It’s safe to say that Paul McCartney’s debut solo album was never part of a grand masterplan. A selection of home recordings, studio tracks, Beatles rejects and ad-libbed offcuts, McCartney was a swiftly assembled collection, released to coincide with The Beatles’ break-up, that divided fans and critics alike.
McCartney was far from a spent creative force by the end of 1969, but had devoted much of his time to works by The Beatles, Mary Hopkin and Badfinger. As a result, he resorted to reworking old songs, improvising others and recorded several instrumentals.
They were almost throwaways, you know? But that’s why they were included. They weren’t quite throwaways. That was the whole idea of the album: all the normal things that you record that are great and have all this atmosphere but aren’t that good as recording or production jobs. Normally that stuff ends up with the rest of your demos, but all that stuff is often stuff I love.
The earliest song on McCartney, Hot As Sun, dated from the Quarrymen days, and was part of that band’s early repertoire. ‘Junk’ and ‘Teddy Boy’ were composed in India during The Beatles’ sojourn with Maharishi Mahesh Yogi in the summer of 1968, and both were performed during the strained Get Back/Let It Be sessions in January 1969.
Although they pulled together a final time to record the Abbey Road album, by the middle of 1969 The Beatles knew their time as a band was all but over. McCartney had fought to keep them together during their final months, but had eventually given up as legal, business and personal wranglings overshadowed their music.
McCartney was dejected and pained by the group’s collapse, and retreated into depression and alcohol dependency. He was lifted by the love of his wife Linda, whom he married in London on 12 March 1969. She encouraged him to channel his energies into new projects, leading to the recording and release of the McCartney album.
The album polarised fans, with many feeling disappointment that McCartney had seen fit to issue so many half-finished songs. Even his fellow former Beatles were restrained in their praise, with George Harrison describing it as disappointing. He astutely noted that, with few checks on his output, the quality would continue to be variable.
‘That Would Be Something’ and ‘Maybe I’m Amazed’ I think are great and everything else I think is fair, you know. It’s quite good, but a little disappointing, but maybe I shouldn’t be disappointed, it’s best not to expect anything, then everything’s a bonus. I think those two tracks are very good and the others just don’t do anything for me. The arrangements for Teddy Boy and Junk, with a little bit more arrangement could have sounded better. Me, Ringo and John, not only do we see each other, but we see so many musicians and other bands, maybe Paul does too. But I just get the impression that he doesn’t. That he’s so isolated from it, he’s out on a limb. The only person he’s got to tell him if the song’s good or bad is Linda. In the Beatle days, if someone came in with a song that had a corny line and some of the others got a bit embarrassed by it, we’d say it!
John Lennon, perhaps inevitably, compared McCartney to his own solo work.
I was surprised it was so poor. I expected just a little more, because if Paul and I are sort of disagreeing and I feel weak, I think he must feel strong. That’s in an argument. Not that we’ve had much physical argument, I mean when we’re talking – but you expect the opposition so-called. So I was just surprised. And I was glad, too. I suddenly got it all into perspective.
Lennon Remembers, Jann S Wenner
This album is written off quite easily, because Abbey Road to this isn`t great, but this album might reveal the most about Paul`s state of mind at this time. I love it!!
I disagree Mr. Sun King, , Abby Road was superior musically and vocally compared to “McCartney”. This album was put together very quickly in haste.
His second album “Ram” was written well.
Great article Joe – a couple of thoughts – when the album first came out most of us thought the reversed placement of the actual disk was based on McCartney being left-handed so he made a left-handed album.
The cherry cover we always heard represented a broken cherry – meaning Paul’s first solo album.
Just something to think about.
I’ve always interpreted it as a play on the idea of “life is just a bowl of cherries,” with the implication being that at that time the cherries were out of the bowl, therefore, no bowl of cherries for him.
I just got the idea into my head that they’re not cherries, but cranberries, and that the cover was meant as an allusion to the Paul-is-dead rumours at the time. Cranberry sauce on a zebra crossing line. I might be wrong.
I’m guessing is was done more out of anger or maybe a feeling that he was trapped in the Beatle implosion and he had to do something. So he did it all on his own. I’m looking forward to “Mccartney” I love it. It’s very listenable. “Ram” even better.
The thing that is forgotten in the history of all of this, mostly by people who didn’y live through it, was that Paul was considered by all who believed they knew him to be some kind of musical genius and, unfortunately for him, he threatened to unleash upon the world music that would put the world ‘on its ear’ once he was free from the Beatles. So, having that, and because he threw such a fuss to get this collection to market, we were all quite hyped. Perhaps we should not have allowed ourselves to be subject to expectations. George said it best in the article. Perhaps Paul believed his own hype? You can’t possibly live as he and the others did for all of those years and not get caught up.
I’ve always thought Every Night was a really good song, probably my favourite on the album. Phoebe Snow thought so. Check out her version.
I also like Every night. What ruins it a bit for me is, though, that the music for the middle eight is basically the same as the first part of the Abbey Road album song You never give me your money.
I agree that Every Night is a great song (even if there are similarities to You Never Give …), however I think it could have been improved (later) with better production …
I admit when I first heard the album in 1970/71 I was slightly disapointed, too. It took me some time to adapt to the feeling of it – and now I “like it”, but to “love it” would be saying too much.
There are three great songs on it: Maybe I´m Amazed, Junk and Every Night, two good songs like “That Would Be Something” and “Man We Was Lonely” … and the rest is interesting … or nice listening to, some even experimental. Nothing wrong with it – but All Things Must Pass surpasses it my a good mile.
I think it also worked as a way for Paul to find his personality again – after the disapointment and the disorientation through the break-up …
Now with the historical distance of 50 years I think we are able to view it from the apropriate perspective – as the important starting point of his solo works … very personal and full of good ideas, but a bit rudimentary, far from perfect but still giving insight into his musical genius – the comparison with John´s Plastic Ono Band-album is not completely wrong, which is also very personal.
We also see a major problem here that is obvious over almost all following albums: the lack of correction by other equivalent colleagues (John, George, Ringo resp.), who wouldn´t have bothered for some of the songs at all. BTW: the same applies for John – and also George´s later solo albums … there are not only masterworks on these.
But on the other hand: what if several tracks wouldn´t have been released at all? It would be a sad miss for all of us fans, right? Even the minor creations by Paul are usually better than the hyped releases of quite a few so called present superstars.
This album gave 1970s musicians a blueprint for multitracking and home recording, one of the most famous musicians on the planet producing a successful album at home, with roughcuts being displayed alongside polished gems. The album allows you to hear bad edits and tape machine glitches, outtakes, half-baked ideas and unfinished tracks all spliced in together. It comes across as heartfelt and intimate. And an object lesson in sound-sketching and experimentation; close-miked mouth-music, overdubbed yet still sounding spontaneous, and a collage approach to songwriting and compiling album tracks. This was do-it-yourself punkiness in sharp contrast to Phil Spector’s overproduction that ruined the Let It Be recordings.
You hit the bulls-eye there. I do believe this album is an ear-popper for many reasons, all of which you mention.
+1
And I always thought it was interesting that both Paul’s and John’s first post-Beatles albums were so raw and intimate. It’s like they were both still in sync. Warm and intimate in Paul’s case, angstful and intimate in John’s. Both great records.
Keith – you’re spot on. This album was totally unlike anything else in early 1970, and only started making sense when punk came along. The only person who realised what he was doing was John Lennon who proceeded to do his version of it later that year
This is one of my all time favorite albums, probably due to the raw and primitive tracks which counter the polished sounds of the last Beatles albums and future Wings efforts. It shows that the recording techniques while revolutionary at that time were only a part of the real mix with such talented guys like McCartney creating memorable grooves.
Like many, either involved in the music industry or just enjoying the sounds, I looked forward to the individual albums to hear their own voices. Both John and Paul surprised me by producing albums that suggested they were tired of impressing us with slick, polished, commercialized works. They, too, were human. Lying on a couch, listening to McCartney for the first time with headphones, I felt as if I had been invited into his home – a home of genuine love. Forgive me for sounding dramatic, but that day changed my life.
Like the film, “Across the Universe,” my own life of peace, love and flowers in our hair had fallen into a dark hole of job hopping, broken relationships, friend’s overdoses, and anger over all of the world problems that were everyone else’s fault. “McCartney” was a wake-up call for me.
I walked out of my friend’s house, sans leather colors and weapons. I moved into my own apartment, got a better job, better friends, and reunited with a forgotten spiritual life of genuine love, joy and fellowship. Even two FBI agents came for a friendly visit, curious about the changes.
No, I didn’t start a McCartney Cult Fan Club. Ironically, however, I met Linda’s sister ten years later when we both worked for the same broadcasting company. While I neglected to take advantage of that to finagle a meeting across the pond, I was able to share my thoughts with her; we both shared similar changes and each other’s company.
Just saying – some albums go beyond chords, riffs and mixes. Music was our medium for personal, spiritual and social changes, and McCartney continued that in a surprising way of suggesting that everything doesn’t have to be “great.” Imperfect simplicity, while basking in love and family intimacy, makes “good” even better.
I don’t have a contemporaneous impression of the album (I was only nine at the time but was a big Beatles fan and can recall listening to their music from about age four) but hearing the material in full for the first time some 40 years after release I understand both the criticism and praise of it. I can imagine it may have been underwhelming and disappointing to many who plunked down $5 to buy it at the time. Even today I wonder why Paul didn’t bother to work some of what are barely past motives into fuller/complete songs. On the other hand no matter how consciously he went about it, this is the only document he left reflecting how he felt and what he produced on his estrangement from the group after its practical breakup and pending the formal acknowledgement or announcement of that fact. I think it has some fascinating sounds on it and it has a lot of merit from this perspective. “Charmless” is a word I seen mention in connection with the album but it sounds quite the opposite to me. It sounds very charming – as if you’d been invited to tea at Paul and Linda’s and he demoed a bunch of tunes for you during the visit.
Well spoken Art. I always liked “Every Night” and thought it could have made its way onto a Beatle album along with “Maybe I’m amazed” and the single “Another day”. All three seem to work together and compliment each other. The rest of the songs from Paul from that specific time period often don’t seem to make the grade. Although I must say that I still prefer Paul’s stuff on “McCartney” and “Ram” to much of Lennon’s anger, self-lothing and political angst on his albums within the same time period. ( There are exceptions such as “Love” and “Imagine”).
With the fullness of time, this album is rightly now seen in a better light than when it was first released. John Lennon and George Harrison came out with masterpieces in 1970. Whilst McCartney was not, two of his best songs are on this. Every Night and Maybe I’m Amazed are beautiful songs and Paul McCartney at his best. I know a live version of the latter was released on 45, a few years later, but the studio version of Maybe I’m Amazed would have been a massive hit if it had been a single. Which I believe it should have been.
I believe that this album is maybe more appreciated today than when it was released because of the huge drop in people´s sence for musical quality since then. If you had grown up listening to The Beatles for seven years during the sixties and then heard “McCartney” the difference in quality was obvious. But if you then have your sence for musical and lyrical quality lowered for five decades because of an outpoor from the music industry of almost entirely lousy material, then you have possibly become brain washed into appreciating something like “McCartney”.
Maybe I´m amazed and Every night are good songs, though the middle eight of the latter has basically the same melody as the first part of You never give me your money, but an album needs more than two good songs. All songs on an album should hold really high quality, but they never do, these days.
McCartney at his best, this was simple and great..Paul treated us to his creative genious at work..yes some of the material not finished or polished..but that is the door he opened for us…as if we were in the Studio with him…as he was creating and recording.
Hey, I don’t think anyone has posted this, but you’ve got the record cover backwards and the disk isn’t placed in the front fold – the album cover was designed LEFT-HANDED because Paul is left handed. This is how it was described when the record first came out. When you make it a left-handed album then the word McCartney is on the front and the disk is in the back. Check it out Joe.
Kreen Akrore is emotionally strong. I have always imagined that McCartney was showing his feelings of frustration and desperation over his life situation in this song, after the Beatles´ break up. It could have been a good start to an alternate and much better early LP than his original ones:
Kreen Akrore
Every night
Maybe I´m amazed
Junk
Teddy boy (with better lyrics)
That would be something (as a finished song)
Another day (with better lyrics)
Uncle Albert
Man we was lonely
The back seat of my car (with better music between the verse refrains)
Just finished watching Get Back and started re-listening to old Beatles songs and some of the solo efforts of the band members. The music community had written McCartney I off and was invariably biased towards John Lennon and his first record (John Lennon & The Plastic Ono Band), as well as George Harrison’s first record (All Things Must Pass). Those critics got it wrong. McCartney I is an excellent, authentic record. The lo-fi, experimental sound presages college radio, indie/alternative rock, and home recording that we hear in the 00s/10s and now. However, most of those artists don’t have McCartney’s talent. The only pop music artist whose talent equals or may exceed that of McCartney is Prince, and this record does remind one of some of Prince’s approach on some of his records. You just put Paul in a room full of instruments and let him mess around. You want to hear him play every one and he ties it all together with melody. It’s like the line Ringo Starr had during the chaos of the Twickenham studio recordings for the Get Back project when he remarked, “I just want to hear him (Paul) play all day” or something to that effect. Every song is a musical journey. He finds a hook, it leads to a spark, and out comes a song. His guitar playing really stands out as well as his handling of drums/percussion. What’s also underrated about McCartney is his skills as a producer/mixer. He looks for balance among the different instruments and sounds to give the best expression of the song. What comes across to me is a guy who was living life with his family in the British countryside, trying to make sense of life post-Beatles after their abrupt end, and who just got locked in with and rediscovered the joys of music. There’s no ego, no pretense, no assumption that what played on radio in 1969/70 was truly the best music. This is a guy shutting out the noise, just tinkering around with sound, melody, and his talent and experience just take over. When you watch how he was in the studio, how he could get locked in and write songs like Get Back, Let it Be, and Long and Winding Road as there is chaos swirling around the band, and how he seemed perfectly content messing around in jam sessions with his band mates, this record makes a lot of sense.
I don’t know. For me, “McCartney” is some of Paul’s best work. Besides “Maybe I’m Amazed,” songs like “Junk”, “Every Night”, “Man we was Lonely” and “Teddy Boy” are some of the strongest he released after leaving the Beatles. The White Album should have prepared us all for the occasional song fragment, or fragments strung together like on Abby Road. I prefer the simple, underproduced sound of “McCartney” to some of the disasters that occurred when he got too cute in the studio.