I thought it had a piano part. I didn’t double check to see.
But that’s always been an element in any genre of music that expresses human feelings. It’s a part of the spectrum of people’s emotions, so deserves a place in some of our music. Is there any other emotional state that you’d want to write off, even when extreme?
And I can appreciate the tenacity of someone who’s continued to write silly love songs for 60 years.
Every now and then, I’d wish John was around to sneer, “Wott’s this Pipes of Peace crap, then? Ya want me to kick yer bleedin’ arse, Paul? Go back and write something GOOD, you wanker!”
Well I don’t want to get off too far into the weeds. But thinking about it a bit more it has something to do with overproduction, or being “overcooked”. Eleanor Rigby has a lot of overdubs with all the weepy violins and the rest of it. Maybe he didn’t want all of the strings. Could be George Martin had a hand, I dunno. Sometimes with music, less is more. At the time all the “critics” and musicologists fell all over themselves praising the deep social commentary and how the song was about the human condition and alienation, blah blah.
Yesterday and Eleanor Rigby were mostly string quartets arranged by George Martin. (Although Yesterday does have Paul on acoustic guitar too.)
Part of the reason that a lot of these piano songs came at the end of their career is that they were writing separately at this point and these were McCartney songs, although credited to Lennon-McCartney.
Another example, though not the Beatles, the penchant for producers adding strings to some of the motown hits of the 60s, e.g. Stand By Me, just a little too sappy for my tastes.
So would John’s “Jealous Guy,” wouldn’t it?
How about “Only Love Remains” from Paul’s underrated (IMHO) Press To Play album? Definitely a sappy piano ballad, but if you like that sort of thing it’s worth a listen.
A good example of this would be “The Long and Winding Road”. As I understand it, The Beatles recorded it rock band-style and thought it was done, then George added a full orchestra on top of that. I believe the boys–Paul especially–were pretty upset by it, if what I’ve heard is accurate.
Not George—he didn’t produce the Let It Be album.
Phil Spector added all that shit, not George Martin. If you haven’t heard the “Let it Be Naked” album, you should. Paul had it re-released about 10 or 15 years ago with all Phil’s shit kicked out the recording studio door.
ETA: Simulpost with Thudlow.
I had not heard that before: definitely sappy, but I liked it. Sometimes I’m in the mood for sappiness.
I’d agree Spector really went over the top. Another example that comes to mind, is Dust In The Wind by Kansas. It’s a nice fingerstyle guitar song, a member of Kansas had a practice warmup tune he’d mess around with on his acoustic and his wife said that would make a good song. But somebody decided to add all those sappy violins, and just sort of ruins it. I like classical music, but strings and horns get added on to pop tunes is just wrong.
Ah yes, Phil Spector, not George Martin. But my point remains, that sometimes it’s the producer’s fault, not the artist’s, if things get too saccharine. And people get…passionate about it. 
Violin was always an integral part of Kansas’ sound. They weren’t “added on”, that’s how the song was created.
Well no, it wasn’t, that’s the point. It was a fingerstyle guitar tune. That’s how it was created. You could look it up, but that’s what happened if the guy who wrote it can be believed.
I think that the reason there were piano songs is that they were successful and they could do whatever the fuck they wanted. Their ambitions were bigger than being a “guitar band” as if that’s a thing that they were supposed to be. Not sure how that rule came about. It wouldn’t have applied to anyone else who had the ability.
I am the Walrus is a masterpiece. Too “weird”? Sorry I’ll take “weird” anytime. Music was an art form last I heard.
Eleanor Rigby is too. It’s known for being restrained, not overproduced. It doesn’t seem to have an outpouring of emotion in it at all.
Since we’re all using Wikipedia I’ll quote this:
Celebrated songwriter Jerry Leiber said: “The Beatles are second to none in all departments. I don’t think there has ever been a better song written than ‘Eleanor Rigby’.”[38]
I haven’t posted because I can’t grok the OP. The Beatles never had a “Ballad Period” and always included a variety of musical styles in their songwriting.
I get the convenience of breaking their time together into Early, Mid and Late given the evolution in the song structures and studio complexity, but that’s about it.
He wouldn’t have had the nerve. Lennon hit the wall creatively and never had the chance to get back as it were. He knew Paul was kicking his ass around the block all through the 70s. (He was a fan of “Coming Up” I’m pretty sure)
I really empathize with famous creative people when I read these threads. Especially Paul’s attempt to get his name first on some of the songs. A little time passes and all of the sudden it’s the fog of war. Every thread is: “Baby you can backseat drive my music” “Trust the artist? Hell no, Hate the artist!”