Helter Skelter | Page 2 | Fab Forum | The Beatles Bible

I may cause uproar here as I know many seem to really like it (I remember indie bands in the 90s raving about it) but I’m not that keen on Helter Skelter – or to put it another way, I’m not keen on the released version that made it onto The Beatles.

For me what puts me off from the get go, and always has done, is McCartney laughing at the end of the first time he yells ‘see you againnnnnn’. It just seems really sloppy, why didn’t he re-do that bit of the vocal? It undermines the track from the off and signifys to me at least that they aren’t really being very earnest with the song.

Then there is the playing, it seems ham fisted with an air of ‘that’ll do’ about it.

In short I would much have preferred the version that surfaced on Anthology 3 which seems to have more about it and a genuine moody/foreboding atmosphere. This, or a similar approach to the song, should have gone onto the album. Or perhaps left it off entirely and stuck Not Guilty on instead.

Any way there we go, shoot me down if you wish but I felt the need to get it out there. I look forward to hearing from you.

Pineapple Records said

I agree in part; though I don’t hear it as “laughing” what Paul does at that juncture — it’s more like just a vocal affectation common in blues and rock singing, extending a syllable out in staccato repetition — I feel overall that Paul’s singing is oddly restrained.  Sort of paradoxically he’s simultaneously trying to let go, and restraining himself from complete freedom; almost like he’s second-guessing himself, which for an artist visited by the Muse such as he is, is often a recipe for a mediocre product. Not that some of his vocalisms aren’t cool, here and there; but mostly disappointing. The instrumentation, however, I think is quite good — the guitars and bass particularly.

I gave a listen to the Anthology 3 version; didn’t care for it at all (and what I described about Paul’s voice above is even more marked in this version).  

Thanks for your reply. I note what you say about Paul’s vocal delivery, I think he could be/perhaps still is a bit self conscious at times. May be he knew that he was taking himself/The Beatles out of their comfort zone? After all whether you like Helter Skelter or not it is their heaviest sounding song and not usual fare the band served up during their career. Even after trying to out do The Who with this track they obviously didn’t feel the need to keep experimenting within the realms of ‘heavy rock’ sounding songs; they pretty much went back to their pop/rock roots.

Zig said
No uproar, Ludwig. Everyone is entitled to their opinion based on their personal preferences. 

If you read Joe’s article about the song – or anyone’s article that describes it’s progression – you will discover that every aspect you dislike is exactly what The Beatles (particularly Paul) were trying to accomplish. That slower version you hear on Anthology 3  (which I also enjoy) is just a short excerpt of take 2. It is a far cry from their ultimate goal of “an attempt to create a Rock ‘N’ Roll song as loud and dirty as possible”. 

Ludwig said
…I know many seem to really like it … but I’m not that keen on Helter Skelter – or to put it another way, I’m not keen on the released version that made it onto The Beatles.

While I can’t speak for the “many”, I personally like it for what it is () rather than disliking it for what it isn’t ().   

Hurrah! I read Joes article and helped give some context to the track – I had forgot that its origins lay in trying to out do The Who for heaviness/raucousness. Even so, I still can’t get into the track that much. Maybe because Macca openly admits he was trying to beat The Who this desire got in the way of creativity/freedom (like what Pineapple Records mentions above). In essence: trying too hard to sound like The Who rather than giving us The Beatles take on what a heavy, raucous rock song could sound like.