The Beatles' Solo Work

[The Man in Blak 0]

The album editing thread seemed to be veering in this direction and the topic is well-worth discussion, so let's give it a thread all its own: which Beatle had the best solo career?

 

I've really been enjoying the first two solo McCartney albums, lately. The only post-Beatles Lennon that rivals them is Plastic Ono Band.

 

Yikes. I'd take Plastic Ono Band or Imagine over virtually anything that McCartney's ever done and, really, even All Things Must Pass seems stronger to me than McCartney's earlier work. McCartney's evisceration in "How Can You Sleep?" is one of the stronger tracks out of any Beatle solo work, in my opinion.

 

I'm not completely anti-Paul, though - I do like McCartney's later work (Chaos and Creation..., Driving Rain) and he's definitely been the most prolific out of the four, but virtually all of his early work does absolutely nothing for me.

[SuperJerk 0]

The only post-Beatles stuff of McCartney's I liked were his stuff with Wings (yes, there were other people in the band besides him) and his duets with Michael Jackson. I've always heard Ringo had the most successful post-Beatles career. I'm a pretty big fan of George Harrison's stuff from the 80s, though.

[Hank Kingsley 0]

All Things Must Pass is one of my favorite all-time records. Besides that I haven't really listened to much other stuff.

[snuffbox 0]

I'm a big John Lennon fan. Paul Mac, not so much.

[Guest RayCo]

I much prefer The Kinks.

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

I've always heard Ringo had the most successful post-Beatles career.

If your definition of "successful" includes having the most under the radar solo career, as well as the least commercially and critically popular solo catalog, then yeah, he was the most successful.

 

As for Paul vs. John, really, if either of them had to take a bullet, I'd rather it have been Paul, but that doesn't mean McCartney and Ram weren't a solid set of rock and pop tunes. No muss, no fuss, none of Lennon's self-important bullshit to mar what would be a perfectly good album.

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

McCartney's evisceration in "How Can You Sleep?" is one of the stronger tracks out of any Beatle solo work, in my opinion.

 

http://forums.thesmartmarks.com/index.php?...;hl=john+lennon

 

Speaking of Paul, John seems pretty peeved at him on "How Do You Sleep?" Was he irritated by Macca's unabashed desire to be a pop star, without all that I Gotta Change The World nonsense bogging him down? Paul probably slept very well, John. Anyway, I like the song, but it doesn't really go anywhere.

 

 

I'm not completely anti-Paul, though - I do like McCartney's later work (Chaos and Creation..., Driving Rain) and he's definitely been the most prolific out of the four, but virtually all of his early work does absolutely nothing for me.

You like "Freedom," don't you.

[C Dubya 04 0]

All Things Must Pass is my favorite solo album by any of the four. Of course, having Derek and the Dominos as your backing band probably didn't hurt anything for George.

[The Man in Blak 0]

Hey, I missed out on Inc's second post.

 

Speaking of Paul, John seems pretty peeved at him on "How Do You Sleep?" Was he irritated by Macca's unabashed desire to be a pop star, without all that I Gotta Change The World nonsense bogging him down? Paul probably slept very well, John. Anyway, I like the song, but it doesn't really go anywhere.

Yeah, there's no doubt that he thought that McCartney was a coward for being reluctant to take a lyrical stand on the cultural issues of the time. (Which, years later, would make "Freedom" and "Ebony and Ivory" all the more hilarious.) The song had more behind it, historically, than just that conflict, though - Harrison's appearance on the track is quite a coup and it, along with Ringo's participation on Plastic Ono Band, reaffirmed the idea that McCartney was the Big Bad Guy in the Beatles' split.

 

Anyway, while Lennon's cultural aspirations do seem a little cheeky (and possibly misguided) nowadays, they were a remarkable step for a guy of his status in pop culture; Lennon's reputation soared after death more as a result of that idealism and optimistic than his solo career. I'm not sure I would necessarily call that ambition "nonsense", as it does make McCartney's silly little love songs seem a little hollow by comparison. But that's more of an argument of taste and, really, the Beatles' breakup was probably the best thing for both Lennon and McCartney, given the divergent directions they took in their respective music.

 

Back to the song, I would agree that "How Do You Sleep?" doesn't really build to anything, but I just like the groove taken through the song, slithering from verse to verse. Harrison's guitar work is great, Lennon's vocal is deliberate and scathing, and the strings, overproduced as they may be, tie up phrases quite nicely. It's not "Jealous Guy" by any means, but it's still good stuff for me.

 

You like "Freedom," don't you.

 

"Freedom" is just about the worst thing I've ever heard (and, BTW, wouldn't it be great if the Patriots won the Super Bowl?!), but, since it's essentially a hidden track on Driving Rain, I tend to turn a blind eye to it when discussing the album. And, all things considered, Driving Rain is probably my least favorite out of the four later McCartney works, as it's a little on the gooey side.

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

The song had more behind it, historically, than just that conflict, though - Harrison's appearance on the track is quite a coup and it, along with Ringo's participation on Plastic Ono Band, reaffirmed the idea that McCartney was the Big Bad Guy in the Beatles' split.

I wasn't aware there was the perception that Paul was the jerk in the Beatles split—Yoko being more famously credited, however erroneously, for breaking up the Beatles, which, in turn, would make John seem more of a bad guy—but I'll wager you're more in tune with Beatles-related minutia than I.

[The Man in Blak 0]

If you can get through the full Beatles Anthology on DVD (which, I'll admit, is more of a chore for a non-Beatles enthusiast, than anything else), you can find more than a couple instances of resentment towards Paul from the rest of the group, particularly near the end, when he tried to bring in his wife's father as the manager of the band. (Watching Paul calling out every single minute detail of how the TV camera should move for the Let It Be sessions is worth a laugh.)

 

John's erratic behavior and relentless inclusion of Yoko in the later recording sessions certainly didn't help matters, sure, but there was plenty of dissension from all of the members of the group leading up to the end.

[Annabelle 0]

wasn't harrison fed up because his songs weren't taken into consideration as much as lennon & mccartneys? didn't mac announce the break up of the beatles before anyone else decided it was over?

[The Man in Blak 0]

didn't mac announce the break up of the beatles before anyone else decided it was over?

Somewhat, yes. Lennon actually quit the band before McCartney's announcement, walking away in September '69, but the rest of the group talked him out of making a formal announcement at that time. When the Beatles met for their last recording session of "I Me Mine" shortly after the new year, Lennon wasn't there.

 

Following that last recording session, there was still an implicit understanding that the group would hold off on announcing a breakup or releasing their solo projects until Let It Be went to market. When McCartney announced that the Beatles had broken up on April 10th, 1970, a week before the scheduled release of McCartney, the rest of the band was a little surprised, as you can imagine.

 

wasn't harrison fed up because his songs weren't taken into consideration as much as lennon & mccartneys?

 

Not only that, but Harrison was tiring from the endless squabbling during the session and the condescension from others, regarding his playing (McCartney, in particular). An argument with Paul over how to play a particular guitar line, which was caught in live detail for the Let It Be tapings, essentially led to George quitting the band temporarily. At times, they treated him more like a session musician than an actual part of the band.

 

And, speaking of solo Harrison, has anybody even listened to anything else outside of All Things Must Pass? Gone Troppo, anyone?

[Zorin Industries 0]

I've always heard Ringo had the most successful post-Beatles career.

If your definition of "successful" includes having the most under the radar solo career, as well as the least commercially and critically popular solo catalog, then yeah, he was the most successful.

 

He married Barbara Bach, i'd consider that extremely succesfull

[Annabelle 0]

i listened to the album right after all things must pass. to say the magic was gone would be an understatement. any & all of the beatle mystique was gone. it sounded like a middle of the road, forgettable 70's pop album.

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

And, speaking of solo Harrison, has anybody even listened to anything else outside of All Things Must Pass? Gone Troppo, anyone?

I picked up Cloud Nine on cassette, back in the heyday of "Got My Mind Set on You." Brainwashed came out when I first joined college radio, so I heard that one a fair number of times.

[Mecha Mummy 0]

And, speaking of solo Harrison, has anybody even listened to anything else outside of All Things Must Pass? Gone Troppo, anyone?

 

I have Brainwashed, which I like for the most part (although the title track never impressed me so much). "The Rising Sun" is probably my favorite song off of it, though "P2 Vatican Blues" is pretty catchy too.

[SuperJerk 0]

I've always heard Ringo had the most successful post-Beatles career.

If your definition of "successful" includes having the most under the radar solo career, as well as the least commercially and critically popular solo catalog, then yeah, he was the most successful.

 

How about we use the definition of "successful" that includes having 7 top ten hit singles?

[Guest "Go, Mordecai!"]

Ringo Starr was not the most successful Beatle, SuperJerk.

[C Dubya 04 0]

It would be a tough argument to even call Ringo the third most successful.

[Guest RayCo]

Oasis, The Kinks, The Rolling Stones and Coldplay are far superior British alternative rock bands to The Beatles.

[Guest "Go, Mordecai!"]

Neither the Beatles nor the Rolling Stones are alternative rock bands, you dumbshit. Not to mention that Coldplay isn't better than much of anyone, to say nothing of the Beatles. Man.

[C Dubya 04 0]

Shouldn't a mod just delete that post? Or the poster?

[Guest RayCo]

Shouldn't a mod just delete that post? Or the poster?

They have censorship on forums aswell over there, aswell as on everything else. Th United States is deinately a police state.

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

A quick bit of research shows Superjerk is right, only if all the Beatles died in 1974. That said, he's wrong.

 

Also, someone put the boot to RayCo. And Superjerk, too. Why not.

[Special K 0]

OH MY GOD .

Mods? Just ban RayCo, ok? Please?

 

On the plus side, I really like The Kinks as well.

[snuffbox 0]

In Ringo's defense those All-Star concert tours were probably a big financial success. And I think he had one hit solo song as well. That should put him at a solid fourth-place as a Beatle solo artist.

[Mecha Mummy 0]

In Ringo's defense those All-Star concert tours were probably a big financial success. And I think he had one hit solo song as well. That should put him at a solid fourth-place as a Beatle solo artist.

 

Actually, two of his singles hit #1 ("Photograph" and "You're Sixteen"), and another three or four were in the top ten as well.

 

That being said, he also hasn't had a single real hit in the last thirty years and hasn't had a Top Forty single since the 80s.

[snuffbox 0]

4th place aint bad.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Does Ringo get extra credit for voicework on Thomas the Train Engine?