Paul McCartney On Hearing ‘Free As A Bird’ For The First Time And Working On It For The Anthology.

Forever loved and missed. May you never be forgotten

Sharing because I’m a John girl and I need to represent

Ah the hypocrisy. Lewisohn gives Paul some light criticism (along with Stu!) about his letter format? and this is unacceptable. Paul takes numerous pot shots at John (criticises his lack of literary nature, lack of handiness around the home, takes credit for Ticket to Ride for some reason) in the lyrics book and anyone who questioned it was completely shot down. Surely this double standard is apparent?

“On 27 March, Stuart wrote a letter looking to get the group a holiday camp booking … and as if in competition, which he was, Paul also wrote one that same day or soon after. Both are indicative of their hopelessness, for - as Rory Storm and the Hurricanes thrillingly knew - summer seasons had already been tied up a month or more. Paul’s was another masterpiece of dressing: this time he made no mention of personnel, obscuring altogether the question of a drummer, and added one to every calculation - the boys were ‘eighteen to twenty’ and had been together for four years, time in which they had ‘acquired three very importance things - competence, confidence & continuity’. Stuart’s letter was also verbose, and more intense. The recipient couldn’t have had many letters from rock groups that began 'Dear Sir, As it is your policy to present entertainment to the habitues of your establishment…’”

— The Beatles: Tune In, by Mark Lewisohn, on Paul McCartney and Stuart Sutcliffe’s attempts to book a spot at a holiday camp for the band to play

September 2, 1980 ..

Interesting he made this assessment when it was only Paul he got alone time with. If he only spent time with Paul one to one, why assume he’s more clever than John? As clever, fair enough. But more clever? Based on zero time with John? This is why I hate all this Paul revisionism going on. He reality is that few people had access to John in relation to Paul due to his introvert tendencies and difficulty trusting people and therefore few people really knew John well. So they put John down in relation to Paul because Paul flattered them more by giving them the time. Total stupidity

Their separate personalities are as clearly defined as characters in a fairy tale: John the clever one, Paul the sweet one, George the quiet one and Ringo the holy fool. As these public images are rooted in a private reality, there seems little point in meeting the Beatles; social confrontation can only confirm the known and simple truth. Yet I was curious to talk to John Lennon and Paul McCartney, because it is as songwriters rather than as performers that the Beatles interest me most. When I met them both together, however, they gave an impenetrable performance - a double act, with John facetiously punning on clichés and Paul obligingly feeding him. The jokes were good, but no better than Beatle jokes on the cinema or television screens. Later, I had the chance of spending two hours alone with Paul at Brian Epstein's office. He was ready to talk about his music, and did so with the minimum of suspicion or self-consciousness. The sweet, in their desire to please, can be even more articulate than the clever.

'Close-Up: Paul McCartney as Songwriter', Francis Wyndham (London Life, 4th December 1965)

they must be separated.....they're just too annoying together..... 😫

★ John with a cat at Reed Pigman Ranch in Missouri, 19 september 1964

Hilarious to see Paul fans so triggered by one guy within the whole Beatles fandom who might actually have criticisms of Paul (instead of acting like he is the only Beatle that matters) while us John girls have to deal with people acting like he was the worst human who ever lived in every post or at best a glorified idiot who was lucky Paul took pity on him (eye roll). I’ll be playing the worlds smallest violin for you.

Sending special love to the original OP who thinks anyone who doesn’t agree with her is narrow minded and that there is such a thing as a historian who isn’t biased. I guarantee if this historian was biased towards Paul she wouldn’t complain.

"The Paul of Tune In isn't real, and so he isn't relatable."

Today's AKOM was outstanding. I have so much to write and probably no time to write it until Thursday, but I had to make the time to say that it blew me away. The aspect I expected to influence me least, influenced me most: the death of Paul's mom. The writing about it. All of it. It humanized him and that loss in a way that hit me hard, and made me realize how much I'd been influenced by Tune In, even though I'd done my own critiquing of that section before.

(I want to write about the money part so badly, because I think that was very real for Paul, and I believe all the evidence shows that Jim was — or at least would have felt — much less stable than we really think about. He bet on the horses. He was the fun parent. But no, that's what I don't have time for.)

This was an excellent, excellent episode. The most powerful overall, by far. The most holistic in its picture, the most undeniable, and the one that brings me back to where I started, and with a bullet: "What story is Mark Lewisohn trying to tell? And why?" And why aren't we talking about the fact that he seems to hate Paul McCartney and Apple definitely doesn't like him?"

There are longstanding grievances, and the fact that he makes Paul McCartney into a manipulative ice cube on the page is likely not an accident.

I mean, right??

Lewisohn seems downright deceptive—may I even say manipulative?—after listening to today's episode. And although I have big problems with Lewisohn because studying the text you just have to, I have played Devil's advocate in my head through every episode, but at some point today I lost my ability to find any excuses. It is just impossible to construct any defense of this.

Fucking incredible episode. Brava, ladies.

Reminder clip: Mark Lewisohn on Fans on the Run pod — "the bastards took my name off it"

As written in the video section :"Paul listens to the song "Beautiful Boy" and tries to hold back the tears. Notice the tribute in the song to Paul ("every day, in every way, is getting better and better"). It's from The Beatles' song "Getting Better" - John's contribution to that song at the time was cynical and witty (his lyric was "it can't get no worse") but here he was sending a little message to Paul that Paul was right, life does just get keep getting better and better."

Seeing Paul holding back his tears makes me want to cry ugly.

Yes thank you! Also the comments on this post from some commentators are disgusting. They somehow think it’s okay to wish violence on someone because they perceive John to be violent and don’t see why this makes them a massive hypocrite

i really really wish i could just write this everywhere.