This is revealing. Paul really cared about John, as a friend, and about the band. And in some way he cared about Yoko too. He wasn't mean, bitter or bossy at all. He just regretted not being able to write with his partner anymore. That's why he came up with the whole "get back" idea. It makes lots of sense. Also, it's kind of funny that the outsiders in this conversation (Linda, Michael, Neil) seem to be the most annoyed by Yoko, while the band members are actually kind of cool about it (except for George, of course, that isn't there). Thanks Matt, well done... again!
You are correct about the non-band members. They pull fewer punches on Yoko. I think the others were used to John's overboardness and took it for what it was. Thanks for the comment, Antonio.
I wouldn't consider Neil to be an outsider. Obviously, he wasn't in the band, but he and Mal were part of the family in a way that none of the WAGS ever were.
@@popgoesthe60s52 In hindsight, though, I think it would have flowed better if I'd said, "Paul is supportive of John." It goes without saying that Paul and Linda had something special, but what really stands out here is that, still at this stage at least, Paul wants to be supportive of John too.
That quote of Paul predicting that 50 years later people would say they broke up because Yoko sat on an amp is both hilarious and heartbreaking at the same time
All things must pass, or so the line goes The Beatles ended. They grew up and apart. They probably needed to. Maybe the four of them would have gotten together at some point later on, after they were out of the storm's eye? Maybe not. The good news: we have their music to feast on.
And totally true, as it turned out. Paul was always the best of the Beatles when it came to PR. He knew how the media and public perception worked, I guess. That image of Yoko at the recording sessions is what stuck in peoples' minds.
I've stated this opinion many times. I don't believe Yoko was the cause of the breakup of the Beatles. I do believe, however, she was a symptom of the breakup.
I find Paul so deeply endearing, both for his conciliatory tone and spirit but also for his wisdom ("it's only an obstacle if we're trying to surmount it!") and his love of his friend ("...but that's John, he always goes overboard."). I'm really impressed by the maturity, grace, and wisdom Paul demonstrates here. Just such great stuff. Thank you again for this.
@@popgoesthe60s52 yes but what's pretty hard to separate: i assume/imagine Paul knows what he's saying is being recorded. So it's just as likely to imagine that he's speaking "to the camera", and we're still not capturing the "real situation". we're seeing paul the publicist; speaking for posterity so that he seems like the reasonable/mature/sane on. I dunno, i guess that makes me think: no one can really get at the truth of all this. :)
@@cajunqueen5125 Michael Lindsay Hogg placed microphones in inconspicuous places including bugging the phones. There are many instances were they couldn't have known they were being recorded. This is likely one of them.
@@popgoesthe60s52 And then, John and Yoko spent several years trashing him to every rock critic they could find. It became the narrative than Paul was a fluffy, weak talent who was riding on his looks.
This seriously deserves more attention, the whole myth of Paul being bossy and full of just misery so prevalent in the mainstream pop culture that everything about this period of The Beatles is completely distorted by the endless regurgitation of the myth by Rolling Stone and the press. Thank you for making this, and I love that you retorted a lot of the myths that these “journalists” have reported as fact.
Paul was bossy when it came to telling George how to play guitar. This is why GH never played with Macca again until Anthology, but often played with George and Ringo in the 70s. Harrison himself said in 1976 "I would be in a band with John Lennon, but not with Paul McCartney." John's allowing Yoko in the studio was a nightmare, but John let George have musical freedom. That is why some of George's best guitar work is on John's "Imagine" album.
@@jmaggio909 with all respect It always felt like a big brother little brother situation between Paul and George where as Paul was overbearing when they were young and John was known to not pick with you when it came to misic
2:35 everybody being in awe of how George said something to John's face, all of them wanted to say but were afraid of John's reaction while George said twice "It's not just you John we're in this band too and you don't get to just bring someone in."
They were afraid of upsetting the gentle balance. I wonder if John would have quit on the spot if they actually said what they felt about Ono being there? Thanks for the comment, Sebastian!
@@popgoesthe60s52 John was really moody but as much as Paul thinks he knew John well I don't think he would've quitted the band cause he later said he was upset Paul did it.. and there was this leaked conversation of him saying he was touched when Paul said to him(in response to John wanting a divorce) to not go public about it because he thought Paul wanted to work things out but then felt betrayed when Paul went public with it to sell his album... it's really interesting how much misunderstanding there is in their partnership even though they knew each other from a young age.
At the end of the day Paul's character and reputation was destroyed to preserve John's legend status john talked about peace and and ending war so therefore Paul was the one who caused the problems when in actuality john was guilty for his share of the problem
@@xxyyzz9791 while I agree she assisted with it I don't think john is without blame that being said his major failing as a human was that he never knew how to multi task when he wanted to be a Beatle Noting came in between that not his son or his wife or his mental issues and once he was with yoko all he wanted to do was be with yoko.and so he let her control all aspects of his life including his opinion on the group
@@dudstep that’s right. There’s even a quote from Brian that he knows they’ll eventually go in their separate ways. He recognised the unity they formed and yet their own individualities as people. Somehow he must’ve feel unnecessary once they stopped touring.
@@terrythekittieful I would never underestimate the importance of George Martin as their producer. He had impeccable musical taste, was refreshingly open minded, and helped their image immensely as a 'class act.' Their songwriting was phenomenal, but George Martin made sure it was presented with such quality that no one in the business could come close to their superiority. I give George Martin tons of credit.
What so many people don't realize (and Paul touched on this) is that Yoko, by always being around John...even when he'd go to the bathroom, actually put up a real barrier between Paul and John...long-time mates.. this had a chilling affect. Do NOT underestimate the role of Yoko in the band's breakup... along with John's weakness
You make a good point, Steve. The Yoko insertion was a major issue in total. I don't fully understand his motives, but there certainly was a better, more compassionate, and more professional way John could have gone about this. John could have had both Yoko and the Beatles and Klein exploited this. John all the power and pissed it away. Thanks for the comment, Steve!
@@popgoesthe60s52 yup.. all true! I think we also have to remember Paul and Yoko are still technically business partners ... so he has to be kinda careful of what he says.
Don't underestimate John's role. He brought her in. I personally have always thought he deliberately was using her as a barrier against Paul. George couldn't stand her being there either.
Well done, Matt. What your video confirms is what Paul has stated numerous times about "Beatle historians", HE was there and HE knows what actually transpired, not second, third and forth hand stories.
None of us were there and even a snippet of audio tape doesn’t tell us that much. Historians were not there yes, but the good ones are more objective than those that were actually there, most of the time.
And what we know NOW is that while Paul was indeed there, he had no more idea of what happened 50 years ago than anyone else. This video is simply another individual making his own version of events through selected excerpts. It confirms nothing other than people's biases.
Paul’s point on needing a “daddy” figure for the band. Makes you wonder how things would have been handled if Brian Epstein was still around to during this time.
@@popgoesthe60s52 I don’t think Brian would’ve been around. I hope he would’ve been smart enough to realise he’s no longer needed. I also don’t think he’d have the ability to reign everyone in. Then again, I can’t think of anyone who could! Great video again, thanks for bringing them to us.
Brian didn't have much to do with the recording process. He handled business affairs. Although with him gone, and the four handling themselves for the first while afterward, The Beatles were a ruddlerless ship. Things were coming to a head in the studio.
Who can blame George for getting fed up and walking out on that dynamic. You really have to give it to Paul though. It seems he just tried to be as diplomatic as possible during a very difficult situation with Yoko and John. Paul just wanted to keep the band together and this just seems to be the most trying time for that.
The part where Rolling Stone misquote George really broke me. It's hillarious, how can they screw this so badly? They probably thought that no one would ever hear the tapes anyway, so might as well just continue the Beatles myth! Your videos on this subject are really insightful.
It's hard not to think Rolling Stone's approach to the Beatles was almost entirely driven by Jann Wenner's agenda to glorify John while demonizing Paul. To Wenner, the facts came a distant second to achieving this goal.
Agreed! The credibility of the Rolling Stone Mag was build on the Lennon Remembers interviews, bound books, audio releases, etc. They didn't care if it was true, just if it sold copies. A rock n roll version of the National Enquirer.
It really opens your eyes the first time you discover what you thought was a trusted journalistic source selectively misquoting someone to push a narrative.
I stopped buying that Sh_t rag magazine 25 years ago. Sorry about the vitriol, but I hate getting lied to. No I’m not sorry btw, but I was able to see through their biased perspective years ago. Anyway, great video and insight! Actual real journalism! Thank You!
Nicely put together I concur..the dialogue is good to follow when its next to pictures of who is saying what..otherwise I think I'd be bemused as to who said what,,,it certainly shows Yoko was perceived as the pushy opinionated outsider trying to break into the Beatles circle...I read that because she was also John's dealer, he didnt dare upset her..she made sure she was holding the cards..I still dont like her..sorry
Perhaps you've seen Peter Jackson's documentary by now and have thus understood just how wildly off the mark your comments are. Perhpas now you understand Paul was being ironic and saying what an absurd thing it would be if in 50 years time people like J. Caraballo will be banging on about how Yoko sat on an amp and broke up the band. And here you are. Feel proud?
Thank you so much for doing this. I’m truly gaining a new perspective on a bleak chapter in my Beatle fandom. I really can’t add too much to the many excellent points already made. What I am struck with is how hard McCartney is trying to rationalize the John/Yoko situation. I hear sadness in his voice. I believe he knows that there was no fixing this issue and he knows that The Beatles are probably done. John and Paul had been together for over 10 years. They had been as tight as two friends could be. You can just feel that he just wants to get back with John and write songs and be a band. If it had been me, I seriously doubt I would have handled the situation nearly as well. I would have been royally pissed. Not so much at Yoko, but at John for messing with the group’s dynamic and deliberately sabotaging our friendship. I’m glad they stayed together long enough to make Abbey Road, but honestly once Lennon let Yoko into their inner circle it was over for the Beatles.
You're right - the moment John and Yoko "became a couple," it was never the same, Your observation of Paul's sadness is important because it shows something that is clearly bigger than the band. Great comment, Franklin.
You’re genuinely doing the best objective historical analyzation of the Beatles possibly ever! Great vids man, these deserve millions of views to be quite honest 👌🏽
@@dabreu I've never seen anything to lead me believe she was butting in to the group from what I understand was the only reason she was around was because john broke the rule of no spouses so Paul brought Linda to make it seem fair
@@dabreu Any girlfriend/wife was going to be sus to the fans, but Linda was not trying to take advantage of her position and that is obvious. I remember the Linda hate. It was completely misogynistic. Linda never did anything worthy of hate.
I think it comes down to this: it wasn't Yoko's mere presence that caused issues within the group, it was her constant interjections and speaking for John, which in part was John's own fault. I don't think the perception of the situation would be as negative if she hadn't put herself into the middle of their disagreements and collaborations.
I think John was hiding behind her, and using her as a wedge to separate himself from Paul. If it hadn't been Yoko, he would have found someone else. He needed someone to do the dirty work.
I love how Linda sounds like she's trying to help the beatles be the beatles rather than acting like she has control over them and acting like a spoilt brat (yoko) being put out that her partner has other interests and friends.
@@loosilu lets not forget that just a few years prior she was committed to a mental hospital. so there has always been something "off" about her. I do think that john realized how pushy and obnoxious she was/is and she became a bit of a shield for him....as Lucie wrote "someone to do the dirty work". So true. Their relationship shrank to nothing more than a story to tell and "rumor" has it that at the end they were on the verge of divorce. Yoko wanted to marry Sam Green.
Thanks for this. It's amazing how Rolling Stone twisted the narrative. And sad that Lennon was so angry, resentful, jealous, hurt, I don't know what, that he was willing to tarnish Paul's reputation with the help of Wenner.
Lennon's 1971-72 retelling is really shameful. He could have corrected the record better in later years but he and the other Beatles allowed Paul to carry the burden. Other business issues contributed to this but the record has never really been set straight. Thank you for the comment, Michele!
I think John Lennon's most radical phase was from "Two Virgins" to "Some Time in New York City" in 1968-1972. He was much more mellow man after that. For instance he saw that Paul was right about Allen Klein's dubious business methods and he said that "Band on the Run is a great album".
@@popgoesthe60s52 I really like John, but sometimes I feel the way he is vilified on the internet these days is karma. People think he was 24/7 wife beater and left Julian on the street. I know these are exaggerations, but I don't correct people most of the time because I feel he (and Yoko) deserve it after what they did to Paul. I also get great pleasure from seeing how much of a joke and how irrelevant Jann Wenner and RS have become. It gives me a bit of faith in humanity's ability to right wrongs.
@@xxyyzz9791 It is interesting how the lionization of John Lennon has started to turn. I believe this has to do with the politically correct cancel culture we are living in. I see people at both extremes but the middle is where the rationality is. He was open about his flaws and I don't believe we should used the standards of today to judge the past too harshly. As for the Rolling Stone, I have very little sympathy.
@@popgoesthe60s52 partly, but it's not just the cancel culture people. I think it's because the narrative of saint John and villain Paul was pushed for so long by Yoko and RS, that when contrary evidence started coming to light, there was an overcorrection in the opposite direction. It's also because John sang and proselytized so much about Peace, but did not act that way. This is a disconnect that puts people off. Paul sang about life on the farm and how much he loved Linda, George about God - and they lived that way so it's authentic. Again, it's John who opened himself up to this scrutiny. It's like if Gandhi preached peace and we then find out he beat the shit out of people at home. The message means nothing then, and John's thing was 'messaging' more than music, unlike Paul.
There's some great insight in these taped conversations. I get the impression that Linda didn't care for her (Yoko) either. Surprisingly Paul seemed somewhat open to Yoko's presence. ...or tolerant.
Yeah, Linda is more vocal about her feelings for Yoko. They all seem to pull punches even when they talk about her when she and John aren't even there. Thanks for watching, Scott.
Linda could be voicing Paul's private concerns. You can fully open in front the loved one, in privacy of your home, vent your frustrations, but you can't do it in business-like situations.
@@josiprakonca2185 True. She could have been revealing Paul's true feelings while Paul put on a diplomatic front to ensure that no impression was made that he was attacking Yoko to avoid upsetting John.
Rule #1, perfectly confirmed by this video: NEVER believe anything you read in Rolling Stone magazine. Remember, this is the rag that absolutely torpedoed Led Zeppelin when they first came out, and then couldn't kiss their asses enough when they realized how wildly popular (and transcendent of time and musical trends) Led Zeppelin is. The members never forgot, that's for sure. I'm kind of surprised that David Fricke got it so wrong, though. Because as that magazine goes, I have always felt he was one of their better, more informed writers. These videos are great, Matt. I just discovered them today, and I will definitely be watching more of them. Nice work!
It's so surprising that 50 years later so many myths are still around, especially with such wealth of documents to disprove them. Thank you very much for going into the real details.
There is so much information, it's quite a task to organize it to tell a balanced story. Just transcribing this video took me about six hours let alone the research, shooting, graphics, etc. That's why Mark Lewisohn is taking 30 years for his 'ultimate' Beatle biography, _Tune In_ ! Thanks for the comment.
In light of Peter Jackson's documentary it seems evident that this video simply added to the false narratives rather than debunked them with "real" (lol) details.
It seems that Paul was responding to George’s insistence that Yoko not be there. Paul is ready to accept that she will be involved. He’s ready to compromise.
I'm not even sure "compromise" is the right word. Here Paul says many times in his own words that he accepts Yoko's presence. He knows John well enough that there is no point bargaining or getting John to come alone, so the band should just keep going with the music as she's there. He keeps saying "stop thinking of it as an obstacle"-- i.e. Yoko's only an obstacle if we make it so. Paul also pushes back against the notion that Yoko is causing him and John to stop songwriting together, since he says that is due to not touring which means not sharing their daily lives, which was way before Yoko came in the picture. For me this video of Paul basically supporting John is making another topic much more relevant and enigmatic: Why only one year later, in 1970, Paul (who went through a depression in late 1969) would cause the band's permanent breakup with the McCartney album statement and his lawsuits against the other three Beatles.
Well, George was pissed - and rightfully so - not only at Yoko's presence but especially at John for not reining his woman in while she rudely sits on George's amp and eats his pastries. John should have told her, "Don't sit on George's amp or eat his food." She should have had the class and decency NOT to do that but she is feeling entitled because she is John's woman. I think George should have just stood up for himself and told her, "Get off of my amp and leave my food alone. If you want a place to sit have John get you a chair and if you want something to eat have John order you something." - while addressing John with full eye contact. If John was that delicate then tough shit - tell him to go ahead and leave and take her with him. I would not have been so diplomatic as Paul or as patient as George. Can't blame him for walking out. John was looking for a reason to bail and Yoko was his lynch pin to bring the whole thing down because basically John was a coward and a pussy.
Yes, Paul's cerebrally trying to accept her overbearing presence, but to do so he must ignore the fact that he cannot seem to write anymore with John because it feels as if he's writing with Yoko instead, John's not really there. Yoko makes all the suggestions, does all the talking and John just follows. Paul has already stopped writing with John. And it's because of Yoko. So tolerating her presence will sustain the Beatles in name only. In spirit, they're already on life support. George is being more realistic I must say.
I think Paul and Ringo come off looking like they understand all the problems and dearly want to save the band. My admiration for Paul and Ringo has just increased enormously. It seems that Linda was a 'voice of reason' also and it is well known that, unlike Yoko, Linda did not interfere with the band's work whatsoever.
Thanks for the upload Matt. If nothing else, this series of videos gives us tremendous insight into the mind of Paul McCartney, his psyche, the way he analyses every situation from every angle and then some. He seems so aware of every side of the issue and sympathetic to all sides, like a true Gemini.
He could have a little more sympathetic about letting George express himself as he wanted on guitar. I do not think Paul realized how much George hated this. George was complaining about it AGAIN in in 96 after Anthology.
I don't get it why this vid has no 1 million views. This is priceless. Thank you! The more i know about this, the more i think yoko was like one of those japanese ghosts clining on to john's shoulder and never let go, went everywhere with him. What a piece of work she was.
Based on this record, Paul really was looking after John's welfare all the time. He did not want John to leave the band and was willing to compromise just to convince John to continue. I guess at this point John already told them he was leaving, but Paul wanted him to stay. So much shit was reported about the Beatles that did not actually happen. That's because the 4 of them kept the most intimate information within themselves only. This confirms one very important aspect, they treated each other as family.
I found your channel not long ago and I just want to say what a breath of fresh air your commentary is! I have been an avid Beatle fan since I was 7, (I’m 37 now) and I feel like I know everything there is to know about them (everything that was put out anyway-the four of them will always share their own truth that only they know to be accurate.) Even though I love John and truly think he is a genius, I’ve always felt that Paul got an unfair shake concerning their partnership/friendship. I respect Paul so much and I’m glad he always tended to turn a blind eye to all the crap and soldier on. Because of his steadfastness, we’ve all been able to witness a living legend work before our very eyes...and he has yet to slow down. Thanks again for your work on these videos!❤️
Thank you, Toni. I started this channel to offer a different way to appreciate the Beatles and I discovered that it is to approach them with balance and fairness, and without regard to whether or not one finds out something bad about our heroes. It was liberating. I appreciate the warm comment.
Matt, this material is invaluable to the above-average to expert Beatle fan that most of us commenting here are. I'm an above-average fan, but I'm no Beatles scholar. I've read much of the work you cite, but I've never done original work in the field. Like many, I've been influenced by a variety of false and misleading remarks by those with axes to grind. Your work is unbiased, objective, and enlightening . Thank you for your dedication and your scholarship. The more I learn about the Beatles, the more I appreciate their impact, and the talents and personalities of the members. Thanks again .
I appreciate the kind words, Joe. Creating this channel has been a liberating experience for me and I was hoping to reach an audience ready for a different perspective and delivery and I am glad to say I have found it!
I've always felt John brought Yoko into everything was his way of sabotaging everything, so he could say" oh I quit the Beatles, you guys aren't accepting her as an equal" 🙄 I don't know... maybe they all sabotaged it on a subconscious level.
I think you are hitting it in the head. I think so too. It’s almost obvious yet I don’t hear that perspective much from others. Maybe they just don’t say it and think it.
I'm not sure Lennon did it on purpose to quit, but he certainly let it be known he didn't care what anyone else thought by her being there all the time.
Facts. And I have my own theory about what happened, so feel free to ignore it: I'm pretty sure John had emotional issues and that's how he developed dependencies on drugs, but also codependencies with people. He needed someone physically close to him to become his emotional support pet. And his emotional vulnerability also led him to become an activist, kinda like most activists tbh. But then the rest of the group wasn't about that he just deliberately became unlikable to make them feel dreadful at the idea of working together with him.
@@VixxKong2 one of the most interesting things I ever saw as a teen was watching a protest in NYC get slightly rowdy and watching John and Yoko jump into a Cadillac limo.. heading uptown. to their mansions..
Well just WOW, i've been a Beatles fan all my life but i'm now getting a Ph. D thesis in Beatleology with your weekly insights. How did i not ever hear about the "McCartney 50 year remark" before? Or the '68-69 John interview (you posted recently) where he is high as a kite..this is like we are going back in time and finding great details that seemingly were lost to time...i LOVE It...please do more and more and more.
Julian has said in more than one interview, "Yoko knew exactly what she was doing." That suggests that she had an overall agenda she was making play out, starting with robbing Cynthia of John. It's pretty well known that Yoko first tried to bed Paul, using the excuse that she wanted a donation of hand written song lyrics to auction for charity, and Paul saw through it, steering her away, suggesting she hit up John for a donation. Then, she targeted John. The idea that she didn't even know who The Beatles were at the time is the most ridiculous thing John used to say in interviews.
Yes she put out the apple in a planned out senerio out of being desperate for success. snagging a Beatle was a good way to do it. How shw cast a spell on John is puzzeling. maybe her mysterious persona and pretending to not care about fame and having some interesting artistic conceopts helped. certainly her exotic looks may have been appealing to him but the guy could have had anyone. Is Sean Lennon really May Pangs baby? not so far fetched and the timing and all fits
@@shaharazon2449 I think Yoko represented the professional visual and concept artist John always wanted to be, she seduced him while later becoming a 'mother' figure thus filling a void his mum's tragic death caused, and she played innocent like 'what are The Beatles... I don't know what that is?' so she was the opposite of a star struck fan. The exotic ethnicity was also a turn on, as you point out.
@@popgoesthe60s52 You can tell that a lot of effort on the transcription. But it's so worth it - you've created what seems like the optimum platform in letting the story speak for itself (unless the actual footage is ever shown!)
The more I dug, the more interesting information popped up! It’s been very gratifying to discover more humanity in the Beatles history than was reported. Thanks for watching, Randy!
@@rodog9465 John is not evil and the break up was not all Yoko’s fault. That said Paul was unfairly scapegoated and I am happy that is coming to light.
Excellent series Matt, keep them coming, the Beatles my all time favourite band, love your fair analysis that cuts through the crap that have been written and said about them 🤘☀️🇬🇧
Done very well again , I’m so glad you’re really clearing the air about all this, and yes like forensics you’re listening to the tapes and actually hearing what and how things were said and to whom, or about whom. There’s an awful lot of negative assumptions about Paul during these sessions. But in reality he was the obe that was being the most sensible and mature about it all. Thanks to the tapes! To tell the real truth.
This video was really enlightening. Thanks for taking the time to put all this material together. You are doing such a service to all the Beatles fanatics out there!
Thank you for this, and the other Let It Be videos. I love Paul's music and respect him as a person, so the commonly accepted idea that he was awful to John and Yoko, and a tyrant toward the other three Beatles, was always painful to consider. It also seemed difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile with everything else I knew about the man. Listening to him in this video, along with some of the others you've assembled, gives me a great sense of relief in that this seems like proof positive that he was a decent, goodhearted guy who was trying to be fair and understanding to his best friend. Regarding the break-up, although of course I would have loved the band to continue making wonderful music, the truth is that they should have broken up. As George once said, you had to sacrifice your nervous system to be a Beatle: it truly was all too much and they deserved a chance to get out of the gilded cage and lead normal lives with their families. I just wish Paul hadn't been made the fall guy. The irony is that when it came to the one factor about which there could be no compromise - namely, Allen Klein - history has shown that Paul was 100 per cent correct and the other three were mistaken. Even John had to, very grudgingly, through gritted teeth, admit as much in last Rolling Stone interview. Thanks again for your work here. It gives me hope that eventually - maybe not in my lifetime, but eventually - history will get this right, thanks to people like you and Mark Lewisohn.
Hi Bill. Yes the rancor and pettiness as reported never passed the smell test and once I started digging into these topics I found a wealth of information that was ignored, suppressed, or misinterpreted. It’s not that hard to sort out these pieces and having been inspired by Mark Lewisohn’s work, I began applying proper historical research methods to the Beatles. It was liberating. Thank you for the kind comment and hang on because there is more coming!
Even the infamous tussle between Paul and George (I'll play whatever you like or I won't play at all if that's what you want) was blown completely out of proportion. George always resented Paul and John treating him like the little brother because of the age differences. There was a pre-existing dynamic between Paul and George in which Paul's approval was needed for one of George's songs to make it onto an album. So, George always felt a little like second fiddle. Paul explained, "Look, I'm not trying to get you," meaning Paul was really not trying to be a dictator, he just knew what he wanted a track to sound like. He didn't mean any dominance over George, but that was more George's hang up from back to the beginning. George had an inferiority complex that Paul never intended to take advantage of. Paul was a demanding artist, not a bully.
McCartney being painted as a villain at the end is a brilliant decades-long PR move by Yoko. She built and mantains John's post-Beatles image with a strong grip while trying to soften her image. The RS magazine is an old vessel for this purpose.
@@popgoesthe60s52 This tape ends all speculation about Paul being bossy and pushing John out of the band. John was being influenced by heroin which was introduced to him by Yoko. Yoko was his Mother figure!
Paul was no villain. Life is complex. Paul was correct about Klien. But, Paul WAS overly bossy when it came to telling George how to play guitar. This is why GH never played with Macca again until Anthology, but often played with George and Ringo in the 70s. Harrison himself said in 1976 "I would be in a band with John Lennon, but not with Paul McCartney." John's allowing Yoko in the studio was a nightmare, but John let George have musical freedom. That is why some of George's best guitar work is on John's "Imagine" album
J. Maggio they apparently had a lot of conflict over it, according to p. Spector. George would want to try over and over to get it perfect and John was impatient and thought George was trying to throw his weight around, and things were very tense in the studio. Never underestimate the power of a narrative.
Despite all this discussion and this controversy about Yoko----- John and Paul got together by themselves and recorded one of the Beatles all-time greatest records: "The Ballad Of John and Yoko". McCartney plays drums and bass and John plays guitars. Just the two of them together, in a one day session. When they wanted to create together and things were good, there's nobody else who remotely came close.
I was born in 1964 in rural Germany where, when I was little, "Beatles" was a synonym for shady long-haired young men :-) Still, I grew up loving their music and I don't think they ever lost relevance but in the past years, I can't really say I actively listened to them much. Maybe six months ago though, I started to re-discover and re-listen to their music (which is as fresh as ever, much to my surprise), I re-watch the films, and I also discovered all those interviews here on YT, which I enjoy lots because nothing of the sort was available to me back in the day. Now,...yesterday, I came across your channel and boy, that's something else entirely! I watched maybe half a dozen videos immediately and can hardly stop. What a gem! I can't thank you enough! I love the way you approach and present your material, knowledgeable, fact-oriented and source-based, not sensationalist but very warm, calm but never boring. Makes me very happy and I really look forward to watching all your vids.
@@popgoesthe60s52 the transcription of it all is what made it so easy to contextualize for the audience! It also really helps highlight your argument against the rolling stone writer at the end. The hard-work paid off my friend, it really is a great video, great content, and a great historical analysis. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I really love your historical analysis and I am amazed by the fact that you didn't major in history
@@zachespinoza1794 Thank you, Mr. Espinoza. I always loved history but I was a born designer and found myself in that career. I guess music history has been my hobby since I was a kid. After working on this channel for a couple more years and I'll have a PhD equivalent! Thanks for sticking with me, Zach.
Funny how their breakup is usually presented as them "growing up" and having proper married relationships. Well, when you grow up, you don't take your wife to work. So this clip where they are discussing John demanding special dispensation to bring Yoko to work is actually more like John's refusal to grow up.
@@lukemacducci Paul wasn't "bringing Linda to work with him" as John was here bringing Yoko. Paul was working WITH Linda, which he had every right to choose to do when he wasn't working with The Beatles. John did NOT have the right to bring his wife into HIS work situation with The Beatles. She was not a member of the band. She was not providing a service for the band. She could have come and gone as Linda and others did, but to stay there right next to John like some kind of guard statue, was just a lunatic thing to do. And not signifying John's 'growing up' at all.
Not just John's refusal to "grow up," the constant presence of Yoko (John's mother-figure) allowed him to stay "child-like" as she was always around, and often spoke up for John, rather than let him speak for himself. It seemed a weird mother-son relationship taken to the extreme. The Get Back movie doesn't show her saying much of anything to anyone (just a couple of times she says something,) she's just there all the time. I can see how her constant presence could be seen as a roadblock to the Paul/John dynamic, even if she wasn't being an open pain.
Love how you play clips of the sessions and discussions in all your videos. It shows what was really going on and somewhat allows the viewer to make up their own mind about the situations the Beatles were in rather than you telling us what to think. Thanks for your open mindedness and hard work! Great job!
Linda was a professional photographer, there to take photos, who was staying on the outside of the inner circle with the other assistants, cameramen, etc. What was Yoko there to do?
@@deannabayless8025 Does that negate the fact that her and Paul were together at this point? Yoko was an artist. She may not have been a very good artist, but she was an artist nonetheless, and could have been there for moral support as well as artistic input for John.
There’s a huge difference between Yoko and Linda. Yoko is speaking for John and being obtrusive. Linda doesn’t speak for Paul and is worried about being there. She understands it would be better with just the 4 of them there and is happy to not be there or just stay in the background
This is the best analysis I've ever heard. It makes everything much clearer. Even I - a Beatles obsessive since 1963 - even I bought into the stories of Paul the impossible-to-work-with, self-appointed dictator and Yoko the opinionated, unwelcome presence at recording sessions. Thank you, Matt, for helping me see things in a new light.
As always, Matt a complete and clear analysis on this key time in music history. I’ve been there since that magical night of February 9, 1964. The new Jackson film coming later this year will set things straight on what really was true, and not what some people have perceived. I’m sure of that. Be well.
The difference between Historians and Journalists is the the former is interested in facts whereas the later is interested in pushing a narrative. So many narratives have been pushed over the years that what actually happened during this time gets lost. Thanks for being an Historian and setting the record straight, Matt.
I'm afraid that both can be guilty of pushing a narrative. Objectivity (and avoiding misleading sensationalism) might be somewhat more common with historians but the gap is closing fast.
@@johnnhoj6749 What we refer to as "good history" is much less inclined to distort facts. Bias always creeps in but not to the point where left becomes right and so on, as what happened , as Matt points out, in discussing how McCartney has been incorrectly characterized by journalists. I'll take academic integrity over sensationalism any day.
Another thing I'll add. I like how Paul laid some of the trouble about not playing live anymore, but he says something about them playing better now than ever before. Then they walk up to the roof and prove it.
Ringo has said that one reason they wanted to stop touring was because it was preventing them from improving as musicians. They did in fact improve after they stopped touring (not that they weren't remarkable before then), but that improvement came at the cost of damage to band chemistry due to the end of their tight, daily interactions on tour.
Great point, Bill. The musicianship in this case came as the expense of camaraderie, which seems to have sunk them. The Stone became a powerful when they resumed touring in 1969. Could the Beatles have done the same?
@@popgoesthe60s52 My sense is that Paul and Ringo would have enjoyed touring, but John and especially George never would have done it. Having said that, it's not hard to imagine the set list of a 1969 Beatles tour. Take the rockers off the White Album ("Back in the USSR" would be a natural show opener, and "Helter Skelter" might have gotten truly wild - and lengthy -in a live show), add "Revolution" and "Hey Jude," and throw in a couple early rock 'n' roll covers ("Rock and Roll Music" and "Long Tall Sally" seem like easy choices, plus maybe a Carl Perkins number for George) and you've got a show. There could even be an acoustic mini-set, as the Stones did in their '69 tour. Off the top of my head, I'd nominate "Blackbird," "Julia," and "While My Guitar Gently Weeps." (The last might seem an odd choice as an acoustic number, but George Martin said he regretted not recording it in that style, as Harrison originally presented it to the band. Plus, it would solve the problem of how to handle that long Clapton solo without Clapton.)
@@billwolfe8125 One thing that I got from listening to over 90 hours of this stuff is they did love the oldies. They could have done a live album just of those. The 1950s revival began as early as 1969 with Sha Na Na playing Woodstock. I think John would have toured. In an upcoming video on more of these sessions, he is the most excited to go on the roof, so maybe he would have acquiesced to playing live. I love your set list!
@@popgoesthe60s52 From a modern perspective it's hard to think of the top songwriting duo of the 60s having to rely on cover versions... the show they could have done just going back to the White Album and then a handful of earlier numbers! But, on the other hand, when you go back to the Live Peace in Toronto concert starting out with three of John's favourite covers, you can picture the Beatles falling back on the oldies to ease the nerves a bit after not having been on stage for 3+ years.
Paul tries to behave rationally and logically and keep the peace but he's dealing with other people who are not rational, having life problems and who are less interested in the band than he is. It's sad to hear.
Thank you so much for putting the time and effort into allowing us to listen in on these conversations. Paul has always been painted as a person of interest in the negative approach to Yoko. George seems to be the person who most objected to her being present at the recordings and John doesn't seem to give much of an opinion as things transpire around the group. Paul shines in this side meeting trying to save the group from disbanding.
it’s very interesting to me that Paul is the one who constantly gives Yoko the benefit of the doubt, or at least is working very hard to see things from John’s perspective. it’s obvious that he’s struggling with the dynamic, but he really seems like he was trying not to force John to choose between him or Yoko. John eventually felt like he needed to make that choice, but Paul comes across as a guy who wants what’s best for his friend. Perhaps him being equally happy with Linda was driving that perspective home for him. Interesting stuff as always Matt!
Yeah, Paul clearly is sad, that things are not like they used to be. And he probably knows he's being jealous of Yoko. And so giving her the benefit of doubt is him taking this jealousy into account. I mean - he's a british gentleman after all ;-)
The narrative that Paul was dictatorial really only applies to musical arrangements. I am sympathetic that the other three who had earlier been musical collaborators were reduced to session men. I believe you are correct Matt. Paul McCartney is bending over backwards to accommodate John’s dysfunctional band mate behavior. Remember that after John leaves Cynthia and participates in all those outrageous happenings, it is Paul who is thrust into the role of smoothing things over with the press. 1969 begins with Paul being very much the peacemaker, the Abbey Road sessions are generally very peaceful and productive, there is no acrimony in the taped September meeting where the band’s future is being discussed with the 4-4-4-2 songwriting quota. But by Spring 1970, John and George sent poor Ringo over with the letter telling Paul that the release date for McCartney has been pushed back to accommodate Let It Be. Compare that with Instant Karma’s rush release, no wonder Paul blew a gasket. John Lennon liked to accuse Paul of musical sabotage of Lennon song in interviews, but I think after a year or more of putting up with Lennon’s behavior and constantly being outvoted on management Paul lost it blew up at Ringo and put in the blasted questionnaire for the McCartney album. The story of the break up won’t be found on the nagra tapes, the Let It Be, movie or the Peter Jackson movie.
God, your heart really breaks for Paul here. He just loves the Beatles and writing with John so much. He’s so conscientious of everything going on around him and is trying hard to keep it all together.
More fascinating stuff man. It's so refreshing to get a well researched insight thats not designed to paint the picture one way or another. Just putting it out there, what went on, what was said, in it's rightful context. Puts a whole new spin on an awful lot of what went down. Top work again dude 👏
Thanks so much for putting out this video! Agree with you about Paul's tone in the audio you played of him talking with Ringo and the others about John and Yoko. In September 2020, Rolling Stone had a good story about the end of the Beatles. In the story, it was mentioned how John still believed the Beatles were his band, and how he was upset at Paul for quitting the group in April 1970 without asking John's permission to quit (even though he had privately told the others he himself was leaving the group several months earlier). I think there were several factors in why the Beatles broke up, but one that isn't mentioned is John's unwillingness to acknowledge the others' growth and maturity and changing roles in the band, especially Paul's and George's.
"Jo Jo was a man who thought he was a loner but he knew it wouldn't last. Jo Jo left his home in Tuscon Arizona for some California grass." I love that opening line and possibl;y the greatest intro to a rock song even rivaling Led Zeppelin's "Black Dog" IMHO. Cheers mate!
I know Paul is trying to compromise and tolerate Yoke as much as he could for the sake of John. But man, i never knew that he's already so much matured and rational in his approach to keep them together and going at that age.
I love this. The Information Age is pulling back the curtain and exposing truths. Love that you’re putting this out here. Poor Paul was left with a rudderless ship after Brian died. John abdicated leadership. Yoko probably spoke for John as protection for him as he was “under the weather”. It all makes sense.
Paul really comes across as a sensitive, intelligent and highly reasonable individual who really wanted to accommodate Yoko. Yoko was the problem from the moment she came into John's life because they were both damaged.
ROSEMARY BLAKE .from Canada ,YOKO was not the problem, when John met YOKO HE told Paul to stay away he was really jealous of Paul, and like he said in the song don't let me down, she done me good it was a obsession a sexual obsession and I had a similar love and I was not the boss anymore she was the boss she had the power bc of her beauty and the way she made love.
Very good video. I like how you put the voice / quote next to the picture of the guy speaking. It makes it so much easier to understand. This is one of the best channels on youtube.
It’s interesting to hear Linda before she developed an English accent. I will never be convinced that Yoko wasn’t responsible or at least being a catalyst for the breakup of the Beatles.
All of these behind-the-scenes bits that you've posted are fantastic. My take: At the end of the day, we see four normal people (plus wives, girlfriends, entourage members, etc.) just doing their best to get along in life. And we got nearly a decade of glorious music in the process.
Really enjoying your insights Matt, terrific work. So many revelatory moments here! Paul's "50 years from now" prediction about Yoko's intrusion is stunning. But just think of how he would have felt back then if he knew, in that same future, he'd be portrayed as a controlling dictator. Hopefully that falsehood will end once and for all.
There is more work to be done to make sure the false narratives don't prevail. I think this is an important time to lay down some alternate perspectives and continue the discussion like we are doing here. Approaching this history with a balance has been an eyeopening experience for me. Thanks for the comment, Mark!
Another fantastic video Matt! As always, your method of showing the dialogue transcribed in "real time" is the best way to present this. It makes this period all the more sad - how hard Paul was pushing for understanding and compromise, trying to give John and Yoko space and ease the tensions within the band - only to have them turn on him particularly with the Klein situation. And then to have completely the opposite angle pushed by Rolling Stone and the Lennon estate for decades.... no wonder Paul's "liberty bell" moment with the group was only a few short months away. Great job, always look forward to the next installments. Cheers
It seems like John was just bored, and fed up with the group, but didn't have the guts to come out and say it. He was also into the addiction thing which tends to focus a person away from anything else. Paul always wanted to move forward, ALWAYS. I think that if the Beatles were to have stayed together, they would have had to take a break for a year or two, then maybe come back to it possibly.
Thanks for all your work. i love these deep dives. In fact, I think you're the only content provider on the internet that's accomplishing what you are: that is, proving through the taped conversations that some myths around the Beatles are exaggerations or worse, arrant lies. Of course, you can always count on the press to slant an article for the sake of sensationalism. [I had first hand experience of this when a Hollywood based reporter for the L.A. Weekly did a piece about a unique coffeehouse I inhabited. He asked me if I would agree to be the centerpiece of the article. He wound up serving up a romanticized version of my "poverty ridden" life at the time and the same for the other inhabitants of that place. I wound up reading the draft, calling him up angrily complaining about his exaggerations. He apologized and said he would fix them. But the final printed article was still nothing close to reality! The press is notorious for this sort of thing.] For some reason I find it a relief that Paul wasn't the despot he was painted to be in some hit pieces. To me, Paul's social philosophy can be summed up the the song 'We Can Work It Out.' The sentiment of compromise is there. Even though in his "your way" moments in the song, it seems like that way is the dead end street and that Paul's way is the right way. But really, examining the lyric, he's saying, "well, if we try it my way, we can find out in time whether things will eventually be okay between us." I think Paul by nature was always diplomatic and hoped for the most harmonious (pun intended) results.
Harmonious indeed, Vinnie! Totally agree with you and I must confess that I believed at one time that the press and biographers were giving us "their best." Well when I started doing the investigative work myself I was angry to find I had been taken in that way. I believe there is a brief window of time to set the record straight before it is wrong forever. When I took a balanced approach to The Beatles (and others) it was liberating and extremely satisfying. Your parallel of _We Can Work It Out_ is perfect. Both of their philosophies are borne out during the Let It Be sessions. I appreciate the warm comment, Vinnie. Much thanks.
Rolling Stone has always been overly worshipful of Lennon at the expense of McCartney., David Fricke being a perfect example. Thanks for another great episode, Matt!
Ive cought up on all your videos Matt, Marianne Faithfull,The Merry Go Round,The Loving Spoonful,Kaleidoscope,The Association,Buffalo Springfield and ALL your Beatle videos, -You are a Great music Journalist Matt(something that Rolling Stone Magazine doesnt have), All your videos are refreshingly straightforward,insightful and of great quality.Your series on the Beatles Let it Be sessions are a fantastic accompaniment to the upcoming Peter Jackson film.-Once again Matt brilliant Work!!!
Thanks Ernie! The timing of my Let It Be session videos is really working out. I can't wait to see the Jackson film! Thanks for watching all those videos - plenty more to come!
You're doing such a good job with these! I love the analysis and also your subtitling style, with the speakers in columns. Very much agree that John put Yoko in a difficult position by inserting her into a situation where she wasn't particularly welcome (even when Paul tried his best to be sympathetic). Of course she was an adult and could've chosen not to go, also. If Yoko had dropped by once every few days (rather than being at John's side 24/7), I wonder if the Beatles/Paul would've been more open to including/collaborating with her?
I think Yoko in smaller doses would have been perfectly fine. Maureen, Pattie, and Linda visit the sessions but most don't know it because they allowed their men to work without intrusion so they could bring home the bacon! Thanks for the substantive comment.
Yoko was extremely problematic for The Beatles. I don’t believe anyone, including John, forced Yoko to show-up in the studio and meetings and voice her opinions about everything, with John’s blessing. While there was a confluence of factors which ended The Beatles, Yoko was a disruptive force who deserves no mercy.
Paul seems so nice and willing to work everything out for the benefit of everyone, strange how Paul has been perceived otherwise over the years. The rolling stone has a lot to answer for!
Excellent that you exposed "The Beard" quote as an utter myth. Well Done! The more I've looked into these sessions, the less it's seemed that the primary conflict was between Paul and George. Rather, clearly, the most significant problem was between John and George (...John and... everybody, in a way).
Exactly. Paul has always been painted as the villain, when John was the real antagonist - well John/Yoko. George, always the grump, actually had some high moments during these sessions so it was up and down. Just like life. Thanks for the comment!
@@popgoesthe60s52 Sadly, the most frightening specter haunting these sessions -- indeed, all of Rock'n'Roll from a certain era -- is severe drug abuse & outright addiction. I can't imagine any tape will feature the band discussing in anything approaching open terms Lennon's struggles in this regard, particularly at that time. No matter how conciliatory Paul could have made himself or how challenging George could have been, this alone likely rendered all efforts fairly useless.
@@tsamantas Yes, the drug issue is a hard one to pin down but it certainly had a bearing on John's relationship to the band. I'll be delving into this in a future video.
Paul was indeed very understanding of J&Y and understood that that the dynamic had changed. He didn’t deserve the abuse he received over the years from others both inside and outside the band.
Man, you're really doing a great job with this "Let it be" stuff here in you channel and I really love it, Kudos to you!! Greetings from a big Beatles fan from Mexico City.
This is when George Martin was needed. "OK guys, be here at 9am, and no girls." As much as I admire John artistically, I have to admit that he could really nurse a grudge all the way to 11. It always got me that he refused George's offer to perform at the "Concert for Bangladesh" simply because George didn't want Yoko onstage.
Matt, this is absolutely great stuff about the Get Back sessions! I think it’s just so funny how bad these misconceptions were/are even up to this day and age. I especially love that bit you pointed out about George saying “you’re so full of shit. “ If the guy just would have listened to the tapes! Anyway, I can’t wait for more of your videos. Thanks so much for the great videos you are doing.
Thanks for another very interesting dive into Beatle history. It's seems that Macca's reputation for being difficult is yet another fabrication by Rolling Stone.
Yes, the more I listened to these sessions, the more positive McCartney became. He is not the "bad actor" in these sessions as has been reported. John and George brought way more problems to this project than Paul did. Thanks for the comment, Catherine.
@@popgoesthe60s52 Thanks again for the great content. You present the facts in a way that makes it very easy to understand what's happening and who's saying what.
Wow, this is so precious. It it is the truth! Not what we read in magazines. It is them talking. Thank you so much for these videos. I have to share it. There are so many people who still thinks Paul was the bossy guy;
It was enlightening to me to give these a close listen and I was delighted with what I heard. It wasn't all sugar and spice but it was certainly honest. Thanks for the comment, Virginia!
I think John and George were just getting to the point where they didn't want to compromise with anybody: they wanted to have it their own way. Which is what they all said later, that they had grown up and were ready to be on their own without anyone to tell them what they should do. It really didn't have anything to do with Yoko. They just wanted to be in charge of their own lives.
These tapes changed my negative views towards Paul because he obviously wanted The Beatles to stay together. The Rolling Stone article was poorly researched and reinforced the popular sentiment and lies of the time. What baffles me is that John and George seemed united in their feelings about Paul in the post Beatles period (e.g. How Do You Sleep) - in light of the fact that George objected to Yoko’s interference. Thanks and I will stayed tuned!
Having bought those bootlegs, way back when, to me, these conversations they were having, were far more interesting than hearing them slog through their rehearsals. And now after all these years, we're finally hearing more, and more of them. AND they are so much more cleaned up, and intelligible! I'm loving it. Thanks for putting these out there!
Paul was so self-aware, accomodating, and diplomatic. And was just John checked out. The setup was just so ridiculous. Shame on John. Paul deserves a medal.
Paul and George knew Cynthia when they were kids. Must have made them feel terrible seeing a home wrecker constantly in the studio while Lennon neglected his family.
Paul and George knew Cynthia when they were kids. Must have made them feel terrible seeing some other woman constantly in the studio while Lennon neglected his family.
Paul and George knew Cynthia when they were kids. Must have made them feel bad seeing some other woman constantly in the studio while Lennon neglected his family.
I'm really impressed by Paul's emotional maturity here. It seems that while the others in the conversation are politely angry, he is sad. I think the Let It Be metaphor in the title here is very apt. It seems that those weren't just empty words for a song to him. He's accepting the reality of what has happened, while the others are fighting it, and in the process he's also more constructively looking for ways for them all to move forward together, which the others aren't. But he also seems to grasp the futility of the situation, and is sad that he's losing his best friend, and of course the band that has consumed all of his attention for a decade. And he apparently went into a yearlong deep depression out on the farm in Scotland when the breakup was finally consummated. The others had places to go after The Beatles: John was wanting to do all the Yoko stuff, George had his Indian stuff plus the desire to get out of John and Paul's shadow, Ringo a budding acting career. But Paul lost pretty much everything with the breakup. I think he really sees the inevitability of this in this meeting here.
I was struck by his sadness as well. He sounds very mature and although a bit emotional, he rationality wins out. Too bad the others couldn't do the same. Thanks for the comment, David.
After seeing this video, I played my copy of Let It Be... Naked. If you listen to the lyrics of The Long and Winding Road, it's as if Paul is sensing the end of The Beatles after their long and winding career and that Paul feels abandoned by John and wishes there could be a 'way' back into the songwriting partnership they once loved. I think it's Paul singing to John, 'C'mon man, we were once soul mates. Don't leave me alone out in the cold and rain. Let me back in.' Just a theory. Also Let It Be is like Paul resigned to the inevitable fact that his beloved band will soon be a thing of the past and there's nothing to be done to save it, so just let it be.
@@continentalgin Interesting idea. I think that could well be. I always felt that Two of Us was about John. On one level, he's kind of trying to remind John of all they had together, but on another he's just appreciating it. The "you and I have memories" line seems to be saying that nothing going forward could possibly surpass or change the deep bond that they have. And the sweet melancholy of all of this kind of sets the tone for the rest of the album. I remember once reading an interview with John where he says that he was married twice: first to Paul and then to Yoko (interestingly leaving Cynthia out entirely). So this period here is when the divorce was happening. And Paul is processing what it means to lose his spouse. It's more than a songwriting partnership, and more than a band.
You have made this a well that I never get bored of dipping into as your fresh approach sheds a new light into subject matter that has been cloudy at best. Your time and effort that you have put into this and each of your videos is much appreciated. Thank you!
I love the way you put the quotes next to the pictures. Makes it so easy to follow.
indeed, especially for non-native speakers/listeners like me
Agreed. V good
add me to these
This guy is brilliant. One of the best on youtube. Total class. Hands down.
Yeah it's a really great idea!!👍👍👍👍
This is revealing. Paul really cared about John, as a friend, and about the band. And in some way he cared about Yoko too. He wasn't mean, bitter or bossy at all. He just regretted not being able to write with his partner anymore. That's why he came up with the whole "get back" idea. It makes lots of sense.
Also, it's kind of funny that the outsiders in this conversation (Linda, Michael, Neil) seem to be the most annoyed by Yoko, while the band members are actually kind of cool about it (except for George, of course, that isn't there). Thanks Matt, well done... again!
You are correct about the non-band members. They pull fewer punches on Yoko. I think the others were used to John's overboardness and took it for what it was. Thanks for the comment, Antonio.
I wouldn't consider Neil to be an outsider. Obviously, he wasn't in the band, but he and Mal were part of the family in a way that none of the WAGS ever were.
Linda is supportive of Paul, Paul is supportive of Linda, John is supportive of Yoko, and Yoko is supportive of Yoko.
@@joeschembrie9450 Well put, Joe.
@@popgoesthe60s52 In hindsight, though, I think it would have flowed better if I'd said, "Paul is supportive of John." It goes without saying that Paul and Linda had something special, but what really stands out here is that, still at this stage at least, Paul wants to be supportive of John too.
That quote of Paul predicting that 50 years later people would say they broke up because Yoko sat on an amp is both hilarious and heartbreaking at the same time
God, yes, exactly. I started tearing up even as I laughed. It really moved me.
All things must pass, or so the line goes The Beatles ended. They grew up and apart. They probably needed to. Maybe the four of them would have gotten together at some point later on, after they were out of the storm's eye? Maybe not. The good news: we have their music to feast on.
That comment by McCartney was prophetic, hysterical and heartbreaking.
And totally true, as it turned out. Paul was always the best of the Beatles when it came to PR. He knew how the media and public perception worked, I guess. That image of Yoko at the recording sessions is what stuck in peoples' minds.
I've stated this opinion many times. I don't believe Yoko was the cause of the breakup of the Beatles. I do believe, however, she was a symptom of the breakup.
I find Paul so deeply endearing, both for his conciliatory tone and spirit but also for his wisdom ("it's only an obstacle if we're trying to surmount it!") and his love of his friend ("...but that's John, he always goes overboard."). I'm really impressed by the maturity, grace, and wisdom Paul demonstrates here.
Just such great stuff. Thank you again for this.
Yes, maturity, grace and wisdom doesn't equate to bossy dictator. Thanks for the comment, Peter - more to come.
@@popgoesthe60s52 yes but what's pretty hard to separate: i assume/imagine Paul knows what he's saying is being recorded. So it's just as likely to imagine that he's speaking "to the camera", and we're still not capturing the "real situation". we're seeing paul the publicist; speaking for posterity so that he seems like the reasonable/mature/sane on.
I dunno, i guess that makes me think: no one can really get at the truth of all this. :)
@@cajunqueen5125 Michael Lindsay Hogg placed microphones in inconspicuous places including bugging the phones. There are many instances were they couldn't have known they were being recorded. This is likely one of them.
@@popgoesthe60s52 And then, John and Yoko spent several years trashing him to every rock critic they could find. It became the narrative than Paul was a fluffy, weak talent who was riding on his looks.
@@popgoesthe60s52 i thought i've seen this conversation on camera? no?
This seriously deserves more attention, the whole myth of Paul being bossy and full of just misery so prevalent in the mainstream pop culture that everything about this period of The Beatles is completely distorted by the endless regurgitation of the myth by Rolling Stone and the press. Thank you for making this, and I love that you retorted a lot of the myths that these “journalists” have reported as fact.
Thank you. When we sweep out the old biases and agenda, what we are left with is very satisfying. Thanks for the comment, Oliver.
@@popgoesthe60s52 Thank you, man! You’re doing great work, keep it up!
Paul was bossy when it came to telling George how to play guitar. This is why GH never played with Macca again until Anthology, but often played with George and Ringo in the 70s. Harrison himself said in 1976 "I would be in a band with John Lennon, but not with Paul McCartney." John's allowing Yoko in the studio was a nightmare, but John let George have musical freedom. That is why some of George's best guitar work is on John's "Imagine" album.
@@jmaggio909 agree 100%
@@jmaggio909 with all respect It always felt like a big brother little brother situation between Paul and George where as Paul was overbearing when they were young and John was known to not pick with you when it came to misic
2:35 everybody being in awe of how George said something to John's face, all of them wanted to say but were afraid of John's reaction while George said twice "It's not just you John we're in this band too and you don't get to just bring someone in."
They were afraid of upsetting the gentle balance. I wonder if John would have quit on the spot if they actually said what they felt about Ono being there? Thanks for the comment, Sebastian!
@@popgoesthe60s52 John was really moody but as much as Paul thinks he knew John well I don't think he would've quitted the band cause he later said he was upset Paul did it.. and there was this leaked conversation of him saying he was touched when Paul said to him(in response to John wanting a divorce) to not go public about it because he thought Paul wanted to work things out but then felt betrayed when Paul went public with it to sell his album... it's really interesting how much misunderstanding there is in their partnership even though they knew each other from a young age.
Well said 🤘🤘🎸🎸
@@sebastianm6695 I got to thinking that it's almost as if they broke up by accident!
@@redletter2008 I don't think growing apart is inevitable.
At the end of the day Paul's character and reputation was destroyed to preserve John's legend status john talked about peace and and ending war so therefore Paul was the one who caused the problems when in actuality john was guilty for his share of the problem
@@xxyyzz9791 while I agree she assisted with it I don't think john is without blame that being said his major failing as a human was that he never knew how to multi task when he wanted to be a Beatle
Noting came in between that not his son or his wife or his mental issues and once he was with yoko all he wanted to do was be with yoko.and so he let her control all aspects of his life including his opinion on the group
Nope.
@@vicbertfartingclack4559 what do you mean
We’ll fucking said !!!!! Great comment
Paul had John's back as his friend. Nobody really knew what to do in as they watched Yoko in real-time suck the life out of John.
This is why George Martin was so important in the studio.
As well as Brian Epstein. Maybe a bit more than Martin.
@@barrilitomusic yeah, they needed Brian because he could keep them all in line. Whenever there was a dispute, Brian would sort it out.
@@dudstep that’s right. There’s even a quote from Brian that he knows they’ll eventually go in their separate ways. He recognised the unity they formed and yet their own individualities as people. Somehow he must’ve feel unnecessary once they stopped touring.
@@terrythekittieful I would never underestimate the importance of George Martin as their producer. He had impeccable musical taste, was refreshingly open minded, and helped their image immensely as a 'class act.' Their songwriting was phenomenal, but George Martin made sure it was presented with such quality that no one in the business could come close to their superiority. I give George Martin tons of credit.
@@terrythekittieful OK, I would agree, but let's face it, they couldn't have had a better producer for their music.
What so many people don't realize (and Paul touched on this) is that Yoko, by always being around John...even when he'd go to the bathroom, actually put up a real barrier between Paul and John...long-time mates.. this had a chilling affect. Do NOT underestimate the role of Yoko in the band's breakup... along with John's weakness
You make a good point, Steve. The Yoko insertion was a major issue in total. I don't fully understand his motives, but there certainly was a better, more compassionate, and more professional way John could have gone about this. John could have had both Yoko and the Beatles and Klein exploited this. John all the power and pissed it away. Thanks for the comment, Steve!
@@popgoesthe60s52 yup.. all true! I think we also have to remember Paul and Yoko are still technically business partners ... so he has to be kinda careful of what he says.
@@stevekaspar1396 Very ture!
Don't underestimate John's role. He brought her in. I personally have always thought he deliberately was using her as a barrier against Paul. George couldn't stand her being there either.
@@loosilu Well stated!!
Well done, Matt. What your video confirms is what Paul has stated numerous times about "Beatle historians", HE was there and HE knows what actually transpired, not second, third and forth hand stories.
Good point
None of us were there and even a snippet of audio tape doesn’t tell us that much. Historians were not there yes, but the good ones are more objective than those that were actually there, most of the time.
And what we know NOW is that while Paul was indeed there, he had no more idea of what happened 50 years ago than anyone else. This video is simply another individual making his own version of events through selected excerpts. It confirms nothing other than people's biases.
John and George aren't around to clarify "what actually transpired."
Paul’s point on needing a “daddy” figure for the band. Makes you wonder how things would have been handled if Brian Epstein was still around to during this time.
Great point. How would Epstein have handled this?
@@popgoesthe60s52 I don’t think Brian would’ve been around. I hope he would’ve been smart enough to realise he’s no longer needed. I also don’t think he’d have the ability to reign everyone in. Then again, I can’t think of anyone who could!
Great video again, thanks for bringing them to us.
Brings to mind John's quote concerning his thoughts when Brian died, "We've fookin' 'ad it."
@@popgoesthe60s52 John once said they fell apart after Brian died.
Brian didn't have much to do with the recording process. He handled business affairs. Although with him gone, and the four handling themselves for the first while afterward, The Beatles were a ruddlerless ship. Things were coming to a head in the studio.
Who can blame George for getting fed up and walking out on that dynamic. You really have to give it to Paul though. It seems he just tried to be as diplomatic as possible during a very difficult situation with Yoko and John. Paul just wanted to keep the band together and this just seems to be the most trying time for that.
The part where Rolling Stone misquote George really broke me. It's hillarious, how can they screw this so badly? They probably thought that no one would ever hear the tapes anyway, so might as well just continue the Beatles myth! Your videos on this subject are really insightful.
It's hard not to think Rolling Stone's approach to the Beatles was almost entirely driven by Jann Wenner's agenda to glorify John while demonizing Paul. To Wenner, the facts came a distant second to achieving this goal.
Agreed! The credibility of the Rolling Stone Mag was build on the Lennon Remembers interviews, bound books, audio releases, etc. They didn't care if it was true, just if it sold copies. A rock n roll version of the National Enquirer.
It really opens your eyes the first time you discover what you thought was a trusted journalistic source selectively misquoting someone to push a narrative.
I stopped buying that Sh_t rag magazine 25 years ago. Sorry about the vitriol, but I hate getting lied to. No I’m not sorry btw, but I was able to see through their biased perspective years ago. Anyway, great video and insight! Actual real journalism! Thank You!
Nicely put together I concur..the dialogue is good to follow when its next to pictures of who is saying what..otherwise I think I'd be bemused as to who said what,,,it certainly shows Yoko was perceived as the pushy opinionated outsider trying to break into the Beatles circle...I read that because she was also John's dealer, he didnt dare upset her..she made sure she was holding the cards..I still dont like her..sorry
Yep! Here we are 50+ years later talking about Yoko sitting on an amp!...Enjoying your series Matt. Thanks for your hard work!
Thank Jackilyn - more to come!
And her you are still minimizing her role in the band’s break up.
@@GillAgainsIsland12 The Beatles were already at odds before Yoko came into the picture. She didn’t even do much, so no minimizing here.
@@StationSquare. yeah, I mean, Magical Mystery Tour and what not.
Perhaps you've seen Peter Jackson's documentary by now and have thus understood just how wildly off the mark your comments are. Perhpas now you understand Paul was being ironic and saying what an absurd thing it would be if in 50 years time people like J. Caraballo will be banging on about how Yoko sat on an amp and broke up the band. And here you are. Feel proud?
Thank you so much for doing this. I’m truly gaining a new perspective on a bleak chapter in my Beatle fandom. I really can’t add too much to the many excellent points already made. What I am struck with is how hard McCartney is trying to rationalize the John/Yoko situation. I hear sadness in his voice. I believe he knows that there was no fixing this issue and he knows that The Beatles are probably done. John and Paul had been together for over 10 years. They had been as tight as two friends could be. You can just feel that he just wants to get back with John and write songs and be a band. If it had been me, I seriously doubt I would have handled the situation nearly as well. I would have been royally pissed. Not so much at Yoko, but at John for messing with the group’s dynamic and deliberately sabotaging our friendship. I’m glad they stayed together long enough to make Abbey Road, but honestly once Lennon let Yoko into their inner circle it was over for the Beatles.
You're right - the moment John and Yoko "became a couple," it was never the same, Your observation of Paul's sadness is important because it shows something that is clearly bigger than the band. Great comment, Franklin.
"They want to stay together,those two.
So it's all right. Let the young lovers stay together". Sweet words from Paul.
You’re genuinely doing the best objective historical analyzation of the Beatles possibly ever! Great vids man, these deserve millions of views to be quite honest 👌🏽
Thank you, Daniel. I'm relatively a new TH-camr so i hope the views come in time. I appreciate you watching!
@@popgoesthe60s52 Yeah I’m sure they eventually will! A lot can happen in 3 months haha
Completely agree, the interpretation of what went on seems to be spot on! Great job!
The problem is it's just a few minutes of a group talk led by Mc on tape.
Here we have a glimpse of Paul, ever the diplomat. Doing his best to think of everyone and not just solely of himself.
@Mahesh K No thanks, I've had my sodium quota. You may now go bite down on your cyanide capsule.
@Mahesh K Michael Lindsay-Hogg secretly filmed and recorded many of their conversations.
I love the insight Linda had at this time speaking facts without over stepping which was always Yokos problem
Not really. Not for me, anyway. I think Linda also talked too much as she was a member of the band.
@@dabreu I've never seen anything to lead me believe she was butting in to the group from what I understand was the only reason she was around was because john broke the rule of no spouses so Paul brought Linda to make it seem fair
@@dabreu Any girlfriend/wife was going to be sus to the fans, but Linda was not trying to take advantage of her position and that is obvious. I remember the Linda hate. It was completely misogynistic. Linda never did anything worthy of hate.
Another great video. It really shows Paul as a fine man.
I think it comes down to this: it wasn't Yoko's mere presence that caused issues within the group, it was her constant interjections and speaking for John, which in part was John's own fault. I don't think the perception of the situation would be as negative if she hadn't put herself into the middle of their disagreements and collaborations.
I think John was hiding behind her, and using her as a wedge to separate himself from Paul. If it hadn't been Yoko, he would have found someone else. He needed someone to do the dirty work.
Linda injected her viewpoints many times during this meeting, so Yoko wasn't the only outspoken female sitting on an amp.
I love how Linda sounds like she's trying to help the beatles be the beatles rather than acting like she has control over them and acting like a spoilt brat (yoko) being put out that her partner has other interests and friends.
@@jammypockets606 Yoko considered herself an equal member of the group. She spoke on John's behalf.
@@loosilu lets not forget that just a few years prior she was committed to a mental hospital. so there has always been something "off" about her. I do think that john realized how pushy and obnoxious she was/is and she became a bit of a shield for him....as Lucie wrote "someone to do the dirty work". So true. Their relationship shrank to nothing more than a story to tell and "rumor" has it that at the end they were on the verge of divorce. Yoko wanted to marry Sam Green.
Thanks for this. It's amazing how Rolling Stone twisted the narrative. And sad that Lennon was so angry, resentful, jealous, hurt, I don't know what, that he was willing to tarnish Paul's reputation with the help of Wenner.
Lennon's 1971-72 retelling is really shameful. He could have corrected the record better in later years but he and the other Beatles allowed Paul to carry the burden. Other business issues contributed to this but the record has never really been set straight. Thank you for the comment, Michele!
I think John Lennon's most radical phase was from "Two Virgins" to "Some Time in New York City" in 1968-1972. He was much more mellow man after that. For instance he saw that Paul was right about Allen Klein's dubious business methods and he said that "Band on the Run is a great album".
@@popgoesthe60s52 I really like John, but sometimes I feel the way he is vilified on the internet these days is karma. People think he was 24/7 wife beater and left Julian on the street. I know these are exaggerations, but I don't correct people most of the time because I feel he (and Yoko) deserve it after what they did to Paul. I also get great pleasure from seeing how much of a joke and how irrelevant Jann Wenner and RS have become. It gives me a bit of faith in humanity's ability to right wrongs.
@@xxyyzz9791 It is interesting how the lionization of John Lennon has started to turn. I believe this has to do with the politically correct cancel culture we are living in. I see people at both extremes but the middle is where the rationality is. He was open about his flaws and I don't believe we should used the standards of today to judge the past too harshly. As for the Rolling Stone, I have very little sympathy.
@@popgoesthe60s52 partly, but it's not just the cancel culture people. I think it's because the narrative of saint John and villain Paul was pushed for so long by Yoko and RS, that when contrary evidence started coming to light, there was an overcorrection in the opposite direction. It's also because John sang and proselytized so much about Peace, but did not act that way. This is a disconnect that puts people off. Paul sang about life on the farm and how much he loved Linda, George about God - and they lived that way so it's authentic.
Again, it's John who opened himself up to this scrutiny. It's like if Gandhi preached peace and we then find out he beat the shit out of people at home. The message means nothing then, and John's thing was 'messaging' more than music, unlike Paul.
There's some great insight in these taped conversations. I get the impression that Linda didn't care for her (Yoko) either. Surprisingly Paul seemed somewhat open to Yoko's presence. ...or tolerant.
Yeah, Linda is more vocal about her feelings for Yoko. They all seem to pull punches even when they talk about her when she and John aren't even there. Thanks for watching, Scott.
Probably because Paul was exposed to/involved in the avant-garde scene in the mid 60s in London and has met Yoko before John and her got together.
Linda has the benefit of being an outsider. Easier for her to speak freely.
Linda could be voicing Paul's private concerns. You can fully open in front the loved one, in privacy of your home, vent your frustrations, but you can't do it in business-like situations.
@@josiprakonca2185 True. She could have been revealing Paul's true feelings while Paul put on a diplomatic front to ensure that no impression was made that he was attacking Yoko to avoid upsetting John.
Rule #1, perfectly confirmed by this video: NEVER believe anything you read in Rolling Stone magazine. Remember, this is the rag that absolutely torpedoed Led Zeppelin when they first came out, and then couldn't kiss their asses enough when they realized how wildly popular (and transcendent of time and musical trends) Led Zeppelin is. The members never forgot, that's for sure. I'm kind of surprised that David Fricke got it so wrong, though. Because as that magazine goes, I have always felt he was one of their better, more informed writers. These videos are great, Matt. I just discovered them today, and I will definitely be watching more of them. Nice work!
It's so surprising that 50 years later so many myths are still around, especially with such wealth of documents to disprove them. Thank you very much for going into the real details.
There is so much information, it's quite a task to organize it to tell a balanced story. Just transcribing this video took me about six hours let alone the research, shooting, graphics, etc. That's why Mark Lewisohn is taking 30 years for his 'ultimate' Beatle biography, _Tune In_ ! Thanks for the comment.
@@popgoesthe60s52 the job you are doing over the let it be sessions is amazing. Thanks
In light of Peter Jackson's documentary it seems evident that this video simply added to the false narratives rather than debunked them with "real" (lol) details.
It seems that Paul was responding to George’s insistence that Yoko not be there. Paul is ready to accept that she will be involved. He’s ready to compromise.
I'm not even sure "compromise" is the right word. Here Paul says many times in his own words that he accepts Yoko's presence. He knows John well enough that there is no point bargaining or getting John to come alone, so the band should just keep going with the music as she's there. He keeps saying "stop thinking of it as an obstacle"-- i.e. Yoko's only an obstacle if we make it so. Paul also pushes back against the notion that Yoko is causing him and John to stop songwriting together, since he says that is due to not touring which means not sharing their daily lives, which was way before Yoko came in the picture.
For me this video of Paul basically supporting John is making another topic much more relevant and enigmatic: Why only one year later, in 1970, Paul (who went through a depression in late 1969) would cause the band's permanent breakup with the McCartney album statement and his lawsuits against the other three Beatles.
@@alesi257 The Allen Klein management issue - the others for, Paul against - was separate from personal issues.
Well, George was pissed - and rightfully so - not only at Yoko's presence but especially at John for not reining his woman in while she rudely sits on George's amp and eats his pastries. John should have told her, "Don't sit on George's amp or eat his food." She should have had the class and decency NOT to do that but she is feeling entitled because she is John's woman. I think George should have just stood up for himself and told her, "Get off of my amp and leave my food alone. If you want a place to sit have John get you a chair and if you want something to eat have John order you something." - while addressing John with full eye contact. If John was that delicate then tough shit - tell him to go ahead and leave and take her with him. I would not have been so diplomatic as Paul or as patient as George. Can't blame him for walking out. John was looking for a reason to bail and Yoko was his lynch pin to bring the whole thing down because basically John was a coward and a pussy.
@@patrickmartens4527 Excellent points, Patrick.
Yes, Paul's cerebrally trying to accept her overbearing presence, but to do so he must ignore the fact that he cannot seem to write anymore with John because it feels as if he's writing with Yoko instead, John's not really there. Yoko makes all the suggestions, does all the talking and John just follows. Paul has already stopped writing with John. And it's because of Yoko. So tolerating her presence will sustain the Beatles in name only. In spirit, they're already on life support. George is being more realistic I must say.
Really liking Paul’s points about keeping everyone on even keel.
Because he wanted to save the band most of all
I think Paul and Ringo come off looking like they understand all the problems and dearly want to save the band. My admiration for Paul and Ringo has just increased enormously. It seems that Linda was a 'voice of reason' also and it is well known that, unlike Yoko, Linda did not interfere with the band's work whatsoever.
Thanks for the upload Matt. If nothing else, this series of videos gives us tremendous insight into the mind of Paul McCartney, his psyche, the way he analyses every situation from every angle and then some. He seems so aware of every side of the issue and sympathetic to all sides, like a true Gemini.
His foretelling of people discussing it 50 years on show some vision! Thanks, El Diablo.
I've always suspected McCartney was basically a decent fella. And this proves it.
I am loving the insight.
He could have a little more sympathetic about letting George express himself as he wanted on guitar. I do not think Paul realized how much George hated this. George was complaining about it AGAIN in in 96 after Anthology.
@@Gardosunron He is certainly a basically nice guy who really loved John.
I don't get it why this vid has no 1 million views. This is priceless. Thank you! The more i know about this, the more i think yoko was like one of those japanese ghosts clining on to john's shoulder and never let go, went everywhere with him. What a piece of work she was.
Thank you, Smith. I just released this today so maybe I'll hit 1 million eventually. Thanks for watching.
Based on this record, Paul really was looking after John's welfare all the time. He did not want John to leave the band and was willing to compromise just to convince John to continue. I guess at this point John already told them he was leaving, but Paul wanted him to stay. So much shit was reported about the Beatles that did not actually happen. That's because the 4 of them kept the most intimate information within themselves only. This confirms one very important aspect, they treated each other as family.
I found your channel not long ago and I just want to say what a breath of fresh air your commentary is! I have been an avid Beatle fan since I was 7, (I’m 37 now) and I feel like I know everything there is to know about them (everything that was put out anyway-the four of them will always share their own truth that only they know to be accurate.) Even though I love John and truly think he is a genius, I’ve always felt that Paul got an unfair shake concerning their partnership/friendship. I respect Paul so much and I’m glad he always tended to turn a blind eye to all the crap and soldier on. Because of his steadfastness, we’ve all been able to witness a living legend work before our very eyes...and he has yet to slow down. Thanks again for your work on these videos!❤️
Thank you, Toni. I started this channel to offer a different way to appreciate the Beatles and I discovered that it is to approach them with balance and fairness, and without regard to whether or not one finds out something bad about our heroes. It was liberating. I appreciate the warm comment.
Matt, this material is invaluable to the above-average to expert Beatle fan that most of us commenting here are. I'm an above-average fan, but I'm no Beatles scholar. I've read much of the work you cite, but I've never done original work in the field. Like many, I've been influenced by a variety of false and misleading remarks by those with axes to grind. Your work is unbiased, objective, and enlightening . Thank you for your dedication and your scholarship. The more I learn about the Beatles, the more I appreciate their impact, and the talents and personalities of the members. Thanks again .
I appreciate the kind words, Joe. Creating this channel has been a liberating experience for me and I was hoping to reach an audience ready for a different perspective and delivery and I am glad to say I have found it!
I've always felt John brought Yoko into everything was his way of sabotaging everything, so he could say" oh I quit the Beatles, you guys aren't accepting her as an equal" 🙄 I don't know... maybe they all sabotaged it on a subconscious level.
I think you are hitting it in the head. I think so too. It’s almost obvious yet I don’t hear that perspective much from others. Maybe they just don’t say it and think it.
I'm not sure Lennon did it on purpose to quit, but he certainly let it be known he didn't care what anyone else thought by her being there all the time.
Facts.
And I have my own theory about what happened, so feel free to ignore it:
I'm pretty sure John had emotional issues and that's how he developed dependencies on drugs, but also codependencies with people.
He needed someone physically close to him to become his emotional support pet.
And his emotional vulnerability also led him to become an activist, kinda like most activists tbh. But then the rest of the group wasn't about that he just deliberately became unlikable to make them feel dreadful at the idea of working together with him.
John was completely lost at this time...... and he NEVER really recovered
@@VixxKong2 one of the most interesting things I ever saw as a teen was watching a protest in NYC get slightly rowdy and watching John and Yoko jump into a Cadillac limo.. heading uptown. to their mansions..
Well just WOW, i've been a Beatles fan all my life but i'm now getting a Ph. D thesis in Beatleology with your weekly insights. How did i not ever hear about the "McCartney 50 year remark" before? Or the '68-69 John interview (you posted recently) where he is high as a kite..this is like we are going back in time and finding great details that seemingly were lost to time...i LOVE It...please do more and more and more.
Thank you for the kind words, James. I have a couple more Let It Be videos to do that are just as fun to hear. So stay tuned!
I don't think Yoko felt she was in a "difficult decision". I believe she WANTED to do all the talking for John.
Julian has said in more than one interview, "Yoko knew exactly what she was doing." That suggests that she had an overall agenda she was making play out, starting with robbing Cynthia of John. It's pretty well known that Yoko first tried to bed Paul, using the excuse that she wanted a donation of hand written song lyrics to auction for charity, and Paul saw through it, steering her away, suggesting she hit up John for a donation. Then, she targeted John. The idea that she didn't even know who The Beatles were at the time is the most ridiculous thing John used to say in interviews.
Yes she put out the apple in a planned out senerio out of being desperate for success. snagging a Beatle was a good way to do it. How shw cast a spell on John is puzzeling. maybe her mysterious persona and pretending to not care about fame and having some interesting artistic conceopts helped. certainly her exotic looks may have been appealing to him but the guy could have had anyone. Is Sean Lennon really May Pangs baby? not so far fetched and the timing and all fits
@@shaharazon2449 I think Yoko represented the professional visual and concept artist John always wanted to be, she seduced him while later becoming a 'mother' figure thus filling a void his mum's tragic death caused, and she played innocent like 'what are The Beatles... I don't know what that is?' so she was the opposite of a star struck fan. The exotic ethnicity was also a turn on, as you point out.
@@continentalgin Yes, John always wanted to be something more than a "mere" musician, AN ARTIST. Yoko gave him that.
She enjoyed being an irritant. Just listen to her bleating vocalizations inserted into songs.
I really like the way you organize the conversations. Everything is as clear as can be regarding who said what.
Thank you. The transcription for this video took me 6 hours but I think it is necessary to understand these sessions better. Thanks for the comment!
@@popgoesthe60s52 You can tell that a lot of effort on the transcription. But it's so worth it - you've created what seems like the optimum platform in letting the story speak for itself (unless the actual footage is ever shown!)
All these years I thought Paul was the problem. These videos are proving that he wasn’t, in this situation anyway. Nice job Matt!
The more I dug, the more interesting information popped up! It’s been very gratifying to discover more humanity in the Beatles history than was reported. Thanks for watching, Randy!
You took the words right out of my mouth before I heard you say it: "The band is clearly walking on eggshells while Yoko is around".
Paul was wrongfully scapegoated for 50 years by Lennon loyalists.
All I see here is McCartney fanboys desperately trying to blame Lennon and Ono for their guy's failings.
hear, hear!
@@noneofyourbeeswax01 yes its completely turned and all of a sudden john is evil, like what are they on about
@@rodog9465 John is not evil and the break up was not all Yoko’s fault. That said Paul was unfairly scapegoated and I am happy that is coming to light.
@@Eyeluvlola I am talking in general of comments I've been seeing online for a while ya know
Excellent series Matt, keep them coming, the Beatles my all time favourite band, love your fair analysis that cuts through the crap that have been written and said about them 🤘☀️🇬🇧
Thank you, John - more to come!
Done very well again , I’m so glad you’re really clearing the air about all this, and yes like forensics you’re listening to the tapes and actually hearing what and how things were said and to whom, or about whom. There’s an awful lot of negative assumptions about Paul during these sessions. But in reality he was the obe that was being the most sensible and mature about it all. Thanks to the tapes! To tell the real truth.
This video was really enlightening. Thanks for taking the time to put all this material together. You are doing such a service to all the Beatles fanatics out there!
Thank you, David - much appreciated.
Thank you for this, and the other Let It Be videos. I love Paul's music and respect him as a person, so the commonly accepted idea that he was awful to John and Yoko, and a tyrant toward the other three Beatles, was always painful to consider. It also seemed difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile with everything else I knew about the man. Listening to him in this video, along with some of the others you've assembled, gives me a great sense of relief in that this seems like proof positive that he was a decent, goodhearted guy who was trying to be fair and understanding to his best friend. Regarding the break-up, although of course I would have loved the band to continue making wonderful music, the truth is that they should have broken up. As George once said, you had to sacrifice your nervous system to be a Beatle: it truly was all too much and they deserved a chance to get out of the gilded cage and lead normal lives with their families. I just wish Paul hadn't been made the fall guy. The irony is that when it came to the one factor about which there could be no compromise - namely, Allen Klein - history has shown that Paul was 100 per cent correct and the other three were mistaken. Even John had to, very grudgingly, through gritted teeth, admit as much in last Rolling Stone interview. Thanks again for your work here. It gives me hope that eventually - maybe not in my lifetime, but eventually - history will get this right, thanks to people like you and Mark Lewisohn.
Hi Bill. Yes the rancor and pettiness as reported never passed the smell test and once I started digging into these topics I found a wealth of information that was ignored, suppressed, or misinterpreted. It’s not that hard to sort out these pieces and having been inspired by Mark Lewisohn’s work, I began applying proper historical research methods to the Beatles. It was liberating. Thank you for the kind comment and hang on because there is more coming!
Even the infamous tussle between Paul and George (I'll play whatever you like or I won't play at all if that's what you want) was blown completely out of proportion. George always resented Paul and John treating him like the little brother because of the age differences. There was a pre-existing dynamic between Paul and George in which Paul's approval was needed for one of George's songs to make it onto an album. So, George always felt a little like second fiddle. Paul explained, "Look, I'm not trying to get you," meaning Paul was really not trying to be a dictator, he just knew what he wanted a track to sound like. He didn't mean any dominance over George, but that was more George's hang up from back to the beginning. George had an inferiority complex that Paul never intended to take advantage of. Paul was a demanding artist, not a bully.
McCartney being painted as a villain at the end is a brilliant decades-long PR move by Yoko. She built and mantains John's post-Beatles image with a strong grip while trying to soften her image. The RS magazine is an old vessel for this purpose.
It is shameful the way Ono has treated McCartney since 1981. There was really no need of it. More to come on Yoko! Thanks for the comment.
@@popgoesthe60s52 This tape ends all speculation about Paul being bossy and pushing John out of the band. John was being influenced by heroin which was introduced to him by Yoko. Yoko was his Mother figure!
@@patrickmartens4527 Oh please. They were all big boys, and made their own decisions.
Paul was no villain. Life is complex. Paul was correct about Klien. But, Paul WAS overly bossy when it came to telling George how to play guitar. This is why GH never played with Macca again until Anthology, but often played with George and Ringo in the 70s. Harrison himself said in 1976 "I would be in a band with John Lennon, but not with Paul McCartney." John's allowing Yoko in the studio was a nightmare, but John let George have musical freedom. That is why some of George's best guitar work is on John's "Imagine" album
J. Maggio they apparently had a lot of conflict over it, according to p. Spector. George would want to try over and over to get it perfect and John was impatient and thought George was trying to throw his weight around, and things were very tense in the studio. Never underestimate the power of a narrative.
Despite all this discussion and this controversy about Yoko----- John and Paul got together by themselves and recorded one of the Beatles all-time greatest records: "The Ballad Of John and Yoko". McCartney plays drums and bass and John plays guitars. Just the two of them together, in a one day session. When they wanted to create together and things were good, there's nobody else who remotely came close.
I was born in 1964 in rural Germany where, when I was little, "Beatles" was a synonym for shady long-haired young men :-) Still, I grew up loving their music and I don't think they ever lost relevance but in the past years, I can't really say I actively listened to them much. Maybe six months ago though, I started to re-discover and re-listen to their music (which is as fresh as ever, much to my surprise), I re-watch the films, and I also discovered all those interviews here on YT, which I enjoy lots because nothing of the sort was available to me back in the day. Now,...yesterday, I came across your channel and boy, that's something else entirely! I watched maybe half a dozen videos immediately and can hardly stop. What a gem! I can't thank you enough! I love the way you approach and present your material, knowledgeable, fact-oriented and source-based, not sensationalist but very warm, calm but never boring. Makes me very happy and I really look forward to watching all your vids.
Thank you for the warm comment! Plenty more to come!
Spent 40years reading biographies, here it is the TRUTH. Love you're work mate 👌
Thank you, Brian! More to come.
This video has been my absolute FAVORITE so far. A true flexing of your historical analysis.
I'm glad it's your fave because I was getting weary transcribing all the dialog! I have a couple more Let It Be videos to come so stay tuned!
@@popgoesthe60s52 the transcription of it all is what made it so easy to contextualize for the audience! It also really helps highlight your argument against the rolling stone writer at the end. The hard-work paid off my friend, it really is a great video, great content, and a great historical analysis. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I really love your historical analysis and I am amazed by the fact that you didn't major in history
@@zachespinoza1794 Thank you, Mr. Espinoza. I always loved history but I was a born designer and found myself in that career. I guess music history has been my hobby since I was a kid. After working on this channel for a couple more years and I'll have a PhD equivalent! Thanks for sticking with me, Zach.
Funny how their breakup is usually presented as them "growing up" and having proper married relationships. Well, when you grow up, you don't take your wife to work. So this clip where they are discussing John demanding special dispensation to bring Yoko to work is actually more like John's refusal to grow up.
I think you nailed it.
And then Paul teaches Linda how to sing and play keyboards so he can bring her to work with him
@@lukemacducci Paul wasn't "bringing Linda to work with him" as John was here bringing Yoko. Paul was working WITH Linda, which he had every right to choose to do when he wasn't working with The Beatles. John did NOT have the right to bring his wife into HIS work situation with The Beatles. She was not a member of the band. She was not providing a service for the band. She could have come and gone as Linda and others did, but to stay there right next to John like some kind of guard statue, was just a lunatic thing to do. And not signifying John's 'growing up' at all.
@@lukemacducci But you're right that neither one choosing to work with their wives was particularly necessary to "growing up".
Not just John's refusal to "grow up," the constant presence of Yoko (John's mother-figure) allowed him to stay "child-like" as she was always around, and often spoke up for John, rather than let him speak for himself. It seemed a weird mother-son relationship taken to the extreme. The Get Back movie doesn't show her saying much of anything to anyone (just a couple of times she says something,) she's just there all the time. I can see how her constant presence could be seen as a roadblock to the Paul/John dynamic, even if she wasn't being an open pain.
Love how you play clips of the sessions and discussions in all your videos. It shows what was really going on and somewhat allows the viewer to make up their own mind about the situations the Beatles were in rather than you telling us what to think. Thanks for your open mindedness and hard work! Great job!
Thank you, Matt. These are hard work but so rewarding. I appreciate the comment.
"that's what George said, just the four of you" then Linda says "it's the only way"
Assuming they're talking about Yoko being there the irony is great
Linda was a professional photographer, there to take photos, who was staying on the outside of the inner circle with the other assistants, cameramen, etc.
What was Yoko there to do?
@@deannabayless8025 Does that negate the fact that her and Paul were together at this point?
Yoko was an artist. She may not have been a very good artist, but she was an artist nonetheless, and could have been there for moral support as well as artistic input for John.
Ayyem why did John need moral
Support?
@@cocosevens5845 being addicted to heroin does major harm to your self esteem.
There’s a huge difference between Yoko and Linda. Yoko is speaking for John and being obtrusive. Linda doesn’t speak for Paul and is worried about being there. She understands it would be better with just the 4 of them there and is happy to not be there or just stay in the background
This is the best analysis I've ever heard. It makes everything much clearer. Even I - a Beatles obsessive since 1963 - even I bought into the stories of Paul the impossible-to-work-with, self-appointed dictator and Yoko the opinionated, unwelcome presence at recording sessions. Thank you, Matt, for helping me see things in a new light.
You're welcome, Cliff. Shame on the biased biographers and lazy rock journalists who peddled their own agendas. I appreciated the comment.
As always, Matt a complete and clear analysis on this key time in music history. I’ve been there since that magical night of February 9, 1964. The new Jackson film coming later this year will set things straight on what really was true, and not what some people have perceived. I’m sure of that. Be well.
The difference between Historians and Journalists is the the former is interested in facts whereas the later is interested in pushing a narrative. So many narratives have been pushed over the years that what actually happened during this time gets lost. Thanks for being an Historian and setting the record straight, Matt.
Thank you, Paul. It was empowering outing the mighty David Fricke in this video! More to come!
I'm afraid that both can be guilty of pushing a narrative. Objectivity (and avoiding misleading sensationalism) might be somewhat more common with historians but the gap is closing fast.
@@johnnhoj6749 What we refer to as "good history" is much less inclined to distort facts. Bias always creeps in but not to the point where left becomes right and so on, as what happened , as Matt points out, in discussing how McCartney has been incorrectly characterized by journalists. I'll take academic integrity over sensationalism any day.
Another great job! I also love how you present the material. You also have a very respectful approach that is refreshing
Thank you for the warm comment, Laura. More to come!
Another thing I'll add. I like how Paul laid some of the trouble about not playing live anymore, but he says something about them playing better now than ever before. Then they walk up to the roof and prove it.
Ringo has said that one reason they wanted to stop touring was because it was preventing them from improving as musicians. They did in fact improve after they stopped touring (not that they weren't remarkable before then), but that improvement came at the cost of damage to band chemistry due to the end of their tight, daily interactions on tour.
Great point, Bill. The musicianship in this case came as the expense of camaraderie, which seems to have sunk them. The Stone became a powerful when they resumed touring in 1969. Could the Beatles have done the same?
@@popgoesthe60s52 My sense is that Paul and Ringo would have enjoyed touring, but John and especially George never would have done it. Having said that, it's not hard to imagine the set list of a 1969 Beatles tour. Take the rockers off the White Album ("Back in the USSR" would be a natural show opener, and "Helter Skelter" might have gotten truly wild - and lengthy -in a live show), add "Revolution" and "Hey Jude," and throw in a couple early rock 'n' roll covers ("Rock and Roll Music" and "Long Tall Sally" seem like easy choices, plus maybe a Carl Perkins number for George) and you've got a show. There could even be an acoustic mini-set, as the Stones did in their '69 tour. Off the top of my head, I'd nominate "Blackbird," "Julia," and "While My Guitar Gently Weeps." (The last might seem an odd choice as an acoustic number, but George Martin said he regretted not recording it in that style, as Harrison originally presented it to the band. Plus, it would solve the problem of how to handle that long Clapton solo without Clapton.)
@@billwolfe8125 One thing that I got from listening to over 90 hours of this stuff is they did love the oldies. They could have done a live album just of those. The 1950s revival began as early as 1969 with Sha Na Na playing Woodstock. I think John would have toured. In an upcoming video on more of these sessions, he is the most excited to go on the roof, so maybe he would have acquiesced to playing live. I love your set list!
@@popgoesthe60s52 From a modern perspective it's hard to think of the top songwriting duo of the 60s having to rely on cover versions... the show they could have done just going back to the White Album and then a handful of earlier numbers! But, on the other hand, when you go back to the Live Peace in Toronto concert starting out with three of John's favourite covers, you can picture the Beatles falling back on the oldies to ease the nerves a bit after not having been on stage for 3+ years.
Paul tries to behave rationally and logically and keep the peace but he's dealing with other people who are not rational, having life problems and who are less interested in the band than he is. It's sad to hear.
Thank you so much for putting the time and effort into allowing us to listen in on these conversations. Paul has always been painted as a person of interest in the negative approach to Yoko. George seems to be the person who most objected to her being present at the recordings and John doesn't seem to give much of an opinion as things transpire around the group. Paul shines in this side meeting trying to save the group from disbanding.
I appreciate the comment, Terry.
it’s very interesting to me that Paul is the one who constantly gives Yoko the benefit of the doubt, or at least is working very hard to see things from John’s perspective. it’s obvious that he’s struggling with the dynamic, but he really seems like he was trying not to force John to choose between him or Yoko. John eventually felt like he needed to make that choice, but Paul comes across as a guy who wants what’s best for his friend. Perhaps him being equally happy with Linda was driving that perspective home for him. Interesting stuff as always Matt!
When listening to these sessions, it's hard not to reach the same conclusion you reached. I appreciate the comment, Brian.
Yeah, Paul clearly is sad, that things are not like they used to be. And he probably knows he's being jealous of Yoko. And so giving her the benefit of doubt is him taking this jealousy into account. I mean - he's a british gentleman after all ;-)
The narrative that Paul was dictatorial really only applies to musical arrangements. I am sympathetic that the other three who had earlier been musical collaborators were reduced to session men.
I believe you are correct Matt. Paul McCartney is bending over backwards to accommodate John’s dysfunctional band mate behavior. Remember that after John leaves Cynthia and participates in all those outrageous happenings, it is Paul who is thrust into the role of smoothing things over with the press.
1969 begins with Paul being very much the peacemaker, the Abbey Road sessions are generally very peaceful and productive, there is no acrimony in the taped September meeting where the band’s future is being discussed with the 4-4-4-2 songwriting quota.
But by Spring 1970, John and George sent poor Ringo over with the letter telling Paul that the release date for McCartney has been pushed back to accommodate Let It Be. Compare that with Instant Karma’s rush release, no wonder Paul blew a gasket. John Lennon liked to accuse Paul of musical sabotage of Lennon song in interviews, but I think after a year or more of putting up with Lennon’s behavior and constantly being outvoted on management Paul lost it blew up at Ringo and put in the blasted questionnaire for the McCartney album.
The story of the break up won’t be found on the nagra tapes, the Let It Be, movie or the Peter Jackson movie.
Paul is actually a pretty empathic guy and has a very open mind steering from judgement. Thats beautiful
Linda McCartney is my new hero ("She just does so much talking...") lol. Thanks again for another great production job and performance in this video!
I like hearing what Yoko had to say too.
@@vicbertfartingclack4559 yep
God, your heart really breaks for Paul here. He just loves the Beatles and writing with John so much. He’s so conscientious of everything going on around him and is trying hard to keep it all together.
More fascinating stuff man. It's so refreshing to get a well researched insight thats not designed to paint the picture one way or another. Just putting it out there, what went on, what was said, in it's rightful context. Puts a whole new spin on an awful lot of what went down. Top work again dude 👏
Thanks, Steve. Much appreciated!
Thanks so much for putting out this video! Agree with you about Paul's tone in the audio you played of him talking with Ringo and the others about John and Yoko. In September 2020, Rolling Stone had a good story about the end of the Beatles. In the story, it was mentioned how John still believed the Beatles were his band, and how he was upset at Paul for quitting the group in April 1970 without asking John's permission to quit (even though he had privately told the others he himself was leaving the group several months earlier). I think there were several factors in why the Beatles broke up, but one that isn't mentioned is John's unwillingness to acknowledge the others' growth and maturity and changing roles in the band, especially Paul's and George's.
That's a good point. I will be delving into a series on their break up later this year so stay tuned Robert!
Yet another superb, fascinating and myth-busting presentation. BRILLIANT!!
Thanks, Tim! More to come.
"Jo Jo was a man who thought he was a loner but he knew it wouldn't last. Jo Jo left his home in Tuscon Arizona for some California grass." I love that opening line and possibl;y the greatest intro to a rock song even rivaling Led Zeppelin's "Black Dog" IMHO. Cheers mate!
I know Paul is trying to compromise and tolerate Yoke as much as he could for the sake of John.
But man, i never knew that he's already so much matured and rational in his approach to keep them together and going at that age.
I love this. The Information Age is pulling back the curtain and exposing truths. Love that you’re putting this out here. Poor Paul was left with a rudderless ship after Brian died. John abdicated leadership. Yoko probably spoke for John as protection for him as he was “under the weather”. It all makes sense.
You sum it up very well, Chris! Thanks for the comment.
Paul really comes across as a sensitive, intelligent and highly reasonable individual who really wanted to accommodate Yoko. Yoko was the problem from the moment she came into John's life because they were both damaged.
ROSEMARY BLAKE .from Canada ,YOKO was not the problem, when John met YOKO HE told Paul to stay away he was really jealous of Paul, and like he said in the song don't let me down, she done me good it was a obsession a sexual obsession and I had a similar love and I was not the boss anymore she was the boss she had the power bc of her beauty and the way she made love.
@@pierrebeausoleil5885 Her beauty? LOL.
... and her malignant narcissism took care of the rest.
Very good video. I like how you put the voice / quote next to the picture of the guy speaking. It makes it so much easier to understand. This is one of the best channels on youtube.
Thank you, Timothy - more to come.
It’s interesting to hear Linda before she developed an English accent.
I will never be convinced that Yoko wasn’t responsible or at least being a catalyst for the breakup of the Beatles.
All of these behind-the-scenes bits that you've posted are fantastic.
My take: At the end of the day, we see four normal people (plus wives, girlfriends, entourage members, etc.) just doing their best to get along in life. And we got nearly a decade of glorious music in the process.
Really enjoying your insights Matt, terrific work. So many revelatory moments here! Paul's "50 years from now" prediction about Yoko's intrusion is stunning. But just think of how he would have felt back then if he knew, in that same future, he'd be portrayed as a controlling dictator. Hopefully that falsehood will end once and for all.
There is more work to be done to make sure the false narratives don't prevail. I think this is an important time to lay down some alternate perspectives and continue the discussion like we are doing here. Approaching this history with a balance has been an eyeopening experience for me. Thanks for the comment, Mark!
Another fantastic video Matt! As always, your method of showing the dialogue transcribed in "real time" is the best way to present this. It makes this period all the more sad - how hard Paul was pushing for understanding and compromise, trying to give John and Yoko space and ease the tensions within the band - only to have them turn on him particularly with the Klein situation. And then to have completely the opposite angle pushed by Rolling Stone and the Lennon estate for decades.... no wonder Paul's "liberty bell" moment with the group was only a few short months away. Great job, always look forward to the next installments. Cheers
Thank you, Andrew. I'm learning so much by listening over and over to these tapes. I have a couple more to come so stay tuned!
It seems like John was just bored, and fed up with the group, but didn't have the guts to come out and say it. He was also into the addiction thing which tends to focus a person away from anything else. Paul always wanted to move forward, ALWAYS. I think that if the Beatles were to have stayed together, they would have had to take a break for a year or two, then maybe come back to it possibly.
Thanks for all your work. i love these deep dives. In fact, I think you're the only content provider on the internet that's accomplishing what you are: that is, proving through the taped conversations that some myths around the Beatles are exaggerations or worse, arrant lies. Of course, you can always count on the press to slant an article for the sake of sensationalism. [I had first hand experience of this when a Hollywood based reporter for the L.A. Weekly did a piece about a unique coffeehouse I inhabited. He asked me if I would agree to be the centerpiece of the article. He wound up serving up a romanticized version of my "poverty ridden" life at the time and the same for the other inhabitants of that place. I wound up reading the draft, calling him up angrily complaining about his exaggerations. He apologized and said he would fix them. But the final printed article was still nothing close to reality! The press is notorious for this sort of thing.] For some reason I find it a relief that Paul wasn't the despot he was painted to be in some hit pieces. To me, Paul's social philosophy can be summed up the the song 'We Can Work It Out.' The sentiment of compromise is there. Even though in his "your way" moments in the song, it seems like that way is the dead end street and that Paul's way is the right way. But really, examining the lyric, he's saying, "well, if we try it my way, we can find out in time whether things will eventually be okay between us." I think Paul by nature was always diplomatic and hoped for the most harmonious (pun intended) results.
Harmonious indeed, Vinnie! Totally agree with you and I must confess that I believed at one time that the press and biographers were giving us "their best." Well when I started doing the investigative work myself I was angry to find I had been taken in that way. I believe there is a brief window of time to set the record straight before it is wrong forever. When I took a balanced approach to The Beatles (and others) it was liberating and extremely satisfying.
Your parallel of _We Can Work It Out_ is perfect. Both of their philosophies are borne out during the Let It Be sessions. I appreciate the warm comment, Vinnie. Much thanks.
Rolling Stone has always been overly worshipful of Lennon at the expense of McCartney., David Fricke being a perfect example. Thanks for another great episode, Matt!
You are welcome, sir!
Ive cought up on all your videos Matt, Marianne Faithfull,The Merry Go Round,The Loving Spoonful,Kaleidoscope,The Association,Buffalo Springfield and ALL your Beatle videos, -You are a Great music Journalist Matt(something that Rolling Stone Magazine doesnt have), All your videos are refreshingly straightforward,insightful and of great quality.Your series on the Beatles Let it Be sessions are a fantastic accompaniment to the upcoming Peter Jackson film.-Once again Matt brilliant Work!!!
Thanks Ernie! The timing of my Let It Be session videos is really working out. I can't wait to see the Jackson film! Thanks for watching all those videos - plenty more to come!
@@popgoesthe60s52 ✌
You're doing such a good job with these! I love the analysis and also your subtitling style, with the speakers in columns. Very much agree that John put Yoko in a difficult position by inserting her into a situation where she wasn't particularly welcome (even when Paul tried his best to be sympathetic). Of course she was an adult and could've chosen not to go, also. If Yoko had dropped by once every few days (rather than being at John's side 24/7), I wonder if the Beatles/Paul would've been more open to including/collaborating with her?
I think Yoko in smaller doses would have been perfectly fine. Maureen, Pattie, and Linda visit the sessions but most don't know it because they allowed their men to work without intrusion so they could bring home the bacon! Thanks for the substantive comment.
Yoko was extremely problematic for The Beatles. I don’t believe anyone, including John, forced Yoko to show-up in the studio and meetings and voice her opinions about everything, with John’s blessing. While there was a confluence of factors which ended The Beatles, Yoko was a disruptive force who deserves no mercy.
The Beatles as a group would not have collaborated with her at all, she had no discernibly talent to offer to the top band unlike Preston and Clapton
Paul seems so nice and willing to work everything out for the benefit of everyone, strange how Paul has been perceived otherwise over the years. The rolling stone has a lot to answer for!
Great job Matt. Very informative and that McCartney 50 year remark is, boom right now! Looking forward to your next Let It Be video!
What a great prediction! These guys had vision!
Thank You!!...great again, realy means MUCH...to me, and lots of fans.. Best vishes Ron
My pleasure, Ron. Thanks for watching.
Another fantastic & fascinating video.
Paul is always right, it's really a spiraling truth to me at this point.
Excellent that you exposed "The Beard" quote as an utter myth. Well Done! The more I've looked into these sessions, the less it's seemed that the primary conflict was between Paul and George. Rather, clearly, the most significant problem was between John and George (...John and... everybody, in a way).
Exactly. Paul has always been painted as the villain, when John was the real antagonist - well John/Yoko. George, always the grump, actually had some high moments during these sessions so it was up and down. Just like life. Thanks for the comment!
@@popgoesthe60s52 Sadly, the most frightening specter haunting these sessions -- indeed, all of Rock'n'Roll from a certain era -- is severe drug abuse & outright addiction. I can't imagine any tape will feature the band discussing in anything approaching open terms Lennon's struggles in this regard, particularly at that time. No matter how conciliatory Paul could have made himself or how challenging George could have been, this alone likely rendered all efforts fairly useless.
@@tsamantas Yes, the drug issue is a hard one to pin down but it certainly had a bearing on John's relationship to the band. I'll be delving into this in a future video.
Paul was indeed very understanding of J&Y and understood that that the dynamic had changed. He didn’t deserve the abuse he received over the years from others both inside and outside the band.
I just so appreciate this balanced tone and the primacy you put on the source material. Thanks for these great videos.
Thank you, Peter. More to come.
Man, you're really doing a great job with this "Let it be" stuff here in you channel and I really love it, Kudos to you!! Greetings from a big Beatles fan from Mexico City.
Thank you, Miguel. I always love to hear from Mexico!
This is when George Martin was needed. "OK guys, be here at 9am, and no girls."
As much as I admire John artistically, I have to admit that he could really nurse a grudge all the way to 11. It always got me that he refused George's offer to perform at the "Concert for Bangladesh" simply because George didn't want Yoko onstage.
Matt, this is absolutely great stuff about the Get Back sessions! I think it’s just so funny how bad these misconceptions were/are even up to this day and age. I especially love that bit you pointed out about George saying “you’re so full of shit. “ If the guy just would have listened to the tapes!
Anyway, I can’t wait for more of your videos. Thanks so much for the great videos you are doing.
Thank you, Michael - more to come.
what a rare and clear taste of sanity these contributions of yours are. thank you
Thanks for another very interesting dive into Beatle history. It's seems that Macca's reputation for being difficult is yet another fabrication by Rolling Stone.
Yes, the more I listened to these sessions, the more positive McCartney became. He is not the "bad actor" in these sessions as has been reported. John and George brought way more problems to this project than Paul did. Thanks for the comment, Catherine.
@@popgoesthe60s52 Thanks again for the great content. You present the facts in a way that makes it very easy to understand what's happening and who's saying what.
Wow, this is so precious. It it is the truth! Not what we read in magazines. It is them talking. Thank you so much for these videos. I have to share it. There are so many people who still thinks Paul was the bossy guy;
It was enlightening to me to give these a close listen and I was delighted with what I heard. It wasn't all sugar and spice but it was certainly honest. Thanks for the comment, Virginia!
I think John and George were just getting to the point where they didn't want to compromise with anybody: they wanted to have it their own way. Which is what they all said later, that they had grown up and were ready to be on their own without anyone to tell them what they should do. It really didn't have anything to do with Yoko. They just wanted to be in charge of their own lives.
These tapes changed my negative views towards Paul because he obviously wanted The Beatles to stay together. The Rolling Stone article was poorly researched and reinforced the popular sentiment and lies of the time. What baffles me is that John and George seemed united in their feelings about Paul in the post Beatles period (e.g. How Do You Sleep) - in light of the fact that George objected to Yoko’s interference. Thanks and I will stayed tuned!
I may delve into the united front of John and George, it's worth examining as part of the break up. Thanks for the comment, Ed!
Damn, Paul's sounding practically wise in this.
Having bought those bootlegs, way back when, to me, these conversations they were having, were far more interesting than hearing them slog through their rehearsals. And now after all these years, we're finally hearing more, and more of them. AND they are so much more cleaned up, and intelligible! I'm loving it. Thanks for putting these out there!
You're right - the discussions are more interesting than hearing them practicing the songs! Thanks for the warm comment!
Paul was so self-aware, accomodating, and diplomatic. And was just John checked out. The setup was just so ridiculous. Shame on John. Paul deserves a medal.
Paul and George knew Cynthia when they were kids. Must have made them feel terrible seeing a home wrecker constantly in the studio while Lennon neglected his family.
Paul and George knew Cynthia when they were kids. Must have made them feel terrible seeing some other woman constantly in the studio while Lennon neglected his family.
Paul and George knew Cynthia when they were kids. Must have made them feel bad seeing some other woman constantly in the studio while Lennon neglected his family.
I'm really impressed by Paul's emotional maturity here. It seems that while the others in the conversation are politely angry, he is sad. I think the Let It Be metaphor in the title here is very apt. It seems that those weren't just empty words for a song to him. He's accepting the reality of what has happened, while the others are fighting it, and in the process he's also more constructively looking for ways for them all to move forward together, which the others aren't. But he also seems to grasp the futility of the situation, and is sad that he's losing his best friend, and of course the band that has consumed all of his attention for a decade. And he apparently went into a yearlong deep depression out on the farm in Scotland when the breakup was finally consummated. The others had places to go after The Beatles: John was wanting to do all the Yoko stuff, George had his Indian stuff plus the desire to get out of John and Paul's shadow, Ringo a budding acting career. But Paul lost pretty much everything with the breakup. I think he really sees the inevitability of this in this meeting here.
I was struck by his sadness as well. He sounds very mature and although a bit emotional, he rationality wins out. Too bad the others couldn't do the same. Thanks for the comment, David.
After seeing this video, I played my copy of Let It Be... Naked. If you listen to the lyrics of The Long and Winding Road, it's as if Paul is sensing the end of The Beatles after their long and winding career and that Paul feels abandoned by John and wishes there could be a 'way' back into the songwriting partnership they once loved. I think it's Paul singing to John, 'C'mon man, we were once soul mates. Don't leave me alone out in the cold and rain. Let me back in.' Just a theory. Also Let It Be is like Paul resigned to the inevitable fact that his beloved band will soon be a thing of the past and there's nothing to be done to save it, so just let it be.
@@continentalgin Interesting idea. I think that could well be. I always felt that Two of Us was about John. On one level, he's kind of trying to remind John of all they had together, but on another he's just appreciating it. The "you and I have memories" line seems to be saying that nothing going forward could possibly surpass or change the deep bond that they have. And the sweet melancholy of all of this kind of sets the tone for the rest of the album. I remember once reading an interview with John where he says that he was married twice: first to Paul and then to Yoko (interestingly leaving Cynthia out entirely). So this period here is when the divorce was happening. And Paul is processing what it means to lose his spouse. It's more than a songwriting partnership, and more than a band.
I love those videos with them talking
You have made this a well that I never get bored of dipping into as your fresh approach sheds a new light into subject matter that has been cloudy at best. Your time and effort that you have put into this and each of your videos is much appreciated. Thank you!
Thank you for the kind words, Joseph. More to come!