I am admittedly not a big Macca fan for a number of reasons that have nothing to do with his music. I started this thread off on a positive note giving due where due is earned.
I thought I saw a spark of the old magic in him. I was thrilled for him that he could show the "kids" on the show how you really get it done.
He is not washed up and never will be. He needs a good wack on the side of the head every once in a while just to deflate his ego, but apart from that he is still one of the best. IMHO
Macca on the Grammy Awards
BTW I like the fact that Dane always has a "different" perspective on things. I don't view that as being negative at all.
“We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” - Albert Einstein
"You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother" - Albert Einstein
"You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother" - Albert Einstein
I've been a huge fan of Macca's for over 35 years. He's influenced everything I've done -- even down to my Hofner & 4001c64s basses. With that said, I feel he is so over-cooked right now. In my humble opinion, he was DREADFUL on the Grammys. Truly, truly embarrassing. He has lot his beautiful voice -- his new material is awful & trite. I saw him play in 2001 and he was really, really good. His voice sounded great. All of his performances as of late are really woeful -- he just needs to take a break. The criticism of Paul regarding his behavior at the Live 8 concert to his THREE songs at the Grammy's seems to show a consistent trend. His ego is out of control now more than ever.
What in the world was he doing out there with Jay-Z and Linkin Park? I hate to say it, but his most recent words, actions & music make me cringe. I hope this was his first and last performance at the Grammys.
What in the world was he doing out there with Jay-Z and Linkin Park? I hate to say it, but his most recent words, actions & music make me cringe. I hope this was his first and last performance at the Grammys.
Overexposure is a different concept. I agree that he's been all over the place ever since the Concert For New York at the end of 2001. That's the way he seems to operate though... He'll go full blast for 4-5 years, then take 10-13 years off, then go full blast for another 4-5. Look at his history... Tours with Wings in the late '70s, doesn't tour again until '89-'93, then doesn't tour again until '02.
Perhaps his voice is a little bit worn right now, but I stand by what I said regarding the 2005 tour. I thought he sounded fabulous both nights that I saw him.
Brian, I understand what you are saying, but perhaps I need to clarify.
You mentioned that you like the fact that Dane has a "different" perspective on things, and that you don't view it as a negative thing. Let me clearly state that I don't view "different" perspectives as a negative thing, regardless of whether or not I agree with them. However, when the nature of those different perspectives are almost entirely negative (at least in this sub-forum), that is what I'm addressing.
Perhaps his voice is a little bit worn right now, but I stand by what I said regarding the 2005 tour. I thought he sounded fabulous both nights that I saw him.
Brian, I understand what you are saying, but perhaps I need to clarify.
You mentioned that you like the fact that Dane has a "different" perspective on things, and that you don't view it as a negative thing. Let me clearly state that I don't view "different" perspectives as a negative thing, regardless of whether or not I agree with them. However, when the nature of those different perspectives are almost entirely negative (at least in this sub-forum), that is what I'm addressing.
I'm not a huge fan of Paul McCartney, but i like him... and i like Dane... and i like all of you.
Seriously, controversial isn't always bad. And a different opinion is not the reason for puttin' anybody down, so to speak, or to go "personal". As far as i am concerned, if i don't like a certain comment, i just skip it. I enjoy reading Dane's comments, no matter if i agree or disagree (as well as everybody else's), and i never found any of his posts offensive. But that's only my opinion.
Peace...
Seriously, controversial isn't always bad. And a different opinion is not the reason for puttin' anybody down, so to speak, or to go "personal". As far as i am concerned, if i don't like a certain comment, i just skip it. I enjoy reading Dane's comments, no matter if i agree or disagree (as well as everybody else's), and i never found any of his posts offensive. But that's only my opinion.
Peace...
Nothing will get you dead quicker than being deadly serious about yourself.
-
jingle_jangle
- RRF Moderator
- Posts: 22679
- Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 6:00 am
- Contact:
So now we know where you draw the line. Stuart, but it's not necessarily where others of us draw the line, so there is no need to personalize.
“I say in speeches that a plausible mission of artists is to make people appreciate being alive at least a little bit. I am then asked if I know of any artists who pulled that off. I reply, 'The Beatles did.”
― Kurt Vonnegut
― Kurt Vonnegut
Dane really is a nice guy Stuart. He also contributes a lot of very positive, interesting comments on this forum, not to mention some of the best comedy I have read in a long time. Perhaps you should try to get to know what motivates him. He is really very interesting and very entertaining. Please try to not personalize comments. If you disagree or you have heard it all before just say that. The message that you are tired of the same old stuff will still arrive intact.
Karen you have touched on the side of Macca that drives me bonkers. He shows up after a multi year absence and expects, yes I said expects the world to go ga ga over him. His performance last night compared to the Stones subpar performance at the Superbowl was very good.
"Yesterday" however made me cringe. He looked out of his element. He had no business being there. By placing himself in that situation he was opening himself up to lots of criticism.
Karen you have touched on the side of Macca that drives me bonkers. He shows up after a multi year absence and expects, yes I said expects the world to go ga ga over him. His performance last night compared to the Stones subpar performance at the Superbowl was very good.
"Yesterday" however made me cringe. He looked out of his element. He had no business being there. By placing himself in that situation he was opening himself up to lots of criticism.
“We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” - Albert Einstein
"You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother" - Albert Einstein
"You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother" - Albert Einstein
Back to the topic, however...
The thing is, the artists do not get any younger... and what was easy when you were 20, takes some effort when you're over 60. When you're 20, the world belongs to you, and you think this would last forever. As you get older, you understand it might not be the case. It can get you frustrated. Luckily, Paul McCartney either never felt that way or always managed to win over that feeling and go on. The world still belongs to him. Whether i like it or not. All the same songs may be a bit annoying, though, but i guess it's the common situation with most 60s acts, and in fact i'd suggest the public leads the game here, the public wants to hear the same old hits over and over again and doesn't pay much attention to the new songs...
And - must add it - Brian, i 100% agree with what you said in the first paragraph of your post (but! it doesn't mean i always agree with what you say, man
)
The thing is, the artists do not get any younger... and what was easy when you were 20, takes some effort when you're over 60. When you're 20, the world belongs to you, and you think this would last forever. As you get older, you understand it might not be the case. It can get you frustrated. Luckily, Paul McCartney either never felt that way or always managed to win over that feeling and go on. The world still belongs to him. Whether i like it or not. All the same songs may be a bit annoying, though, but i guess it's the common situation with most 60s acts, and in fact i'd suggest the public leads the game here, the public wants to hear the same old hits over and over again and doesn't pay much attention to the new songs...
And - must add it - Brian, i 100% agree with what you said in the first paragraph of your post (but! it doesn't mean i always agree with what you say, man
)Nothing will get you dead quicker than being deadly serious about yourself.
Ok, points taken. I already mentioned that Dane is great for wity comments, comical moments, and everything else. Outside of The Beatles forum, I enjoy his comments, and I don't dispute that he's a nice guy.
I guess I'm just sick of the Paul bashing. The Rolling Stones are just as overexposed as he is, yet the criticism always goes towards Paul. Why is that? At least this place is much more civil than VoxTalks when it comes to those two acts.
I don't particularly understand comments like this one:
"He shows up after a multi year absence and expects, yes I said expects the world to go ga ga over him."
I'm not quite sure what that means. I'm not attacking your or trying to get personal. Countless people post similar statements, but as far as I know, there isn't a single person that would qualify as an acquaintance of Paul either here or at VT. Therefore, how is it possible to make such an assertion about his attitude? Furthermore, all of Paul's interviews with the media are positive and professional. Yeah, he has performed a lot over the past few years, and he's made a lot of appearances, promoted a new album, etc... but how that would qualify him as egotistical is beyond me. Jay Z, or Sly Stone, or anyone who dresses up in Halloween attire six months too late is what I would call egotistical (85% of those who were on stage last night - at minimum).
As far as "Yesterday," I thought it was ok. I don't think Paul was aching to sing what is obviously his most cherished song, with a rapper and a guy with such a nasaly voice that he could send the neighborhood cats heading for the hills. He was probably asked to do it and obliged.
I guess I'm just sick of the Paul bashing. The Rolling Stones are just as overexposed as he is, yet the criticism always goes towards Paul. Why is that? At least this place is much more civil than VoxTalks when it comes to those two acts.
I don't particularly understand comments like this one:
"He shows up after a multi year absence and expects, yes I said expects the world to go ga ga over him."
I'm not quite sure what that means. I'm not attacking your or trying to get personal. Countless people post similar statements, but as far as I know, there isn't a single person that would qualify as an acquaintance of Paul either here or at VT. Therefore, how is it possible to make such an assertion about his attitude? Furthermore, all of Paul's interviews with the media are positive and professional. Yeah, he has performed a lot over the past few years, and he's made a lot of appearances, promoted a new album, etc... but how that would qualify him as egotistical is beyond me. Jay Z, or Sly Stone, or anyone who dresses up in Halloween attire six months too late is what I would call egotistical (85% of those who were on stage last night - at minimum).
As far as "Yesterday," I thought it was ok. I don't think Paul was aching to sing what is obviously his most cherished song, with a rapper and a guy with such a nasaly voice that he could send the neighborhood cats heading for the hills. He was probably asked to do it and obliged.
Sheena,
We can agree to disagree any any moment in time during a discussion. That is ultimately a measure of respect.
This is the Beatles section of the forum so lets get back (no pun intended) to the business at hand and discuss Pauls performance last night.
:
We can agree to disagree any any moment in time during a discussion. That is ultimately a measure of respect.
This is the Beatles section of the forum so lets get back (no pun intended) to the business at hand and discuss Pauls performance last night.
:
“We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” - Albert Einstein
"You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother" - Albert Einstein
"You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother" - Albert Einstein
Brian, i've tried to... as you might have noticed... well, sort of, since i haven't seen the performance, but at least to Paul McCartney... maybe they'll show it here later, and i've already heard the story of U2 takin' most of the Grammys while PM not takin' anything.
Well, in any case, regarding Karen's comment... i really cannot see anything bad in PM showin' up on the same stage where Jay-Z and Linkin Park also played... well, at least it's a good way to show "who is who"...
Well, in any case, regarding Karen's comment... i really cannot see anything bad in PM showin' up on the same stage where Jay-Z and Linkin Park also played... well, at least it's a good way to show "who is who"...
Nothing will get you dead quicker than being deadly serious about yourself.
You are correct of course Stuart I don't know Paul on a personal basis. I was born England and as teenager in the 60s we got a very steady diet of the fab four. Knowing that he has a huge ego is a matter of observation and it is also a matter of public record.
I worked in the music business for quite a few years and I do have some experience dealing with famous personalities. So I believe that I recognize ego when I see it. I also know what sort of demands Paul puts on promoters when he is contracted to work. His laundry list of needs is quite extensive. Again all these things are a matter of public record.
When pasted together, these morsels of information paint a picture that some choose to ignore and others like the media thrive on. I tend to add that information to what I know to be factual and see if 2+2 = 4. If it does then my opinion is shaped accordingly.
Thus my comment. It is congruent with what I believe that I know about the man. My opinions are not steadfast and determined in the sense that I am blinded by them. If my impressions of him are shown to be false, then I would be the first to say so. That's one of the reasons why there is so much to discuss in this section. If we all agreed all of the time, what would there be to discuss?
BTW I am open to change my mind if there is a compelling argument that matches the facts as we know them.
I worked in the music business for quite a few years and I do have some experience dealing with famous personalities. So I believe that I recognize ego when I see it. I also know what sort of demands Paul puts on promoters when he is contracted to work. His laundry list of needs is quite extensive. Again all these things are a matter of public record.
When pasted together, these morsels of information paint a picture that some choose to ignore and others like the media thrive on. I tend to add that information to what I know to be factual and see if 2+2 = 4. If it does then my opinion is shaped accordingly.
Thus my comment. It is congruent with what I believe that I know about the man. My opinions are not steadfast and determined in the sense that I am blinded by them. If my impressions of him are shown to be false, then I would be the first to say so. That's one of the reasons why there is so much to discuss in this section. If we all agreed all of the time, what would there be to discuss?
BTW I am open to change my mind if there is a compelling argument that matches the facts as we know them.
“We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” - Albert Einstein
"You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother" - Albert Einstein
"You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother" - Albert Einstein
-
johnashfield
- Veteran RRF member
- Posts: 723
- Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2002 8:57 pm
- Contact: