You can now buy our e-book 'Smile Away - The Alan's Album Archives Guide To The Music Of Paul McCartney' by clicking here!
The Lovely Linda/That Would Be Something/Valentine Day/Every Night/Hot As Sun-Glasses/Junk/Man We Was Lonely/Oo You/Momma Miss America/Teddy Boy/Singalong Junk/Maybe I’m Amazed/Kreen-Akore
Paul McCartney “McCartney” (1970)
'Don't
cry little baby don't cry, daddy's gonna sing you thirteen reasons why'
The dream is over – but nobody (the fans, the band)
quite wanted to believe it at the time. Where do you go after being The
Beatles, travelling the world multiple times over and touching everyone’s lives
in some significant way (whether they weanted them to or not?) Well, if you’re
George you finally get the chance to showcase all those songs you’ve been
stockpiling all those years. If you’re Ringo you go to Nashville and get
drubnk, making an album on the side about your liberty. And if you’re John you
make a whole concept album about how The Beatles are over and you are free to
be yourself at last. But Paul wasn’t ready for The Beatles to end – the member
who wanted them to stay together the most, he found it hardest to let go and in
a massive irony somehow found himself vilified as the ‘man who broke up The
Beatles’ thanks to a press release including in this very album admitting that
they weren’t getting on at all well. Retreating from that world of excitement and
possibility to his London flat and/or Scottish farmhouse as the mood took him,
with a tape recorder to hand, Macca shut the door on the outside world so tight
that even his fellow Beatles (who co-owned the Apple record label alongside
him) didn’t know he was making a record. There were no studios booked to make
this record, no session musicians, nobody else at all except for Linda who
makes her first real impact on her husband’s work by singing pretty harmonies
alongside him from time to time. ‘McCartney’ is very much a solo work, intended
to show off to as many people as possible that there was life after The Beatles
and while Paul loved working with the otherts, he didn’t really need them.
The last to make a record away from the band he
always assumed he would never leave, Beatles solo albums hadn’t had a good
press in April 1970 when ‘McCartney’ came out, a few weeks ahead of ‘Let It Be’
John, George and Ringo had all released a variety of wacky solo projects
varying in taste and quality, from the impenetrable Two Virgins by John and
Yoko (although follow-up ‘Life With The Lions’ is a very under-rated and moving
affair) , the I’ve-just-bought-a-new-toy bleeping of George’s ‘Electronic
Sounds’ (although, again, George’s ‘Wonderwall’ soundtrack is well worth
hearing) to the drunken-sounding Ringo warbling through ‘Sentimental Journey’
(even if I quite like his equally drunken go at Nashville on ‘Beaucoups Of
Blues’). Yet strangely, to most modern ears who see ‘McCartney’ as one of the
highlights of the Macca canon, full of some of his deepest and greatest songs,
what’s now heralded as one of the best (if lowest budgeted) albums in his back
catalogue wasn’t always greeted with such respect. At the time 'McCartney' got
roped in with all these curios and leftovers, seen as a ‘marking time’ album
before something better came along than instrumentals and jamming sessions. Oddly,
though, time has been kind to this album – perhaps because it suffers less from
the ‘need to be with the times’ of some of the Wings and 1980s McCartney
material, or perhaps we better understand the melancholy behind the words as
Paul’s ‘thumbs aloft’ persona slips and we see the scared musician hiding in
plain sight, convinced that the world is out to get him. After all, it’s not
every album where one of the most naturally optimistic writers of his
generation suffers from depression – and yet that’s what this album is, hidden
beneath a layer of leftover songs, tape-testing instrumentals and a
characteristic grasp of melody. This helps ‘McCartney’ a lot, if you’re patient
with it. While some McCartney and Wings albums have grown podgy and old with
the passing years, attached just that bit too cutely to the time period with
which they were released, the sparse grab-bag of styles 'McCartney' could have
been released in any time period. Including one of the most turbulent years in
Macca's entire career.
Given that it was ‘McCartney’ that soaked up the bad
blood after the fallout of The Beatles, simply because of a rather badly worded
press release written by a tired Paul being grilled by Beatles press officer Peter
Brown that seemed to spell an end to the group, ‘McCartney’ is a mightily understated,
almost humble album. In its own way it’s as radical a step forward for its
creator as ‘Plastic Ono Band’ ‘All Things Must Pass’ and, yes, ‘Sentimental
Journey’, not just because it tells us so much more about Paul than he’s
usually up to telling his public but because it’s so different to all the
qualities we usually associate with Macca: production values, epicness and
effortless pop tunes. It’s the opposite, indeed, to ‘Abbey Road’ (the last
Beatle album made with a production surface sheen that can be seen from space)
and more like how the rough-and-ragged ‘Let It Be’ should have turned out. To
think that the chief creator behind the much admired ‘Abbey Road Medley’ should
go on to create this hurried, mainly instrumental one-man-show as the ‘proper’
launch to his solo career caught more than a few people on the hop and to this
day there are many Beatles fans who don’t know what to make of ‘McCartney’.
There were many more at the time who hated this album for its sheer
amateurishness - the unfinished songs, the kids giggling in the background, the
rattling pots in the kitchen - not so much because the album was bad but
because they feared that all Beatles record were about to be replaced by
half-measures such as this and ‘Two Virgins’ etc. Nowadays, of course, we know
that even Lennon was about to go all accessible and orchestral a few months
later with ‘Imagine’ and that an album like ‘McCartney’ is the exception in
Pauk’s catalogue rather than the rule – but oh what a fright it gave fans and
critics in 1970, who thought they had nothing but half-finished albums like
this to look forward to instead of the most complete and rounded group the
world had ever produced.
Fans today are used to Macca doing this
back-to-basics thing from time to time – see 1980’s 10-year-update of this
album ‘McCartney II’ and even ‘Electric Arguments’ released as ‘The Fireman’ (2009)
– and see it as a side-effect of someone that creative being held in one place
for so long. There are some fans who shrug their shoulders and don’t play these
albums very much – and others who love them to bits. Perhaps it depends on what
you’re used to (it’s interesting to keep an eye on this much-reissued album’s
critical standings every time it comes out: what confused fans at the time was
hated in the 1980s when big productions were in, adored in the 1990s when big
productions were out and has largely gone back to confusing people again, the
deluxe re-issue of this album trounced by most reviewers compared to sister set
‘Mccartney II’). There’s been a bit of a backlash against the more
‘over-produced’ sounds of the 1970s/80s of late, something that’s done more
lasting damage to the reputation of prog rockers than any number of punk rock
groups could and many of Macca’s embellished Wings albums have come in for more
stick than most. But ‘McCartney’, for all its primitiveness, sounds like it
could be an album from the current decade, more or less anyway, and with no
production values as such or any desperate need to be ‘with it’ or
contemporary, ‘McCartney’ hasn’t dated anything like as badly as, say, ‘Wings
At The Speed Of Sound’. To many curious Beatles fans who want to know more
about Paul’s work, ‘McCartney’ is often the first stop simply became first
(though don’t worry, not every album will sound like this one!) Now that we
know its an experiment rather than an album that just sounds like the others
and that it contains arguably Paul’s greatest ever solo non-single ‘Maybe I’m
Amazed’ ’McCartney’ is still perhaps more fondly remembered by a lot more fans
than Paul’s other solo albums. Never, then, has the reputation of a Beatles
album changed so drastically over the years – and never has my job been more
difficult for reconciling the two sides together.
Suffice to say, there are plenty of reasons for this
album’s greatness and also for its weakness. And they all happen to be because
of the same thing – this album’s lo-fi status irritates as many fans as it
pleases and the tape-testing instrumentals are often just a means to pad out an
album otherwise full of excellent songs. Looking at it another way, though,
this Paul McCartney seems much more real, especially when singing about his
Beatle-induced depression or resentment and the fact that each ‘main’ song
comes with its own palette-cleaning teaser makes the half album that is trying
to think deep thoughts seem ever deeper. You just have to be patient with an
album like this one, to understand that it isn’t going to be a solid work of
genius all the way through but an eccentric album where naturallhy eccentric
B-sides and world-beating A-sides mesh together on the same slab of vinyl.
There are plenty of ‘excuses’ for how this album
turned out. It seems odd to think now he’s made flippin g twenty-two of them
(plus six classical pieces and a dozen other things besides) but Paul had never
ever filled an album on his own before this one. Well, he had written the
classical soundtrack for the Hayley Mills ‘Family Way’ film I guess, but that
was mostly George Martin’s doing and runs mighty short anyway. While George –
the Beatle who was writing songs at a phenomenal rate but was never allowed as
many per record as John and Paul – had no problem filling up an album of songs,
John and Paul had always been able to share the workload between them and after
giving up his best material to ‘Let It Be’ and ‘Abbey Road’ (while John was
sneakily holding on to much of his) he found he had not much left to give and
not much inspiration yet to write more. No wonder Macca ends up going back to
so many old songs across this album: ‘Hot As Sun’ was first written back when
he was a teenager, busked – like ‘When I’m 64’ – when the electricity went out
at The Cavern. ‘Teddy Boy’ was suggested for ‘Let It Be’ and had been kicking
round at least a year. ‘Every Night’ – or at any rate a rough first draft of it
– was similarly old and The Beatles busked this one during ‘Let It Be’ rehearsals
too. ‘Junk’ was written for ‘The White Album’ (though oddly The Beatles never
rehearsed it). Together with the instrumental version of it on the album’s
second side that makes five of the thirteen songs ‘oldies’. When you realize
that four songs are either instrumentals or song fragments used to check the
tape recorder was working that doesn’t exactly say a lot for ‘McCartney’ as a
vehicle for Paul’s creativity.And yet it is. ‘Maybe I’m Amazed’ is many
people’s favourite ‘Paul’ songs for several good reasons – mostly that it
sounds so ‘real’. The Beatles were wrong to spurn ‘Every Night’ (though perhaps
not ‘Teddy Boy’) because that song isn’t far behind, raising the emotional
stakes much higher than usual. ‘Man We Was Lonely’ is a fascinating attempt to
write what would normally a lovely merry commercial McCartney song, but making
it clear in the lyrics that these are fixed grins, staring through real tears.
‘Junk’ may not be that deep (and we certainly don’t need it twice), but it is a
very lovely song. ‘Oo You’, a fiery instrumental given lyrics at the eleventh
hour, is a lovely blast of ‘Get Back’ style primitiveness. And I put it to you,
dear reader, that the fascinating ‘Momma Miss America’ is more than mere album
filler as its often supposed and is actually one of the best AAA instrumentals
of all, daring and epic in its scope. Not a bad return for an album made
effectively as a set of home demos.
Paul wanted to keep this album a secret, partly to
avoid all the shenanigans going on with Apple and to keep music ‘fun’ rather
than just a business proposition and partly because he knew that, as the Beatle
who publicly most wanted to keep the group together, releasing a solo record
would be a clear indicator that the band were no more. Lennon had famously
declared his intention to end the group at the end of 1969 but the news wasn’t
common knowledge yet and even the few fans who knew it didn’t want it to be
true so just ignored it. The last straw with this timid, understated album came
when Paul learned that the abandoned Beatles project ‘Let It Be’ had been
revived without his consultation and was coming out at the same time as
‘McCartney’, a move seemingly designed to hurt sales. (It also prompted
McCartney in a very uncharacteristic display of violence towards Ringo, who had
been sent round as peacemaker – it’s to Ringo’s credit that he took one look at
how distraught his friend was and promptly moved his ‘Sentimental Journey’
album into the slot instead). The end result was that no one at Apple even knew
he was making an album until Paul sent this one round to be mastered, on the
strict understanding that no one change a note (he and Linda even sent in the
finished cover art together, their first collaborative effort in that sense too).
We all know the story now – Paul and Linda as animal
activists, far more at home in the countryside than they ever were in towns,
raising a farm and a family singlehanded while keeping the British music industry
alive with regular releases.But back in 1970 Paul’s move to the country and his
run-down Mull Of Kintyre farm was unprecedented by any rock star of the day and
age, not least the fact that Paul was the only Beatle to stay in London during
the mid-60s while his three colleagues moved to sleepy Surrey. But then Paul
wasn’t really in control of his life at this point, having seen the band he had
effectively been running since 1967 fall apart and his closest friends tear him
apart in a sea of business papers and acrimony. It’s that feeling of betrayal
and sudden unexpected loneliness that’s at the core of this timid little album.
Not for McCartney the same feeling of freedom and escape heard on sister albums
by John or George; instead man Paul is lonely and he’s effectively just become
unemployed from the best ob the business ever had to offer. What the hell does
he do next? You see, all these decades of books about the Beatle fallout later,
its easy to forget that they weren’t just his musician colleagues. The Beatles
were seen by many who knew them in the 1960s as ‘the four-headed monster’
(copyright Eric Burdon) and were arguably as close in the mid-1960s period as
its possible for a band to get. When the Beatles fell apart, Paul didn’t just
lose his empire and outlet for songs, he lost his best friends as well – not to
mention income when Allen Klein’s appointment as manager tied up all available
assets for all the Beatles, leaving them back to the levels they’d been living
off in 1966.
Paul hadn’t just lost ‘The Beatles’ either but
seemingly much of The Beatles’ fanbase, blamed for being ‘the bad guy’ by suing
the other three (though it wasn’t what it seemed: the only Beatle who didn’t
want to be managed by future tax-dodging criminal Allen Klein, he was trying to
protect their assets the only way he legally could). Paul was really suffering
in this period, having gone from hero to zero overnight and pilloried in the
press as the man who didn’t care enough about The Beatles to save them. As we
now know with hindsight, Paul was the last one to say he wanted to leave The
Beatles (indeed he’s never said it; Ringo had left as early as 1968 during The
White Album, George during ‘Let It Be’ and John even called a business meeting
in 1969 to announce the fact that the band was over, before he got asked to
keep quiet). However it was when McCartney, the band’s biggest supporter, said it
was over that everyone kenw it was – and he announced it by accident almost, a
tired and emotional Paul answering a series of questions offered him by press
secretary Derek Taylor who was coming up with everything he thought the public
would want to know, including inevitably ‘When are The Beatles getting back
together?’ Macca’s comment, that he couldn’t see it happening due to ‘business
reasons, personal reasons, but most of all because I prefer spending time with
my family’ seemed to the largely ignorant public like a big announcement;
instead it was Paul forgetting that the rest of the world didn’t know the full
story and the splits behind the seams.
Paul had after all no management figure to look
after him, while the others had Klein (who was in truth more of an attack dog
than a manager). Even when Lennon announced he wanted to leave the others
didn’t take him seriously (Lennon had also claimed he was the reincarnation of
Jesus six months before and rarely stuck to his guns once he’d made a
decision). But Paul’s decision was different – the cheerleader of the final
Beatles days didn’t make the decision as lightly as the others and there was no
question of talking him out of it in the way that Lennon, Harrison and Starr
had been. Paul, even more than the others, thrived on the adulation of his fan
base and the respect his songs received from people he admired and being seen,
largely erroneously, as the man who ‘broke up The Beatles’ damaged his career
path more damage than anything else before or since. When Paul recorded this
album, he wasn’t even sure if he’s have an audience any more, never mind one as
big as the group’s following had been. On the surface, it seemed as if there
was no point him getting out of bed to record at all and many of the ‘songs’ on
this album reflect that in their half-made, spurt-of-enthusiasm spate. There’s
certainly less thought put into this album than any of the McCartney epics over
the next decade or so, but that’s to do his best songs on the album a
disservice – after all, Paul had always written, before he ever got an audience
and before he even had Lennon as a writing partner, and almost despite himself
many of his best songs ‘came through’ during this period where he needed that
confidence in himself most.
Paul has often talked of this period of his life as
being ‘close to a nervous breakdown’ and even in the deluxd edition seems
compelled tokeep mentioning how ‘up’ he felt despite everything, but if you
listen to a song like ‘Every Night’ then its clear that Paul almost certainly was
having a nervous breakdown. He was struggling to get out of bed. He couldn’t
see the point in bathing or shaving (Paul invented most things, maybe he
invented the hipster full bearded look here too). He was drinking far more
heavily than he ever had in his life before. He became a hermit, seeing no one
except Linda and his children and the odd nany or staff member. The most famous
man in the world who would be welcomed almost anywhere was hiding away in a
remote Scottish farmhouse hoping that nobody would find him. And to top it all
there was suddenly a rumour flying round, made up by Beatles fans, that he was
dead (and had been an ‘imposter’) since 1966. At the time he probably felt like
one. With no job, no mates to see at work and the knowledge that any money he
made from his music would be tied up in business battles for years anyway, a
lesser man than Paul McCartney would have given up then and there, even if
temporarily. 'McCartney' is a much darker record than many give it credit for:
'Every Night' wonders why the narrator bothers to get up at all, depressed and
bed-bound 'just resting my mind', processing the un-processable. 'Man We Was
Lonely' is sung with wild cheer and has an upbeat chorus just to confuse us,
but it's really a devestating song, with Paul - one of the most naturally
cheery positive people on the planet - 'hard pressed to find a smile'. 'Junk'
is a tale of being forgotten and abandoned, the narrator cataloguing the
rubbish that's around him either because he too has been left to rot unloved
and unforgotten or because a partnership he so cherished is being left to
gather dust before it had the chance to use half the ideas in Mccartney's
imagination.
'Maybe I'm Amazed' may sound like the ultimate
lighters-aloft torch ballad nowadays, but at its core its the most scared and
humble Paul has ever been: a love song not between equal partners for once but
a depressed man who thinks he can offer nothing in shock that someone he so
admires wants to be with him out of everybody in the male half of the
population. This song made such an impact because it sounds so real – in the
context of an album of half finished songs all the more profound and deep for
this life-altering frealisation. Even 'Teddy Boy' isn't quite as sweet and
charming as it seems on the surface: it's a tale of sacrifice between parent
and child, neither quite realising all that the other is doing for them and
considering that each person's love is a one-way street. Even some of the
(many) instrumentals and jam sessions sound dirty and nasty: check out the
grunge guitarwork on 'Oo You' which virtually comes with a grimace (especially
the 'Don't Cry Baby' instrumental version on the deluxe re-issue before the deliberately
silly words were added to soften the blow), the scary guitar howl of pain near
the middle of 'Momma Miss America' that turns a laidback song into a grooving
piece of primal art or the sinister cowboys-shooting-doomed-indians feel of
'Kreen-Akore', a wild primal instinctive chase rather than a bedtime story. 'McCartney'
has partly dated so well and done so well with the fanbase because its not just
the throwaway, test-the-tape-recorders set the album's critics always made it
out to be: there's a very scared, betrayed musician at the heart of this LP
whose so unsure of what others think of him that he's forced to make a whole LP
on his own 'just in case' what everyone says is right and he can’t blame its
success or failure on anyone but himself - a world away from the with-it
creative genius of the second half of The Beatles' career. The difference is
that, unlike Lennon on his 'Plastic Ono Band' LP of the same year, much of the
grieving and worry was done in private not with close friends and the analysis
and worry isn’t on the surface but is 'hidden' skilfully across the LP,
squirrelled away in between the older happier songs ('Hot As Sun', the
dementedly cheery instrumental from the late 1950s) and the bouncy
instrumentals ('Valnetine Day').
There’s another big influence on this album of
course and that’s Linda Eastman, who comes into her own as McCartney's main and
greatest muse in this period, after inspiring a handful of songs on both 'Let
It Be' and 'Abbey Road'. The pair had only just met in 1967 and only marriedin
March 1969, about a year before this album was in the shops, but already Paul
had overhauled his lifestyle completely, getting rid of the bachelor flat he’d
bought while breaking up from Jane Asher and ignoring the groupies outside calling
to him who he’d always found time for. Give or take the delightful ‘Two Of Us’
on ‘Let It Be’ and the ‘nowhere to go’ passage on ‘You Never Give Me Your
Money’ plus the breezy 'Oh Darlin' (written in the 50s style Paul knew would
please her), this album is full of Paul’s first love songs to Linda. Just as
John’s ‘Plastic Ono Band’ is only about John until you scratch the surface (and
see that it’s really about his love for Yoko as his only grip on reality now
that stardom and Beatlehood have let him down), so ‘McCartney’ is a love album
masquerading as a confessional breakdown. Paul wrote many many fine love songs
for Linda between 1969 and her death in 1998, but never did he top his first
‘proper’ love song for her ‘Maybe I’m Amazed’. Linda was useful in other ways
too: she tool the phorographs, did the artwork and even booked the few studios
used in the making of this record (for a few overdubs) so that it would be in
her name, not his. She adds some lovely harmonies too, with ‘Man We Was Lonely’
only her second ever time in front of a tape recorder (‘Let It Be’s title track
was the first and her only Beatle appearance). However her biggest role is
cheerleader: when Paul had lost confidence in everything, she was his
springboard who said ‘it’s great dear but how about…’, a role she’ll fulfil
more than ever on their next LP. In this long dark tea time of the soul, Paul
really did feel as if only had Linda on his side and it would be a while before
he got most of his fans back on board too.
A few other people this album seems aimed towards
are the other Beatles. No, not in a Lennon-gloating 'how do you sleep?' sense
(although the answers to that question will come on 'Ram' and less
aggressiverly on 'Wildlife') but in the fact that Paul finally puts his money
where his mouth is. Much of the bad blood between the Beatles in the later
years that wasn't caused directly by Apple, Allen Klein or Yoko came from
Paul's increasing control over the arrangements of his own songs. While Lennon
gave up caring how his songs turned out as long as Yoko liked them, Paul cared
more and spent ages getting George or Ringo to play exactly how he wanted them
to (he gave up on John). On 'McCartney' he can at last record a whole album
'his' way beginning to end and go 'see - I told you I was right' (because
Paul's musical decisions, such a mixture on later albums, are nearly all
spot-on for this one). John may have called his own first work a 'solo' album
and in many ways it was more so with every track filled with Lennon from beginning
to end rather than teddy-boy characters and junkyards. However he still needed
the help of Ringo and Klaus Voormann to make it; the more instinctively musical
McCartney doesn't need anyone else, even with the odd pang of doubt about whether
anybody needs him at all and can finally give way to that ‘but I have the
arrangement already in my head and it sounds great so gee just play it like
that fellas’ mentality he was long accused of. People often talk about how good
Paul's drumming is on ‘Band On The Run’ considering he only learnt the
instrument second-hand in between piano, guitar and bass and he is. However if
anything it’s better here – all the more so considering that the drums would be
more often than not laid down first (that crack by Lennon about Ringo 'not
being the best drummer in the world because he's not even the best drummer in
The Beatles isn't far wrong). His bass and piano playing are also, of course,
as good as they've always been,. But what impresses me most on this album is
his guitar playing, which manages to be as tough as John's but as melodic as
George's, with a hard-to-get sound that's just the right side of feedback and
distortion and which drives knives through the mix when needed, though by and
large the sound is used sparingly. That’s especially true of that tear-jerking
solo on ‘Maybe I’m Amazed’, that ‘guitar in the distance’ squeal on ‘Momma Miss
America’ and those stinging grungy chords on ‘Oo You’. Paul started off as the
lead guitarist in The Beatles before flubbing his first ever solo in concert
and being more or less replaced with George straight away - in many ways
'McCartney', the first post-Beatles McCartney album, makes amends in the best
way possible and seems to take revenge on a band that once spurned him. ‘See’, says
Paul, responding to comments in the press that the other Beatles are going to
carry on without him, ‘you might be able to do it without me, but I can do
everything without you’.
The end result is an album that's many things to
many people. Those who love Paul at his deepest creative best will have bought
the album to hear 'Maybe I'm Amazed' and probably discovered 'Every Night' as a
welcome bonus in the same vein. Those who like the rockier side of McCartney's
art will wonder why he doesn't do songs like 'Oo You' and 'That Would Be
Something' more often. Fans of the glorious McCartney ballad will be singing
along to both versions of 'Junk' long after the album has finished. I'd be
surprised if there are many fans of the McCartney music hall idiom, but 'Man We
Was Lonely' is in there for them too. Against all odds, just when McCartney's
confidence was at his lowest, his writing style comes into its own: he can
offer a rounded, verstaile, mercurial album in a way that none of his Beatle
colleagues could ever manage (superb as ‘Lennon/Plastic Ono Band’ and ‘All
Things Must Pass’ are, they are similar more or less all the way through)
because even at his lowest ebb McCartney remains a natural musical genius. So
much of this album is deliberately written to be throwaway (almost defensively,
because anything Paul puts out in this year of woe will get kicked to death
anyway) and personally I'd still take a more developed, 'finished' record like
'Ram' or 'London Town' over this as an example of Macca at his very best. But
even at his silliest, most off-handedly wilfully deliberately empty, McCartney
still has too much to say to be truly silent. There’s just one thing that lets
this album down (well that and the large pile of instrumentals). Usually
McCartney albums run together with some skill, thanks to multiple late night
and a tape recorder trying out what songs lie well together. For me the
‘McCartney’ album has always got it slightly wrong, never quite getting the
perfect balance between deep tracks and filler jamming sessions. Well,
actually, that’s not true: like many of you the copy of this album was the
cheap re-issue on cassette that rather than have a gap at the end of one side
switched the songs around to become more ‘even’. Usually this is a travesty (especially
when hacking up Moody Blues concept albums), but that version of the album
really works, with fewer violent switches in mood and tempo (the tracks on this
version are: 12, 7, 9, 10, 6, 11/13, 1, 2, 4, 3, 8, 5).
The
Songs:
[1] ‘The Lovely Linda’ is, fittingly, the opening track and sums up
the album quite neatly. On the one hand, its a thirty-second song improvised on
the spot in order for Paul to test the tapes and see if they’re working, with
even in that short space of time a rather repetitive tune and lyrics. On the
other it’s a sheer delight, with a daft singalong melody that even in haste
reveals what an all-round songsmith McCartney was and is, with simple but never
cloying lyrics about his new wife. The embarrassed giggle at the end says it all
– this track was never written for public consumption and is more of a laugh to
show off to the missus, but many fans love this track – especially after
Linda’s ‘rehabilitation’ in the eyes of the press somewhere around the mid-1970s
– as its so charmingly dottily brilliant. Nobody else would allow such a
throwaway as this as the opening track of such an important debut LP – and at
the same time, nobody else would infuse it with so much promise and
detail. You know where this song is
coming from: Paul is admiring the way his wife looks with flowers in her hair
and there’s really nothing more he needs to say on the subject. ‘The Lovely
Linda’ will never be song of the year, but its very sweetness and lightness of
touch make it far more successful than any of McCartney’s epic over-polished and
pretentious attempts at getting hits ([90] ‘Let ‘Em In’, [173] ‘Say Say Say’ [169]
‘Ebony and Ivory’, etc). And that’s despite the amount of noises going on in
the background from Paul’s whistling kids. If only Paul had got round to
actually finishing the song after testing his tapes we might have been in for a
masterpiece (he promises on the press release for the album that ‘it is a
trailer to the full song that will be recorded later’ and did admit years later
that the original draft ‘descended into Spanish and became a Mariachi thing’...
forty-nine years on from release I would say that it’s overdue!)
[2] ‘That Would Be Something’ is a surprising second song as,
despite being longer, its not really more of a finished piece than ‘Lovely
Linda’. It is a lot of fun, however, with Macca putting on his best deep growl
for the song and getting truly eccentric on the drums. This is the last in the
great trilogy of songs where Linda equals escape, along with ‘Two Of Us’ and ‘You
Never Give Me Your Money’. Macca often mentions in interviews how, tired and
tied to a schedule with endless Beatles meetings, Linda encouraged Paul to go
away with her in a car and a couple of dogs somewhere, anywhere, to ‘get lost’
and just enjoy life without looking at a clock. Everybody thinks ‘Two Of Us’ is
about John and Paul, but its actually about Paul and Linda, ‘going nowhere’ on
their way home from one of these trips. It’s easy to see ‘That Would Be
Something’ as another jam written on a guitar thrown in the back of a car and
it’s a song of longing for something bad to be over, so that Paul can run away
and meet his beloved ‘in the pouring rain’. Most fans would be hard pressed to
recognise this song as being by their idol, what with the back-to-basics
approach and huskier-then-normal vocal, as if Paul is shedding every last
association with The Beatles, although the unusual guitar tuning and wide
circular tune which ties up all its loose ends by the end is prime Macca. There
aren’t many lines to this song, which one of the shortest and simplest of all
in Paul’s canon, but the scattered line ‘That would be something, to meet you
in the fallen rain’ is interesting for lots of reasons – one because the
‘fallen rain’ is symbolic of Paul’s troubled time in the late 1960s when he was
waiting to meet Linda afterwards and escape it all; the second because ‘rain’
should be a negative image but is turned into a positive here, just as in ‘You
Never gave Me Your Money’ the hopeless seeming phrase ‘nowhere to go’ is turned
into a joyous exclamation celebrating endless possibilities; perhaps thirdly as
an antidote to George’s infectious ‘Here Comes The Sun’ from the ‘other’ point
of view. ‘That Would Be Something’ isn’t Paul’s best song by any means, but it
sums up nicely this album’s dichotomy between throwaway and depth, with a nice
idea and some fine multidubbing.
[3] ‘Valentine Day’ is the first of this album’s five instrumentals
and is probably the most thought out and pre-planned of them all. You can really
hear McCartney’s multi-instrumental prowess on this track, where he plays
acoustic, electric and bass guitars, drums and keyboards (paul can’t remember
in the press release whether he did the acoustic guitar or the drums first – I
would guess the former as the drum part alone would be a weird one). What many
critics overlook is how hard tracks like these must have been for Paul to
record on his own, without a George Martin or Geoff Emerick around to help.
Recording with a band is one thing, but working out all the parts on your own
is something else and although none of the instrumentals on ‘McCartney’ are
anything like as good as the songs, they are all quietly impressive in the way
they still sound fresh and improvised and as if there really is a whole band
playing together. The title doesn’t really mean anything and is unlikely to
have been recorded on Valentine’s Day 1970, being so close to the album’s
original release date. It’s certainly not as romantic as you’d expect on first
hearing from the world’s most romantic songwriter and that title and this is
actually quite a hard-hitting rocker in retro 1950s mode. The closest things to
this previously in McCartney’s canon are the really early Beatles recordings
like ‘Cry For A Shadow’ when The Shadows were indeed king and rock and roll was
simple. Had this track been given lyrics it might have been better remembered, but
even without them it’s an intriguing insight into something Paul couldn’t have
possibly done as a Beatle.
[4] ‘Every Night’ is the album’s clear highlight, ‘Maybe I’m Amazed’
excepted, and the one other track here that really adds a new dimension to
McCartney’s canon. It’s a glorious pop tune on the chorus, with its wonderfully
upbeat sentiment about love saving everything which is so McCartney-esque and a
clever switch back to quite a downcast minor key on the verses that is quite
unlike any other track in Paul’s canon. It’s the sound of a man trying to find
enough reasons to pick himself up and carry on and the delayed resolution that
finally comes onto a major chord is so perfect it somehow makes everything
right. ‘Every Night’ is, as we’ve seen, a nervous breakdown in song, with Paul
listing reason after reason why he should give up everything and stay in bed a
la Brian Wilson, only to change his mind in the choruses because he can ‘be
with you’. There’s an interesting moment in that press release again where he
refers to wanting to ‘be in bed rather than in some club’ and this is perhaps
McCartney’s most domesticated track: he had the world at his feet, but all he
was searching for was the family life in this tiny house. He could easily bhave
slipped off the wagon and become an addict, enjoying getting ‘out of my head’,
but Linda gives him reason to stay on the straight and narrow. It’s a truly
moving song that’s well regarded by fans and might have done his solo
reputation the world of good had it come out as a first single (the storylike [13]
‘Another Day’ is an excellently crafted song, but perfect fodder for Lennon to
hit back against when deep in ‘confessional’ mode). The stark production, with
the drum licks seemingly hitting the back of the song and driving it forward,
is quite different to the rest of this album (it feels like a moody teenager
draghing their feet and refusing to do something they don’t want to do). There
isn’t even much going on for the first opening flurry of music - poetical
procrastination if you will. The suddenly big(ish) production sound suggests
McCartney himself was quite impressed with it as a song, giving it the time,
space and energy many of these other recordings don’t have. His world weary
vocal is also delicious and delivered perfectly straight, both the harsh and
the pretty sections, as you can tell if you play it back to back with his
only-to-date re-recording on ‘Unplugged’ (1992) where Paul is, thankfully, so
much happier and more comfortable with himself this song sounds like a fading
memory rather than a piece that still comes from the heart. In 1970, though,
this was heavy stuff for Paul, where this song ranks with ‘Let It Be’, the real
dream he had of his mother Mary and his song for Jane Asher ‘Here, There and
Everywhere’ as his most rounded and complete song, the ‘night’ of worry falling
naturally into day with every verse, as sure as day follows night. The only
downside of this piece is that it’s so short – ‘Every Night’ ends after just
two short verses and a repeated chorus and might have been a 100% classic had
Paul written an equally moving middle eight. Then again, this song might well
benefit from being kept simple and like many of the best simple songs it has a
depth and complexity the ten-part epic songs can’t match. Interestingly session
notes reveal that Paul recorded an extra electric guitar part for this track
but didn’t use it in the final mix, preferring to keep it all acoustic, which
does suit the ‘confessional’ feel of the track.
[5] ‘Hot As Sun’ used to be the earliest McCartney song on record
until ‘Unplugged’ saw a revival of his first song ‘I Lost My Little Girl’ (the
first version of ‘When I’m 64’ is of a similar vintage), composed when Paul was
just fifteen or thereabouts (its actually written in 1957 and not 1958/59 as it
says in the press release). A poorly recorded version from a couple of years
later, with Spanish nonsense lyrics a la Michelle, is a bootleg favourite and
shows how different this song might have been in the pre-1960s era when it was
a part-Shadows, part-Show tune kind of a song. Paul probably did well to cut out
the lyrics for his revival on this album but ‘Sun’ sports a typically fine
McCartney tune, a carefree romp that’s recognisably McCartneyesque (just ‘on
holiday’, without the earthly ‘grounding’ so many of his somngs have), through
some sunny chord changes that is a delight to hear. The new part of the song –
the keyboard solo that cuts through the song in the minor key and sounds
straight out of the same swampy American club as ‘Mr Moonlight’ – also helps a
good song sound great, on first hearing at least, adding a new dimension to the
singalong. Again, though, considering the song’s short running time it doesn’t
half repeat itself enough times. Perhaps Paul might have done better shortening
the song and extending his intriguing closing piece ‘Glasses’, which is the
sound of Paul and Linda rubbing wine glasses at different frequencies (an idea
Paul revived for his ‘back to basics’ reinterpretation of ‘Band On The Run’ for
the BBC a few years back; Pink Floyd intended to do a whole album based on
‘household objects’ like this in 1974, but alas they never finished it – some
rubbed wine glasses then became the opening of ‘Shine On You Crazy Diamond’
instead). Considering how simple the idea is the effect is really eerie and
makes for an interesting coda to this hitherto jolly track, almost as if Paul
is summing up his time with The Beatles and the uncertainty of what comes next
suddenly slicing away into that jolly certainty, like a busy Monday morning
after a week’s holiday (note the way the track ends suddenly, locking onto a
chord and getting stuck before fading into ‘Glasses’ abruptly, before we’re
quite ready to say goodbye). You can also hear a snatch of another teenage
McCartney song [15] ‘Suicide’, an uninspired track that isn’t quite as bad as people
say which he originally gave to Sinatra. The use of ‘Suicide’randomly here is puzzling – are we meant to think that
this jolly time in Paul’s life is abruptly over and replaced by doubts and
worries that lave him suicidal? Or is it just an accident that sounded cute? These
kind of random, short compacted songs are more what Paul will do on ‘Wildlife’
than on the rest of this album and don’t fit the mood of either song. The use
of ‘glasses’ also gives Paul the opportunity for a typically bad pun in the
title (the track is not ‘as hot as sun’ but ‘as hot as sunglasses’, which is not
quite the same thing!)
[6a] ‘Junk’ is another of the album’s highlights, a delightfully
wistful understated song written under care of the Maharishi in India that in
an alternative universe is sitting on ‘The White Album’ (for which project the
song was written). It’s a shame there weren’t any takers as this lovely
acoustic song fits both album moods well, offering a humble contrast to the
‘bigger’ electric ideas on offer here. The tune is typical McCartney and
existed as an instrumental before getting a set of lyrics late in the day
(hence ‘Singalong Junk’ later on in the album), but the lyrics are equally
fitting, with the extended metaphor of a seller trying to get rid of ‘junk’
that he doesn’t want in his life anymore a fitting metaphor for the physical
and emotional baggage made up over time in any long-term relationship. In some
ways it’s a song about guilt as even a couple’s inanimate objects seem to think
worse of a couple for splitting up: ‘Buy says the sign in the shop window, why?
Says the junk in the yard’. It’s very Mccartney that such a beautiful song
should be given such deliberately ugly imagery somehow. The title was taken by
some fans at the time as being about drugs (‘junk’ being a slangword for
heroin) and how Paul was going to throw away his old partying lifestyle in
order to embrace the simpler and more natural delights of the country. That
definition is equally fitting, but it’s probably unlikely that Paul had this on
his mind when he was writing, as this is clearly one of his ‘story’ songs
rather than anything overtly autobiographical and may well have been inspired
by a simple visit to a junk shop during early days of courting Linda and
getting stuff for their Mull of Kintyre farmhouse. Or, perhaps, it’s the last
song Paul wrote for Jane Asher (who was with him in India), imagining having to
leave his in-laws’ house where he’d been happily living for years in central
London, the detritus of their relationship all around him. It feels like this
song is more substantial somehow though; ‘Junk’ is very yearning in its melody
though, especially in the chorus and Paul’s equally weary and fragile vocal,
which makes for a song that’s surprisingly moving given that for most of the
song it is simply a list of expendable spare parts. This is take two apparently
– a shorter version than the ‘sister’ song.
[7] ‘Man We Was Lonely’ is often seen as another of the album’s
highlights – it made a surprise appearance on the ‘Wingspan’ compilation for
instance, along with quite a lot of this album’s tracks it has to be said – but
for me it doesn’t really hit the same spot. Like ‘Every Night’ this is a song
that switches between major and minor keys depending on the mood of the
narrators (Linda sings clearly here for the first time on a McCartney record,
not sounding as good as she will on ‘Ram’) and is another of those ‘things are
terrible but they’ll get better’ kind of songs. But it’s not so successful the
second time around, thanks both to a repeat of ideas, the rather pedestrian
melody and the curiously detached way the McCartneys sing most of the lyrics. Written
in bed one night (except the middle eight, which was instrumental until a lunch
break the day vocals were being taped for the album) it feels flimsier than the
rest of the salbum somehow, a draft away from becoming a real song. Only that
minor key passage about ‘singing songs I thought were mine alone’, a clear
reference to having used all of his best material on the last two difficult
Beatles albums, really catches the ear and is sung straight. Everything else
sounds arch – and well it should given that this is a song about struggling to
stay upbeat and positive when life is cruel (even the chord changes, usually so
natural on McCartney’s songs, sound forced and angular – not unlike Lennon’s
method of writing). Not that this song is bad, it’s just a rather clichéd,
hurriedly recorded song without the clear hooks and classy vocals of the rest
of this album.
[8a] ‘Oo You’ is often forgotten when talking about this album and it’s
obviously another of McCartney’s written-on-the-spot songs rather than a
carefully thought out epic, a song which didn’t even have lyrics until the
absolute eleventh hour. But the complex riff that underpins the song is one of
Paul’s better hooks and the one-man band backing is a good foil for Paul’s
confident vocal. The lyrics aren’t up to much – being a series of phrases
rather than a proper song, about how Linda can be all things at once (girl,
woman and baby) – but with five
instrumentals on the album any lyrics are better than none and they suit this
simple rocker well. This is, perhaps, Macca’s most lustful song until [42] ‘Hi
Hi Hi’, the cry of joy in the lyrics as he unlocks the ‘key’ that turns his
cute little missus into a sexually knowing woman matched by the incessant
screech of the guitars that signify his libido turning into overdrive. The
sound of this song is great and the long awaited return of the cowbell (the
signature Beatle sound of 1964) only adds to the feeling of lust, as if a clock
is ticking down the foreplay until the song explodes at the end. Macca’s
drumming is particularly spot on here, sounding like a busy Keith Moon part but
in slow motion (anyone can play noisily, but doing so in a controlled away is
difficult) and the added tambourine over the top playing too fast is a clever
way of controlling expectations and suggesting movement. Again, this song is
all the more impressive when you consider that Paul is playing everything here
himself – you can hear Paul ad libbing ‘more guitar’ at the beginning of the
song, as if noting to himself about the arrangement when he plays the tape
back. He clearly took notice of his comment too, for it’s the chiming, shrill
guitars for which this track is most memorable – and, unlike Macca’s sterling
guitar work on the likes of ‘Taxman’ and the Abbey Road medley, he doesn’t have
to pretend it’s by the other Beatles in the face of ‘unity’. The press release,
weirdly, mentions that one of the instruments Paul is playing is an ‘aerosol
spray’ – is this part of the distinctive drum sound?
[9] ‘Momma Miss America’ finds Paul back to being a classy bassist,
though, with his driving walking bass the hook on which the rest of this
multi-part instrument rests. The title given at the top of this song is ‘Rock
and Roll Springtime’ rather than ‘Momma Miss America’, a title that suits it
rather better – this is another retro rocker with early 1970s twinges, as if
Paul – freed of the Beatles – is going back to his roots in the late 1950s, the
‘springtime’ of rock and roll before it flowered into the summer of love and
back again into the winter of discontent of 1968/69. Presumably the new title is about new wife
Linda missing the rock and roll soundtrack to her upbringing in America, where
she fell in love with many of the same 1950s classics as Paul. McCartney’s
drumming is rather more dignified here than on the rest of the album, with a
classic drum roll a la Ringo towards the end of the song, although again it’s
Paul’s shrill feedback-filled guitarwork and also his piano playing that
catches the ear. Despite the complexity of the song and the difficulties of
overdubbing this song was a first take, with Paul clearly revelling in the
‘anything goes’ mood of the album. It’s an intense instrumental that would surely
have been matched by a paranoid lyric had it been given one, the swooping
gulping basses walked over by a pounding drum roll with various random crashing
piano chords and some guitar to give it colour. Paul said that he wrote the
‘chords’ for this track before the melody, oerhaps enjoying the rise-and-fall
sequence he came up with. Considering its made up via overdubs (with the piano
first), it is all impressively tight. There is, however also a shocking edit
two-thirds of the way through the song, at around the tweo minute mark right
where the piano riff seems to spiral upwards out of the keyboard, suggesting
that Macca’s engineering skills aren’t quite up to his musicianship ones. Those
are, however, pretty fine and nowhere else in this book can you hear such a
good example of McCartney the one-man band at work.
[10] ‘Teddy Boy’ is a fascinating track. It’s not particularly profound
or well made, but is it just me or can I see a hint of John Lennon in the
character in this song? (it is a Beatle era track after all). I’ve thought this
for years though as far as I know no one else has made the comparison, but the
title character clearly has an on-off relationship with his mother, a
disappearing father and a tenderness that he keeps well hidden and which belies
his teddy boy haircut. Could it be that Paul, nearing the end of perhaps the
longest lasting relationship in his life outside immediate family, was
remembering who they used to be (when Lennon was very much a 1950s ‘Teddy
Boy’). Play this song back to back with the ‘Nowhere Boy’ film and you’ll know
what I mean. We’ll probably never knew if that was what Paul was thinking when
he wrote it – or if that’s what Lennon heard in the song, although he certainly
doesn’t take kindly to it when Paul introduces it into the ‘Let It Be’
sessions, cruelly spoofing it as a ‘square dance’ on the outtake heard on The
Beatles’ ‘Anthology Three’. Lennon might simply have been in a mean mood that
day or had issues with the song’s quality – it certainly wouldn’t be the first
song of Paul’s he dismissed out of hand – but John sounds riled to me. Change
the opening of the song where ‘when mother told Teddy be good, he would’ to
Aunt Mimi and accept that Lennon’s hardman image of this era belied a soft
heart that really didn’t want to look after both his mother and his aunt and
you have a pretty close match I think, especially the way both protected the
other but would never ever let on that they did. Lennon aside, though, this
song could only have been written by McCartney – the melodic touches which
takes the song round in a loop and the rejoinders to each verse (‘Ted be good –
he would’ ‘Then she cried – oh my’ ‘Ran far away – OK’, etc). Like many of
Paul’s ‘story’ songs the strengths and weaknesses is our distancing from the
song, where the characters are seen only from the narrator’s stunted viewpoint.
This works for songs like ‘Eleanor Rigby’ and ‘Press To Play’s under-rated
[198] ‘Footprints’ because the characters are lonely and unattached to society,
but fails when matched to a lyric where the characters really are sympathetic.
Both Ted and his mother think they’re the grown-ups, looking after the other
without the other really knowing and that’s a clever inspiration for a song.,
though it mnever quite goes anywhere. The problem is, Paul’s written a catchy
hook-laden chorus to go with the song and doesn’t know whether to sing it
straight or make it a comedy and the result is a terrible mis-mash of a song
that doesn’t know if it wants to make us laugh or cry. If only Paul had gone
for another version of the song ‘Teddy Boy’ might have been better remembered,
especially if Lennon was his source material consciously or unconsciously, but
as it appears on record ‘Teddy Boy’ is a frustrating anti-climax.
[6b] ‘Sinaglong Junk’ is another frustrating anti-climax two thirds
of the way through the album and works much better as a coda to ‘Junk’ (as per
my old cassette copy). The trouble is that we’ve heard the song already and
pretty as it undoubtedly is it’s hardly one of Paul’s most deep or complex
songs. The highlights of the Beach Boys’ ‘karaoke’ album ‘Stack-O-Tracks’
weren’t the hit singles where we pretty much knew what was going on underneath
all the surface harmonies but the obscure album tracks like ‘Our Car Club’ that
sounded like a whole new song in their own right. In contrast, we already know
everything about ‘Junk’ we needed to know with the finished version and there
really isn’t any instrumental part or new rhythm we couldn’t hear on the
original if we concentrated. However classy the melody, ‘Singlong Junk’ just
sounds like album unnecessary album filler. Had Paul put a singalong version of
‘Maybe I’m Amazed’ or even ‘Oo You’ (as happened on the deluxe edition) the
results might have been more worthwhile. This is a different take to the vocal
version – take one in fact!
Not so [11] ‘Maybe I’m Amazed’ which is still one of the most
fondly regarded and loved of all of Paul’s solo songs. Even at the time the
song was seen as the classiest recording from the album (it was chosen as the
backing for the promo used to promote the album, with a slideshow of the
McCartneys having fun on their Scottish farm) and even now many fans and celebs
surprise Paul by claiming it as their favourite song (though many still insist
that it was a Beatles not a solo song!) Like ‘Every Night’, this is a rare
piece of autobiography on this album and from the opening church-like keyboard
chords and ‘Let It Be’-like piano runs the whole seriousness and ambition of
the album has gone up a whole notch. The tune is one of Paul’s very best,
widening its scope little by little as the wife of the narrator helps him to
become ever more confident and peep out from his narrow little world, her love
for him inspiring some charming Liberace style piano runs. The lyrics, too, do
not disappoint, with the revelation of the man who had the world at his feet
finding out that the only person’s opinion he cares aboyt is his wife’s being quite
a big step for Paul’s songwriting. The whole piece sounds as if Paul has just
sat at the piano not expecting to hear that thought out loud and his need to be
loved (after writing so many love songs this one seems real!) seems to catch
him by surprise as much as the rest of us. The whole teasing opening which
could go any of several directions, happy or sad, is the perfect introduction
for such an unsure song, growing in confidence with every verse as the narrator
becomes more and more convinced that only his love will see him through his
hard times. Paul’s vocal is also a delight, growing from little-boy-lost to
full blooded Lennon-ish primal scream. The guitar solo too is extraordinary for
someone who wouldn’t normally play guitar at all (Paul must have practised one
hell of a lot on John’s and George’s guitars throughout the Beatles years to
stay in shape, as well as playing the solo in ‘Taxman’), cutting through the
doubt of the mid-part of the song with wave upon wave of conviction. At last he’s
found what he was looking for: someone who can ‘pull me out of time’, ‘help me
sing my song’ ‘right me when I’m wrong’ and ‘help me understand’. The key line
here though may be ‘that you’re with me all the time’ - Jane Asher was always out following her own
career and Paul’s own mother died too young, so Macca wasn’t exactly used to
stability from his loved ones. Interestingly, this song is very similar in
structure and key to ‘My Sweet Lord’, George’s hymn of devotion not to his wife
Patti but to God and like that song grows in stature from an uncertain
structure to howling conviction by the end. The roots of both songs are clearly
in gospel (perhaps both inspired by the success of ‘Let It Be’s title track),
although unlike many AAA songs that use a similar feel but get things wrong
(Paul Simon springs to mind), the production here is so wonderfully
straightforward and uncluttered that the sentiment of the song shines straight
through. Just listen to the sheer cleverness of the last verse when McCartney
goes back to his verse melody with backing not from a hesitant piano but from a
chuckling guitar that’s almost laughing with delight and eager to live again –
a clever moment in a very clever song. Like the best of this website, ‘Maybe
I’m Amazed’ is catchy but deep, accessible and complex and moving without
giving too much away, up there with the very best songs of Paul’s whole
collected works. Why this song was never a single is beyond me – Paul admits
now that it was a mistake. Even so no McCartney concert is complete without it.
Closer [12] ‘Kreen Akore’ isn’t so much a let down as a puzzle.
So far even the most bizarre tracks have been relatively straightforward, with
proper tunes if not always lyrics. ‘Kreen Akore’ is less of a rock-pop song and
more of a prog rock epic as, inspired by a nature programme about Brazilian
jungles Paul had been watching (‘The Tribe That Hides From Man!’, broadcast on
February 11th 1970, the day before this song was taped), Paul
decides to get back in touch with his inner grunt. There are moments of pure
magic in this song, from the chiming guitar parts to the simply lovely
overdubbed mass choir in the middle, but for the most part ‘Kreen Akore’ is a
drum solo with McCartney on not particularly good form. He’s clearly working up
a storm on the second half of the song – and making his side-effect
out-of-breath rhythmical panting as loud as the drumming is a clever, rather
Lennonish avant garde touch – but somehow the effect just leaves the listener
cold. Apparently he shot a bow and arrow into the air for this sequence too,
only it didn’t sound right and the arrow broke. Ditto a fire he made in Morgan studios
but which didn’t sound right when lit (so he and Linda threw some twigs around
instead). Ok so it was the 1960s – or at least, it had been just four months
before this album came out and yes Lennon and Harrison had got away with far
more on their early solo works, but the end result must surely be ‘why?’‘Kreen-Akore’
is the official name of the Brazilian tribe, by the way, who deserve a
co-credit if not royalties on the song. One thing I’ve never understood though:
why do Beatle main rivals The Hollies also namecheck this tribe on their
otherwise unconnected song ‘Tell Me To My Face?!?
Overall, then, ‘McCartney’ is an album pretty much
equally split into three. On the one hand parts of ‘McCartney’ are as esoteric
and downright odd as anything on Lennon’s ‘Unfinished Music’ series or George’s
‘Electronic Sounds’. On another, many of the tracks are delightful, not
terribly deep pop songs a la ‘Imagine’. It’s the third section – the two
confessional, ‘primal scream’ Lennon/Plastic Ono Band but with melody songs –
for which this album is remembered and celebrated. ‘McCartney’ is an oddball
album, never to be repeated again by Paul even though ‘McCartney II’ does it’s
best to head in the same made-up-on-the-spot territory (and has its own two
classic songs [154] ‘Coming Up’ and [152] ‘Waterfalls’ to offset the lesser
moments). It’s nothing like as good as critics say it is nowadays (the best
album behind Band On The Run? Hardly), but neither is it as bad as people said
it was at the time. Chances are you’ll like some of it, love some bits of it
and puzzle your head in confusion over the rest of it. But then McCartney
albums weren’t like most other albums we bought because we’d heard a good
review or felt he was the star of the moment. This is Paul’s first time away
from the other Beatles delivering the soundtrack of our lives and even though
he’s uncertain about all sorts of things, he’s spot on about lots of others.
Even at half-speed this man can’t half run a marathon, setting the bar so much
higher than almost all other competitors. Maybe I’m amazed that, even at half
measure and with such a loss of confidence, ‘McCartney’ can turn out being as
good as it is, a record where life is a bowl of cherries – if the birds don’t
squash them first!
A NOW COMPLETE LIST
OF PAUL McCARTNEY ARTICLES TO READ AT ALAN’S ALBUM ARCHIVES:
'McCartney' (1970) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2010/08/news-views-and-music-issue-73-paul.html
'Ram' (1971) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2008/07/review-47-paul-and-linda-mccartney-ram.html
‘Wildlife’ (1972) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/paul-mccartney-and-wings-wildlife-1972.html
'McCartney' (1970) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2010/08/news-views-and-music-issue-73-paul.html
'Ram' (1971) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2008/07/review-47-paul-and-linda-mccartney-ram.html
‘Wildlife’ (1972) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/paul-mccartney-and-wings-wildlife-1972.html
‘Red Rose Speedway’ (1973)
http://www.alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/paul-mccartney-and-wings-red-rose_2844.html
'Band On The Run' (1974) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/news-views-and-music-issue-87-paul.html
'Venus and Mars' (1975) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2008/07/review-64-paul-mccartney-and-wings.html
'Band On The Run' (1974) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/news-views-and-music-issue-87-paul.html
'Venus and Mars' (1975) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2008/07/review-64-paul-mccartney-and-wings.html
'Wings At The Speed Of
Sound' (1976) http://www.alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/paul-mccartney-and-wings-at-speed-of.html
'London Town' (1978) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2008/07/review-71-paul-mccartney-and-wings.html
'London Town' (1978) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2008/07/review-71-paul-mccartney-and-wings.html
'Back To The Egg' (1979) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/wings-back-to-egg-1979-revised-review.html
'McCartney II' (Original Double Album) (1980) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/news-views-and-music-issue-106-paul.html
'Tug Of War' (1982) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/news-views-and-music-issue-122-paul.html
'McCartney II' (Original Double Album) (1980) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/news-views-and-music-issue-106-paul.html
'Tug Of War' (1982) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/news-views-and-music-issue-122-paul.html
'Pipes Of Peace' (1983) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/paul-mccartney-pipes-of-peace-1983.html
'Press To Play' (1986) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2008/07/88-paul-mccartney-press-to-play-1986.html
'Flowers In The Dirt' (1989) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2009/08/news-views-and-music-issue-40-paul.html
'Press To Play' (1986) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2008/07/88-paul-mccartney-press-to-play-1986.html
'Flowers In The Dirt' (1989) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2009/08/news-views-and-music-issue-40-paul.html
'Off The Ground' (1993) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/paul-mccartney-off-ground-1993.html
‘Flaming Pie’ (1997) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/paul-mccartney-flaming-pie-1997.html
'Driving Rain' (2001) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/paul-mccartney-driving-rain-2001.html
'Chaos and Creation In The
Back Yard' (2005) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.nl/2016/08/paul-mccartney-chaos-and-creation-in.html
'Memory Almost Full'
(2006) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/paul-mccartney-memory-almost-full-2006.html
'Electric Arguments' (as 'The Fireman') (2008) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2008/11/news-views-and-music-issue-13a-paul.html
'Kisses On The Bottom'(2012) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/news-views-and-music-issue-141-paul.html
'New' (2013) http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.com/2013/11/paul-mccartney-new-2013-album-review.html
‘Egypt Station’ (2018) https://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.com/2018/09/paul-mccartney-egypt-station-2018.html
The Best Unreleased McCartney/Wings Recordings http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/the-best-unreleased-mccartney.html
Surviving TV and Film Footage http://www.alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/paul-mccartney-surviving-tv-appearances.html
Live/Wings Solo/Compilations/Classical
Albums Part One: 1967-1987
http://www.alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/paul-mccartney-and-bands.html
Live/Wings/Solo/Compilations/Classical/Unreleased
Albums Part Two: 1987-1997
http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/paul-mccartney-and-bands_21.html
Live/Wings
Solo/Compilations/Classical Albums Part Three: 1997-2015
http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/paul-mccartney-and-bands_28.html
Non-Album Recordings Part
One 1970-1984 http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/paul-mccartneywings-non-album-songs.html
Non-Album Recordings Part
Two 1985-2015 http://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/paul-mccartney-non-album-songs-part-two.html
Essay: Not So Silly Love Songs https://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.com/2018/03/essay-paul-mccartneys-not-so-silly-love.html
Key Concerts and Cover Versions https://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.com/2018/05/paul-mccartney-five-landmark-concerts.html
Essay: Not So Silly Love Songs https://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.com/2018/03/essay-paul-mccartneys-not-so-silly-love.html
Key Concerts and Cover Versions https://alansalbumarchives.blogspot.com/2018/05/paul-mccartney-five-landmark-concerts.html
This is still my favorite McCartney album, though possibly not his "best". I feel this is his purest personal expression, unclouded by thoughts of chart placings or critical comments or what for him passes for intellectualizing. I feel closest to McCartney when listening to this record. Maybe I'm deluded, but that's the way it seems to me. I don't think that it even matters that usually his words are not especially clever or even coherent. His melodies say everything. Often the words are just there to give his voice something to do, and a chance to communicate with us in some direct emotional subverbal way. For me, melody is the truly magical, inexplicable part of music. Significant intellectual content is nice, but it is optional. For me, Paul McCartney is the greatest living melodic genius, and nearly the best of all time. Of course, your mileage may vary.
ReplyDeleteThat's interesting Mrs Bear, that's more or less how my review for 'McCartney II' runs! I think Paul does think in terms of pure melody more than any other writer I know and the two McCartneys do feel like that instinctive creativity in its rawest, purest form. I do like it when lyrics are as profound as the melodies too though - music is the only artform that can tell you things twice over through the words and tune and if you can get the two together working in tandem (which is rarer than you might think) then it is like nothing else on Earth.
DeleteI would agree that great lyrics and great music do not often go together, and it is certainly lovely when they do. If forced to do without one or the other, I'll keep the music. Most songwriters do not strike me as being so smart or so subtle in their thinking or so creative in their concepts that their lyrics tell me much that I couldn't say as well or that I haven't heard before. Dylan has his moments. Richard Thompson does, too, and dear old Ray Davies is a witty guy. My favorite album for the balance of fine music, evocative lyrics, and inspired performance is actually The Band's second album, the one with "The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down" on it. Just brilliant. It's a pity that I have not seen any essays from you on their body of work - I am sure that such writings would be fascinating. I suppose they didn't make the cut for AAA? They're the only band that I know of that has made an album that, for me, seems better than any Beatles album. Of course, they only managed it once, but it's still pretty remarkable. Brian Wilson, both with and without the Boys, has also done some transcendantally wonderful things. It seems to me that the main difference between him and Paul McCartney, aside from their somewhat different luck mental health-wise, is that Paul's genius is primarily in the actual act of composing, and Brian's is more in the arranging of that which he has already composed. This is, of course, not to say that Paul has shown no brilliance for arrangement, or that Brian has shown none for the actual composing. (Brian also reminds me a little of Duke Ellington. Once long ago, a rather gifted arranger named Gil Evans, who worked with Miles Davis, commented that he could pretty much tell with almost any other arranger, upon hearing one of their arrangments, exactly how they had done it. But, with Ellington, he said, "Duke lifts a finger, three horns make a noise, and I don't know what it is." Brian Wilson has some of that same mysterious facility. Oh, well, I'm just maundering on, aren't I? I need to go take my family out for ice cream. Thank you for your extensive writings - I quite enjoy them.
DeleteAn interesting point of view Mrs Bear. I do personally find that lyrics tell me even more than the music in most cases, though not all - as you say Ray Davies is particularly good at that and Richard Thompson too (I regret finding him just too late for his website or he would be in here also). Van Dyke Parks' work with Brian Wilson is up there too, Pete Townshend's and CSNY's as well. I used to love buying new records and without a record player to hand being able to read the lyric booklets on the way home - they almost always had something to offer. Gosh better than a Beatles album is big praise. I must admit I've never 'got' The Band. I tried 'Music From The Big Pink' to see what I was missing and it all sounded the same without much energy or excitement - it was more 'Music From The Big Snooze' for me. 'The Last Waltz' rather put me off them too! Sorry if you like them, each to their own I guess! Brian is pretty incredible at writing melodies and knowing how to find the right arrangement and combination of instruments to make the most out of what he writes; Paul is more of an instinctive melodicist I think, his songs sound good played on just about any instrument. Thanks for the chat, I hope your family enjoyed the ice cream!
DeleteThank you, we did enjoy the ice cream. Few things are more soothing to the throat than a good milkshake! Actually, I can understand your reaction to "Big Pink". Much as I have come to love it, I would have to concede that it is not the most immediately accessible record. A lot of it is slow and a bit strange, but I find it rewarding. The second album is somewhat livelier and has a more vivid emotional range, from anger to glee to wistfulness to utter desolation. It has also more than a hint of an almost Chaucerian ribaldry and a definite sense of humor. (I wish more artists showed signs of a sense of humor. It's a major reason that I love The Kinks so much.) Oh well, I guess that I've wandered far afield from commenting on McCartney here, so I'd better stop. Gotta go to work anyway. Have a fine and productive day!
ReplyDeleteThanks Mrs Bear, you're quite right - my favourite record shop used to sell milkshakes alongside the vinyls, a perfect combination they go together somehow! I must give The Band another chance sometime, but it is a bit slow for my tastes. I agree with you about needing more humour in music. What are your feelings on 10cc? For me they put the fun back into music without straying too far into silliness (especially at the end on the records nobody knows!) Thankyou, I am working on turning my articles into a book series which is hard work especially when I keep re-writing myself! I hope you have a fine and productive day too. 8>)
DeleteArguably, I am not qualified to have feelings abour 10cc. As far as I can recall, I have only heard two of their songs. One was "I'm Not In Love", which I liked but which was vastly overplayed on New York radio. The other was "Wall Street Shuffle", which I only heard a couple of times, but which I enjoyed and still can play bits of in my head. Perhaps I should note that my liking for humor in music, as in other areas, depends to some extent on how mean-spirited the humor is. Humor that concentrates on what fools all you guys out there are just makes me tired - more self-deprecatory humor is better for me. I loved "All Of My Friends Were There" on VGPS.
DeleteWhat did you think of Paul's 'Press To Play' album Mrs Bear? Much of that was written with Eric Stewart of 10cc. It's not so much self-deprecating but its definitely not mean spirited (well, only occasionally to politicians!) Paul turns up on a few of their albums too. I agree, 'I'm Not In Love' is very overplayed and it loses its impact once you know the joke! I love 'All Of My Friends' too by the way, it's the sort of song only The Kinks would come up with!
Delete"Press To Play"? I remember liking "Stranglehold". I remember liking "Press", despite being utterly befuddled by its mention of Oklahoma. I seem to remember finding most of the compositions insufficiently baked, though nicely recorded and performed.
ReplyDeleteThat is most people's re-action to 'Press To Play' I think Mrs Bear. Don't laugh, but I think it might be the best McCartney album in terms of songs - certainly the most under-rated. It's the production that doesn't quite fit on that record! Anyway, Eric of 10cc co-wrote I think 7 of those songs and his band shares that slightly mad surreal sound! And no I don't understand the 'Oklahoma' reference either!
Delete