Re: Stones article...Macca mention



rforman61@xxxxxxx wrote: 
Dale Houstman wrote:

True, but John did pretty much the same thing: enlisting good session
players who wouldn't question his decisions. I haven't looked into this,
but I suspect this is a very common feature of post-band activity, as
individual members try to get away from all the ego and in-fighting. And
Paul did make at least one choice from "upper echelon" players (which
DID lead to ego problems) when he chose Dennie Laine as guitarist. Also,
he later took on Elvis Costello as a songwriting partner, surely
outdoing John's choice of Yoko in the same capacity. So I don't think
the analysis is quite accurate, or (even if accepted) really all that
unique.



Denny Laine was Paul's employee, not his equal or partner (I"d hardly
call him an upper echelon player, but that's beside the point.....lots
of the musicians Paul's hired have been very good, but he was still the
artist and the boss).

No argument that Denny was Paul's employee, but he didn't just sit by and smile at Paul, and he did get a few songs on the albums, and - whether he is as "A-list" as - say - Clapton or not, being a member of the Moody Blues beats - by a long shot - cutting holes in your dress and calling it art, at least as considered from a rock'n'roll perspective. In addition Paul has worked with several other luminaries in one capacity or another to good and bad effect: Stevie Wonder, Michael Jackson. He also has had several "guest" musicians here and there that aren't precisely low-cal cheese, such as Pete Townsend. Not an equal partnership to be sure, but hardly scared of his own shadow either.

Elvis the C was the exception, I would say the
closest to a true collaborator Paul has worked with since John, and
they had a decent run together, and in fact seem to have meshed and
worked beautifully together, brought out the best in eaach other
without any big ego-clashing problems!  Maybe that's why they didn't
keep the partnership going too long, didn't want to press their luck,
realized they had a good thing and didn't want to overdo it, plus they
both moved on to many other things since then, but it would be great if
they got back together again at some point, the results were terrific.
The "Run Devil Run" band might have been somewhat of an exception too,
all older, established players, not young turks, more or less
contemporaries of Paul's and they seem to have worked together as
something close to a real band on the album and on their many gigs.


It's getting to be a pretty long list of exceptions to take the original theory to heart!

The main point is though, that such "I'm tired of being in a band of equals" stance is common as hair in a swimming pool filter, to the point that it might almost be viewed as inevitable. So I doubt - still - the perspicacity of the theory. True perhaps, but scarcely worth mentioning, especially as it applies to one person, implying that it is somehow indicative of some unique psychology on their part. T'isn't.

I do agree that Elvis and Paul worked well together, and that it might be nice to give it another go. Actually, I'd like to see Paul (and a lot of other songwriters) take a considered go at composing with others.

On the ESP tip: I was telling my friends that Elvis and Paul should work together more than a year before it happened. I now predict that Britany Spears and Bob Dylan will not only compose together (on an album to be entitled "Trailer By the Side of Highway 61 Refurbished") but will eventually fall in love, marry, and give birth to the Anti-Christ, who will be named Allen Klein Redux.

Jeez, this precog business is easy!

dmh

.

Quantcast