Wait…did I say something favorable about Sinatra? No? Am I part of one of those preceding generations? No?
I find that people who defend a reprehensible person because “art” can be dismissed.
Maybe not every year, but often enough.
April 2017 I Like the Monkees better than the Beatles, and I don’t care who knows it!
August 2016 Guess What! The Beatles Never Existed, and there’s a website to prove it (the argument being they were a fraud)
Also August 2016 Beatles - Not Even Close To The Best Group Ever
June 2015 Worst beatles songs (original)
May 2014 Are the Beatles overrated as musicians?
June 2012 The Beatles, not a rock band?
November 2010 The Beatles: Could you happily live without ever hearing another song of theirs?
September 2005 musical impact of the Beatles?
May 2005 Are the Beatles a rock band?
March 2004 Do The Beatles still mean anything to you?
I would argue a case can be made that McCartney was under-rated while his bandmates were over-rated. Lennon really went off the beam after '66 and by all accounts a real asshole. To be fair that kind of fame and fortune is probably really difficult to handle. Though he himself claimed it won’t change who you really are.
One thing, the 60s era rock groups from a technical perspective, some of them weren’t very accomplished. Many of the hits played on the radio were actually done with session musicians. The Beatles never did this, except on their very early hits, and only with the drumming.
Some more:
September 2001 am I the only one who thinks the beatles are overrated?
April 2001 Who honestly believes the Beatles sucked? (OK, this is one I apparently started–but have little memory of–in response to several Beatles-are-overrated/suck type posts.)
Jan 2001 What is the big deal about the Beatles?
November 2011 I Hate Beatles Fans (Thread title is not directly about the Beatles, pe se, but first two sentences of OP are “Fuck the Beatles. They suck.”)
And then there’s the more general threads about overrated bands, which I’m not counting.
I’m no fan of John Lennon. He was a pretentious poser that lucked out by partnering with Paul Mcartney. Everything I’ve read about John indicates he had a vile temper and acid tongue.
The Beatles were a very innovative band. I like a lot of their music and The Red & Blue albums are on constant rotation in my mp3 player.
I’m a very big fan of Paul McCartney. Wings was my band in high school. I love their music. It’s rare for a musician to start two bands and achieve that much success.
I believe Lennon and McCartney needed each other. Neither of them was even half as good as a solo artist as they were together. When they were working in the same group, they each tried to outdo the other. And because their styles were different, the work they produced that way was much deeper than what they did on their own. Lennon tried to out-McCartney McCartney and McCartney tried to out-Lennon Lennon.
I often say “Every John needs a Paul”.
Especially when I worked for an ad agency led by one optimist and one cynic. Neither would have done as well by themselves.
Yes. McCartney’s reputation is just fine and will rise farther after he passes away and he is further lionized. This is great (not the dying part ;)) and Paul deserves it. But don’t denigrate John’s songwriting skills. You’re welcome to not like the man - he had a lot to wrestle with - but to toss him off and say he road Paul’s coattails is simply incorrect.
(That’s in general, not to you, Little Nemo)
QFT. The Beatles were a case of the whole being way more than the sum of its parts.
John Lennon did have talent as a songwriter…but only in conjunction with Paul McCartney. His post-breakup work varies from self-indulgent crap to Yoko-indulgent crap. One could make a case that Barry Manilow was a better songwriter than the solo John Lennon.
As a performer, Lennon wasn’t McCartney’s equal. Hell, he wasn’t Ringo Starr’s equal.
Nonsense. McCartney wrote sugary pop songs. There isn’t a McCartney song that is nearly as good as Imagine or Instant Karma. Nor as jaringly honest as Jealous Guy. The Beatles seem to be dying on inverse order to their songwriting abilities.
Sinatra was reprehinsible? Sure he was.
Helter Skelter does seem like it was lifted from the Archies catalog, now that you mention it.
While I concur with this, it in no way has any effect on their quality as a band. (And I know that wasn’t the point you were trying to make).
I just hear this argument all the time from other people trying to find a way to tear down the Beatles.
I think it’s the other way around - you can’t look at the four of them individually, sum them up, and say, “therefore, the Beatles really weren’t all that great.” That argument won’t fly.
Bands are collaborations of musicians, and people working with each other, bouncing ideas off one another, are usually a lot better than the same people would be working by themselves.
It’s true even with bands with dominant frontmen: take The Police, versus Sting as a solo artist. Whatever Andy Summers and Stewart Copeland contributed (and I’m not denigrating them here; I just don’t know enough about music to understand, let alone evaluate, their contribution), they made Sting as frontman of The Police a hell of a lot better than Sting ever was by himself.
Wait, what? Stings first two solo albums were miles better thsn anything The Police did. He didn’t want to be pigeonholed into a single genre.
To be honest, I think Sting is the most disposable member of the Police (though they all brought their talents and I think needed all three together to make it as they did.)
McCartney had plenty of songs as good as “Imagine” with its trite lyrics and sure-cure-for-insomnia music. Pretty much everyone who’s ever had a top 40 hit has had at least one better song.
If I had a choice between listening to “Imagine” and Barry Manilow singing “Mandy,” it would be a tough call - and have I mentioned that I detest Barry Manilow? Consider it mentioned. But even “Mandy” at least runs the gamut of emotion from A to B, which is more than can be said about “Imagine.”
Then the absolute worst crap got airplay, is all I can say. There was that one song that was basically an op-ed with some music.
ETA: Just because he didn’t want to be pigeonholed, doesn’t mean he did good stuff outside his pigeonhole.
He chose a band with young jazz musicians with real chops. He wrote literate songs to a rock beat. He went in a completely new direction. I understand that some might not like his music but his talent and vision are undeniable.