Why didn't Paul write and record with George after 1970?

I don't like it. It's a horrible neologism. You see the confusion it's causing already????

 

You quoted George's statement when he quit the band, so my reference to Eric was a quotation of John's response when George left. I was intending to perpetuate the referential joking.

So your contention is that "quite" in "quite liked it" is used sarcastically? That despite being an intensifier, it's used to indicate lack of enthusiasm? What about the other interview where he says he "quite enjoyed it"?

 

Seems to me what was going on in that interview was pretty clear really. He was putting Paul down with a very mean comment, and there was nothing that indicates it was a joke at all. Or sarcastic. It was a snide and dismissive remark, outright.

It's one thing to say the whole leather/pleather jacket on the Anthology is a joke, and that's the way I in fact tend to see it, but this interview?, especially when you consider the MANY comments in a similar vein he did over the years about Paul...

As for Paul being "earnest", I really don't get that impression at all. If anything, wouldn't George be more earnest?.
I remember in fact Paul said in an interview, asked about the problems between him and George, that (paraphrasing) he thought deep down George was a much more serious person than he is. I'll see if I can find the quote.

 

Good interview. George Harrison is so special, he was an essential part of the Beatles and a fine solo artist. Yet still very honest, always, no BS. I miss him.

 

Had never heard that In Spite of all the danger isn't an actual co-write. Guess really the question is more "Why didn't they ever write together?".

But what you said doesn't support that conclusion? Isn't/wasn't McCartney friends with the ones you named, Wonder, Jackson, Costello?. George mainly worked with other musicians in time limited projects as well.

But how do you know he was not tactful...? we don't know exactly how that exchange even went (or do we?). Why should he have said he could put those licks in the second chorus, if he didn't want them there either?.

 

McCartney worked well with those three guys (and they enjoyed themselves) but I don't get the sense he was close friends with any of them socially outside the work situation. Not in the manner George hung out with Clapton or Dylan many times, just socially with no projects being worked on. That's the distinction I meant. Didn't the Traveling Wilburys just come about by happenstance, for example, because the guys were hanging out at Dylan's house?

 

Well, we don't really know that though... at least when it comes to Michael Jackson I'm quite sure they were actually friends.

I do get the impression Paul might be less of the sociable type than the other beatles, though of course I might be wrong. It would seem he has spent a lot of time in his life simply with his family and animals in the country.

 

Today, for St. George's Day, Paul's Twitter feed posted a cool photo I'd never seen before and wrote: "Happy George's Day."

 

And George H is SMILING!!! Spread the word!!!

 

Was that taken when the two Georges visited Paul during the Back to the Egg sessions?

 

All Those Years Ago session at George's house!

 

And Denny Laine too:

 

Linda most have taken a lot of photos of them post 1970. I dont doubt there is a John and Paul photo from the Dakota Years.

 

This is a very clear photo for an old polaroid -- and makes me wonder whether that rumor someone here mentioned months ago about a new book coming out of Linda McCartney's polaroid photos is true? Can you clean up the image quality of old Polaroids? I mean, I look at my Polaroid shots from the 1970s and 1980s -- and they don't look this clear.

 

In fact, he is the only one smiling!

Guess Linda took that pic.

 

I think you're reading more into the comment than was intended. The fact that he chuckles as he's saying it suggests it's a joke. His overall tone regarding McCartney throughout the rest of the interview is not angry or bitter. He's magnanimous about the HOF no-show, and says he likes Broad Street. If he were really wanting to tee off on Paul, it would have been pretty easy for him to attack Broad Street, a universally-panned flop. But instead, he praises it.

It's possible they were friends, but I don't recall McCartney ever talking about spending any substantial time with Jackson outside of a work setting. I don't get the sense Jackson had many friends anyway, at least not in McCartney's age bracket.

That's mainly what I was saying. For whatever reason, McCartney doesn't seem to have been close friends with many peers, in the way George was. He was always closest to his family, and seems to relate to other musicians more as co-workers than friends. And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that.

 

Yep, I saw that photo earlier today and it pleasantly surprised me seeing George Harrison so happy with Paul and George M. Implies that George and Paul's relationship wasn't quite as cold as some of us thought.

Again, nice to see George getting along with Paul, George M and Denny Laine.

 

Yeah the photo of a car in the background gives it away.

 

I dont get it sorry!

 

George was a race car enthusiast

 

Maybe he just liked Broad Street better than Paul's music at the time... I think one has to work REALLY hard to see George's comment there as a joke. Especially given his "It's true" as if to make sure people don't think he's joking.

Do you know if the whole interview in on YT though?, maybe seeing the whoe thing does make it seem different.

Well, there's a pic of them doing the dishes (at Paul's house apparently), and when the whole thing with the songs catalog happened, George made a comment saying he was surprised because he thought Michael was Paul's "mate".

It does seem that way, at least to some degree.

 

By contrast, I think you have to work really hard to see it as "very mean" or "snide and dismissive." He's smiling and chuckling when he says it, and it strikes me as an example of what we in the US call "flipping each other s**t," ie a joking insult between friends. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on our interpretations.

FWIW, here's a longer version of the interview. Cuts off at the exact same spot though, so we don't know what (if anything) he says further about Paul after that comment.

 

Thanks for posting that link. I think I had seen it now.

He says "it's true" with a serious face, don't you think?

(George's eyebrows look huge lol)

 

Okay, found another clip that runs a few seconds longer, and we can see that George smiles again after saying "it's true." FWIW, the person who uploaded it seems to agree with you though, as does the narrator who describes it as a "classic diss." I'm still not convinced it's anything but a joke though.

 

He's laughing to himself--these saps came over thinking I was going to work on some lame McCartney track, but they are all actually going to work on my lame "tribute/reunion" track that will give me a great publicity angle to exploit...beat him at his own game.