I am quoting Wikipedia here without bothering to read the cite. I have no idea how royalties work in the music industry and how much credit you get for performing only rather than writing and performing, but this line has always struck me as indicating some massive resentment on Simon’s part:
In 1990, Simon and Garfunkel were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Garfunkel thanked Simon, calling him “the person who most enriched my life by putting those songs through me”; Simon responded, “Arthur and I agree about almost nothing. But it’s true, I have enriched his life quite a bit.” After performing three songs, the duo left without speaking. In August 1991, Simon staged his own concert in Central Park, released as a live album, Paul Simon’s Concert in the Park, a few months later. He declined an offer from Garfunkel to perform with him at the park.[118]
When Simon appeared on the Dick Cavett show, he explained those changes: why those reverent words were being sung to this seducer of innocent young Benjamin Braddock. Cavett replied that it would have been a very different movie without those changes. I.e., Dustin Hoffman getting seduced by Eleanor Roosevelt.
IME royalties go to songwriters, not performers. I would guess Garfunkle got some share of record revenue, but he certainly made less than Simon did. He made a lot of money performing live as part of S&G, and was able to launch his solo and acting career. But I don’t see how any of Garfunkel’s success came at Simon’s expense.
In my view, “had some success on his own” describes Garfunkel after they split. He released a moderate amount of solo material but only about ten songs made it into the top 40. Paul Simon, OTOH, went on to become a superstar.
“Some success”? I would assume that common perception of Simon’s catalog as a solo artist is considered far more substantial than the earlier works with G-Funk.
I think it’s a valid question to ask if Simon would have expanded his songwriting career into an a-list performing career (like Neil Diamond or Carol King) on his own. Those hit records in the 1960s owed a lot to the harmonies that Garfunkel contributed to and the arrangements/production that Tom Wilson contributed to. It is arguable whether the less than charismatic Paul Simon could have had the successful solo career he did without those collaborations as stepping stones.
Exactly. This is a ponderable on the level of “would The Beatles have been The Beatles without George Martin”? The first S&S acoustic folk album, containing “The Sound of Silence,” was a bomb. The two split and Simon went to England as a solo folkie. Then Wilson brought in some rock session players, created a background to the SofS, and put it out without telling him. Simon found out what happened when he was told he had a number one hit.
From then on Wilson arranged the fantastic sounds that, like Martin, added so much to making his clients unique. Producers like that seldom get the credit they deserve. They’re more than Ringos, even. (Who was, of course, great in what he did for the group.)
Production on S&G albums was done mostly by Bob Johnston and Ray Halee. Wilson was producer for Wednesday Morning, 3am including the electrification of “The Sounds of Silence” (renamed as The Sound of Silence)
Which, without more, is indistinguishable from my position:
Paul Simon as Paul Simon has had nowhere near the impact as he did as Paul Simon of Simon & Garfunkel.
You might think he’s a big deal (and I’m certainly not arguing he’s not incredibly talented with or without a little two-part harmony) but I don’t see him as anything like the cultural phenomenon he was when he was paired with Garfunkel.
And, as a millennial (speaking to lasting impact, albeit from my own limited perspective), I think the only song I can even think of from his solo career is Me and Julio. Contrasted against at least half a dozen from his limited time with Garfunkel.
I too much prefer the repertoire of S&G to that of Paul Simon solo. I’m a late-period boomer (born 1959), and I was exposed to S&G early.
But there’s a difference between what I (and you) prefer, and the critical and commercial success of his post-S&G work, which is every bit as much as that of S&G.
Really? Have you forgotten the highly acclaimed “Graceland”, Simon’s 7th solo album and 1987 Grammy winner for Album of the Year? All you have to do is look at the track listing and there’s 11 absolute classics, every one. That album has won incredible acclaim.
I’m certainly not dismissive of Simon & Garfunkel and loved their music in my youth, but I think that if Paul Simon today isn’t even bigger than they were as a duo, he’s at least as popular and impactful.
I was going to say that what bugs me, is how in every verse (in the same place) he stretches one syllable over 2 notes. “A-a street lamp”….”I mi-ight reach you”.
Paul Simon has had an extremely respectable solo career. Billboard rankings:
Mother & Child Reunion #4; 13 weeks, Feb. 1972
Me & Julio… #22; 11 weeks, Apr. 1972
Duncan #52; 7 weeks, Jul. 1972
Kodachrome #2; 14 weeks, May 1973
Loves Me Like a Rock #2; 16 weeks, Aug. 1973 [with Dixie Hummingbirds]
American Tune #35; 10 weeks, Dec. 1973
Gone at Last #23; 10 weeks, Aug. 1975 [with Phoebe Snow]
50 Ways to Leave… #1; 17 weeks, Dec. 1975 (#1 for 3 weeks)
Still Crazy… #40, 7 weeks, May 1976
Slip Slidin’ Away #5; 20 weeks, Oct. 1977
Wonderful World (cover) #17; 14 weeks, Jan. 1978 [with Garfunkel & James Taylor]
Late in the Evening #6; 16 weeks, Aug. 1980
One-Trick Pony #40; 11 weeks, Oct. 1980
The Blues #51; 8 weeks, Jan. 1983 [with Randy Newman]
Allergies #44; 10 weeks, Dec. 1983
Graceland #81; 7 weeks, Dec. 1986
The Boy in the Bubble #86; 4 weeks, Mar. 1987
You Can Call Me Al #23; 29 weeks, Aug. 1986
And here’s Simon and Garfunkel’s rankings for comparison:
SIMON & GARFUNKEL
The Sounds of Silence #1; 14 weeks, Nov. 1965 (#1 for 2 weeks)
Homeward Bound #5; 12 weeks, Feb. 1966
I Am a Rock #3; 11 weeks, May 1966
The Dangling Conversation #25; 7 weeks, Aug. 1966
A Hazy Shade of Winter #13; 9 weeks, Nov. 1966
At the Zoo #16; 9 weeks, Mar. 1967
Fakin’ It #23; 8 weeks, Jul. 1967
Scarborough Fair #11; 11 weeks, Mar. 1968
Mrs. Robinson #1; 13 weeks, Apr. 1968 (#1 for 3 weeks)
The Boxer #7; 10 weeks, Apr. 1969
Bridge Over Troubled Water #1; 14 weeks, Feb. 1970 (#1 for 6 weeks)
Cecilia #4; 13 weeks, Apr. 1970
El Condor Pasa #18; 11 weeks, Nov. 1970
For Emily… #53; 7 weeks, Nov. 1972
America #97; 2 weeks, 11 1972
My Little Town #9; 14 weeks, Oct, 1975
As a boomer, I can think of a LOT more. such as Kodachrome, Graceland, Boy in the bubble, 50 ways to leave your lover, Diamonds on the soles of her shoes, You can call me Al, Love me like a rock, Mother and Child Reunion, Still Crazy, and Late in the Evening. And that’s without even googling.
I grew up on Simon & Garfunkel, but once they split, I followed them both. Simon was definitely a top tier artist, with more hits after the split than before. Billboard says he had 21 Top 100 tunes after the split, compared to 17 for Simon & Garfunkel.
I loved 'em both. I was lucky enough to see Garfunkel and Simon just a few year ago. Art performed in Milwaukee one late winter evening, and some months later, Paul was at Milwaukee’s Summerfest, so I got to see 'em both. ;-D
I saw Simon perform live here in Chicago, during his Farewell Tour in 2018. He opened with a S&G song, “America,” and then the rest of his main setlist was entirely his solo work, including several deep cuts, like “Rene and Georgette Magritte With Their Dog After the War.” During the second and third encores, he did finally play three more S&G songs: “Homeward Bound,” “The Boxer,” and he closed the show with, yes, “Sound of Silence.”
I’ve been a fan of his music for most of my life, but I agree with others: he has had a long-standing resentment of Art, and I suspect he chose his setlist for the tour specifically to focus on his music that he made outside of their partnership.