Another theory as to why The Beatles ended.

I agree White Album has a few too many songs but you're being way too harsh of their late 60s creative abilities. The problem was more so that they couldn't get along, rather than couldn't write good material. I think the White Album is great, besides Side 4. Let it Be is decent and Abbey Road is a masterpiece.

Did any of the Beatles have classic solo albums after 1971?

 

The long awaited Beatle disco album!!

 

No. Only John provided two "classics" with John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band and Imagine (and only like the latter).

 

Some time in New York City is god awful of course, I don't know what was going through his head. And the opening track did not age well at all if you catch my drift

 

I wish it really happened. Is it known if any of the Beatles liked disco?

 

....not.

 

I will not lie, I would love to hear that album! Some groovy melodic paul basslines , steady drumming of Ringo and 3 of my favorite singers in history doing a disco album? I am totally in.

 

The Beatles broke up because it's logical for bands to break up, until they're not composed mostly by cynical predators who are only interested in making money.

 

So tired, the same old 'it wasn't John, it was Yoko' mantra. Find a new script.

 

Yes! When Yoko took George's digestive biscuit off his amplifier, that was the end.

 

This is closer to truth than to fiction!

 

my opinion... for what it's worth !

I don't think there was ONE major reason, there were several key factors that tore them apart

1. they had retreated to the studio after 1966 so no functioning touring band as such existed which to an extent made them (as far as they themselves may well have felt) something of an 'illusion' of the real earlier group - John once referred to them ending in 1966 but "Paul kept up the illusion for a few more years..." which is a telling comment I think, while the sudden death of manager and mentor Brian Epstein shook them badly and unnerved them

2. re the state of the band itself later on - the 'White Album' saw them not always performing as a four piece outfit, true Paul had done 'Yesterday' solo with strings in 1965 but those type of songs were very much 'one offs' however by 1968 the fragmentation of the recording group was becoming a clear factor, indeed from 'Revolver' onwards they were largely solo writers but still had a group unity, tho' over time that was weakening

3. musically they were beginning to 'go their own way' to an increasing extent as they matured

- John may well have been feeling something of a prisoner to his early success and with Yoko clearly wanted to break way from his old image and explore new areas - hence 'Revolution 9', 'Cold Turkey', 'Two Virgins' etc

Paul was working more and more alone and presenting finished works to the band (which annoyed John it seems) and by 1968 Paul clearly was in control of the band, something of a 'perfectionist control freak' re how he wanted things played, arranged etc and it was Paul's ideas they followed from 1967 (Pepper, MMT, Get Back / Let it Be etc)

Paul by then was seeing HIS songs top the UK chart covered by others (Michelle, Ob-la-Di) penning hits for Cilla Black, had scored a UK film 'The Family Way' and very much was was dominating the Beatles singles 'A' sides from 1967 to 1969 (in the UK John got just two and a bit, George got just the one) and by 1970 Paul clearly wanted to be his own man, even so he was reluctant to allow the band to dissolve but wanted to be the band's effective sole leader - the film footage of 'Let it Be' shows that ...Paul very much in charge, John becoming more and more uninterested, George getting frustrated, Ringo looking sad...

George - from 1968 onwards was emerging as a much more prolific songwriter (before he'd been an improving but far less productive composer normally with a song or two only) and was also now happily jamming with The Band, Eric Clapton, working as producer / guest musician with Badfinger, Jackie Lomax etc so having to face 'same old big brother Paul' forever looking down on him (probably quite without his realising he was doing it) and 'same old big brother John' still not taking him seriously as a songwriter and perhaps a little envious that George was always the better guitarist and now even more so as George was hanging around with the 'in crowd' of TOP UK and visiting American musicians - something John openly admitted he wasn't a part of as he felt he just wasn't on that level as a musician...

So clearly re the music John, Paul and George were drifting apart...

4. add in women (ala Mick Jagger's view in 'The Rutles') which were also a major factor in pulling the three main band members evermore in differing directions

5. ...and their own sense that 'THE BEATLES' was a brand name becoming increasingly something of an albatross weighing more and more on each member's shoulders - imprisoning them when they wanted musical freedom ....and the glue that held the group together was fast becoming unstuck

6. then APPLE - wot a disaster that became !

...an honorable concept it misfired badly for them - their talent as musicians back then did NOT extend into the potentially nightmare world of big business, and the thing then bled money which became a major issue as the young lads became mature men and saw how MUCH they both were losing with Apple, and had failed to get from the old Northern Songs deal and from EMI etc

the business pressures alone would have driven four close friends apart - and the Fab Four were not quite that, even so it's effect on them creatively must have been grim and led directly to the BIG legal break up as The Beatles became a lawsuit (hence; 'if we ever get out of here think of giving it all away..'/ 'sue me sue you blues' / 'all I want is the truth just gimmie some truth')

so on musical, friendship, business levels they hit increasingly stormy seas

7. plus as George Martin later observed the sheer TIME factor;

'it had been a long time'

and that was a very key point, I think one of them once commented on leaving the Beatles was like 'getting out of the Army' - the band which began as pure fun playing skiffle, electric rock & roll etc...became a professional job, then took over their lives totally in a manner quite unimaginable and became bigger and bigger until it probably overwhelmed them each
(hence: 'I Don't believe in...Beatles !')

by 1970 each was in truth probably feeling burnt out and shell shocked from the very LONG LONG LONG time...

others like The Stones, Moodies, Deep Purple etc followed the lead and formed their own record labels (without the boutiques or electrical divisions etc) but worked much more with the major record labels behind them and learned the hard lessons of Apple and it's demise which must have been the final and at the time biggest 'nail in the coffin' for the band

John later lamented how Paul and he did not own their songs nor could do anything about how they might be used (car commercials ?) while Paul surprisingly failed to grab control of them later

I think George actually wanted to turn his back on it all and begin afresh later 'I'm not The Beatles' he once remarked but maybe his sense of loyalty and some sort of duty (plus the money of course) led him back to participating in later projects like the Anthology and the two created singles etc when he likely would have really wanted to put that sixties past behind him (especially after losing John, then his own nightmare incident)

In retrospect, given all the pressures on them both up to 1966 and later, we should really admire them for lasting as LONG as they did and creating as much classic music as they did

'and you know that can't be bad'

 

Sometimes you are a part of something (marriage, partnership, business venture, whatever) that is no longer working well and a clean start looks far more promising and thrilling than trying to work out how to fix it.

 

I don't agree.
John didn't regard most of George's material presented in Get Back. He praised "Something".....but he sort of did so in a fatherly way.
John wanted to do 4 tracks of whatever he wanted, not subject to band veto (which would give George and Paul four tracks)....but the others wouldn't go along with that.

I do think that John was spurred by the success of ATMP to make Imagine more commercial....out of competitiveness....but I don't think he ever regarded George as an artistic threat.

 

Band on the Run was in 1973.

 

Based on MY vicarious research, John Lennon was tired of being a Beatle well before the actual breakup occurred.

 

You can't thwart the will of the people.

 

Any idea if he also resented the fact that Paul took charge? Paul was the main driving force on Pepper and Abbey Road. His ego might have taken a beating?

 

Probably a good 15 to 20 reasons why they broke up. John was the one who tried to figure out a way to get more George on the albums and was willing to have less compositions himself so George could have more when they had their final meetings. Paul was the one who was resistant and claimed George never had anything good enough before "Something" and only reluctantly agreed when it was close to the very end but did not offer to have less songs himself on albums. John also thought of the idea of having double albums so George could have more room. It's in the book 'You Never Give Me Your Money'. George had problems with Paul because of Paul's in studio behavior. Yes, John claimed multiple times that he had trouble following George's "strange" chord sequences but that was acceptable to George.

Lennon's 1969 output since people keep saying he was in a songwriting slump. This is a man who couldn't get his act together? This looks like a great album to me with 5 charting songs.

Don't Let Me Down
Across the Universe
Dig a Pony
'Everybody Had a Hard Year' from "I've Got a Feeling"
The Ballad of John and Yoko
Give Peace a Chance
Come Together
I Want You
Because
Sun King/Mean Mr. Mustard/Polythene Pam
Cold Turkey

 

He may have resented it, but some of it was his own doing, or lack of doing, I think. John was just nowhere near as motivated as Paul - and his substance choices were no doubt a factor in that.

 

Indeed. It may be difficult for some of the uber-fans to understand, but I think that John came to view being in the Beatles as a kind of prison after a while. He just wanted to break away, be with Yoko and do his own thing without the weight of expectation bearing down him all the time. George was similarly fatigued and only Paul seemed to remain enthusiastic about being in the band by the end. They went as far as they could together and they split up at the right time.

 

There's no evidence to support this theory whatsoever. Maybe John felt threatened by George but it seems more like he didn't respect him. It's interesting that after John became involved with Yoko he essentially refused to work on George's songs. In 1969 John was probably too high on heroin to feel threatened or jealous of anyone. He always regarded George as less worthy and that probably didn't change. It's difficult to know what John was thinking though because he was so mercurial (and on drugs).

He was threatened by Paul's assumption of the leadership role in the band, but Paul didn't ask for that role: he took it because John's drug use forced him to abdicate it. He could have been the leader once again, but he wasn't communicating (or even writing much) in 69. He'd come to believe that people as close as the Beatles should be able to communicate without using words. Which is mad and not at all helpful!

Yoko is a primary reason the band broke up. Which isn't to say it was her motivation, but she seems to have done everything in her power to be A Problem. Same with Allen Klein. He wanted to manage the Beatles for years and when he finally got them he did everything he could to divide them. What was he thinking? He was confrontational with Paul, went through the Beatles song list with John and told him "what he wrote" (Elanor Rigby! lol) to inflate his ego, told George that he was getting shortchanged by Paul when Paul was the one who'd always work on endless takes of George's songs while John was ignoring him. It's interesting how after John hooked up with Yoko he essentially refused to work on George's songs.

Drugs were another main cause of the breakup: John wasn't contributing, and it made him even more erratic. What's striking to me though is that it seems like they broke up by accident. In a meeting after John quit the band (iirc), he suggested that he, Paul and George each get four songs going forward, starting with the next album. That's an odd stance for someone who quit the band to take. His actions in the years after the breakup don't seem like those of a partner who left a relationship: they seem like they're the actions of the one who was left. His hostility towards Paul (and in general) increased when Paul started seeing Linda, but that's also around the time heroin entered his life.

 

Considering his early solo singles and "Plastic Ono Band," I don't buy this at all. I'd put band politics and difference in musical direction down as the main reasons, myself.

 

Across the Universe, Mr Mustard and Polythene Pam were from 68 so I deleted them.
Give Peace a Chance is barely a song and wasn't presented to the Beatles so I deleted it.
The list is much less impressive without those songs!
He contributed a fragment to I've Got A Feeling. When you have to include a fragment in a song list you know you're in trouble

He wasn't bringing songs to the band, but he also wasn't contributing much to the songs George and Paul brought. He's either absent from or made negligible contributions to many Beatles songs in 69.

 

If Eppy would have lived,everything would have been done to much more of everyone's liking instead of Paul becoming the motivator,pest he's been known to be.They wouldn't have broken up and started sniping at each other in the press,and suing each other.It would have been an agreed hiatus and most likely would have meant more collaboration in the 70's other than the odd Ringo session.Epstein dying,to me meant that they were finished and it took 2 years for the lads to figure it out.