― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Wednesday, 9 March 2005 19:18 (nineteen years ago) link
― Lee F# (fsharp), Wednesday, 9 March 2005 19:44 (nineteen years ago) link
― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Wednesday, 9 March 2005 19:52 (nineteen years ago) link
― billstevejim, Wednesday, 9 March 2005 20:16 (nineteen years ago) link
― Doobie Keebler (Charles McCain), Wednesday, 9 March 2005 20:22 (nineteen years ago) link
― John Fredland (jfredland), Wednesday, 9 March 2005 22:24 (nineteen years ago) link
― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Wednesday, 9 March 2005 22:31 (nineteen years ago) link
but that's not true. they had a lousy reissue campaign, with questionable remastering, no bonus tracks and perfunctory packaging.
― fact checking cuz (fcc), Wednesday, 9 March 2005 22:35 (nineteen years ago) link
― Dot Dash, Wednesday, 9 March 2005 22:45 (nineteen years ago) link
I don't know which Beatles thread to post this in, so this'll have to do. I've been listening to "Sgt. Pepper" lately (40th anniversary and all) and there is a line in "She's Leaving Home" that has bugged me for many years. The line in question?
"Fun is the one thing that money can't buy."
My reasons for hating this line are thus:
1. Not three years before, the Beatles themselves informed us that money cannot buy love. 2. Of all the things that money can't buy, Macca lists FUN as the ONE THING that MONEY CAN'T BUY? Fun would seem to be one of the easier things to procure through the use of currency. Go see a movie or something, for Christ's sake.
God, I'm a nerd but I had to get this off of my chest.
― Davey D, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 22:20 (sixteen years ago) link
that line bothered me too
― Dominique, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 22:23 (sixteen years ago) link
oh wells
― Tim Ellison, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 22:45 (sixteen years ago) link
i enjoyed reading johan kugelberg's beatles are so awesome piece in the old issue of ugly things with kim fowley on the cover the other day.
― Tim Ellison, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 22:47 (sixteen years ago) link
As if Paul actually believed every line of lyric that he wrote. I always thought he was more into the idea of putting words together that sound good with the song, rather than emphasizing his words.
― billstevejim, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 22:52 (sixteen years ago) link
To be fair, the speaker in the other song mostly emphasizes that money can't buy HIM love, weakly suggesting that it can't buy YOU love as a sort of trailing afterthought.
― nabisco, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 22:57 (sixteen years ago) link
Also the original 45 pressing had "YMMV" etched along the run-off groove.
― nabisco, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 22:58 (sixteen years ago) link
xx-post
Agreed, fully! However, the rest of the song is so evocative (especially for Paul) and carefully put together that I'm surprised he chose such a cop-out line to conclude the whole story (and then stuck poor John with the task of delivering it).
― Davey D, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 22:58 (sixteen years ago) link
how do you know john didn't write that line?
― Tim Ellison, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 23:19 (sixteen years ago) link
Well, I don't.
― Davey D, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 23:29 (sixteen years ago) link
also, how can you say "so evocative for paul" when he was writing stuff like for no one and and eleanor rigby and penny lane around that time??
― Tim Ellison, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 23:31 (sixteen years ago) link
I don't think it's so bad if you hear it in the voice of rich parents trying to figure out why their daughter ran away after trying to buy her off for years.
― Pete Scholtes, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 23:33 (sixteen years ago) link
paul says in 'many years from now' that they wrote it together: "(john) was doing the Greek chorus, the parents' point of view: 'we gave her most of our lives/we gave her everything money could buy'."
― Tim Ellison, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 23:36 (sixteen years ago) link
Those are also especially evocative for Paul. They're the exception, not the rule. For the record, I'm one of the biggest Macca supporters I know - I just had issues with that one line.
And Pete, I do think the line makes sense if you imagine the parents saying it - something that's reinforced by the fact that John sings all of the parents' lines. I'd never noticed this before. I do believe you've saved the song for me!
― Davey D, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 23:39 (sixteen years ago) link
See, this is why I love ILM. I can now listen to this line with contentment.
― Davey D, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 23:40 (sixteen years ago) link
you're content because john wrote it??
― Tim Ellison, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 23:41 (sixteen years ago) link
I'm content because I'd never imagined that particular line as the parent trying to rationalize their daughter's departure - "oh well, fun is the one thing we couldn't buy for her."
― Davey D, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 23:42 (sixteen years ago) link
parent -> parents
indeed - problem solved!
― Tim Ellison, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 23:43 (sixteen years ago) link
Man, I was on fire on this thread.
― Alex in NYC, Wednesday, 20 June 2007 23:48 (sixteen years ago) link
also, how can you say "so evocative for paul" when he was writing stuff like...
Ah, I think you misread Davey D. He meant that the line was evocative for paul! Since he knows that it was, obv "Davey D." is Paul.
...when he was writing stuff like for no one...
oh come on, even though Davey could only describe his own feelings about the lyrics, I'm sure he was aware that there was an audience out there as well.
― anatol_merklich, Thursday, 21 June 2007 00:08 (sixteen years ago) link
1st comment is funny but you lost me on the 2nd one!
― Tim Ellison, Thursday, 21 June 2007 00:20 (sixteen years ago) link
I don't know if this has been said, but the version of "I'm Looking Through You" is much, much better on Anthology 2, not just for the superior arrangment and sonics, but because it doesn't yet have the bridge, which is weak musically, and which corners the song into being about love, when it can be about many other kinds of relationships otherwise.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eedLQ006ciM
Bridge: Why, tell me why, did you not treat me right? Love has a nasty habit of disappearing overnight
― Pete Scholtes, Thursday, 21 June 2007 00:30 (sixteen years ago) link
I prefer the Anthology versions of 'Something' and 'Can't Buy Me Love'. 'Something' has more of a sitar-y guitar and a new verse, and 'Can't Buy Me Love' has a call and response structure that works really well, too bad it was scrapped.
― musically, Thursday, 21 June 2007 00:53 (sixteen years ago) link
IIRC john wrote all of the parents' chorus and took it largely from things his famously cranky aunt mimi used to tell him ("never a thought for ourselves...")
― J.D., Thursday, 21 June 2007 00:58 (sixteen years ago) link
There is nothing new to say about The Beatles. But their music is still great nevertheless. Both as a listen in itself, and as a source of musical influence for new generations of musicians to come.
― Geir Hongro, Thursday, 21 June 2007 02:13 (sixteen years ago) link
You are a true patriot.
― Hurting 2, Thursday, 21 June 2007 02:17 (sixteen years ago) link
musical influence for new generations of musicians to come.
That could very well be needless wishful thinking, Geir. I say let young people create their own music.
― Tim Ellison, Thursday, 21 June 2007 02:26 (sixteen years ago) link
They will anyway.
― Tim Ellison, Thursday, 21 June 2007 02:27 (sixteen years ago) link
Have you heard my amazing new album, Memory Almost Full? It like, a stunning return to form, or something, y'know?
― Davey D, Thursday, 21 June 2007 03:56 (sixteen years ago) link
I agree about the bridge cornering the song lyrically, but I prefer the original arrangement. Anthology 3's version of "Ob-La-Di" completely slays the White Album version, though.
― Davey D, Thursday, 21 June 2007 03:59 (sixteen years ago) link
It's been a long time since I've heard it, but I seem to remember the acoustic version of "All Things Must Pass" on "Anthology 3" being pretty amazing.
― novaheat, Thursday, 21 June 2007 06:10 (sixteen years ago) link
Insert commas in your mind before and after "like".
― anatol_merklich, Thursday, 21 June 2007 06:30 (sixteen years ago) link
In my early teens the family had a CD player that had buttons for intro and repeat. You could program a single song and use both buttons so that it'd play the first ten seconds endlessly. I discovered this worked rather well with "Girl," such that you get asked "Is there anybody going to listen to my story all about the girl who came to stay?" over and over. What was once a rhetorical question starts to seem rather desperate after a while.
― eatandoph, Thursday, 21 June 2007 07:30 (sixteen years ago) link
You know, I read recently that Paul wrote "for no-one" while on holiday abroad (switzerland?) with Jane Asher.
Must have been one hell of a downer holiday!
― Mark G, Thursday, 21 June 2007 08:30 (sixteen years ago) link
I say let young people create their own music.
Yes. But based on the legacy of The Beatles. Just like Beethoven created his own music based on the legacy of Mozart and Haydn.
― Geir Hongro, Thursday, 21 June 2007 08:47 (sixteen years ago) link
The bridge is the best thing about "I'm Looking Through You"
― Geir Hongro, Thursday, 21 June 2007 08:49 (sixteen years ago) link
The 'pre-' version without the bridge is better.
― Mark G, Thursday, 21 June 2007 08:57 (sixteen years ago) link
but geir there have already been generations that have done something with the legacy of the beatles. i don't know how long you expect it to go on.
― Tim Ellison, Thursday, 21 June 2007 13:36 (sixteen years ago) link
It reads like a Minor Threat song without the bridge.
― Pete Scholtes, Thursday, 21 June 2007 20:22 (sixteen years ago) link
Stephen King shot John Lennon.
― Mark Rich@rdson, Thursday, 21 June 2007 21:23 (sixteen years ago) link