Re: Why Macca?..Why?

Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (StompMyFoot) on this day of 28 Nov 2003
23:54:59 -0600:

>>If I remember my Beatles history correctly, it was when Paul heard the 
>>single version of "Long and Winding Road" that he finally gave up and 
>>called an end to his participation in the band. 
>
>This undoubtedly pissed him off but I don't think it was more of a factor than,
>say, the others' rejection of Lee Eastman as manager.  In fact I think the
>Eastman/Klein management feud was probably the biggest single factor in the
>breakup, including artistic differences & Yoko's involvement etc..  "Follow the
>money ..."

I think the management feud was crucial but rather late in the game.
The band was on its way to breaking up long before.
>
>Come to think of it, I've never quite understood Paul's "Long Winding Road"
>kerfuffle as anything *except* a reaction to the Eastman/Klein feud.  Think of
>it in context: George & John had seen their compositions outright rejected by
>Paul & GM - that's a lot worse than layering a few strings & female singers on
>a slow ballad!  "All Things Must Pass," "Cold Turkey," "Not Guilty," "What's
>the New Mary Jane,"  ... there are probably others.  And if John were still
>around, he'd probably say that demoting "Walrus" to the B-side of its single
>was every bit as artistically humiliating & compromising as what Spector did to
>LWR.  And John & George would *both* probably say, IMHO, that "Maxwell's Silver
>Hammer" did as much to hurt their reputations as the Spectorizing of LWR.

I can see your point regarding songs being rejected. A song on the B
side of a single doesn't alter the song itself; ditto the inclusion of
Maxwell on Abbey Road--doesn't change the other songs. Someone's ego
may be hurt not to get first billing; someone may be irritated by the
inclusion of what they feel is an inferior song on an album; but if
you can get your song out *the way you want it heard*, then
*artistically* you shouldn't have a beef.
>
>My point is, if Paul had his way and Lee Eastman had been hired as manager,
>then Paul wouldn't have complained so much about LWR.  (I know, I know: Eastman
>wouldn't have let Spector touch the tapes in the first place - but you get my
>main point, right?)

Your parenthetical point is pretty big. Anyway, adding stuff to Paul's
song behind his back, stuff he'd already considered and rejected, is a
serious artistic violation. 

Yes, the management feud was crucial, but the rest was not negligable.
-- 
Kevin Wayne

"Stark raving sane."
     -- Rosencrantz and Guildenstern

--

All follow-ups are directed to the newsgroup rec.music.beatles.moderated.    
If your follow-up more properly belongs in the unmoderated newsgroup, please 
change your headers appropriately.   -- the moderators