Erin Weber is pretty strong. That said, she way over plays Lennon's supposed claim on Eleanor Ribgy. If you look at the Lennon interview in 1980 (David Shef - Playboy) If find it to be his most accurate. Lennon in 1980 gives Paul credit for the song.
Not if Ringo (or George in the early days) sang it. Every Little Thing is mostly Paul's song, but John's voice is more prominent. But yes, by and large it is true.
Erin Weber is a gifted communicator and if she has a horse in this race I wasn't aware of it. It's refreshing to hear a lecture where one's biases (and we all have biases) are disconnected from the pursuit of truth.
I see in the comments a lot of people have their own views and doubt Erin’s veracity, She is actually a researcher some of the people that wrote the books we all own did not do the correct research that’s why we have so many conflicting statements
I must say, that even if History concluded "Eleanor Rigby" to be a Lennon song, I wouldnt have believed it - ever. Its clearly a McCartney melody/song/construction. As Lennon sang himself; he is/was a "Jealous Guy".
Is that a fact only for " claimed" Lennon-written songs or is there any Paul-claimed written song that Lennon had a part in? Was Paul they only that wrote and composed full songs only by himself? In Get back it seem to me that all four took part in playing and singing on the songs. Maybe that's why Lennon was jealous and Paul was more confident.
John Lennon never claimed to be the primary writer of Eleanor Rigby. He said that McCartney started the song and had the first verse, and he had then helped finish up the song by working on a good percentage of the final lyrics. This makes sense. McCartney never wrote lyrics like that in his life.....and also would never himself choose to make controversial statements on Religion ("Father McKensie wiping his hands as her turns and he walks from the grave...No One Was Saved"). George Martin is the one responsible for the striking Musical String Arrangement (inspired by the Movie "Psycho") that makes the song distinctive.
Erin, next time you do ANY video make sure closed captioning is TURNED ON! For those of us with hearing impairments, and presenters with echo, reverb and accents, it all makes it very difficult to understand what is being said.
There has also been "scientific"-musicological of chord sequences typic of Lennon, and typical of Paul, which differ. The song in question as to authorship in that case is about Lennon's "In My Life. The conclusion is that Lennon wrote it.
If anything, Paul has stayed consistent about his involvement on In My Life. As early as 1972, when he was shown John's list of who-wrote-what in the April edition of Hit Parader, he pointed out he composed the music on a mellotron in John's house. In the late 70s he told Paul Gambaccini the same, although he may have specified the 'melody' as opposed to *all* of the music. He repeats having written the 'tune' on a mellotron to John's words in his and Linda's 1984 Playboy interview. He does the same in his semi-autobiography Many Years From Now from 1997. John is a little bit more erratic: In the Rolling Stone interview(1970), released as Lennon Remembers in 1971, he states that '..on Norwegian Wood and In My Life Paul helped with the middle eight, to give credit where it's due.' In the 1972 Hit Parader interview he takes full credit for the song - at least Paul is not mentioned - which appears to be the reason Paul first made *his* claim, at least publicly. In his final Playboy interview in 1980, he credits Paul with '..the harmony and the middle eight itself.' [which doesn't mean much as the song doesn't have a middle eight]. But I've recently come across some of the tape recordings from that interview, and it becomes clear that John is not absolutely sure as to whether Paul contributed the middle eight to In My Life or If I Fell, suggesting that In My Life might have been completely his own composition after all. I think the most likely scenario is that neither of them wrote the music entirely on his own.
Basically - without this interminable waffle. John wrote the basic tune and lyrics . Paul helped arrange it with the rest of the band. And George Martin made up the solo. In his interviews Paul often gets arrangements mixed up with composition.
A sound piece of historiographical work, and therefore a sound conclusion. To my mind, the case could have been strengthened a touch more if one of Paul’s quoted strengths, that of chord and chord structure ,had been brought to bear. A musicological argument in other words, a somewhat understated area of argumentation, simply because it is fairly specialised. I believe there are sources that would further strengthen Paul’s claim. One source is composer Howard Goodall. This line of argumentation is used in passing after a question about In My Life
Has the Dugan-Gorges Conference Center upgraded their A/V systems yet? I'm quite enjoying Ms. Weber's topic but jeez. Plus, why cut the video off short? I was digging the Q&A.
@@SecretAgentPaul different spelling, but they're not pronounced differently (not like McCarthy and McCartney). Listen to Hunter Davies pronounce his own name (Day-viss) on the Age UK website video. He should know! ;-)
@@marcchrys Hmmm…perhaps not a valid guideline. There are four people whose name is Funnell, that I know. They choose to announce themselves differently ie. Fur…nell, Fun…ell and Foo…nell. Would you wish to tell them which is correct? I was taught geography by a Mr Davies, who introduced himself as Mr Dav…eez. My PE teacher was Mr. Davis…pronounced as it is written. I live in the UK, by the way.
In addition, any questions from the audience should be repeated by you so we know what the hell the question was asked. One can't always figure what the question was from your answer.
Ms Weber doesn't quite get the drummer situation correct. Before they went to Liverpool, Lennon, McCartney, and Harrison were all playing guitar with Lennon's friend Stu Sutcliff on bass. It was at this time several different drummers played with the band. At the end of this period, McCartney was playing the drums. When they got the gig in Hamburg, the contract required that the band have five members. So they drafted Pete Best, the son of the owner of a youth club, to play drums. While they were in Hamburg they occasionally jammed with other English musicians also playing in Germany, including Starr (who they liked a lot). Sutcliff decided to stay in Europe, so McCartney took over bass. Starr replaced Best when producer George Martin told them Best was not good enough to record with the band.
And to further add to the dismissal of Pete was the fact that Ringo sat in several time at the Cavern Club when Pete either couldn't make the show or was sick. This how the friendship with Ringo grew with the other Beatles.
I call bs on most of this. Lennon never claimed he wrote ER. only helped finish the lyrics. also pete shoten (according to his book) claimed to have helped.
This woman is claiming something that never happen. John Lennon NEVER claimed to be the primary writer of Eleanor Rigby. John never said that he wrote the melody or the music. He said that McCartney started the song and had the first verse, and that he then had helped Paul finish up the song by working on a good percentage of the final lyrics. This makes sense. McCartney never wrote lyrics like that in his life.....and also would never himself choose to make controversial statements on Religion ("Father McKensie wiping his hands as her turns and he walks from the grave...No One Was Saved"). John also named George Harrison as contributing to the Chorus. George Martin is the one responsible for the striking Musical String Arrangement (inspired by the Movie "Psycho") that makes the song distinctive. Martin's musical orchestration, and the clever lyrics ... are where the "genuis" comes from. .
I think it didn’t work because it’s the stereo version and that vocal is coming mainly out of one channel, which must not have been working or plugged in
Erin Weber is fantastic and has the correct approach to this. In my opinion Eleanor Rigby should be credited McCartney with Harrison for his contribution of the ALL THE LONELY PEOPLE line. Others making lyrical contribution like Ringomay have a valid claim too.
Yes, I agree - George's line is pretty vital to Rigby. McCartney has said that George should really have got a writing credit for his And I Love Her guitar riff.
It's strange that Paul never mentioned that until after George's death (Around the time of the Martin Scorcese doc). He also forgets to mention John's middle "A Love like ours. Will never die " bit these days aswell
A line or two of a song does not warrant a co-writing credit. That’s not how songwriting works. Anyway, Paul already had the lines “All the lonely people, where do they all come from? All the lonely people, where do they all belong?” George just suggested “look at” for the exclaim. So it’s not even really a full line, lol.
So let me get this straight? The fact that Paul sings Eleanor Rigby means that he is unequivocally the principal songwriter, as was their practice. And I'm fine with that because that is what they had always done. So then why do you need to have a second video about In my life to uncover the principal songwriter? John is singing lead isn't he? You can't have it both ways Lady.
@@johnsheppard4143 Sorry John, then that's on me then. It's quite possible that Paul did help with the melody. It's either in the video or someone commented, that John wouldn't have written a melody like that because of its range. However, that's totally inaccurate. John could have easily written that melody. The only people who know for sure are John and Paul. Unfortunately John is gone, and Paul is always rewriting history and contradicting himself in the process. However it came about, it's a wonderful song with the great solo by George Martin.
My understanding is George wrote the chorus and the third verse, John assisted Paul who started with a song called Sadie Hawkins. We all know now the name is on a grave stone in Liverpool where they met.Paul story we all know by now.
Norwegian Wood - John says it’s his song completely. And, in general terms, absolutely. Paul says he provided the last line. Does it matter? Maybe not, because one line is not significant vis-a-vis ownership. But, the line itself is profound. John’s song.
Let's be accurate: In 1970 John said, in the Rolling Stone interview: 'I think on Norwegian Wood and In My Life Paul helped with the middle eight, to give credit where it's due.' [The 'she asked me to stay and she told be to sit anywhere'-section, which is where Paul's voice appears.] In the 1972 Hit Parader interview John said[about Norwegian Wood]: 'Me but Paul helped on the lyric.' In John's 1980 Playboy interview: 'Norwegian Wood is my song completely.' However, when David Sheff asked John about the title, the answer was: 'I don't know how the hell I got to Norwegian Wood.' Paul asserts in his biography that when John presented the idea to him, John only had the first line of the song and nothing else. So the idea that Eleanor Rigby and In My Life are the only disputed Lennon/McCartney songs is simply untrue. I could have mentioned Ticket To Ride, This Boy, There's a Place, Do You Want To Know a Secret and I'm Happy Just To Dance With You, and others as well. The likely reason why In My Life and Eleanor Rigby are singled out, is because they seem to rank a bit higher in the Parthenon of Beatles songs, so claiming authorship on those two would probably carry a bit more weight than the two 'insignificant' songs they wrote for George. Even Lennon and McCartney fans aren't particularly bothered with discussing those two.
According to Paul Simon, Lennon asked him at a dinner party how he dealt with his "other half," meaning Art Garfunkel. Lennon went on to tell him that back when he was in the Quarrymen a friend told him about this guy in another band who was really good. So Lennon went to see him -- he was Paul McCartney and the was really good. He decided he needed to get McCartney in the Quarrymen where he could keep an eye on him. So the whole churchyard festival was set up in advance by Lennon so he could get McCartney in the band.
They didn't ignore Harrison. Not only did they insist on at least one song per album, he got the lead spot with Taxman (which John helped). Not too shabby.
There's also one crucial pattern of proof Erin, of who was the driving genius behind Beatles, is their solo career songs. Paul never wrote lyrically or melodically par songs post break-up, but John wrote songs on the level of Beatles in his solo career like Imagine, Instant Karma, Love, Working Class Hero, Mind Games, Woman, Mother, #9 Dream etc. (not albums but songs as singles).
Apart from instant karma none of those songs are particularly good - take away the lennon ethos and u could maybe see. This reflected in album sales at the time .
I can think of one song “Every Little Thing” which was written by Paul and George was sung by John Lennon, of course this was and early song and probably they figured it was John’s band so he should lead sing? I don’t know just guessing.
McCartney was attracted to Lennon because John was at the moment singing and playing guitar. McCartney had a musical background, and was also into rock and roll. One report is that Lennon invited Paul to join the band because Paul knew how to tune a guitar (Lennon had begun with playing banjo). Whether at that moment they revealed to each other that they wrote songs is unknown. It was at that point coincidental that they had each been writing songs. And they were introduced by mutual friend Ivan Vaughn.
One of the most important lessons when it comes to The Beatles is that John Lennon is absolutely not a credible source on just about anything. He will flat out lie about facts, out of humor, jealousy, or pure spite.
spikesya Which is exactly what Paul McCartney does. McCartney is always revising history. The Beatles were fortunate to have a number one reach the charts in the US because they were already scheduled to appear there. In the anthology series and everything that followed Paul McCartney always claims that he was adamant that they not go to America until they had a number one hit. Then once they hit number one, they'd be happy to go. Ed Sullivan had already booked them, and Sid Bernstein with already promoting their Carnegie Hall appearance. The man is a revisionist and totally full of shit. So don't just throw Lennon in that pot. Boy are you calling the kettle black.
A rather one-sided view. John's interviews in 1980 are quite reliable. The least reliable is his long interview from 1970. John was in a pretty emotional mood when the Beatles broke up and he had attended Janov therapy. . Wenner published a book on interviews (Lennon Remembers) althought John did not give his consent to the publication, but Wenner didn't care. I also don't trust Paul's views in Barry Miles' book. Paul also disagrees with his own previous opinions.
@@olavirannisto3552 Absolutely! In 1970 the wounds were still fresh and John's interview was given from that vantage point. His 1980 interview was far more rational and accurate. As for Paul McCartney, he's unreliable because he's always rewriting history and contradicting himself. In the Beatles anthology he said that the Beatles told Brian Epstein that they refused go to America until they had a number 1 hit LOL. They were already scheduled to go to America, and the shows were already booked when they hit number one in America. It worked out very well for them, but they did not plan that, and they certainly didn't refuse to go to America until they had a number one record. So your comments hit the nail on the head. I couldn't agree with you more. McCartney not only contradicts history, he's always contradicting himself.
Eleanor Rigby is about as McCartney as a McCartney song can get. He even spoke of how he found the right name, which strangely enough had nothing to do with the Grave stone, a few yards from where they first met. John Lennon was no stranger to the occasional fib which would tie in with whatever mood he was in at the time. The song is also the most un John Lennon song as well. Hmm not sure if that is poor grammar or not, but you get my meaning.
The thing that wasn't brought up is that you should never leave an interview with Paul or John with the thought that you've just heard true statements. Paul said that Linda is on the song Let It Be. (Listen to it. She's not there) They both lied about things all the time for different reasons. Paul just did it a lot more often since he's lived a lot longer.
Lennon was trying to reassert himself as the leader? She presents no evidence for this. John wanted out by 1969, not to reassert himself. In fact there's evidence he favored George getting more songs on future records, if they were to continue, something Paul objected to. What she's saying is just her own speculation. There are other misstatements or assertions for which she presents no evidence, but I'm not going to list them here. She obviously doesn't like John.
John claimed in one interview I believe at 1970 but it could’ve been 1980 that he wrote two of us. It was a complete lie. He had nothing to do with two of us but he really admired the song. Seems that when he really at Myers this song when John really admired a song he wants to claim it for himself.
I believe the refrain, "ah look at all the lonely people' is by Lennon. It lifts the song into another realm and makes it art. So Lennon has a good claim in a way. Terrific presentation of things that I think about often. The one false note: I do not think George Martin Is a good witness for John. I don't think he ever 'got' John and in fact I don't think he even liked John. He often shortchanged the production of John's songs especially the psychedelic masterpieces. Just a slight 'both sides' comment: Lennon's 'Cry Baby Cry' is very much like El Rigby, melodically and in its mood. And I think it's a much better and more hauntingly beautiful song
Actually it was George Harrison who came up with that refrain not Lennon. But overall its a McCartney song. As for Cry Baby Cry, Lennon often got ideas for melody from other songs, his own and sometimes others. For example Paul McCartney’s Michelle and then Lennons Girl, which followed Michelle, have similar melody. The song Ticket to Ride and Daytripper have very similar melody. Even Come Together was very similar to Chuck Berry’s song. McCartney told John to slow it down so he wouldn’t get into issues with plagiarism.
@@lindakelly9552 Every songwriter borrows. It was Lennon's band. They were all writing in the School of Lennon, as you can see in their post Beatles years. There is a tendency these days to minimize Lennon, because he threatened the status quo. And still does. One day soon someone will write him right out of his own band.
@@carlkarasZoNoNine dont get me wrong here I think both John and Paul are bloody brilliant and George Harrison started to come into his own, too late though. I know he wrote some early stuff too but he was a much slower writer, not under the pressure Lennon/McCartney were under to produce. We really lost out when John Lennon was murdered, how horrible. To me the Beatles will always be John, Paul, George, and Ringo. Oh and I do agree with you that George Martin had issues with John Lennon.
How can you claim George Martin short changed John when it was Martin who added the integral strings to songs like I Am the Walrus, and edited together two versions of Strawberry Fields Forever, at different speeds and in different keys, and made them into one brilliant recording? Those are just two examples.
@@mikeysaint4368 Lennon himself hints that Martin never took him seriously. Clipping together 2 halves of a song that John knew would never be able to be performed live anyway was no biggy. Today it can be done in seconds. Martin says the biggest regret of his life was not waiting to put SFF on SGT Pepper's. It indicates to me that only later on he realized it was a work of stone cold genius.
It’s extremely difficult for Americans to understand the Beatles due to their lack of understanding of British culture and Americans’ limited intellectual capacity Despite these obvious short comings Erin did a good job. George Harrison deserved co authorship for Eleanor rigby ie all the lonely people
She's not critical-enough of Paul's account in Barry Miles' "Many Years From Now" which is more inaccurate, in total, than Lennon's accounting of who wrote what.....We know this because there are quite a few Demos that exist for some of the songs in dispute. "If I Fell" for example which Paul falsely-claims is a co-write. Without exception, all of the demos are solo compositions. Also, she doesn't take into account that Paul was buying up shares of Northern Songs behind John's back near the end of the Beatles' association. A fact that angered John so much, he couldn't even bring himself to discuss that with Jann Wenner in the RS interviews....so, there were several REASONS John was so angry beyond Paul's leadership style of the group after Epstein's death. John was no saint either...he was very difficult.... but Paul wasn't the "cuddly" good-natured mop-top his fans think that he was (or is....)....He's a hard-nosed self-interested businessman as it turns out...This seems to get overlooked because of his pleasing public persona...still love him though!
@@myguitardetective5961 He bought, if I recall correctly, 1000 shares. The shares he bought weren't enough to give him any more power in the company. It was just a smart business idea to reinvest in himself that was suggested to him. John Lennon took it too personally. If John wanted to, there was nothing stopping him from buying more shares. Also If I Fell has nothing to do with Eleanor Rigby, which even John's best friend said he had barely anything to do with.
@@myguitardetective5961 No one really knows how much Paul contributed to If I Fell. Regarding Paul's "happy" mop-top persona, it also works against him though. Paul never wanted that to be his image because he doesn't want to be known as just the "cute" Beatle who isn't deep. I also don't think he should be knocked for wanting to be careful with what he says to the press. Why wouldn't he? He's led a relatively drama free life and I think that's admirable. I don't look at it like a PR stunt.
@@myguitardetective5961 Paul wrote Too Many People because John was talking trash in the press to him. Too Many People was a veiled light jab at John. John in return made a nasty diss in which every thing he said was false. "All you've done was Yesterday.." which John knew was bullshit as well.
This is excellent. Erin Weber is a blessing.
and so are you, breathless 345! Your Beatle videos are transcendentally excellent!
Great session
Erin Weber is pretty strong. That said, she way over plays Lennon's supposed claim on Eleanor Ribgy. If you look at the Lennon interview in 1980 (David Shef - Playboy) If find it to be his most accurate. Lennon in 1980 gives Paul credit for the song.
It is relatively easy to determine who wrote what in "Beatles" songs by who sings it -- including parts of songs.
Not if Ringo (or George in the early days) sang it. Every Little Thing is mostly Paul's song, but John's voice is more prominent.
But yes, by and large it is true.
George sang his own early songs.
Amazing lecture.
Erin Weber is a gifted communicator and if she has a horse in this race I wasn't aware of it. It's refreshing to hear a lecture where one's biases (and we all have biases) are disconnected from the pursuit of truth.
I see in the comments a lot of people have their own views and doubt Erin’s veracity, She is actually a researcher some of the people that wrote the books we all own did not do the correct research that’s why we have so many conflicting statements
I must say, that even if History concluded "Eleanor Rigby" to be a Lennon song, I wouldnt have believed it - ever. Its clearly a McCartney melody/song/construction. As Lennon sang himself; he is/was a "Jealous Guy".
Is that a fact only for " claimed" Lennon-written songs or is there any Paul-claimed written song that Lennon had a part in? Was Paul they only that wrote and composed full songs only by himself? In Get back it seem to me that all four took part in playing and singing on the songs. Maybe that's why Lennon was jealous and Paul was more confident.
John Lennon never claimed to be the primary writer of Eleanor Rigby. He said that McCartney started the song and had the first verse, and he had then helped finish up the song by working on a good percentage of the final lyrics. This makes sense. McCartney never wrote lyrics like that in his life.....and also would never himself choose to make controversial statements on Religion ("Father McKensie wiping his hands as her turns and he walks from the grave...No One Was Saved").
George Martin is the one responsible for the striking Musical String Arrangement (inspired by the Movie "Psycho") that makes the song distinctive.
Erin, next time you do ANY video make sure closed captioning is TURNED ON! For those of us with hearing impairments, and presenters with echo, reverb and accents, it all makes it very difficult to understand what is being said.
There has also been "scientific"-musicological of chord sequences typic of Lennon, and typical of Paul, which differ. The song in question as to authorship in that case is about Lennon's "In My Life. The conclusion is that Lennon wrote it.
The study has many criticisms. They got certain other parts of songs wrong, so their system has flaws and is not always correct.
If anything, Paul has stayed consistent about his involvement on In My Life. As early as 1972, when he was shown John's list of who-wrote-what in the April edition of Hit Parader, he pointed out he composed the music on a mellotron in John's house.
In the late 70s he told Paul Gambaccini the same, although he may have specified the 'melody' as opposed to *all* of the music.
He repeats having written the 'tune' on a mellotron to John's words in his and Linda's 1984 Playboy interview.
He does the same in his semi-autobiography Many Years From Now from 1997.
John is a little bit more erratic: In the Rolling Stone interview(1970), released as Lennon Remembers in 1971, he states that '..on Norwegian Wood and In My Life Paul helped with the middle eight, to give credit where it's due.'
In the 1972 Hit Parader interview he takes full credit for the song - at least Paul is not mentioned - which appears to be the reason Paul first made *his* claim, at least publicly.
In his final Playboy interview in 1980, he credits Paul with '..the harmony and the middle eight itself.' [which doesn't mean much as the song doesn't have a middle eight].
But I've recently come across some of the tape recordings from that interview, and it becomes clear that John is not absolutely sure as to whether Paul contributed the middle eight to In My Life or If I Fell, suggesting that In My Life might have been completely his own composition after all.
I think the most likely scenario is that neither of them wrote the music entirely on his own.
Basically - without this interminable waffle. John wrote the basic tune and lyrics . Paul helped arrange it with the rest of the band. And George Martin made up the solo. In his interviews Paul often gets arrangements mixed up with composition.
@@scottandrewbrass1931 excellent comment
A sound piece of historiographical work, and therefore a sound conclusion. To my mind, the case could have been strengthened a touch more if one of Paul’s quoted strengths, that of chord and chord structure ,had been brought to bear. A musicological argument in other words, a somewhat understated area of argumentation, simply because it is fairly specialised. I believe there are sources that would further strengthen Paul’s claim. One source is composer Howard Goodall. This line of argumentation is used in passing after a question about In My Life
That magically little beatle chain is broken by Stu
Has the Dugan-Gorges Conference Center upgraded their A/V systems yet? I'm quite enjoying Ms. Weber's topic but jeez. Plus, why cut the video off short? I was digging the Q&A.
Such a great and thught-provoking talk... I can't help but point out that Ms. Weber bears a passing resemblance to Wings-Era Linda McCartney :)
I thought the same!
Very interesting talk . Just a minor point: In England, Hunter Davies is pronounced Day-viss not Dayveez
Davis is day-viss.
Davies is day-veez
@@SecretAgentPaul No. In the UK, they're both pronounced the same.
@@marcchrys but they're not. Davies and Davis are different names, pronounced differently. Like McCartney vs McCarthy.
@@SecretAgentPaul different spelling, but they're not pronounced differently (not like McCarthy and McCartney). Listen to Hunter Davies pronounce his own name (Day-viss) on the Age UK website video. He should know! ;-)
@@marcchrys Hmmm…perhaps not a valid guideline. There are four people whose name is Funnell, that I know. They choose to announce themselves differently ie. Fur…nell, Fun…ell and Foo…nell. Would you wish to tell them which is correct? I was taught geography by a Mr Davies, who introduced himself as Mr Dav…eez. My PE teacher was Mr. Davis…pronounced as it is written. I live in the UK, by the way.
In addition, any questions from the audience should be repeated by you so we know what the hell the question was asked. One can't always figure what the question was from your answer.
another tech weakness of this presentation, unfortunately. Outweighed by its brilliance, though!
Ms Weber doesn't quite get the drummer situation correct. Before they went to Liverpool, Lennon, McCartney, and Harrison were all playing guitar with Lennon's friend Stu Sutcliff on bass. It was at this time several different drummers played with the band. At the end of this period, McCartney was playing the drums. When they got the gig in Hamburg, the contract required that the band have five members. So they drafted Pete Best, the son of the owner of a youth club, to play drums. While they were in Hamburg they occasionally jammed with other English musicians also playing in Germany, including Starr (who they liked a lot). Sutcliff decided to stay in Europe, so McCartney took over bass. Starr replaced Best when producer George Martin told them Best was not good enough to record with the band.
And to further add to the dismissal of Pete was the fact that Ringo sat in several time at the Cavern Club when Pete either couldn't make the show or was sick. This how the friendship with Ringo grew with the other Beatles.
@@johnsheppard4143 George was the one really pushing for Ringo even before they met George Martin.
I call bs on most of this. Lennon never claimed he wrote ER. only helped finish the lyrics. also pete shoten (according to his book) claimed to have helped.
And according to what I read... George offered the line "All the Lonely People "
He did in fact claim that he wrote "a good lot of the lyrics, about 70%". This is the claim that is disputed by Paul, and also by Pete Shotton.
Love this
This woman is claiming something that never happen.
John Lennon NEVER claimed to be the primary writer of Eleanor Rigby. John never said that he wrote the melody or the music. He said that McCartney started the song and had the first verse, and that he then had helped Paul finish up the song by working on a good percentage of the final lyrics. This makes sense. McCartney never wrote lyrics like that in his life.....and also would never himself choose to make controversial statements on Religion ("Father McKensie wiping his hands as her turns and he walks from the grave...No One Was Saved").
John also named George Harrison as contributing to the Chorus.
George Martin is the one responsible for the striking Musical String Arrangement (inspired by the Movie "Psycho") that makes the song distinctive.
Martin's musical orchestration, and the clever lyrics ... are where the "genuis" comes from.
.
I think it didn’t work because it’s the stereo version and that vocal is coming mainly out of one channel, which must not have been working or plugged in
In an interview George Martin said that “ In my life “ is a Lennon song
Wikipedia disagrees with her analysis of In My Life. Bad memory? Or just a pro-Paul bias?
Her book is a must have and a great read .
I’ve always thought that ‘look at him working’ came from John.
Erin Weber is fantastic and has the correct approach to this. In my opinion Eleanor Rigby should be credited McCartney with Harrison for his contribution of the ALL THE LONELY PEOPLE line. Others making lyrical contribution like Ringomay have a valid claim too.
Yes, I agree - George's line is pretty vital to Rigby. McCartney has said that George should really have got a writing credit for his And I Love Her guitar riff.
It's strange that Paul never mentioned that until after George's death (Around the time of the Martin Scorcese doc). He also forgets to mention John's middle "A Love like ours. Will never die " bit these days aswell
A line or two of a song does not warrant a co-writing credit. That’s not how songwriting works. Anyway, Paul already had the lines “All the lonely people, where do they all come from? All the lonely people, where do they all belong?” George just suggested “look at” for the exclaim. So it’s not even really a full line, lol.
So let me get this straight? The fact that Paul sings Eleanor Rigby means that he is unequivocally the principal songwriter, as was their practice. And I'm fine with that because that is what they had always done. So then why do you need to have a second video about In my life to uncover the principal songwriter? John is singing lead isn't he? You can't have it both ways Lady.
Mike I believe she said John had the Lyrics and possibly the chord pattern and asked Paul to help with the Melody.
@@johnsheppard4143 Sorry John, then that's on me then. It's quite possible that Paul did help with the melody. It's either in the video or someone commented, that John wouldn't have written a melody like that because of its range. However, that's totally inaccurate. John could have easily written that melody. The only people who know for sure are John and Paul. Unfortunately John is gone, and Paul is always rewriting history and contradicting himself in the process. However it came about, it's a wonderful song with the great solo by George Martin.
I wonder if she has read Mark Lewisohns Tune In?
She's likely to have read both the abridged and the extended version. I seem to remember her even saying so in some interview, or podcast.
Yea she has….at least she referenced it quite a lot late in her book.
My understanding is George wrote the chorus and the third verse, John assisted Paul who started with a song called Sadie Hawkins.
We all know now the name is on a grave stone in Liverpool where they met.Paul story we all know by now.
The chords are more typical of John, no?
Norwegian Wood - John says it’s his song completely. And, in general terms, absolutely.
Paul says he provided the last line. Does it matter? Maybe not, because one line is not significant vis-a-vis ownership.
But, the line itself is profound.
John’s song.
But in the case of Eleanor Rigby, we have proof that John didn't contribute anything significant to it.
Let's be accurate: In 1970 John said, in the Rolling Stone interview: 'I think on Norwegian Wood and In My Life Paul helped with the middle eight, to give credit where it's due.'
[The 'she asked me to stay and she told be to sit anywhere'-section, which is where Paul's voice appears.]
In the 1972 Hit Parader interview John said[about Norwegian Wood]: 'Me but Paul helped on the lyric.'
In John's 1980 Playboy interview: 'Norwegian Wood is my song completely.'
However, when David Sheff asked John about the title, the answer was: 'I don't know how the hell I got to Norwegian Wood.'
Paul asserts in his biography that when John presented the idea to him, John only had the first line of the song and nothing else.
So the idea that Eleanor Rigby and In My Life are the only disputed Lennon/McCartney songs is simply untrue. I could have mentioned Ticket To Ride, This Boy, There's a Place, Do You Want To Know a Secret and I'm Happy Just To Dance With You, and others as well.
The likely reason why In My Life and Eleanor Rigby are singled out, is because they seem to rank a bit higher in the Parthenon of Beatles songs, so claiming authorship on those two would probably carry a bit more weight than the two 'insignificant' songs they wrote for George.
Even Lennon and McCartney fans aren't particularly bothered with discussing those two.
According to Paul Simon, Lennon asked him at a dinner party how he dealt with his "other half," meaning Art Garfunkel. Lennon went on to tell him that back when he was in the Quarrymen a friend told him about this guy in another band who was really good. So Lennon went to see him -- he was Paul McCartney and the was really good. He decided he needed to get McCartney in the Quarrymen where he could keep an eye on him. So the whole churchyard festival was set up in advance by Lennon so he could get McCartney in the band.
That’s highly unlikely
In fact..Mcartney went up there randomly. Your story is just another rumor
@@billbrasky12 Don't tell me, tell Paul Simon.
Thats an amazing story
Looking forward to reading your book!
They didn't ignore Harrison. Not only did they insist on at least one song per album, he got the lead spot with Taxman (which John helped). Not too shabby.
Lennon also envied McCartneys single status. Desperately.
Talking about breakups, reading into Paul and Jane's relationship is just sad.
There's also one crucial pattern of proof Erin, of who was the driving genius behind Beatles, is their solo career songs. Paul never wrote lyrically or melodically par songs post break-up, but John wrote songs on the level of Beatles in his solo career like Imagine, Instant Karma, Love, Working Class Hero, Mind Games, Woman, Mother, #9 Dream etc. (not albums but songs as singles).
And that’s what bias looks like.
@@deannabayless8025 That's what facts look like, Paul's granny music was let loose post Beatle and he never recovered.
you haven't heard Band on the Run then?
Apart from instant karma none of those songs are particularly good - take away the lennon ethos and u could maybe see. This reflected in album sales at the time .
Paul wrote a bunch of bangers after beatles lol, even his new album is good.
Eleanor Rigby - John himself said it was Paul’s baby.
Playboy Interviews p. 151.
He has more details on p. 118-119. where he says he added a couple of lines, as does George H. (who says he wrote a lot of the lyrics to ER).
@@yrlic But John didn't add anything of significance to it like he said he did.
I can think of one song “Every Little Thing” which was written by Paul and George was sung by John Lennon, of course this was and early song and probably they figured it was John’s band so he should lead sing? I don’t know just guessing.
Dear Linda! Tell me please, how do you know about the McCartney-Harrison authorship in that song? I've never heard anything about it...
1957 meeting - they were attracted to each other because they wrote songs.
No one else they talked to, did that.
McCartney was attracted to Lennon because John was at the moment singing and playing guitar. McCartney had a musical background, and was also into rock and roll. One report is that Lennon invited Paul to join the band because Paul knew how to tune a guitar (Lennon had begun with playing banjo). Whether at that moment they revealed to each other that they wrote songs is unknown.
It was at that point coincidental that they had each been writing songs.
And they were introduced by mutual friend Ivan Vaughn.
One of the most important lessons when it comes to The Beatles is that John Lennon is absolutely not a credible source on just about anything. He will flat out lie about facts, out of humor, jealousy, or pure spite.
spikesya Which is exactly what Paul McCartney does. McCartney is always revising history. The Beatles were fortunate to have a number one reach the charts in the US because they were already scheduled to appear there. In the anthology series and everything that followed Paul McCartney always claims that he was adamant that they not go to America until they had a number one hit. Then once they hit number one, they'd be happy to go. Ed Sullivan had already booked them, and Sid Bernstein with already promoting their Carnegie Hall appearance. The man is a revisionist and totally full of shit. So don't just throw Lennon in that pot. Boy are you calling the kettle black.
A rather one-sided view. John's interviews in 1980 are quite reliable. The least reliable is his long interview from 1970. John was in a pretty emotional mood when the Beatles broke up and he had attended Janov therapy. . Wenner published a book on interviews (Lennon Remembers) althought John did not give his consent to the publication, but Wenner didn't care. I also don't trust Paul's views in Barry Miles' book. Paul also disagrees with his own previous opinions.
@@olavirannisto3552 Absolutely!
In 1970 the wounds were still fresh and John's interview was given from that vantage point. His 1980 interview was far more rational and accurate. As for Paul McCartney, he's unreliable because he's always rewriting history and contradicting himself. In the Beatles anthology he said that the Beatles told Brian Epstein that they refused go to America until they had a number 1 hit LOL. They were already scheduled to go to America, and the shows were already booked when they hit number one in America. It worked out very well for them, but they did not plan that, and they certainly didn't refuse to go to America until they had a number one record. So your comments hit the nail on the head. I couldn't agree with you more. McCartney not only contradicts history, he's always contradicting himself.
Eleanor Rigby is about as McCartney as a McCartney song can get. He even spoke of how he found the right name, which strangely enough had nothing to do with the Grave stone, a few yards from where they first met. John Lennon was no stranger to the occasional fib which would tie in with whatever mood he was in at the time. The song is also the most un John Lennon song as well. Hmm not sure if that is poor grammar or not, but you get my meaning.
The thing that wasn't brought up is that you should never leave an interview with Paul or John with the thought that you've just heard true statements. Paul said that Linda is on the song Let It Be. (Listen to it. She's not there) They both lied about things all the time for different reasons. Paul just did it a lot more often since he's lived a lot longer.
Linda was in the mix of the single version. The album version, which is the popular version, doesn't have Linda on it. Paul didn't lie about that
Lennon was trying to reassert himself as the leader? She presents no evidence for this. John wanted out by 1969, not to reassert himself. In fact there's evidence he favored George getting more songs on future records, if they were to continue, something Paul objected to. What she's saying is just her own speculation. There are other misstatements or assertions for which she presents no evidence, but I'm not going to list them here. She obviously doesn't like John.
I agree
John claimed in one interview I believe at 1970 but it could’ve been 1980 that he wrote two of us. It was a complete lie. He had nothing to do with two of us but he really admired the song. Seems that when he really at Myers this song when John really admired a song he wants to claim it for himself.
Photos ??
she is cute!
Really? Why don't you just look at the thousands of hours of Paul and Lennon? Really?
She says why right at the start. Really?? Did you even watch the video?
I believe the refrain, "ah look at all the lonely people' is by Lennon. It lifts the song into another realm and makes it art. So Lennon has a good claim in a way. Terrific presentation of things that I think about often. The one false note: I do not think George Martin Is a good witness for John. I don't think he ever 'got' John and in fact I don't think he even liked John. He often shortchanged the production of John's songs especially the psychedelic masterpieces. Just a slight 'both sides' comment: Lennon's 'Cry Baby Cry' is very much like El Rigby, melodically and in its mood. And I think it's a much better and more hauntingly beautiful song
Actually it was George Harrison who came up with that refrain not Lennon. But overall its a McCartney song. As for Cry Baby Cry, Lennon often got ideas for melody from other songs, his own and sometimes others. For example Paul McCartney’s Michelle and then Lennons Girl, which followed Michelle, have similar melody. The song Ticket to Ride and Daytripper have very similar melody. Even Come Together was very similar to Chuck Berry’s song. McCartney told John to slow it down so he wouldn’t get into issues with plagiarism.
@@lindakelly9552 Every songwriter borrows. It was Lennon's band. They were all writing in the School of Lennon, as you can see in their post Beatles years. There is a tendency these days to minimize Lennon, because he threatened the status quo. And still does. One day soon someone will write him right out of his own band.
@@carlkarasZoNoNine dont get me wrong here I think both John and Paul are bloody brilliant and George Harrison started to come into his own, too late though. I know he wrote some early stuff too but he was a much slower writer, not under the pressure Lennon/McCartney were under to produce. We really lost out when John Lennon was murdered, how horrible. To me the Beatles will always be John, Paul, George, and Ringo. Oh and I do agree with you that George Martin had issues with John Lennon.
How can you claim George Martin short changed John when it was Martin who added the integral strings to songs like I Am the Walrus, and edited together two versions of Strawberry Fields Forever, at different speeds and in different keys, and made them into one brilliant recording? Those are just two examples.
@@mikeysaint4368 Lennon himself hints that Martin never took him seriously. Clipping together 2 halves of a song that John knew would never be able to be performed live anyway was no biggy. Today it can be done in seconds. Martin says the biggest regret of his life was not waiting to put SFF on SGT Pepper's. It indicates to me that only later on he realized it was a work of stone cold genius.
It’s extremely difficult for Americans to understand the Beatles due to their lack of understanding of British culture and Americans’ limited intellectual capacity Despite these obvious short comings Erin did a good job. George Harrison deserved co authorship for Eleanor rigby ie all the lonely people
She's not critical-enough of Paul's account in Barry Miles' "Many Years From Now" which is more inaccurate, in total, than Lennon's accounting of who wrote what.....We know this because there are quite a few Demos that exist for some of the songs in dispute. "If I Fell" for example which Paul falsely-claims is a co-write. Without exception, all of the demos are solo compositions. Also, she doesn't take into account that Paul was buying up shares of Northern Songs behind John's back near the end of the Beatles' association. A fact that angered John so much, he couldn't even bring himself to discuss that with Jann Wenner in the RS interviews....so, there were several REASONS John was so angry beyond Paul's leadership style of the group after Epstein's death. John was no saint either...he was very difficult.... but Paul wasn't the "cuddly" good-natured mop-top his fans think that he was (or is....)....He's a hard-nosed self-interested businessman as it turns out...This seems to get overlooked because of his pleasing public persona...still love him though!
@@myguitardetective5961 great points excellent points
@@myguitardetective5961 He bought, if I recall correctly, 1000 shares. The shares he bought weren't enough to give him any more power in the company. It was just a smart business idea to reinvest in himself that was suggested to him. John Lennon took it too personally. If John wanted to, there was nothing stopping him from buying more shares. Also If I Fell has nothing to do with Eleanor Rigby, which even John's best friend said he had barely anything to do with.
@@myguitardetective5961 No one really knows how much Paul contributed to If I Fell. Regarding Paul's "happy" mop-top persona, it also works against him though. Paul never wanted that to be his image because he doesn't want to be known as just the "cute" Beatle who isn't deep. I also don't think he should be knocked for wanting to be careful with what he says to the press. Why wouldn't he? He's led a relatively drama free life and I think that's admirable. I don't look at it like a PR stunt.
@@myguitardetective5961 Paul wrote Too Many People because John was talking trash in the press to him. Too Many People was a veiled light jab at John. John in return made a nasty diss in which every thing he said was false. "All you've done was Yesterday.." which John knew was bullshit as well.