George, Paul and Ringo jamming in 1995 video footage- Can someone fill me in?

What's this bit?

I think Harrison felt unfulfilled, ultimately, by the Beatles in that his songwriting had begun to take off by 1968 and 1969, but he didn't benefit from having the Beatles unit playing behind lots of his songs or adding their ideas. Just as he was coming into his own, the wheels of the vehicle fell off. The band was burnt out by then. Lennon probably felt he was spent and needed to recover. Paul was more interested in his own songs. But Lennon-McCartney had gotten to blow their creative wads during their Beatles tenure, and George had not. So he must have felt abandoned when the group broke up. Not that they would have backed him on whole albums (or triple albums) anyways, but he must have felt pushed aside yet again and irrevocably by his older bandmates.

 

Thank god it wasn't the Leslie!

 

Actually the formation of their relationship goes back even farther - probably 11 and 12 or 12 and 13. At 15, Paul met the older, cooler John and, to some extent, replaced George with this older guy they both looked up to. Add to that the fact that John accepted Paul as an equal while he thought of the slower developing George as a little kid and voila! - you have a complicated triangle that they never completely outgrew. Just my armchair analysis FWIW

 

Like I mentioned to Sean, I'll post support for this tonight but I'm at work until then.

 

I know the story that John was angry with George over George's "I Me Mine" book. But I've always wondered...with nothing to really back it up...if John might've been a little upset with George taking part in The Rutles TV special? I know John had a great sense of humor, but really the special isn't exactly too kind to Yoko...

 

I would be shocked and stunned if that turned out to be true. Shocked. and stunned.

 

Don't know where I read it, but George's frustration might have become more apparent after the Indian Adventure, which could be read as a move by George to take the (religious? spiritual?) lead with the band that was adrift after the death of Brian Epstein and the harsh reality-check of the Magical Mystery Tour tv-movie. Ringo didn't take well to the food, Paul left earlier, John decided to take Magic Alex's side in accusing the Maharishi of unwanted intimacies...an John and Paul kept on writing songs by the dozens. After that George seemed to find his refuge with musical friends like Clapton and The Band.

 

I disagree; John had a different personality to Paul and thus simply wanted a different type of public image, but his was also considered, just maybe not as much.

John chose to do and say shocking things, knowing full well that they would cause controversy. I would say that John was actually a PR genius in many ways; his idea to promote peace by pulling 'crazy' stunts like lying in bed whilst being filmed or sitting with Yoko in a sack just go to show how good he was at manipulating the press. He knew that they would all report on it and that it would get attention, and he was right.

He was obviously someone who spent time thinking about his image and PR; after all, when Paul released the press statement with the McCartney album, John saw it as a good PR stunt, and said that he wished that he had thought of doing it.

Paul works hard on his image, but John worked on his as well. The differences were in the public images that each wanted to project; Paul was always the polite Beatle, being nice to the journalists, whereas John liked to be the more controversial and witty Beatle. That is one of the many reasons why they worked so well together.

As I said before; there is nothing negative or wrong about considering your public image if you are famous.

 

Completely agree. I hope there is a better record of the "triangle" in the second and third books. I remember being slightly disappointed with the first volume at not getting more information as to why Paul was the odd-man out when they were in Hamburg. Granted, there is probably only a few people outside of the Beatles that were privy to that kind of information, and without documentation of some kind, Lewisohn, is probably not going to include much speculation, other than setting the tone for a specific chapter.

 

Am I correct in thinking that Paul, George, Ringo and others actually performed 'Let It Be' at Linda's funeral, or am I mistaken?

 

I remember reading that John actually loved The Rutles TV special and found the Yoko bit funny. From what I understand, John was upset that George didn't give him enough credit for what he contributed to Taxman and coming up with the idea of using the sitar in Norwegian Wood. Even then he doesn't have a good argument because George was brief about all his songs, and like George said, John was hardly one to talk when he never gave George credit for his contributions.

 

By "breakup", I'm assuming you mean The Beatles. I've never heard any such thing...but, considering that Harrison is the ex-Beatle that bolted out of the gate with a HUGE hit of an album (and a triple, at that!) and single, I doubt very much whether a lack of help from Lennon, if what you are saying is true, bothered him one whit. I am guessing a fairly normal thought process might be to think, "hey, I didn't need his help after all."

As far as 25 years later...pretty inconceivable.

 

The Yoko bit in the Rutles is really more a joke about the press depictions of Yoko than it is about Yoko herself.

 

That line always brings a smile to my face

 

It was not a performance, rather the entire 700+ congregation in attendance (which included Paul, George, and Ringo) sang the song together as a hymn.

 

Endlessly fascinating. I don't know why it matters so much to us that these four musicians get along, but I have always wanted them to. I'm getting too old for this...

 

Exactly! Grumpy faces, slights (imagined and real) from 40 to 50 years ago poured over and analyzed...none of us here on this forum can even imagine what it must be like. And it never goes away! Bygones are never bygones.

 

Well said, I could not agree more.

It always shocks me when I see people trying to claim that Paul is really calculating and that he considers everything that he says and does. As the book 'Man On The Run' proves, nothing could be further from the truth.

Paul often says and does things without thinking, the 'It's a drag' comment being a case in point.

As the comments that you have posted go to show, Paul does hold his emotions back quite often, but who wouldn't when being asked the same things again and again for 50+ years?

If the interviewer is in any way skilled, it is actually not that difficult to get him to speak about different things; the problems are normally the questions that he is asked.

There can be no doubt that Paul considers things more than John did, but reality is not 'Black and White'; John worked on his public image and Paul throughout the years has opened up and spoken about his 'warts', like his bossiness in the studio, his drug use or his 'Drag' comment.

 

It's not like the Stones, Kinks, Beach Boys, Who, etc, haven't had their disagreements over the years.

 

OK Zeki ! I will say for the third time today here, I will post the info regarding this tonight and...you if the information is correct, you are wrong.

 

His recent interview with the Nerdist podcast is one example. He came off as totally genuine there. I don't think The Beatles would mind answering Beatle questions so much if they weren't asked the same boring questions all the time.

 

?? I don't get what you are saying. If you are thinking I am saying that the ex-Beatles are unique in having old stuff dredged up constantly, no, I didn't say that.

 

Okay. Look forward to it.

 

I know, but Beatles fans seem to talk endlessly about it. Wasn't blaming you for anything, just how the thread in general has been.

 

Ahh, I get it now. Thanks for the clarification.