?

Log in

Apr. 18th, 2007 @ 07:28 am Rant #17
About this Entry
macca
abromeds:
[User Picture Icon]
From:zyzzybalubah
Date:April 18th, 2007 08:04 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
You can't honestly believe that Linda added anything worthwhile, as a musician or singer, to Paul's music.

She and the kids could've gone on tour with Paul without Linda being on stage.

John and George are both deceased and people in this community have said far worse things about them than what I said about Linda. In fact, I said nothing bad about Linda. I just stated the obvious...she had little to no musical talent. I feel quite bad that Linda died far too soon and I'm sure she was a wonderful human being but she had no business being in the band.

Btw... The name of this community is Beatle RANT not Beatle KISS UP.

Cheers then :-)
[User Picture Icon]
From:zyzzybalubah
Date:April 18th, 2007 08:16 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
I guess I just out-ed myself as the ranter!

Oh well. I'm sure my annoying over use of "..." gave me away already! LOL
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture Icon]
From:zyzzybalubah
Date:April 19th, 2007 01:21 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
I assumed I was really asking for a lot of trouble by posting this but there have really only been a couple of people who have taken me to task.
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture Icon]
From:abromeds
Date:April 18th, 2007 08:44 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Btw... The name of this community is Beatle RANT not Beatle KISS UP.

Uhhhh, right. Counter-Ranting a critical Rant does not equate with "kissing up."
[User Picture Icon]
From:zyzzybalubah
Date:April 18th, 2007 09:16 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Yes, but her "counter-rant" was implying that I shouldn't even think such things because Linda is dead and Paul is so great...blah, blah, blah.

In my opinion, that's not really a "counter-rant". It's just kissing up.

But no use quibbling over semantics. :-)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture Icon]
From:zyzzybalubah
Date:April 19th, 2007 01:18 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
C'mon now. You were the one who was ranting a while back that George was a crappy guitarist and should've been kicked out of the Beatles but you defend Linda being in Paul's bands?

"But I'm not so blind that I won't admit that part of the reason I feel this way is that I adore Linda as a person."

BINGO :-)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture Icon]
From:hb_princess
Date:April 19th, 2007 04:29 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
You can't honestly believe that Linda added anything worthwhile, as a musician or singer, to Paul's music.

I never said she did (though I did say she had an influence as his muse, his inspiration, blah blah blah what have you, a la "Maybe I'm Amazed", "My Love", etc.) And I never said you had to "kiss up" to anyone, so you can save the sarcasm, thanks. I just took issue with your statement - that Paul's solo career would have been SOOOOO much better and he would have been taken SOOOOOO much more seriously had Linda not been on stage with him - and I still do. Would drivel like "Bip Bop" be any LESS drivel if Linda didn't sing on it? Would Paul look any LESS ridiculous tap-dancing with an army of hermaphrodites and giant disembodied legs if Linda weren’t there? Is Linda’s presence the only thing keeping Give My Regards To Broad Street from being the burning classic of post-Fab mid-life crisis it could be? I mean, come on. Opinions are obviously most subjective things, but a little perspective goes a long way.

And while you are obviously not alone in finding Linda's constant presence in Paul's career annoying, I don’t believe it had much of a bearing on the quality of his music either way. (I do believe it altered the perception of that quality, but as I said in my initial comment, that’s the perceiver’s issue, not Paul’s.)

That said, I guess what really irks me about your rant is how presumptuous it sounds. As if being a fan of Paul's music gives you the right to demand some sort of control of his life and his personal decisions as well. Maybe that's not even what you meant, I don't know...I probably over-reacted. This is just a really prickly issue with me, and it got me into a very overheated debate with a good friend on another comm...Look, I know we all offer our unsolicited opinions on the Beatles all the time. And most of them I don’t feel are invasive or assuming. I feel perfectly comfortable with things like, for example, "You know, maybe a convicted drug felon really shouldn’t have tried to enter Japan with a pound of weed on top of his suitcase" (!) or "John was a shitty father to Julian, he owed that poor kid so much better,” because those opinions are based at least in part on a fairly conventional sense of right or wrong, smart or stupid, etc. But outright telling someone how he should have balanced his familial obligations and his career? Or telling him which one should have had higher priority for him? Ooh. That’s a whole other story, that. That just crosses a line for me.

Now, I could go into a whole litany of reasons I think Paul wanted Linda in the band (and some of them involve the words “homo-erotic symbiosis” and “John,” so I’ll spare you, oh Token Straight Male of the Comms ;D), and I don’t think all of them were positive or even particularly healthy - but the bottom line is, it’s none of my business. And I guess I can’t imagine even judging something so none-of-my-business, let alone ranting about it.
[User Picture Icon]
From:zyzzybalubah
Date:April 19th, 2007 05:24 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
"Would drivel like "Bip Bop" be any LESS drivel if Linda didn't sing on it? Would Paul look any LESS ridiculous tap-dancing with an army of hermaphrodites and giant disembodied legs if Linda weren’t there?"

Part of my point is that if Paul had been working with musicians of his caliber instead of his wife and yes-men, he probably wouldn't have released horrid songs like Bip-Bop or partook in silly promo things. It's like when he made the Chaos & Creation CD. The producer actually had the courage to say to Paul McCartney "I don't like that song" or "You can do better than that" and Chaos turned out to be one of Paul's best CDs.

I think that some people are letting their postive feelings for Linda as a person (which are well deserved) get in the way of the fact that she was not a real musician.

Once again this is Beatle RANT so we are all here to talk about things that bug us about the Beatles. It's "presumptious" of you to think that ranting about things like John's crappy parenting or Paul's pot trafficing is fair game but pointing out Linda's lack of musical ability isn't.

However, I guess it's safe to say we'll have to agree to disagree. :-)
[User Picture Icon]
From:hb_princess
Date:April 19th, 2007 07:30 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Part of my point is that if Paul had been working with musicians of his caliber instead of his wife and yes-men, he probably wouldn't have released horrid songs like Bip-Bop or partook in silly promo things. It's like when he made the Chaos & Creation CD. The producer actually had the courage to say to Paul McCartney "I don't like that song" or "You can do better than that" and Chaos turned out to be one of Paul's best CDs.

Okay, that's an excellent point. But Ram, BOTR, and ToW are every bit as good as Chaos, and Paul made them with -*gasp* - Linda in the band (I'm just tweaking you now, don't get bent xP), so...how much effect did she really have? Would he have made more great albums w/o Linda and the yes-men? Possibly. Probably. All I'm saying is he didn't exactly suck monkey-tit as it was, you know? Again, perspective.

It's "presumptious" of you to think that ranting about things like John's crappy parenting or Paul's pot trafficing is fair game but pointing out Linda's lack of musical ability isn't.

But it's not. It's not the same thing at ALL. It isn't a judgement call to say, "You know, it's really stupid to bring drugs into a country that wouldn't give you a visa for five years because of your past drug busts," because that really IS stupid! It isn't only stupid if I don't agree with it or I wouldn't have done it myself - it is stupid by any normal objective measure or standard of stupidity. But saying Paul probably wouldn't have done some of the outright crap he did with Linda in the band, and implying he therefore owed it to the world as an artiste NOT to have her in the band...? I'm sorry, but that's purely subjective, and - just in my opinion, now! - not your or my place to say.

However, I guess it's safe to say we'll have to agree to disagree. :-)

On what? I'm beginning to feel like we're arguing two entirely different things! ;P
[User Picture Icon]
From:zyzzybalubah
Date:April 19th, 2007 09:41 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
There is no difference between saying taking drugs to Japan is stupid and saying putting someone in your band who cannot sing or play an instrument is stupid. Those are both stupid choices. I'm not judging Linda as a person or God as a thing or whatever it is...oh wait...wrong topic. Like jkg_vader, you obviously just like Linda too much to be objective about her role in Paul's band. That's fine. If you can rock out to "Cook of the House", more power to ya!

"Would he have made more great albums w/o Linda and the yes-men? Possibly. Probably."

That's actually what my point is! I think you are percieving my post as an attack on Linda. It's not. Like I've said before, I think Linda was great at a lot of things but music was not one of them.
[User Picture Icon]
From:abromeds
Date:April 19th, 2007 10:06 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
There is no difference between saying taking drugs to Japan is stupid and saying putting someone in your band who cannot sing or play an instrument is stupid.

HB can certainly speak for herself, but I think there very obviously is a HUGE difference between those two things. One is illegal, dishonest, and puts your entire future, and subsequently the future of your entire family, in terrible jeopardy. The other creates a situation not conducive to creating great art all the time.

you obviously just like Linda too much to be objective about her role in Paul's band.

Um, no.

That's actually what my point is! I think you are percieving my post as an attack on Linda.

No, dude. We're taking exception to the fact that you think Paul ought to have lived his life according to your (extremely subjective) priorities. That he, like you, should have let the quality of his art, or the "sacredness" of art itself, or whatever, overrule whatever benefits he believed he got from having Linda in the band. We don't see how that's anyone else's call to make. As HB said, that just crosses a line in our minds. Feel free to draw your line elsewhere, but please understand that THAT is our issue, not a bias toward Linda or a need to "kiss up" to Paul or whatever.
[User Picture Icon]
From:zyzzybalubah
Date:April 19th, 2007 10:58 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
"No, dude. We're taking exception to the fact that you think Paul ought to have lived his life according to your (extremely subjective) priorities."

I have not said a single thing about how Paul lived his life! I have not said a single mean thing about Linda. I have no problem with Paul & Linda spending every single day of their lives together, That was all romantic and GREAT FOR THEM!

All I am saying is that Linda was a bad singer and non-musician and Paul would have been better off as a musician and songwriter working with truly talented people. I don't see how that is remotely more judgemental than any other single rant posted in this community. If you can point me to any past rant that isn't based on someone's opinion, I'd be very interested to see it.

Obviously you and HB are Linda fanatics and that's fine but I don't appreciate the both of you accusing me of "JUDGING PAUL AND LINDA ON HOW THEY LIVED THEIR LIVES". I have not done that AT ALL. I simply disagree with Linda pretending to be a musician and that is all I have said in the numerous responses. I have said nothing...zero...nada...about how they lived their lives.

If you want to disagree about Linda's musical worth, fine. I would love to hear a defense other than "that's what Paul wanted" or "they wanted to be togther all the time". Out of all these replies, the best defense of her musicianship that I've read was something to the effect of ...she wasn't that bad.

Is it for me to say how Paul should pick people for his bands? Ultimately, no. Of course not. But I believed this comm was for people to discuss what bugs them about things concerning the Beatles. I don't see how saying I think Linda should not have been in Wings is any worse than the posts about how George was arrogant and should've quit the Beatles (How dare that ranter judge George for how arrogantly he lived his life, that's his choice) or why the Beatles broke up (OMG, how dare that ranter question the Beatle's choice to disband. Don't tell them how to live their lives). The May Pang rant was downright personally mean. I have said nothing mean about Linda.

So if you want to disagree with me about Linda's musicianship, fine but please don't accuse me of dictating how Paul should have lived his life because I did no such thing. I've criticized how he made his music but NOT how he lived his life.


[User Picture Icon]
From:abromeds
Date:April 20th, 2007 01:59 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
All I am saying is that Linda was a bad singer and non-musician and Paul would have been better off as a musician and songwriter working with truly talented people.

Yes, and we've agreed with you there. I've agreed with that since the very beginning. I'm not sure how you missed that. We're not "Linda fanatics," we're not defending Linda's "musical worth."

We have, however, mentioned a few extenuating circumstances which moved Paul to put Linda in the band in spite of all that. They were completely personal, non-music-related reasons. Your dismissal of them indicates to me one of two things.

1, you consider them invalid reasons, and think they ought not to have outweighed Paul's artistic scruples, or sense of artistic integrity, or whatever. That he ought not to have let his personal comfort/peace of mind overrule his dedication to making the best music he could. And yeah, to me, that does cross the line into making judgements on how Paul lived his life.

Or 2, you want this to be a purely "artistic" discussion with no mention whatsoever of personal/emotional motivations, which would be fine, I guess, if rather boring. But if that is the case, then you can read my earlier comments to see how I agree with you, though again we'll probably hit up again against that concept of "artistic credibility," which I don't care about but you do. It doesn't bother me that someone with a mediocre voice and no musicianship should be allowed to play a few chords and sing a bit in a band. I just don't care. I might not like the results aesthetically, but I have no problem with the principle of the thing, the way that many of you apparently do. *shrug*

I don't see how saying I think Linda should not have been in Wings is any worse than the posts about how George was arrogant and should've quit the Beatles (How dare that ranter judge George for how arrogantly he lived his life, that's his choice) or why the Beatles broke up (OMG, how dare that ranter question the Beatle's choice to disband. Don't tell them how to live their lives). The May Pang rant was downright personally mean.

I don't remember vader questioning their choice to disband; wasn't it just an explanation of why she thought they broke up? And criticizing George for arrogance is different; his arrogance was hypocritical and hurtful to others. That makes a HUGE difference, in my mind. I don't remember the May Pang rant.

I'm not sure what your point here is; are you feeling unduly persecuted or something? Or are you accusing me of being inconsistent? I'm quite comfortable that my opinions are not inconsistent, but frankly I don't feel like taking the time necessary to defend them to someone who has misunderstood so much of what I've said in the past. It's quite possible I was more active in disagreeing with you on your rant than on others -- What can I say? I might choose to voice or not voice my disagreement for a variety of reasons, how busy/tired I am, how much I care about the issue, the quality of the ranter's writing, the mood I'm in, etc. etc. etc. This isn't my job, you know.

For the record, even if you are, IMO, making a judgement on how Paul lived his life, that doesn't mean I think you're like, EVIL, or MEAN or anything. Presumptuous perhaps, but that's about it. It's true that HB was overaggressive in her original post, as she's so graciously admitted and apologized for below. :) Again, as I said in my last post, feel free to draw your "line" elsewhere, we'll agree to disagree, but please understand that THAT is my issue, not a knee-jerk need to defend Linda's musicianship because I'm an irrational fanatic.
[User Picture Icon]
From:zyzzybalubah
Date:April 20th, 2007 02:49 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Look, I read about half of this and stopped.

If you are going to keep insisting that "Linda shouldn't have been in the band because she was not a musician" is equal to "I'm telling Paul how he should've lived his life"...then I really have nothing more to say because that just doesn't make a lick of sense.

If you'd like to discuss what I actually posted about ..ie.. Linda's lack of musical ability and how it effected Paul's music, that would be wonderful. However, I'm not going to be bothered with anymore of this "I've crossed the line and am judging Paul and Linda's life" nonsense.

I've made my points very clear and politely and I am, frankly, sick of repeating myself.

Cheers then :-)
[User Picture Icon]
From:abromeds
Date:April 20th, 2007 08:38 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Linda's lack of musical ability and how it effected Paul's music

I have already discussed it. I've agreed with you, several times. I just think there are other issues involved.

I've made my points very clear and politely and I am, frankly, sick of repeating myself.

Well, that makes two of us, then. Oh well, I'm sure we both tried our best. :)