The proof is in the pudding. Just look at the solo work......come to think of it, Harrison may have been more talented, too.
2006-06-17 03:32:22 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Music
Okaaaaaaaay-
Too bad John Lennon was so frigged up on drugs that he spend more time pretending to campaign for peace than making music.
Of course, my only real problem with Paul McCartney is that he advocates be a vegetarian.
So yes, Lennon is better. Or was. Whatever.
2006-06-17 03:37:47 · answer #1 · answered by meathead76 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Even lennon didn't feel that way why should you? Difference in solo work is the difference between being commercial to make some $ and being political to express your opinion. McCartney has been so prolific and so successful over the years that to say he is untalented is almost ignorant. The proof IS in the pudding! Harrison was a talented guitarist , more so than the recognition he got. McCartney plays guitar, bass, piano and drums well enough to record the different parts on his latest disc. Lennon is dead. Instant kharma's gonna get you.
2006-06-17 10:52:57 · answer #2 · answered by Norman 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know, that was one talented group of individuals, as well as collectively, where I'd contend that the whole was greater than the sum of its parts.
2006-06-17 10:38:22 · answer #3 · answered by Besmirched Tea 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yup McCartney isin't all that,he just thinks , he's a little freak show,a little woo woo in my opinion.
Go John Lenon you're a Legend
Harrison you're a Legend
2006-06-17 10:38:54 · answer #4 · answered by I-C-U 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, when I think of "Yesterday" (McCartney has wrote it) I cannot say he's not talented.
2006-06-17 17:01:16 · answer #5 · answered by Sabina_Rois 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋