So last night after band practice the band and I, along with our friend Shawn got in a small debate over who was the better Beatle, or who was more important, etc. John, or Paul. I think there was two of us who said John was, the other three said Paul I think. Anyway, I came up with some points I couldn�t think of last night:

Paul wrote many Beatle classics, like �Fool on the Hill,� and �She's Leaving Home� None the less the only truly great songs he did were "Yesterday" and "Eleanor Rigby" and one or two other songs by individual taste. Other than these two classics, the rest of what he produced was not on the same level as what John did. Paul�s songs were better known for being catchy, more pop friendly and less artistic. The list of cheerful simple McCartney songs is extensive: �Ob-la-Di Ob-la-Da�, "Yellow Submarine�,� Honey Pie", "Hello Goodbye", "When I'm Sixty-Four" Paul�s artistic achievements are well above most other artists of yesterday and today, but Lennon was on a separate plane than everyone one else.

Lennon was the �smart� Beatle, he was an avid reader, dabbled in poetry, art, philosophy, and religious theology. His intelligence can be witnessed from many facets. Being the "smart" Beatle he was also a smart ass, endearing himself to many with his witty retorts. When asked to what he attributes The Beatles success John answered,� must be the weather." There John tactfully avoided a question he had probably been asked a hundred thousand times, reminding me of Dylan in Don�t Look Back when he�s being interviewed by the Time magazine guy. Or in front of the British Royal Family when Lennon asked;� Will the people in the cheaper seats clap your hands? And the rest of you, if you'll just rattle your jewelry� leaving the crowd in laughter. I think this is on one of the Anthologies actually. Lennon was just the "smart" Beatle by his public persona, but musically he was the artistic Beatle. John was the artist, he created the depth and meaning in what The Beatles produced. Lennon wrote the deeper songs, more profound songs. Lennon was typical of the atypical, he was a genius. Of what McCartney created one can not argue against the merit that �Yesterday�or "Eleanor Rigby� deserve for they are great,deep songs, and were done almost solely by McCartney. However, in some situations Lennon was helpful, even vital, to a song of McCartneys to succeed. Take for example the �Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band� album which is often considered one of the greatest albums of all time. The album is usually credited to Paul, as his baby. But, if one examines the songs true author they would see that Lennon was no slouch, creating: �Strawberry Fields Forever�, �Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds�,� Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite�, Good Morning, Good Morning�, and a probably the best Beatles song ever, �A Day in the Life.�. Lennon is more transcendent than McCartney. Johns greatest achievements with the Beatles were probably: "You've Got to Hide Your Love Away", "In My Life", "Norwegian Wood", "A Day in the Life", "Stawberry Fields Forever", and "Across the Universe." McCartney�s solo career continues today, but the majority of it is crap. As far as music of any quality from the solo McCartney one has to look back many years. Look back all the way to,�Maybe I'm Amazed" and the first few years of his solo career. And as far as the McCartney blunders go, can anyone forgive him for that hideous duet with Michael Jackson, "Say Say Say?" Lennon�s solo career was consistent throughout. From the beginning of his solo years Lennon put out classics like "Imagine" , "Jealous Guy.", and the haunting �Mother� This continued to the end of his career with "Instant Karma", "Happy Xmas (War is Over)",and "Watching the Wheels" off his final album "Double Fantasy." Without Paul, John did very well on his own. Paul, without John, did not fare so well. Some people think the �Double Fantasy� album was a bit cheesy, but at the time it was a great record, and still is in my humble opinion. Which reminds me, I should pick it up again. Anyway that is my take on the whole debate, now that I�ve taken up an hour of work time working on this, I should get back to work. Now get out and buy the �Plastic Ono Band� album and listen to it alongside Paul McCartneys� �Ram� album and see which has more soul to it.

Next up, why the Rolling Stones were cooler (key word "were") than the Beatles, and why the Kinks were cooler than anyone.

I�m out�

before & after