Another theory as to why The Beatles ended.

Paul (and the others) could have explained that to John, Paul instead chose to double down on the behaviour and started to bring Linda. Presumably Maureen and Pattie knew better to let themselves get dragged along.

Yoko's not to blame, a band that used to be so tight that others thought of them as a four headed beast simply stopped communicating.

 

So you don't think it's awkward to bring your wife to work and let her be on the album? I agree they stopped communicating, most mega bands do at some point even today. People grow up and have families, views change. That's only natural. What isn't is to you have your spouse be in the recording studio and have a song that is the absolute worst song on the album.

 

Its certainly awkward, but everything thats been written about the subject suggests no one ever directly brought it up to John, just passive aggressive nonsense that made the situation worse.

Yoko's not to blame and John is partly to blame, but so are his bandmates. If Ringo decided that he was going to drum completly in the nude during studio sessions it is up to his bandmates to tell him 'no'.

 

It was obviously an awkward situation. I've been there myself when planning trips with my friends and had one who wanted to bring his wife to a fishing trip which was supposed to be a getaway for the guys, how do you say she can't come?

There was much more to the whole thing than just Yoko but it certainly added more tension. I do think even if Yoko wasn't around that they would not have stayed together. I think it is very difficult to not grow apart when forming at such a young age. Being in the biggest band has it's own issues. as well

 

The Paul McCartney Song That Made John Lennon Storm Out of the Studio

 

From the article:
"During the recording of Revolver (1966), it became plain to see. While John worked on experimental tracks like “I’m Only Sleeping,” Paul still banging away at lighthearted romps like “Good Day Sunshine.” (An exception was Paul’s “Here, There and Everywhere” from the same album.)"

WTF? How about Eleanor Rigby? For No One? his contributions to songs like Tomorrow Never Knows?
I thought we were past such ignorant characterisations of John and Paul.

 

Read the other articles on the Beatles on that website and you'll see further poorly researched articles.

John Lennon: How Much Was the Beatles Legend Worth at the Time of His Death?

"At the time of his death, Lennon’s estimated net worth stood at $800 million. Obviously, had his life not ended tragically, he’d have become a billionaire in the following years. His final albums as a solo artist (and with wife Yoko Ono) were among his most successful recordings.

Of course, anyone who listens to the lyrics of “Imagine” would think these numbers didn’t matter much to him. It’s would have been impossible for Lennon as a young man to conceive of that sort of wealth (as it is for any young person).

McCartney, who continues recording and touring, actually surpassed the net worth of $1 billion. (Part of his fortune came from an inheritance, though the bulk obviously came from his work.)

Had he survived, Lennon’s net worth would most likely surpassed that of his old songwriting partner."

 

My god, the amount of inaccuracies in those few sentences...

 

Well said. Sick of hearing such bunk.

 

Agreed... it was a different world then with the Beatles still in a world where they were on the hook for a new song and a new sound every six months. Still .. just at that time.. John was releasing a series of solo singles and had the September 20 meeting not gone in the direction of "what do we do next"... it is entirely possible that the terms of the new contract.. two albums by any of the four Beatles per year... would have covered Ringo's planned solo release... John's live rock and roll album... and maybe McCartney would have sat singing on his farm for a few months longer without doing anything. In that delayed period all the same tensions would have been flying around but there is a possibility that they would have gone forward in separate directions without the breakup occurring immediately.

I said a few years back in another thread that Genesis was unique and profoundly blessed to have over the course of their career dealt with many of the same problems and tensions with the way things turned out for them. It's not like they were immune from the very same problems as any other band as they had already lost key members over the precise same issues as the Beatles from ego, religion, personal relationships, divorces, business issues, internal squabbles... but because they actually didn't blow up before they all agreed to do solo projects which all kind of caught fire in the midst of the main band catching fire in a less time compressed era they had the chance to discover the possibilities for themselves and the record company they had probably couldn't believe their luck!!!

 

I wake up to the sound of music... Mother Maaaarrrrry came THROUGH for me???

 

Actually Linda. Paul did inherit quite a bit from her, possibly as much as 200 million.

 

It's all hindsight... that September 20 era is crucial as it is just after Lennon makes this cataclysmic decision and just after Klein has wound up a megacontract for the Beatles. If the reality of this contract had existed for another 8 months... if the reality of Lennon's solo emancipation coming before McCartney does anything.. if Harrison had possibly moved to record a solo album successfully in this environment without a explosive breakup, then even as unlikely as it seems it is possible that the process of breakdown they were in could have slowed down. It coulda happened. Likely it would not have but at that very moment they had some wind in their sales that might have alleviated some tensions.

 

She was his wife, half of everything he earned while married was hers. The vast majority of her wealth came from her partnership from Paul.

Interestingly when googling for a source for this 200 million the top 3 sources are all from the same website, Cheatsheet.

Paul mccartney 200 million linda - Google Search

The BBC, actual journalists, have a far more conservative figure

BBC News | ENTERTAINMENT | Linda leaves fortune to Paul

 

But still, there was a sizable inheritance. Her food business alone was estimated at 60 million. Not to mention her song-writing royalties.

And Paul was smart to have her estate probated in New York, avoiding the 40 percent British death tax. That's a nice chunk of change!

 

... from songs Paul wrote and put her name on to keep the rights. I love Linda, but it's no coincidence that post-Speed of Sound her name disappears from the writing credits. ("Long Leather Coat" aside, of course, for which she wrote the lyrics.)

 

I'm not an expert on LM foods, but I'm guessing, like any business, it required plenty of investment from the McCartney's. It was, initially, a passion project rather than a money making one, I imagine the McCartney'swere happy to subsidize its early losses.

But you are right an estimated 60 million from his first marriage came to Paul and a decade later around 50 million paid out to his second wife in the divorce.

 

That's why I used a smiley!

 

Sure, but my point was that there was indeed a sizable inheritance, meaning that that part of the article in the OP was not technically inaccurate.

 

They don't even have a comments sections to correct them. People will read this BS and think it's true. I'm tempted to e-mail them and ask them to please stop writing about The Beatles.

 

Even Genesis and Radiohead never were at the level of scrutiny and pressure that The Beatles were at from 1964-1969. No band before or since, so it's hard to even compare!

 

Personally, I couldn't imagine The Beatles in the Seventies. The Beatles were a band that belong to the Sixties, and whatever was the reason for their breakup, that's better than to ruin their heritage in the Seventies.

 

Absolutely. Yoko wasn’t just some helpless passenger who John forced to attend Beatles recording sessions. She knew damn well that her presence was creating problems. It was weird and awkward, and she clearly revelled in it. She held an enormous amount of power in that kind of dysfunctional social dynamic.

I don’t think Yoko is the only reason the Beatles broke up, but I don’t think it’s a coincidental that the **** really hit the fan when she started making her presence felt. Not only did she exacerbate tensions in the group, but she encouraged (pushed) John to drift away from the group. She was the prime catalyst of the breakup.

 

Oh I wasn't talking about the songwriting with posters anti-John comment. I meant the personal stuff constantly dragged in - he paid the ultimate price for his deeds but we can't let it go.

Concerning "A Day in the Life" - we're off topic anyway but just wanted to say that yes, it is a co-write but when John writes the main melody, most of the verse lyrics, and adds the orchestral buildups, and then Paul adds a middle eight that appears once we can add up that Paul wrote the 30 seconds and John wrote just about all the rest including the arrangement. Still a co-write but not 50/50 - do you agree? And yes, John wrote a whole section of "Here There and Everywhere" but basically, it's Paul's song. Someone else commented that Paul does "A Day in the Life" with "Give Peace a Chance" as Lennon's section of his concert so that should be taken into account as well.

 

Can you back this up with actual evidence? That Paul's only contribution was the middle eight?