie McGivern while being with Jane.
Paul reports ‘liking’Jane and that they got on well (not the most inspiring description of the love of your life) but that they never really clicked. They were a golden couple for the media and Paul’s need for approval prolonged it. I think he enjoyed the relationship with her family too. Marianne Faithfull observed his and Jane’s relationship as quite tense and almost like an act. Linda’s “womanliness” and skills as a single mother as well as her work was something he admired. He came from a loving family and wanted that for himself. I think he made the right choice.
The media couple myth again. Out of all the hundreds of muck racking, salacious tomes written about the Beatles, not one has managed to come up with a name associated with Jane supposedly “cheating” on Paul. She may have seen someone during one of the couple’s off times, but that hardly constitutes cheating. It seems that too many want to let McCartney off the hook. Because he knew McGivern over a period of three years, that doesn’t mean he had a long term relationship with her. She was one of several. Her account of being with Paul mainly seems to apply during the period after Jane walked. Marianne Faithfull’s observation: wouldn’t anyone be tense if they had uninvited guests dropping in at all times of the day and night? From what Hunter Davies said in the authorised biography their relationship did not appear to be an act.
McCartney is always going to be emotionally dishonest about his time with Asher. He admits he wrote For No One and You Won’t See Me about her (hardly the sort of songs you write about someone you merely “like”). It must have been very difficult for Jane to feel constantly sidelined by the Beatles. Give her some credit for seeing out the relationship for so long. If anyone thinks the post-Beatles women could have done any better then they are deluding themselves. In the end if McCartney wanted a somewhat self-serving relationship based on sex, drugs and rock n’ roll, then Linda was the right one. But for me, Paul was never quite the same person again.
The following people thank Saltie for this post:
Ahhh Girl, Beatlebug, Lisa0018.14am
18 September 2016
Offline Saltie said
[… Out of all the hundreds of muck racking, salacious tomes written about the Beatles, not one has managed to come up with a name associated with Jane supposedly “cheating” with Paul. Not one. She may have seen someone during one of the couple’s off times, but that hardly constitutes cheating. It seems that too many want to let McCartney off the hook…] [.. And because he knew McGivern over a period of three years, that doesn’t mean he had a long term relationship with her. Her account of being with Paul mainly seems to apply during the period after Jane walked…] […McCartney is always going to be emotionally dishonest about his time with Asher…]
Haven’t read any salacious tomes on the Beatles, unfortunately. You are right, no one has come up with a name of this Bristol boyfriend (would anyone be interested anyway?) and unless you count them being in a separate location, wasn’t off time. He did write love songs inspired by Jane, an interesting one about his local meter maid and of course more than a few were inspired by Linda. I can’t agree about Paul’s “emotional” dishonesty about it. Isn’t it just his opinion, with the perspective of time? They drifted apart, had different friends, she didn’t like the Robert Fraser crowd and all the drugs. Jane has never discussed her relationship to the press, but she did spectacularly well when she publicly dumped him, hitting him where it hurts most (in the PR department) and good for her. She kept her dignity and her career.
The relationship with Maggie was long term, managed to stay covert (unless you were Epstein or other Beatles).
Saltie said
If anyone thinks the post Beatle women could have done any better then they are deluding themselves. And yes, in the end if McCartney wanted a somewhat self-serving relationship based on sex, drugs and rock n’ roll, then Linda was the right one. But for me, Paul was never quite the same person again.
Yes, Paul wasn’t the same person, he had grown up a bit and was lucky enough to find another great woman.
The following people thank penny lane for this post:
Beatlebug
“I know, Jerry, that you are as human as the rest of us, if not more so."
8.15pm
21 March 2018
Offline Jpenny lane said
Haven’t read any salacious tomes on the Beatles, unfortunately. You are right, no one has come up with a name of this Bristol boyfriend (would anyone be interested anyway?) and unless you count them being in a separate location, wasn’t off time. He did write love songs inspired by Jane, an interesting one about his local meter maid and of course more than a few were inspired by Linda. I can’t agree about Paul’s “emotional” dishonesty about it. Isn’t it just his opinion, with the perspective of time? They drifted apart, had different friends, she didn’t like the Robert Fraser crowd and all the drugs. Jane has never discussed her relationship to the press, but she did spectacularly well when she publicly dumped him, hitting him where it hurts most (in the PR department) and good for her. She kept her dignity and her career.
The relationship with Maggie was long term, managed to stay covert (unless you were Epstein or other Beatles).
Yes, Paul wasn’t the same person, he had grown up a bit and was lucky enough to find another great woman.
The Bristol boyfriend was a Paul invention – from the perspective of time of course – and regarding the relationship with Maggie McGivern, it was stated quite openly in the British press in 1966, that Paul saw other girls but that he much preferred the company of Jane Asher. If covert it was still deceitful. Jane refuses to talk about Paul; unfortunately Paul doesn’t do the same. He is entitled to his opinion, but why be derogatory and demeaning in some of his comments about Jane. Unnecessary, if his marriage to Linda was as strong and secure as it was made out to be. He was asked by Howard Stern how he managed to sleep with Jane behind her mother’s back while living with the Ashers. Smug answer, and disrespectful and insensitive, not only to Jane but to her late parents (who probably did turn a blind eye but attitudes were still different then) who had invited him into their home. It is Paul who continues to associate his name with Jane’s, not the other way round. Grown up?
It’s pretty below the belt to suggest Jane did spectacularly well after “publicly” dumping Paul. She was asked about her engagement because she knew she would be asked, and gave an honest answer. Their supposed lack of compatibility was unlikely: they were together for five years. So Jane wasn’t into drugs. Perhaps she was concerned about Paul’s welfare – what a crime. The relationship broke under circumstances we know absolutely nothing about. John, George and Ringo’s marriages ended too, despite them being “compatible”.
It seems that too many people get some sort of perverse enjoyment from the dismissal of Jane Asher. Countless books and press articles have thrived on this for too long. She didn’t ask to be compared with Linda McCartney so don’t take it out on her if people don’t like what they read. She has certainly moved on, but you can’t take away her time with the Paul and her influence on him. It’s the Beatles that will go down in history, not Wings, not John and Yoko, not any of the post Beatles stuff.
The following people thank Saltie for this post:
Pineapple Records, Lisa00111.55pm
15 May 2015
Offline Good post from Saltie. It’s a fine line, I guess, between “Paul is a fantastic guy all around” and “Paul is an a*****e” — somewhere in between these unrealistic extremes probably lies the truth…
The following people thank Pineapple Records for this post:
Beatlebug, Lisa001A ginger sling with a pineapple heart,
a coffee dessert, yes you know it's good news...
5.38am
21 March 2018
Offline Thanks. Hopefully he realises he can be insensitive.
The following people thank Saltie for this post:
Pineapple Records10.54pm
25 August 2020
Offline That time you told them you were going to be marrying soon
And Jet , I thought the only lonely place was the moon
Was your father as bold as the sergeant major?
How come he told you that you were hardly old enough yet?
And Jet , I thought the major was a lady suffragette”
12.04am
25 August 2020
Offline “Here’s my opinion. If he married Jane, We might not have gotten Wings”
That’s true, but had he remained with Jane I am convinced the Beatles would have stayed together, as it was Paul’s breakup with Jane that changed him and created the mess. And, I mean like to this day! Paul is not the same anymore. Regardless, it was Paul who was aggressive in the studio towards the other three band members not the other way around. Paul was using them as his back up group per the Beatles and those who witnessed it. He was terrible to George, who was a close friend to Paul since they were 15 years old. Paul loved George! And yet, no one questions why Paul behaved like that accept a very hurt George (“Run Of The Mill “). The attitude was bad..just really bad. And, it did not help that Linda wanted to manipulate the situation to her and her family’s advantage either because he was so vulnerable. She brought in her father, her brother and herself to tell the others how it was going to be. Clearly, the other three Beatles did not trust the situation. Who could blame them? Had Paul and Jane remained together, Paul would have had a completely different approach, trust me. The Beatles could have remained a band, but did solo albums on the side. It would have been better for Paul, as he would have had a great band, taken his time writing good songs, critics would have loved him, and had his inspiration with him instead of worrying him to death over where she was and if she was safe, why she had not called him, waiting for her to come back, etc. have you heard the song “The Mess?” written in 1972? Is it written for Linda? Hardly! He’s been crying out to Jane for over 50 years.
“When i want ya do i get ya
Will you give me your number
Oh sweet darling
Oh – sweet darling what a mess i’m in
What a mess i’m in, since you left me”
I’ve been waiting, waiting to long
In my soul is, constant yearning
Always singing, singing this song”
10.41pm
Moderators
15 February 2015
Offline
Crying over Jane for 50 years? He was blissfully married to Linda for almost 30 of them, and doubtless would be to this day were it not for the cosmic shithammer that is cancer. You can read whatever you like into his songs, but it’s worth remembering that many of them are fiction – as a songwriter myself, I know that it’s often a large part of the songwriter’s art to put oneself into shoes that are not your own and write from those perspectives, as a way to explore hypothetical moods and situations. As for the Beatles, the problems within the Beatles were just that – problems within the Beatles. I honestly find it exhausting when people try to blame their interpersonal discord on the women who surrounded them, as if they were colluding maliciously – why would anyone with acquisitive motives want to do that when the Beatles were the most successful band in the world? There’s also the correlation=causation fallacy. It seems far more likely to me that the Beatles’ breakup was influenced by personal factors that also contributed to Paul’s breakup with Jane, but it’s a leap to say that his breakup with Jane caused his breakup with the Beatles.
The following people thank Beatlebug for this post:
meaigs([{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! 
11.41am
25 August 2012
Offline 
Indeed, any time non-fiction is interpreted into any form of art, it nonetheless becomes fiction as a result.
The following people thank Duke_of_Kirkcaldy for this post:
Beatlebug7.05pm
25 August 2020
Offline Beatlebug said
Crying over Jane for 50 years? He was blissfully married to Linda for almost 30 of them, and doubtless would be to this day were it not for the cosmic shithammer that is cancer. You can read whatever you like into his songs, but it’s worth remembering that many of them are fiction – as a songwriter myself, I know that it’s often a large part of the songwriter’s art to put oneself into shoes that are not your own and write from those perspectives, as a way to explore hypothetical moods and situations. As for the Beatles, the problems within the Beatles were just that – problems within the Beatles. I honestly find it exhausting when people try to blame their interpersonal discord on the women who surrounded them, as if they were colluding maliciously – why would anyone with acquisitive motives want to do that when the Beatles were the most successful band in the world? There’s also the correlation=causation fallacy. It seems far more likely to me that the Beatles’ breakup was influenced by personal factors that also contributed to Paul’s breakup with Jane, but it’s a leap to say that his breakup with Jane caused his breakup with the Beatles.
Blissfully married to Linda? Linda wanted to leave Saint Paul in the late 80s. I guess after nearly 20 years she couldn’t stand it anymore because the pot no longer worked. Not going to get too deep into this, but I agree with Cox that there is coldness around Paul. Mark my words, this family has a lot of dark secrets and someday it’s going to come out. Hope his fans can handle it.
There were several factors that led to the break up of the band. However, as I said Paul took his attitude in the recording studio. While it was not the main source it compounded the situation according to the Beatles and biographers.
Paul doesn’t write fiction. I have been going through his song catalog for months now and he writes from the heart. Not only that, but Linda responded to Paul’s constant yearning for this girl he’s written about for over 50 years in “Endless Days.” Paul made up some BS about her singing it as a lullaby. Linda’s almost mocking his breakup with Jane:
“Endless days and lonely nights, I cry out baby
When will you come back to me?
Gone away you wouldn’t say the hurt I caused you
When will you come back to me?
I’ve been waiting for you to call
But you just won’t get back to me
Endless days and lonely nights
Are all that you give to me
Please come back, I beg you dear
Oh, come back, baby, when will you come back to me?
Gone away you wouldn’t say the hurt I cause you
When will you come back to me?”
Then, there’s “The Light Comes from Within” in which Paul said it was about her critics. More BS, as it’s too personal. Too many people have called Paul “controlling” in which she puts in the lyrics.
11.33pm
25 August 2012
Offline Lisa001 said
Blissfully married to Linda? Linda wanted to leave Saint Paul in the late 80s. I guess after nearly 20 years she couldn’t stand it anymore because the pot no longer worked. Not going to get too deep into this, but I agree with Cox that there is coldness around Paul. Mark my words, this family has a lot of dark secrets and someday it’s going to come out. Hope his fans can handle it.
According to whom? I suppose she was glad she got cancer, then, so she finally had a way out? 
12.32am
25 August 2020
Offline The McCartney’s PR marriage isn’t a secret. Peter Cox’s “Linda Tapes” is well known. Although, only known to me about five months ago. It’s what sparked my attention. And, if you read the very quote you copied nowhere did I say she was glad she got cancer. Those are your words.
12.54am
25 August 2012
Offline I know. I was being facetious.
The following people thank Duke_of_Kirkcaldy for this post:
Lisa0019.22am
25 August 2020
Offline Father McKenzie said
From everything I’ve read on this subject,it seems that Paul thought that he and Jane had an open relationship,but the ‘open’ part of it seemed very one sided. I can’t imagine he’d have been too happy if he’d walked in on Jane in bed with another guy. Maybe they both just realized that marriage wasn’t the right course of action for them both.She was good for him in certain ways, and it’s clear from songs like Here,There and Everywhere, I’m Looking Through You , What You’re Doing ,We Can Work It Out etc that he loved her very much,but what comes across for me in those songs is that he sounded so frustrated with her. It seems (quite selfishly) that he wanted a relationship with her on his terms, and when he couldn’t have that, and she wasn’t prepared to give up her career for him,he started cheating on her. I could be wrong,but that’s just my feelings on it.
I also read somewhere that when she caught him in bed with Francie Schwartz, that was deliberate on Paul’s part, because he saw it as a way to end the relationship with Jane,which seems a bit of a shitty way to go about it if true
Father McKenzie said
From everything I’ve read on this subject,it seems that Paul thought that he and Jane had an open relationship,but the ‘open’ part of it seemed very one sided. I can’t imagine he’d have been too happy if he’d walked in on Jane in bed with another guy. Maybe they both just realized that marriage wasn’t the right course of action for them both.She was good for him in certain ways, and it’s clear from songs like Here,There and Everywhere, I’m Looking Through You , What You’re Doing ,We Can Work It Out etc that he loved her very much,but what comes across for me in those songs is that he sounded so frustrated with her. It seems (quite selfishly) that he wanted a relationship with her on his terms, and when he couldn’t have that, and she wasn’t prepared to give up her career for him,he started cheating on her. I could be wrong,but that’s just my feelings on it.
I also read somewhere that when she caught him in bed with Francie Schwartz, that was deliberate on Paul’s part, because he saw it as a way to end the relationship with Jane,which seems a bit of a shitty way to go about it if true
It was Beatles associate, Tony Borrow, who said he thought Paul used Schwartz to break up with Jane. Obviously, a planted statement in an attempt to get Paul off the hook for cheating. Alastair Taylor’s book clearly challenges Borrow’s statement. If there was any truth of this, Paul would not have had a emotional breakdown and continued to write yearning songs for a girl in his past. Like, up until 2018. Also, if it was “open” Jane would not have left Paul. Jane was the only woman who has ever walked away from Paul. The fact that he was “a Beatle” meant nothing to her. Imagine how he felt knowing that she truly loved him for who he was.
Jane was a huge inspiration not to just as a lyricist, but she introduced him to classical music and Paul’s written classical albums. Clearly, her influence. Paul’s frustration came from Jane’s refusal to allow him to control her. She grew up and obviously questioned why her working interfered with their relationship. This was most likely their disagreement in which Paul wrote his feelings in his lyrics of how he felt during these times. Also, Jane was just 17 when they met. Paul could not be her entire life. He’s the one with the insecurity issues not Jane.
9.43am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline I’m sorry, @Lisa001, but I just don’t buy the premise that Paul remains fixated on Jane, his one true love.
You can suggest Paul has kept writing love songs about Jane up until today but that’s just your interpretation.
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
Beatlebug, Ahhh Girl, WeepingAtlasCedars"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
9.03pm
25 August 2020
Offline Ron Nasty said
I’m sorry, @Lisa001, but I just don’t buy the premise that Paul remains fixated on Jane, his one true love.You can suggest Paul has kept writing love songs about Jane up until today but that’s just your interpretation.
It’s cool, as you have the right to your opinion and I respect that. However, I stand by what I wrote.
2 Guest(s)