The bum bum bum reminds me of Mr. Sandman
McCartney performed it on Jimmy Fallon. I guess he’s ok with the song.
I think Fallon’s version is much better than the original. It works better with a chorus of voices.
Winos?
What, is that really the lyrics? It’s a song about panhandling or something?
Anyway, it doesn’t matter. Just about all Christmas music is shit–shit that people wouldn’t listen to under any other circumstance. I mean really, would you want to listen to It’s a Holly Jolly Christmas, let’s say, in summer, and if it were were about something like going to the county fair? I seriously doubt it. The only Christmas music I find any good if the Afro-Caribbean stuff. Very little else is any good.
The laziest Christmas song ever is probably “I wish it could be a wombling merry christmas everyday”, where Roy Wood just shunted two of his previous crappy songs together into one in a shameless cash in.
No. There are proper lyrics about Christmas things.
I think it’s fine. The thing about McCartney in this era is that every album had at least two or three successes despite themselves. Cliff Richard did too. They aren’t all going to be gems that stand up to scrutiny forty years later.
I’ve heard this song performed live at Christmas shows with acoustic piano and choir.
It’s a really fun song with a cool melody.
The Synth used in the 70’s hasn’t aged well. It’s a much better song with little or no Synth.
Don’t be too hard on the choir of children. After all, they practiced all year long.
mmm
Still better than John’s.
I like John’s. I never fail to get a chill up my spine when I think of “war is over IF YOU WANT IT”----because, of course, humans don’t want war to be over.
Insipid and bland it ain’t. Whereas Paul’s song…
Close, but apprently a little bit less, if a “Forbes” article from 2010 is correct.
Could be worse…like Lennon’s album of oldies. Now that was uninspired dreck.
OK, I’ll say it: I seriously dislike, “Holly Jolly Christmas.” But I hate Burl Ives.
Noooo, don’t say that!
Seriously Yoko may have written it.
That song is number one on my hate list of Christmas songs! I just heard Hanson’s xmas album “Finally it’s Christmas” and they mash up that song with a fun, upbeat chorus and it’s the first time I could listen to it without being totally annoyed! I’m far too old to be a Hanson fan, but that song encouraged me to listen to the whole album and it’s probably the most fun xmas album I’ve heard. A few originals, some classics, but most with a unique twist and totally fun. That terrible Paul McCartney song has been rendered tolerable!
To the contrary, “War is over if you want it” is one of the blander, more insipid thoughts one could have about war and how to achieve peace. It offers absolutely no true insight. It’s arguably false. Even if nobody wanted war, given an urgent enough situation, if they saw no other way, they would fight.
“War is over if you want it” ignores the real causes of war to offer a bland, insipid, useless and ultimately disempowering deepity in place of anything that could logically inspire real anti-war activism.
Obviously I disagree, Frylock. “War is over if you want it” places a floodlight squarely on the all-too-common pieties uttered by those who like to be seen as opposing war. It exposes the hypocrisy of the many who actually hope for war (sometimes for psychological reasons; sometimes for profit), while claiming the opposite.
As for “the real causes of war”: sometimes a large proportion of people may assess a particular war as having been “just,” but that doesn’t change the fact that the judgment is subjective.
The most profound observation one may make about ‘deepities’ is that the mere assertion that something is a deepity does not constitute proof that it is such.
Well, I find it to be worse pablum than the McCartney song referenced in the OP . Even though McCartney’s song is insipid, it at least stops at knowing it’s pablum.
If you think war is over “if you want it”, you’re simple and exemplify the worst of the hippies’ thought. To end a war (much less war in general), you have to make the other guy not want it. You can do that through craftiness, brute force or some brilliant combination of the two, but that’s the actual problem you’re trying to solve. I mean, they’ve already decided whatever problem they have is worth killing you over. Your feelings on whether it’s worth killing them over the same are almost immaterial. If the other parties’ demands were easy to acquiesce to, there wouldn’t even be talk of war.
So yeah, I prefer McCartney’s Christmas nonsense over Lennon’s, but neither really did a great job.
That was the article I was thinking of. Actually, it’s much less impressive: the article says that the amount he earned from “Wonderful Christmastime” in 30 years is less than the amount of royalties he earns in one year (they link to another article saying that he earns 20-30 million in royalties each year). I totally misread it.
You guys are funny. You get it that music and songwriting are subjective, right. A song you don’t like might make somebody very happy and they love it. Whenever I hear somebody say that song/band sucks I think and laugh to myself “we should all just like the same songs/bands”. That is just the way it is.
hmmm I think you’re just flat-out wrong and I’m empirically correct when I say that bands that others like but I feel suck do actually suck.
As Bruce Hornsby said…