Paul McCartney - Egypt Station (#1 album in US) Appreciation Thread 2.0 - New and Improved

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I think his (solo) reputation has suffered because he was in the Beatles. That's a nonsense thing to say, of course, because his reputation is based on having been in that band, and it's what makes him the greatest artist of all time. But that's kind of my point. Nobody looks beyond his Beatles career and, when they do, they find nonsense like Junior's Farm and twee stuff like Mull of Kintyre and We All Stand Together.

If McCartney had written he exact same songs and released them as a solo artist in the 1960's I think he'd be considered as an artist who had exceptional talent but, like many others, had his best days at the beginning of his career. I'd think he'd be thought of like Dylan. The problem is that there's this dividing line in 1970. And his post-1970 work is much less well liked than the work he did with The Beatles. Which allows some to think that it was the presence of the others - notably Lennon - that elevated McCartney beyond what he was capable of on his own. And that can't help but sully his reputation and that of his solo career.

 

Fake live performance of DRW. Not bad.

 

Perhaps this is the issue. We're talking at crossed purposes. I understand legacy to mean something along the lines of "a body of work that is well-respected and considered of high importance in the development of the genre". As I've noted already, I don't see sales as part of that.

Take Phil Collins: he sold more records than was good for him (or anyone else). What would we say his legacy is to the world of rock/pop? I'd say he offers very little. What is Boyzone's legacy?

 

I referenced Wings simply because someone else referred to them as the biggest selling act of the 70's. I was merely offering that that is no arbiter of legacy. My point, if you'd care to refer back to it, is that McCartney's legacy is based around his Beatles work, and that his post Beatles work offers no legacy. For the record, I never said I agreed with that.

According to Top 100 Artists of the 70's - Weekly Top 40 , in the US we have:
1. Stevie Wonder
2. Led Zeppelin
3. Elton John
4. Pink Floyd
5. Rolling Stones
6. The Eagles
7. Marvin Gaye
8. Queen
9. James Brown
10. The Who
11. Black Sabbath
12. Aretha Franklin
13. David Bowie

I can't find anything for the UK but I'd suspect that Slade, Bay City Rollers, Abba and perhaps the Bee Gees gave Wings a run for their money.

 

Oh no, no no. I bought a small farm from a guy named Junior. This was the farm's theme song (no, I don't know if other farms have theme songs)! Not nonsense.

 

You see it on Spotify

 

Did it have sea lions? Were they well-prepared?

 

While I don’t necessarily agree with everyone of @Paul H ‘s points I sure as hell am happy he is making them. I tire of many music related forums & blogs because so many people just parrot the same things or the admiration for an artist or band gets into sticky Cult of Celebrity territory. Another viewpoint is key for these types of forums to remain authentic and relevant.

I know as a huge Beatles/McCartney fan since I was six that my perspective can get clouded with emotion and nostalgia. One area I had to get brutally honest about was the touring. After seeing McCartney in 1993 & 2005 I had to tap out on seeing him again after it became crystal clear he would not change his act beyond a handful of songs a tour. Added to that with his “play it just like the record” performance ethos there was little to gain from dropping a grand on tickets for my wife and I when all we’d get was the ticket stub and ability to say we saw him again.

The man is no deity, he’s a human being with a great talent and the gift of being in the right place at the right time. McCartney himself has marveled in recent interviews at the sheer luck of it all that he met some guys who had talent to spare like he did and that his life has played out like it has. To me it isn’t about McCartney’s marriages, his wealth, his appearance, etc. It’s always been about the music the cat created...while his legacy in the pantheon of rock, popular culture and history in general is food for thought, I know how I feel about his music and it’s place in my life, that is the “legacy” that’s most important.

 

Wings is at #7 on this site's calculation (for the 70's)

#1: Elton John #2: The Rolling Stones #3: Pink Floyd #4: Abba #5: Led Zeppelin
#6: Bee Gees #7: Wings #8: David Bowie #9: Bob Dylan #10: Rod Stewart
#11: Elvis Presley #12: The Beatles #13: Deep Purple #14: Santana #15: Eagles
#16: Neil Diamond #17: Neil Young #18: John Lennon #19: Cat Stevens #20: Queen
#21: Chicago #22: The Who #23: Donna Summer #24: Jethro Tull #25: Stevie Wonder
#26: James Last #27: Fleetwood Mac #28: The Carpenters #29: Creedence Clearwater Revival #30: Boney M
#31: Simon & Garfunkel #32: Electric Light Orchestra #33: George Harrison #34: John Denver #35: Bob Marley
#36: Earth, Wind & Fire #37: Yes #38: Black Sabbath #39: Slade #40: Billy Joel
#41: Alice Cooper #42: Carole King #43: Supertramp #44: Genesis #45: Barry White
#46: Emerson, Lake & Palmer #47: The Sweet #48: Joni Mitchell #49: Eric Clapton #50: Paul Simon

 

The problem is you are assuming the only argument being made is his sales, its not. It is a relevent part of it but there are many other factors.

But this is a poor argument with little nuance. You earlier brought up Boyzone, there biggest ever hit is No Matter What, written by Lloyd Webber who's legacy is helped from the huge success of that song. Their second biggest hit is a cover of a Bee Gee's song. Legacy wise the success does more for the Gibb's than Boyzone.

Paul's reputation and legacy is largely built on his songwriting, the success in the charts is a large part of that.

And I'm sorry, but you are wrong.

Paul McCartney / Linda McCartney: Ram Album Review | Pitchfork



Wingspan (film) - Wikipedia

There has been a lot of interest in his 70's solo career. TC companies don't comission documentaries and broadcast them in great slots (or repeat them for that maatter) if there is little interest.

Paul is talked of as a songwriter, people talking about him or Lennon don't treat them as brand new artists come 1970. Most of Dylan's best music came before 1970, no one feels the need to stress this.

Slade (69- 87) : 15 studio albums, 2 went no1, another went top 10, 5 failed to chart. Plus 15 compilation albums, the only one to go top 10 in '73. In total 7 Gold albums, 1 Silver. Singles wise: 16 top 10 hits, including 6 no 1's.

Bay City Rollers (74-85): 11 studio albums, 2 went no1, another 2 top 10, 5 failed to chart. Plus 8 compilation albums, none have gone top 10. In total 2 Platinum, 2 Gold albums, 1 Silver. Singles wise: 10 top 10 hits, including 2 no 1's.

Wings (71-79): 7 studio albums, 2 went no1, another 4 top 10. Plus 2 compilation albums, both gone top 10. In total 2 Platinum, 5 Gold albums, 1 Silver .Singles wise: 13 top 10 hits, including only 1 no 1's.

So yeah, pitch their entire careers against an 8 year period of Paul's and they come close in the UK (but nowhere near worldwide). But the fact that you have to place such handicaps on Paul to give them a fighting chance tells its own story.

Which of their songs was bigger than Mull of Kintyre?

You don't seem to understand what legacy means. It is their entire career and it encompasses everything, Paul's songwriting, singing, production and music playing.

Of couse it is. The Beatles being the biggest selling act of all time is very much part of their legacy

 

At this point I think Led Zeppelin has sold the most from their 70s stuff, just never stops selling. Pink Floyd is up there too and the Eagles. Elton of course is near the top too.

 

All I know is I’ve had this album in my car stereo for weeks now, and it has just plain old *delivered*!!!

I Don’t Know has become the soundtrack of my life - I hum it constantly.

And, there are at least five stone classics found in this amazing album.

I don’t want to be harsh but, if you can’t hear anything good in Egypt Station, then my advice is go find a lake and take your jumping shoes with you because you are dead in your soul.

 

Don't go jumping waterfalls
Please keep to the lake
People who jump waterfalls
Sometimes can make mistakes ...

 

Is there a comparable site for US radio? I remember one years ago that showed you in real time where songs were being played, but it disappeared 7 or 8 years ago.

 

What exactly is the criteria for that list? Other than someone being able to name 100 artists that released music in the 70's?

Paul spent the same number of weeks in the 70's at no1 and 21 weeks more in the top 10 than the Stones. 87 weeks in the singles top 10 and 14 at no1 while the Stones 4 weeks at no1 and 30 in the top 10. Evidence below

Chart Runs for Paul McCartney - BeatleLinks Fab Forum

ROLLING STONES CHART HISTORY (1963-2010)

Bowie can't possibly have outsold him in the 70's. 1 no 1 and 1 no10 were his only significant hits that decade, album wise only 5 went top 10 and only one of those Platinum.

Something is certainly off with that list

 

Gotta agree. Having lived with the album since release day, I think it's absolutely in the top tier of post-Beatle Macca albums. There are a couple tracks I don't love, but no complete clunkers, and a bunch that are just off-the-charts brilliant.

What I really wish Paul would do on tour is do his shows in 2 parts: Play all of Egypt station, then an intermission, followed by a dozen or so Beatles/Wings classics to keep the rabble happy. Nah, he won't do it, but I can dream.

 

This is a very interesting conversation. As there have been comparisons between Paul's solo work and the work of Elton John & Billy Joel, I wonder, if Paul had been a different guy from the Paul in the Beatles & he was touring today off of the legacy of only his solo work, he'd still have a hell of a three hour greatest hits show - likely very similar to a typical Elton John or Billy Joel set. I'd go to that show in a heartbeat.

 

This is the part of your argument that I disagree with (despite broadly agreeing with your wider point) because it is reductive. They would also find Maybe I'm Amazed, Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey, Band On The Run, Live & Let Die, Let Me Roll It, Coming Up & No More Lonely Nights to name but a few. Not all of these are the equal of Eleanor Rigby or Paperback Writer but they are all fondly remembered and often highly regarded and will surely form part of the catalogue of songs for which McCartney will always be celebrated. I think there is little after the mid 80s that will achieve that status, often just because his popularity as a singles act was fading so the songs are less well known but yes, also a lot of the time because they are not as good.

Nevertheless, I think you and I, as UK based fans are bruised by the prevailing narrative and background noise here, arising essentially from We All Stand Together and his performance at the Olympics that McCartney is an embarrassment who cant sing and only ever wrote sentimental children's songs, as if those two items are the only things he ever did.

 

There appear t0 be nine of them:

Store Directory

 

I heard People Want Peace yesterday on my playlist and I liked it better than in the context of the album. I don't have the heart to push Hand In Hand to my 16th best liked track because of the pan flute solo.

Guess Come On To Me will have to drop.

 

I must mention how much, in 'Get Started', I LOVE the harmony during the line:
"To ensure there's no confusion
I would like to make it clear"

And now I love Nothing For Free (although I still dislike the bridge), way better than Fuh You that I find okay 'as time goes by' (it started at "yeah it's good" to "I LOVE IT" and now "yeah it's listenable"

 

With Youtube, iphones, digital downloads etc. McCartney's music gets even more exposure than ever! Reaching more people than the Beatles or Wings ever could back in their day!

Absolutely no one could challenge the supremacy of the Beatles, that is the totally unrealistic expectation! But starting from absolute scratch and becoming the second biggest act of the entire 70s, breaking and setting world records, still to this day being the most successful rockstar in the entire history of popular music!

We will just agree to disagree!

 

An interesting thread topic would be "What would Paul's 2018 setlist be if he did NO Beatles songs live?" Here's 24 songs across his careers....Not too shabby at all. Would be a helluva great time!

Coming Up
Band on the Run
Letting Go
Come On to Me
Hi Hi Hi
Dance Tonight / Four Five Seconds
Wanderlust
Junior's Farm
Temporary Secretary
Let 'Em In
Jet
Early Days
Every Night
Too Many People
All Things Must Pass (George Tribute)
Here Today (John Tribute)
Let Me Roll It
Too Much Rain
Sing the Changes
Hunt You Down/Naked/C-Link
Live and Let Die
Maybe I'm Amazed

Encore:
Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey
Come and Get It
1985

 

About the Target Version, this one could be called as deluxe... So the real deluxe album... what's that about?

 

That's a killer set and it doesn't even include some of Paul's biggest hits from the 70's: Listen To What The Man Said, Silly Love Songs, Mull of Kintyre, Goodnight Tonight, My Love, Another Day, Helen Wheels. There are just so many!