Cool Question

[Greg]

Don't know if it's been asked yet:

Would we appreciate George's songs more...or less...if they weren't on Beatle albums?

[mervap]

That's a tough one, for sure.....for me personally, I think his tunes, especially in the Beatles' later career, were the equal of what JL and PM were writing. His songs added a sense of mystery as well, so I think his stuff is better left amongst the Beatles collection.

[Greg]

Yeah it's tough.  Do they look at them as, "Hey.  He was a Beatle.  Those are Beatle songs."  or do they pale somewhat when you've got something like Drive My Car or Nowhere Man on the same album as his songs?

But, yeah, when you've written Gently Weeps or Here Comes the Sun there's no difference in the song quality.

[Paperback Writer]

Well............if he were not a Beatle, perhaps he would have flown under the radar and been under-appreciated......yet he may have been discovered as a break-out artist - known as the next coming of the Beatles.

I say, he definitely was laps behind  John and Paul, early days, a lap and a half in the middle years, then neck and neck (minus the issue of number of songs) in the late period.  Stashing all those tunes for his solo career shows he was ready for his break-out and recognition.

[chris]

Well............if he were not a Beatle, perhaps he would have flown under the radar and been under-appreciated......

that is exactly right, i think. lets face it. you need more than talent (vocal, instrumental, songwriting) to make it big. you need luck, too. plenty of talented musicians never made it. george was lucky enough to be in the band. and that...got him noticed.

i think i am still figuring out just how great this guy was. even among beatle fans he goes under-appreciated.

[Kylenz]

Yeah it's tough.  Do they look at them as, "Hey.  He was a Beatle.  Those are Beatle songs."  or do they pale somewhat when you've got something like Drive My Car or Nowhere Man on the same album as his songs?

But, yeah, when you've written Gently Weeps or Here Comes the Sun there's no difference in the song quality.

Well personally, Think For Yourself and If I Needed Someone are two of my favourite songs on Rubber Soul! I'm a big fan of those lesser-regarded tunes, like Wait and You Won't See Me. George's first Beatle song Don't Bother Me is also a fav tune here too. Did he ever try and play that song live as a solo artist? I think it would groove with the likes of his mate Eric Clapton playing a wee lead line underneath.

[acebackwords]

Personally, I think the  songs George recorded on his first couple of solo albums are better than most of the stuff he recorded as a Beatle. 

Has anyone heard that live tribute concert they did after George died where people like Clapton, Ringo, Paul, Jeff Lynde, etc are playing covers of George's songs?  Great show, and his solo songs hold up right up there with his Beatles stuff.

This is just conjecture, but I strongly suspect that none of the other Beatles would have made it without John.  Not because of lack of talent, but because of lack of drive.  Paul's Dad would have probably convinced him to get a sensible, boring job, and maybe just play music on the side as a hobby.  (Or as Aunti Mimi used to famously scold John: "The guitar is nice and all, but you'll never make a living at it!")  And John probably wouldn't have attained the level of popularity that he achieved without the other three  --  without the pop star/ show biz appeal that he got from Paul, George, and Ringo.   But I still think that John would have been a force to be reckoned with, with our without the other Beatles.  I'm not so sure about the other three.

[Greg]

Interesting to read.  ...and sure, makes sense to me.  Paul could easily have gone the straight route.  John needed the challenge of, and prodding by, Paul and his talents.  Although maybe he would have hooked up with someone else to prod him along.  It just wouldn't have been a talent like Paul's.

All that makes me think of John moving to New Zealand or Australia as a kid or moving to Manchester or whatever.  And...are there two other people who never met and never went into music that would have formed a partnership as magical as Lennon/McCartney? 

[acebackwords]

Of course without the other 3 Beatles John could have gone completely off the rails, considering what an extreme, and risk-taking, character he was.  John often said that one of the biggest helps he got from the other 3 Beatles and from Brian Epstein was they helped keep him out of trouble.  And helped to clean up his messes and smooth things over afterwards.

My position? As great of a musician and songwriter as Paul obviously was, John was the Beatles.  Paul once beautifully described the dynamics between the Beatles: "We were all in love with John.  It was like having our own Elvis in the group."  Maybe later, after Paul started noticing that he was coming up with the lion's share of hit singles, he might have changed his mind a little.  But I still say John was the driving force behind the whole thing.  Especially at the beginning (one wag summed up the Hard Days Night album as basically a Lennon solo album -- most of the songs are his after all).  And especially during the psychedelic period in the middle (he was the Walrus after all).  And especially at the end, when he added a whole new weirdo element by adding Yoko to the mix.  Or as John once put it:  "I started the band, and I disbanded."

Nothing against the other three.  Brilliant and great all the way.  But John was a rare genius.

[Derek]

As far as George's songwriting and musicianship went and how it progressed during the Beatle years....John and Paul created a monster without realizing it. George knew from day 1 how they were writing songs. And George was a quick learner. They never expected that from George. And i suppose it was somewhat of a threat to them...maybe more to Paul than John. As far as John "being The Beatles", i'm not sure i agree, yes, John had the drive and the cockiness..but Paul had the musical know-how...and John knew it, When he first met Paul. He knew right from the moment he met him that he needed Paul. John could still write songs, but they didnt have that "maturity" like Paul's style did...John desperatly needed that, and he got it. It was almost like John meeting a woman at a bar, and he's dang determined to get her. Paul was the "her".

[2 of 3]

The question is...would ANY of them gone anywhere without each other, and the timing of events that created them? Nobody knows of course. :)