For me it is Paul.
Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
I vote Brian.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
Ringo.
Posted by breyerchic04 (Member # 6423) on :
George
Actually I'll be nice and vote John.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
I find myself liking Paul's songs better. But John was the cooler dude.
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ben: I vote Brian.
Just to check out the late night record shop?
Posted by prolixshore (Member # 4496) on :
That is so impulsive.
--ApostleRadio
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Pete.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
quote:Originally posted by Javert: Ringo.
Ditto.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
George. Definitely.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I vote Linda.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
If anyone votes Yoko, I say we all whistle them.
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
quote:Originally posted by prolixshore: That is so impulsive.
--ApostleRadio
I'd say compulsive, or, possibly, insane.
Posted by Luet13 (Member # 9274) on :
The correct order is John, George, Ringo, and Paul.
Posted by Telperion the Silver (Member # 6074) on :
John Paul
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I think overall I'd vote Paul.
John loses purely on the fact that he even dated Yoko, to say nothing about marrying her, and even having a child with her.
His doing so while married does nothing to help his status IMO.
Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
quote:Originally posted by Primal Curve:
quote:Originally posted by Ben: I vote Brian.
Just to check out the late night record shop?
Yep.
Posted by SenojRetep (Member # 8614) on :
Generally I like John better, but it's hard to beat Paul on "The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews."
We are talking about epistles, right?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
The Apostle Ringo?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I vote Yoko, because no one's ever whistled me.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by Luet13: The correct order is John, George, Ringo, and Paul.
Nah, it's George, John, Paul, Ringo.
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
I don't care -- together, they were magic.
Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
John = better artist, but Paul's probably a nicer person.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: I vote Yoko, because no one's ever whistled me.
What makes you think so?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: I vote Yoko, because no one's ever whistled me.
I stick my tongue out at you instead. Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by plaid: John = better artist, but Paul's probably a nicer person.
I dunno... they say death can do wonders for the disposition.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Uprooted: I don't care -- together, they were magic.
You misspelled "are".
Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
For me it was always John - the better singer, the dark, troubled geniius, the better wordsmith. But Paul was the more stable one, and probably the nicer guy.
Posted by JonHecht (Member # 9712) on :
I actually like Ringo's voice the most but he is a horrible writer... not to mention he can't actually sing that well, ie whenever Paul and John wrote a song for him they had to be very careful with the notes.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote: I vote Yoko, because no one's ever whistled me. ......
What makes you think so?
Is that a confession?
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
I've whistled at you. Does that count?
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
SenojRetep, I was so with you on that one. It surprised me when Beatles member's names started getting mentioned. By the way, I am starting to really like Paul's writings, but I much perfer the other ones for shear unpolished faith. Wish we had more from them.
As for the Beatles? John until he got involved with Yoko and became Loco.
Posted by Heffaji (Member # 3669) on :
I'm with Stu.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I love John... He reminds me of Kaoru... *retro crush*
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
A thousand times John. I've never understood how anyone could not say John. The world makes no sense to me. The world is full of strange alien creatures who say things like "Paul." And I have to think: Am *I* the crazy one?!
They were both at their best, though, together.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
From what I remember, Paul was the only one with any real musical training--and therefore wrote most of the music for the band. John was a lyricist with a pretty voice.
George's songs are my favorite on the whole, though.
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
I don't think it's correct that Paul wrote most of the music for the band. Everything I've heard contradicts that, in the sense that it was mostly a joint effort, and any attempt to give one or the other credit for a specific role is probably flawed. There were a lot of songs mainly written by Paul, and a lot mainly written by John, but not really one moreso than the other, and a lot of songs were collaborations. I recently read a book about them that seemed relatively well-researched.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by TL: A thousand times Paul. I've never understood how anyone could not say Paul. The world makes no sense to me. The world is full of strange alien creatures who say things like "John." And I have to think: Am *I* the crazy one?!
They were both at their best, though, together.
Fixed that for you.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Paul. Paul. Paul!
Posted by Frisco (Member # 3765) on :
"The world is split into two kinds of people, those who would go out for a drink with John Lennon, and those who'd choose Paul McCartney....After the Beatles came back from India, Lennon wrote Happiness Is a Warm Gun and McCartney wrote Ob-La-Di. End of argument." --Paul Bettany
Me...I'm a George guy. But happy 65th anyway, Paul!
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
quote:Fixed that for you.
Kind of uncool.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
*resets TL's humormometer*
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:"The world is split into two kinds of people, those who would go out for a drink with John Lennon, and those who'd choose Paul McCartney....After the Beatles came back from India, Lennon wrote Happiness Is a Warm Gun and McCartney wrote Ob-La-Di. End of argument." --Paul Bettany
Precisely...
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
"There are two kinds of people in the world. The ones that think there are two kinds of people in the world, and the ones that know better."
And I vote George all the way. Second to that is Ringo, but only because he was the only one that wanted to take Nowhere Man on the sub.
Posted by JonHecht (Member # 9712) on :
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen:
quote:"The world is split into two kinds of people, those who would go out for a drink with John Lennon, and those who'd choose Paul McCartney....After the Beatles came back from India, Lennon wrote Happiness Is a Warm Gun and McCartney wrote Ob-La-Di. End of argument." --Paul Bettany
Precisely...
Indeed, who cannot choose Ob-La-Di. Posted by Luet13 (Member # 9274) on :
Me. Happiness is a Warm Gun is one of my favorite songs.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by vonk: "There are two kinds of people in the world. The ones that think there are two kinds of people in the world, and the ones that know better."
I've been quoted!
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
The first time I saw that line was, I think, in the early 90's. I believe it was in daily newspaper comic. Maybe 'Pickles'.
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
I'm pretty sure the first (and only) time I heard(read) it was in a Tom Robbins book. Sorry Lisa.
ETA: and I think it was Still Life with Woodpecker, which was published in 1980.
[ June 19, 2007, 04:13 PM: Message edited by: vonk ]
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
Is Tom Robbins worth reading? I know, I know -- that might be a dumb question. But I'm looking for something to read and it suddenly occurs to me that he has a fairly awesome reputation. Any specific books?
(Also, just to stay on topic: John again.)
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
Yes! Yes yes yes! My favorites are Another Roadside Attraction and Even Cowgirls Get the Blues followed very closely by Jitterbug Perfume. They each deal with mysticism, religion and its affect on society, women's issues, pop culture, un-pop culture, history and just about everything else. Very very good stuff, I highly recomend it.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
I guess I didn't come up with that line after all, because I loveStill Life with Woodpecker. I wasn't wild about Cowgirls, and I haven't read the others, but Woodpecker is kind of like The Princess Bride on crack. Good crack, though.
I remember "Wait for Baby!" and the two mantras, but I didn't remember that the two kinds of people thing was from that book. I have to reread it.
Posted by vonk (Member # 9027) on :
SLwW was the first one I read, and I also love it. It's a pretty good intro to his work, but it doesn't deal with some of the topics I find most interesting in his other work, like religion, and to be honest, Lee Cheri gets a little annoying towards the end. You might want to try some of his others. If you didn't like ECGtB, you probably won't like ARA either, but Jitterbug or Firece Invalids Home from Hot Climates might be more along the lines of what you liked in SLwW. (particluarly Jitterbug)
Also, the two kinds of people line may have come from another TR book, but I'm sure I heard it from him.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
John was much better musically. Paul is catchy but substanceless musically, mostly. Without John the Beatles would never have been an important band. Paul is ear-candy. John is the real musical light of the group. George was also pretty awesome. Ringo was extremely lucky. My order is John, George, Paul, Ringo.
Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
George? Are you kidding? have you heard his stuff after the first couple of solo years? It's terrible.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cashew: George? Are you kidding? have you heard his stuff after the first couple of solo years? It's terrible.
Yeah George went on this binge of Indian music and kept trying to get it put in the Beatle albums.
I love Indian music, just not right next to Beatles music.
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
I'm with Tatiana exactly. Even if the only song George ever wrote was 'My Sweet Lord' that makes him a slight favorite over Paul in my mind. What a beautiful song.
I like it when people write music that, as Morrissey would say, says something to me about my life.
Paul just didn't do that a whole heck of a lot. To me, a lot of Paul's stuff is kind of cringeworthy, what with all the sap and the molasses. It's like the instant the Beatles were over he turned into, I dunno, sapmaster McCartney or something. Wings?
The man's music just doesn't speak to me. He needed John to be good. He needed to be balanced by the challenge of another, darker, human mind. And he didn't have that (it seems to me) after The Beatles.
Now, when I apply the same argument to John, what I find myself thinking is that John Lennon's solo stuff was musically not as interesting as Beatles music, but in terms of saying something, it was probably better. And that might be because John *did* go on with the challenge of another mind in his life. (And I'm speaking in terms of creative collaboration here.) Of course I mean Yoko. I think 'O Yoko' is a more beautiful love song than I've ever heard Paul do. Or 'Beautiful Boy (Darling Boy)' or even 'Jealous Guy'.
That was sap done right. Because it dug into something more specific than big mooney-eyed love too deep to express without using words so vague (love, forever) that they really meant nothing. He was writing about his family and his lif--
You know what? That's what it boils down to. To me, the difference between Paul and John is not in talent or songwriting ability. Pick either one. Put them together or tear them apart; you'll have two of the greatest songwriters who ever lived. The difference is honesty.
John was honest. John bore everything. John ripped out his soul and put it on the table. Paul wrote 'Ob-la-di, Ob-la-da.'
Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
Quoting TL: "Even if the only song George ever wrote was 'My Sweet Lord' that makes him a slight favorite over Paul in my mind. What a beautiful song."
But "My Sweet Lord" was ripped off (subconsciosly or not) from the Chiffons' "He's So Fine". George lost a lawsuit over it in the late 70s.
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
*Listening* - They do sound a lot alike. Similar tunes. Yes. That doesn't negate the beauty of 'My Sweet Lord'. I like the tune, but that was never what I was talking about when I said it was beautiful. It's the meaning of what Harrison is singing about -- that yearning for a connection with God -- that longing for a deeper meaning. I feel that. I relate to that. It's goes a bit deeper than 'He's So Fine'.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
Yeah, and "Here Comes the Sun" and "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" and even "I'm Happy Just to Dance With You". George was a fantastic songwriter and musician.
I've actually had 3 favorite Beatles in my life. When they first came out the other girls in my neighborhood loved Paul, I think because he was the cutest, while I, for reasons I can no longer remember, loved George. The Beatles were huge for us when I was 5, 6, 7, 8 around that time. I had Beatles posters on my wall and the AM radio that we listened to all the time played the Beatles more than any other group. It was ridiculous because often 7 or 8 of the top ten songs would be Beatles songs. I had Beatles 45s (small vinyl records played at higher speed) that we played again and again. I had dreams about meeting the Beatles and them coming to our neighborhood to hang out. One day when I was 6 or 7 I dreamed that I loved Paul best, and when I woke up it was true. I was a Paul fan for the next however many years, I forget exactly, because I liked the simple sweet songs like I've Just Seen a Face, Yesterday, Let It Be, The Long and Winding Road, Mother Nature's Son, Your Mother Should Know, etc.
But at some point as I got more musically mature, I realized that the most interesting stuff musically was always John (and to a lesser extent George). Glass Onion, I Am the Walrus, Sexy Sadie, Happiness is a Warm Gun, In My Life, and so on. I came to realize that the musical heart of the Beatles was John. He was why they were so good. Paul could write sweet songs, but without John, Paul was just sappy. John was the one who made it matter. He had "it".
[ June 20, 2007, 07:15 AM: Message edited by: Tatiana ]
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
John Lennon makes stupid hearts fly over my head. He also looked vaguely Japanese. i never understand why as he was born in England. John was just soooooooo cool and had a great voice and was just awesome. So I totally agree with folks praising on John Lennon
Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
Point taken, TL. I always found John the 'real artist', the deeper, darker, and therefore more interesting of the two (him and Paul), and the strength of his devotion to his family that was his life during the last part of it, basically surrendering his career (at least that part of it) for them struck a chord with me too. The thing everybody always said about the Beatles, after they broke up, was that the band was always greater than the sum of its parts. They made each other better, in other words. Having said that, Paul wrote some GREAT songs. John was the edgy one, the darker, more tormented, probably more intellectual one, while Paul was the more 'ordinary guy'. And he's a great bass player too. I love both their stuff, even George's stuff while he was with them. JUST THE BEST BAND EVER.
Posted by IanO (Member # 186) on :
probably gonna get killed for this, but....
quote:John was honest. John bore everything. John ripped out his soul and put it on the table.
...And yet he was such a loser Dad to his son Julian. I have a problem with people who can't seem to be caring parents to ALL their children, and yet then are hailed as so profoundly ethically enlightened. Kids need love, appreciation, acceptance, and encouragement. In those terms, it's not that hard. Giving it to one child (Sean) but not the other smacks of...something.
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: I had Beatles 45s (small vinyl records played at higher speed) that we played again and again.
Oh, no. Have I gotten so old that I didn't even know we have to define terms like "45s" now?
Posted by NotMe (Member # 10470) on :
I'd go with George. I won't even bother posting in the other thread, because Eric Clapton is the only person alive today who is allowed to play While My Guitar Gently Weeps.
Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
NotMe, have you heard the Jeff Healy Band's version of While My Guitar Gently Weeps?? It's appalling, should be retitled While My Guitar Hysterically Shrieks!
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
Uprooted, would high school kids today ever have seen one or know they existed? I just figured they needed to be defined. Maybe I'm wrong.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)