+Nico Val Aah thanks for that, it's appreciated. I've even seen the interview before, but i don't remember that bit. I know their friendship has been strained over the years, and I read recently that he used to think of that phrase from Frankie Crisp, when things would be difficult: "scan not a friend with a microscopic glass - you know his faults, let the foibles pass". Which has been a great help to me too, on occasion.
+Nico Val Is I just my imagination, or did Ringo acting really strange for most of this clip?... constantly butting in whenever George said something - with bizarre, nonsensical comments,?
Harrison was never an alcoholic. Him and Paul fell out with each other for quite a few years which is why Paul never showed up to the Hall Of Fame induction.
@@ryanblob3105 Not really, the only album George put out that flopped completely was Gone Troppo. Even Somewhere in England has its monents. The rest of them are great, ATMP and LITMW are among the best albums ever made. As is John Lennon's Plastic Ono Band and Imagine. Paul never really put out a "solid" album, he did killer singles such as My Love and Band on the Run etc etc. But never a top tier album. Not that that matters much anyway, I'm glad Paul's still making music, he's at his best when he's making easily digestible pop
In my 55 years as a Beatle fan I’ve always enjoyed the beauty and honesty of George. He never took shit, never demanded the spotlight and always gave 1,000% and never wrote anything other than great songs. God, I miss him.
George did take a lot of crap from Paul and John listen to the words it's only a northern song who wrote that song because if you listen to the words he didn't have the John, Paul writing machine but then he showed them when he finally got away from the Beatles his solo albums you can't touch ,there beautiful and the fact that he wrote something and tax man and don't bother me and an unknown fact is he wrote Waa Waa when you quit the Beatles during the get-back filming listen to those words really George took a lot but then he showed them
@@slothfromthegoonies8201 put a normal,a bit virtuous and soulless solo on it doesn't mean to write a song. Taxman is an absolutely Harrison song at all
I think what hurt George is never feeling he got validation from Paul. Which is something that DID mean a lot to him. Paul was the first great influence in his life outside of his parents, the one who brought him into the Beatles, and basically his big brother. George was never particularly close with John. So when it came down to George finally being ready for his breakthrough, he felt he really NEEDED Paul's support and blessing. The guy who championed him to John and the others the first time around. When it became clear that it wasn't going to happen in the way George imagined, thats really where the rift began. Its not that George needed Paul to convince him that he was good. He already knew the stuff he was making whats good. It just hurts when you feel like your closest confidante essentially doesn't give a shit. I think a "wow George, you are really coming into form. This is great." from Paul would have went a long way.
I hate these people saying that George and Paul hated each other. They were pretty much the closest Beatles out of the four. Paul made sure a lot of George's songs were recorded while John didn't even show up for a lot of them. Just listen to the bass on "Something," simply amazing! The piano on "My Guitar Gently Weeps" was awesome as well, yet John isn't considered the one who had the least interest in the other Beatles songs? The reason that George seems to hate Paul is because of petty musical disagreements or George being a bit hard on Paul. They were brothers! They loved each other, and I will not let anyone tarnish their connection, many relatives, friends, and even George's widower said that they were close, Paul gave George a nice place to die in peace after all! Yes Paul and George had arguments here and there but does that mean they hated each other? That's complete and utter bullshit.
+Too Many Lives "They were pretty much the closest Beatles out of the four." It's probably fair to say that e.g. George-Ringo and John-Paul were closer friendships than Paul-George. For years George resented Paul's bossiness (and frankly probably also resented that generally speaking Paul was a better singer than he was, better songwriter than he was, and better musician than he was). "Paul made sure a lot of George's songs were recorded while John didn't even show up for a lot of them." Roughly speaking, that's true, but that's because Paul was a team player for the Beatles and John wasn't as much, not because Paul and George were terribly close. Paul gave his all to "The Ballad Of John And Yoko" not because he loved the song necessarily but because that's what Paul habitually did for the Beatles.
+Joseph Scott your right Paul McCartney was very bossy in the studio. When they had a new song or single to record he would go around and tell everyone to do this and do that, where as John or George would just show the others the song and then start playing and what ever sounded good they would keep
+John Paul Zuni That's a little simplistic, JPZ... but it's true that Paul DID know what he wanted his songs to sound like more than John or George did. Paul was the natural musical arranger in the group. Good thing, too. Ringo has said that without McCartney directing them, nothing would get done.
+Joseph Scott John made the decision to put out the song as a Beatles single. Paul had nothing to do with the decision nor could he have stopped it from happening.
Let's don't forget that George would not have been a Beatle had it not been for Paul. Not only did Paul introduce him to the band, he had to push Lennon to accept him because George was so much younger.
Lol! Relative time. George was "so much younger than John" (3 years). To me, Brittany Spears is so much younger than me (I won't divulge the difference).
You guys are forgetting how much difference three years makes at that age. Lennon was 17, already in art college, and already had a band. Harrison was 14.
Just to set the record straight,John,George and Ringo wanted Klein,Paul did not because he did not trust him.John later admitted that Paul was right.Paul was always the better businessman of the four.
Agree. This video is slanted as it discusses Give My Regards to Broad Street and doesn't address all the great albums McCartney has had: Ram, Tug of War, Band on the Run, among others. I think George would have had a different response if they were getting along with Paul at the time, which he wasn't. Also, Paul reconciled with George and what you hear is the bitterness of Paul not being at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame at the time. Paul would go over to Georges house and play the ukulele with him later, before he passed.
The others were better musicians, what's Paul ever achieved since? He had a free ride for years, very little talent, dragged along on John and George's coat tails. Without them Paul has done nothing of any value!!
+tony davies Are you serious?Paul is and was the most musical of them all.He can play just about anything.He rewrote the book on rock and roll bass playing.He is a master of melodies.Saying that he is not even my favorite Beatle,but credit goes where it is due.
I think it's funny reading comments of people looking in from the outside about what these guys say about each other and directly to each other and who inreal life were like real life brothers. Paul was at George's side at his death and george was there for Paul when his wife Linda died, and George said "Paul's my mate and that's all there is to it". Quit reading so much into it. they were close as close. Life changes things but they were tight to begin with all the way to the end,
i think you nailed it --but just if they had all gotten together on spur of the moment that one night in NYC on Sat nite live-- they were all in town --it would have been the biggest thing in TV history---and it almost happened,,,, sigh,,, oh well,,,,
+Kevin Harris Yeah people trying to say the beatles hated each other with a passion is stupid. Many friends and even his widower said that it was simply not true, Paul even gave harrison a mansion so he could die in peace without millions of people screaming. The only one that could possibly have hated paul and the rest of the beatles was John really. He had a certain ego to him that people refuse to admit he had.
Not in the first interview, he wasn't. He totally omitted that he and Ringo had sued Paul (for some business matters) just two day before the introduction party, ripping wide open old wounds. The reason Paul didn't show up was hurt feelings, not some obscure motives George is hinting at. And if you watch Ringo's and Georges acceptance speeches, they appeared both rather shaken and not at all having a good time. Honestly, I think George and Paul, along with all their lovable character traits, shared a not so admirable one: not to be able to ever admitting to a mistake.
It always mystifies me when someone says; 'I'm not a huge Beatles fan.' Even if those people had never heard a single Beatles song - or heard a few and then didn't like them, you'd think they'd at least respect the Beatles for having inspired millions of other musicians who have followed. They changed the direction of music and who knows where the world of music would have progressed to (or regressed). I grew up with the Beatles - what precious memories. And what a bold statement they made, asking for peace and love in a world that was (and still is) consumed with greed, hatred and rage. I pray that peace wins.
Exactly. That's one of the great things about Paul, other than Ringo, you never really heard Paul bad mouthing the way you would hear Harrison 'and' Lennon.
Indeed that's true. Paul really had some moral depth. At least with John though, as immature as he could be at times, he had enough moral courage to later say he was wrong in what he'd said. He could say some really nice things about Paul's songs and about Paul. George often wasn't so generous.
Despite George's criticism or anyone else's for that matter, time and truth walk hand and hand and Paul has continually landed on his feet and proved himself one of the greatest composers of the 20th century. This was more than 20 years ago, and although "Broadstreet" may have looked like a failure at the time, most people would kill to have written ONE successful pop song such as "No More Lonely Nights", let alone the unequivocal catalogue of McCartney tunes.
This guy is SO underrated...He had an uncommon amazingly funny sense of humour...He was a fantastic composer and probably the best human being to have lived on earth...Thank you George for everything you've done to humanity. I misss you so much...
The Beatles were a force, a game changer. Together, they changed the music industry. In the end though, Paul, whether some feel he was the dominant writer/player or not, was the work horse. It got to the point where he'd be at the studio to work and the others may not get there til 3 hrs after the agreed time. Paul didn't waste that time. He'd record drum parts, bass parts, guitar parts, vox and key parts. I can only imagine they got their knickers in a wad over that, but screw 'em. Paul's time had value too. He showed up to work... and WORKED, then he went about his own personal time. If they didn't like it then they should've gotten their butts to the studio. John was deep with a sometimes whimsical/artistic sense. Paul was whimsical and romantic who had depth as well. If John said, "Yesterday is the only good song you wrote" then he's full crap (I bet he knew it when he said it too) and a statement like that could only come from a place of envy at the time. Paul has written MANY timeless masterpieces that will be remembered and studied for millenia to come. John also said, "I couldn't keep up with his song writing." There are two reasons Paul had such a prolific career post Beatles; he's a songwriter and composer that connects with people and he has a great work ethic. He has great ideas. He writes and records them. He gets them into the hands and ears of people.
And, as you suggested, he has an enormous amount of energy to match his enormous amount of ambition. You're absolutely correct about his role in the band. Paul has certainly always had an enormous ego (and why not? he's effing Paul McCartney), but certainly no bigger than Lennon's, for gosh sakes. Paul's ego only became a problem in the group when Lennon lost interest and George started to. Paul became "bossy" in their eyes because he was trying to keep things on track and moving forward. As it began to slip away, he became truly bossy, and it spiraled down from there. But Paul can at least say he showed up, and showed up straight enough to work.
Paul is amazing but let’s not act like he’s a Genius like John Lennon. I’ll give Paul the workhorse part and the technical musical ability part. Lennon was the true ingenious artist of the Beatles. He was the best writer and the best singer. Paul and George (and Ringo) were all amazing as well
Andres. John and Paul were genius. PAUL had more abilities in music and John in lyrics but there were complementary. Read George martin or Geoff Emerick who told that paul was the one who have the most abilities in music Read the books about the Beatles. In the 70 everybody told John was the genius but now with the different biographies of the people who were in the studios with the Beatles we can change our mind and accepted the great work paul accomplished in the band. ringo said : « we can thank paul if the Beatles had so many songs and producted all these albums , Paul was the workaholic « Without Paul maybe revolver would have been the last album.
Liliane Lucas saying Paul had more ability musically than John is not entirely true. I think John was a better songwriter; besides having something more to say lyrically he also composed more inventive, original chords/chord sequences than Paul in both guitar and piano. However, Paul composed great melodies more consistently. Paul was technically superior as a musician, but Paul didn’t come up with guitar riffs like John did. Paul is my favorite bass player of all time. I think Bass, melody and harmonizing were his three greatest gifts, even more so than songwriting. But I still think John is the genius artist of the Beatles. He’s the one who did the truly experimental songs that still sound ahead of their time today. You listen to “Yesterday”, “Hey Jude”, “Let it Be” and many others and they sound of their era. Not so with John’s “Tomorrow Never Knows”, “Strawberry Fields”, “I am the Walrus”, etc... John was so much more ahead of his time than ANYBODY. Still, that doesn’t take anything away from Macca. He was a musical genius as well
I am glad George later got over his bitterness. He was too good for that. John had said he would never forgive George for being so mean to Yoko. Paul brought George into the Beatles. George later was an often visitor to Paul's home. George was at Paul's LA place when he did. Paul talked about visiting him and rubbing his arm. I just wish George and John would have made up.
You know, you seldom heard Paul or Ringo say anything disparaging about George or John. They may have been thinking some unkind thoughts, but at least they were gracious enough not to say it, or at least not much. But George and John seemed to take every opportunity to rip into each other and Paul. Ringo always seemed to be left out of their squabbles, probably because he didn't write, so there was no jealousy toward him.
@@rabibengali5811 Yeah if you push and push, it will eventually break. I guess Paul was tired of being the nice guy and pushed back. Lennon was very capable of hawking venom in every direction (1970 Rolling Stone interview) and it hurt Paul.
Also I think the criticisms written in ‘Too many People’ compared with the venom in ‘How do you sleep’ is a good example of Paul’s restraint. Love all The Beatles of course! They were brothers, and brothers squabble.
Uhm not really, Paul started it by making a dig at John & Paul never went to rock and roll hall of fame. George and John are HONEST - they’re sincere, Paul not so much
That's because Paul was the instigator of the majority of the rows. He started quarrels with John, George and Ringo. In fact, he caused each to quit the band at least once. But John got fed up and quit permanently.
Patagualian Mostly Usually people sit like that in the comfort of their own home or relaxed settings such as at a friends house but this was a interview. He even put on a button shirt and an 80's jacket for the interview suggesting he knows that it isn't a kickback hangout.
As was/is the case with the Stones, the sum total of the Beatles collectively was far greater than they were as individuals. A chemistry thing, Methinks.
Exactly... The Beatles would not have been without the four of them. Everyone has a fave - fact is however the band would not exist without all four and chances are you may not have heard much of any of them had not all four played together... As people speak in terms of song writing and talent I do not know if any of those people realize most all the Lennon/McCartney or McCartney/Lennon or Harrison songs on a "Beatle" Lp in reality should have writing credits - "The Beatles". ;) Everyone who has ever been in a band knows this. Let me elaborate... the Beatles went into the studio with ideas, likewise John wrote a lyric a melody or what not from that however evolves the "song" ... hey George add a guitar fill here, Paul says Ringo I did not like the kick drum on that last take for this track... etc... Still John retains the song credit BUT I will let everyone know "I am the Walrus" would not be the same interesting piece had they not been together just as "While my guitar gently weeps" would not cry as much without Clapton's track within it... My fave Beatle production is the Abby Road medley where Ringo short and sweet solo preludes the three Paul, George and John exchanging solo riffs - be it a diamond between golden slumbers and the end.
Tom Mack To add to your point, Paul only recently (I believe it was recently) gave George Harrison credit for the indispensable guitar figure in "And I Love Her."
Iowahawk8 yes, I heard that, but I pretty much knew it before Paul even mentioned it recently... guitar players have certain style to their playing - is like a signature... when you listen to a band you can not only tell who is playing what, but can also pretty much pick out a lot of who thought of what, as they adhere to certain style of phrasing, is similar to how one speaks... many people do not notice an instrument - is a voice.
The one who is most driven (Paul in this case) becomes the one most open to criticism from the rest, but without their efforts so much brilliant work wouldn’t have been achieved. It’s similar to Roger Waters of Pink Floyd.
It always makes me sad when I listen to George bad mouthing paul. It is easy to understand why he felt this way. Paul probably did underestimate him and treat him like a junior Beatle. But man, life is so short. George is gone. It would have been wonderful to see more of him, ringo and paul just hanging out and enjoying each other's company. /Just fan talk. What do I really know about any of them irl? Not a thing. :/
Yes, it comes across as bitter. I mean he was still angry about events that were decades before. One of the things I liked about Paul is he never badmouthed any of the others. Even when John publicly attacked him in the early 70s. And he always tried to make it up. Anyway, at least George never blanked out Paul, and allowed him to visit him on his deathbed. There was still some friendship there.
Paul worked for years to get George and Ringo as solo artists in the rock n roll hall of fame. I would say they didn't hate each other. Paul inducted both John and Ringo.
I have a very good friend that used to see the Beatles play in The Cavern during regular lunchtime gigs and I always remember him saying that George's guitar playing was quite poor to start with. But they improved and gelled together from playing so much. The Beatles knew they were different and were going to be huge and that is why they could get away with releasing 20 cover songs on their first 5 albums. John, Paul and George just ended up with musical differences so it made sense to go their own way - make sure you have listened to John's/Plastic Ono Band first album - I cannot stop playing Well, Well, Well and Working Class Hero on a loop
To me, George was, and still is, a vastly underrated singer, guitarist and songwriter. All his songs with the Beatles were really great. However, he happened to be in a band with the two greatest pop songwriters ever , so it must have been very tough to get his songs on their albums, but as the the years passed his tracks became better and better until Abbey Road where his songs were the equal of Lennon n McCartney. I am sure he was learning the songwriting art just being in the company of these two.
You know, it's so sad to realize that George and Paul had such difficulties getting along with one another. Heck, if it wasn't for Paul, George wouldn't have even been a Beatle. I know that Paul can be a pain at times but gifted people are usually like that. As time went on George attacked Paul more and more. Paul was the hardest working Beatle and sometimes I think that George and even John couldn't handle the creativity level that Paul was putting out and expecting from the other members.
If anyone on planet earth has the right to run out of good one's of his own it's Paul McCartney, the man is a musical genius who had more good ones of his own' than any other human being did.
I would say, a lot of the credit is Harrison's own talent, really. He pretty much was able to show that in his solo career. Yes Paul introduced him to John, and that's big - but young George was gonna be a musician and had enough talent to get their notice
@@luveniwai but paul provided the platform, there are many talented musicians and actors in the industry who struggle because people dont notice them,talent is important but so is recognition and george never seemed grateful about it...he was literally working as an electrician when paul decided him to introduce to john and even pushed for him be included as john thought he was too young...george definitely wouldnt be known if it hadnt been for paul
@@sharmisthachakraborty287 Obviously George made an impression on young Paul for him to think of him for the band. Also had heard of George being an Electrician (though he might have been starting a Trade), from what I know George was 14/15 and they were in High School
We always want our favorite people to get along but life's never that kind.Fighting over who was better or who was right or wrong is just a waste of time especially since two of them are now gone and there's nothing we can do about it! What we can do, however, is cherish the wonderful moments they had together and thank them for all they left us with....their music, their songs, their jokes and everything else. RIP George and John!
Some of my favorite Beatle songs were written by George. The versatile styles and sounds that came from the Beatles in every new album was one of the main reasons that I bought them. It was brilliant!
In Paul's defense, being the only surviving member of the greatest songwriting duo in history, he's got a lot to live up to. He doesn't want to slide down the totem pole and he'll do whatever it takes to remain on top (if not in the charts at least by remaining relevant in the industry). He's uncorked some very nice stuff here and there ("Sing the Changes" and "My Valentine" among them).
I've met Paul , he is very humble and he kept the Beatles together when Epstein died ; George wasn't a victim; otherwise he would have left. People badmouthing Paul should read serious books on the Beatles
romans52345 Robert Johnson was never a bloke he was a home boy. I went with him to the chicken shack and I had to pay (when I say pay I mean I had to steal chickens for both of us)
I love George's 'zero fucks given' attitude to his bandmates. I'm sure that was an important part of The Beatles' dynamic - keeping Lennon and McCartney's egos in check to some degree.
You do realize this was before the Anthology project, wounds were healed and George passed??? Some of you seem to think this is breaking news. Saw Paul i Seattle last night.. His tributes to both John and George were quite heartfelt and touching. Stop rehashing the negative shit.. Best music ever recorded by the Fab4, period.
Yeah, this was like the post "Cloud 9" late 80s/early 90s era. And anyhow, it's easy to misinterpreted what is likely just "sibling rivalry" type stuff and light ribbing for some dark feud. They certainly cared about each other throughout, but there's no doubt they had very different personalities, which clashed at times.
Regardless how others might feel concerning the Beatles, and certain ones who feel they were used particularly by the enemy of souls, whenever I think about the Beatles, and what was called the "British Invasion" of their music into North America, there still remains within me, a joy that speaks of the freedom that loved music can have on the lives of people everywhere. The Beatles so far as music is concerned, are the very best, and I shall remember them with fondness, wishing them the best.
George knew Paul longer and better than anyone. They had been friends years before meeting John in 1957. Anything he said about Paul in interviews was undoubtedly spot on.
I checked the information Eleanor Rigby was written primarily by Paul Mac Cartney and Ringo also said that 90/ of the lyrics were Paul's as well as the music and the haunting voice give him the credits he deserves for this beatiful song He was as able as John to write dark songs Listen to She's Leaving Home: it was Paul's inspiration !
I listened to the Beatles since I can remember.they were the ones that changed music forever! Let all the ones that have passed Rest In Peace already and let go of the past.shiit more than half of us in this mothafucka weren't even born yet and we talking about old shiit...fucking be grateful that they got together and did what they did....friendship and business doesn't always mix well
Don’t think that’s fair to say. Although Paul is a genius, all four of the them plus Martin is what made the genius of the Beatles. They were all great in extremely different ways. You can’t tell me Paul could’ve written even 50% of Sgt. Peppers on his own.
guaranteed, if they could all play together again they would have a blast. After all, they are the best ever by a large margin. People forget how great they were together, look what they accomplished in their own careers to boot.
I miss George !! You are with Jesus now ! I know in my heart ! You and John are entertaining the Lord everyday!! So sad that you are gone on this Earth !!
After watching the ‘Get Back’ documentary, it puts things into context. They had no manager, Paul was the ‘leader’ and George walked out but came back. In the documentary, you can see that Paul McCartney was just trying to get some structure.
I’ve always been a big fan of both of them, I feel as if Paul was the “black sheep” of the group when they broke up, I hear that he didn’t care for George’s songs but then I hear that it was John who didn’t care, I honestly think Paul McCartney is the greatest musician of all time, most of my favorite songs are written and played by him, and I love all of George’s songs too, it’s just a shame I wish there was less bickering between them after they broke up I would’ve loved to see some cooperation with music
I think you are right - but I can understand how this could have happened. Lennon/McCartney's shadow kept most, including their bandmates in dim light. George probably came into his own and improved because of their greatness as composers. You become what you hang around.
Well, with all due respect to George's "contributions" to the Beatles, he was just bitter. That's it in a nutshell. He knows his writing was not up to par in the early days, or at least not up to John and Paul standards. So when he says he's been in Paul's life all of 30 years, well it took all of 'about' 10 years or so for him to even learn to write a top notch hit song just from being around Lennon & McCartney and learning skills he didn't have before. He really had no basis for his resentment
I wouldn't worry about it, Paul and George were at great peace with each other just before George passed and I certainly wouldn't say he even seems that bitter here, just George being George! RIP George, one of the best.
The Beatles are great - no doubt. It is sad though for all of the "Let It Be," "Give Peace a Chance," "Hey Jude," meetings with the Maharishi, even the Beatles could not "Give Peace A Chane," nor "Let It Be." They could not get along which is sad.
George played on 'How do you sleep?' by Lennon though. I realise it was a response to McCartney's 'Too many people' in which he was critical of John and Yoko, but the lyrics to 'TMP' weren't really ugly. They weren't eviscerating in tone. Lennon's response with 'Sleep' was nasty and utterly disproportionate. In the outakes you hear Lennon sing "ya c**t". Why would Paul want George to write with him after that public humiliation? Because Lennon had two more Beatles (George and Ringo) play on 'Sleep' it gave the song a kind of 'blessing' in terms of Beatles fans or the media - which made its sentiments more potent and damaging. I like George and he's written some fantastic songs, but it's a bit disingenuous of him to outwardly wonder why Paul passed on the idea of working with him.
+aerialkate Very insightful comment. Thank you. I have not accessed this level of information and did not realize all of this. What sources did you get this information from? I think George may have seen himself as getting on with everyone and didn't get that Paul was internally experiencing shunning by George and Ringo's collaboration with John. I am sure did not intend that and likely just wanted to create like the old days. Although I am sure John was well aware and there was likely a manipulative element to it all. There always seems to be a power struggle in a band and it usually gets nasty. Women always get in the way. Paul didn't mind Linda M being involved in everything but he could not handle Yoko. Very disrespectful.
+50hellkat2 I have seen this outake video, and John really slams Paul. Yes... he does call Paul a cunt. After Epstein died, Paul pulled the band back together and they continued recording great music. I think John especially hated this, as Paul was now the groups leader. I'm sure it drove a wedge between them. Also, their songwriting styles differed more and more by the late 60s. So Paul, in their eyes, became the bossy and temperamental overseer of the band. The truth is... that John really had a bad temper, and Paul was more easy going. But the others didn't like being told where to stand by Paul. And, he was shunned for it after the breakup. By the way, I've never seen a video of Linda in the studio while they recorded. However...I have seen several videos of Yoko in the studio again and again.
50hellkat2 I disagree with the "women get in the way" comment. Yoko was undoubtedly irritating and was probably on the make. She was ambitious as an artist. However I don't doubt that she genuinely loved John. They were very similar avant garde type artists. Clearly John was the major talent. But the point is they were so similar in terms of their world view. Like her or not, John always said they were soulmates. I've written this before, but everything we know about Lennon _screamed_ that he was his own man. Nobody dominated him. He was a man out of time and an independent thinker. Re Linda: all that "we never spent a night apart" bit we were always reading - I wonder if that wasn't because she knew Paul would stray on the road? Paul was into touring and John wasn't. And Paul did cheat on Jane Asher quite a bit and Linda learned from her experience. I don't think Linda was really ambitious musically. I think she knew what went on on the road and kept a close eye on her husband! Before Paul left, John had announced privately he was going to leave. But George had left before that (and had been persuaded to come back.) Even Ringo had walked out at one point. It was Epstein's death which created a power vacuum which Paul was happy to fill. To be fair to him - he had the work ethic and was probably qualified to do the job. He was dead right about Alan Klein for example. I think he was a bit too blunt in the studio for someone like George who was a sensitive soul. "He ruined me as a guitar player" (he once said of Paul.) So for me, the domineering nature of Paul was probably well intentioned, but pissed off the other band members no end. Lennon had spoken about the treadmill of being a 'Fab'. The tedious meet and greets with the daughters of Mayors, the tour / album / tour treadmill and what he saw as Paul's domination of recording sessions. Paul also wanted to tour and John didn't. In every interview recorded in the late 60s early 70s you can hear how "over" with it Lennon was by then. Even Paul (not Yoko's biggest fan) has said numerous times "Yoko didn't split up the Beatles". As much as I love the band, I'm glad they split up when they did. All things have to end and genius has a shelf life. For me it's better that they split when they did, rather than go on and make mediocre Beatles albums. Wouldn't that have been _awful?_
+aerialkate I did read a book on John Lennon written by an author with the last name of Seaman. Thought it was good. He hung out with John as an assistant if my memory was correct. I got the impression that Yoko and John had a complicated relationship. They both kind of had a blind eye to each other's transgressions. Both had addiction issues and the consequences of that. John depended on Yoko to manage everything and he took on a parenting role with their child. I think that John Lennon brought Yoko into recording studio with the Beatles to stick it to Paul McCartney because he knew Paul didn't like it. Paul felt that Yoko was too much of an obstacle for Paul to get around and that was an insult to John. Also John put up with Paul and Linda McCartney for years.
+aerialkate John Lennon was insulted that Paul McCartney as giving the impression that John was weak enough to be manipulated by Yoko. Which is an insult to John particularly coming from Paul McCartney.
The great contradiction of George Harrison is that, on one hand, he was this gentle soul on a lifelong quest for inner peace and enlightenment, and on the other, he seemed deeply embittered and resentful about having been a Beatle (though he did his best to mask it behind Liverpudlian charm and sarcasm). The weight of all that fame at such an early age combined with the continued squelching of his artistic voice seemed to make him the one who least enjoyed the experience of being in the Beatles. I think he was done with the whole thing by 1966.
having been a band for 7 years or so way back when, you have to be in close proximity and work together long hours. The band has to have a united vision/drive to succeed. Paul and John had so much in common and no distractions like today and had already both began to immerse themselves in music when they met before meeting George. So, it makes sense that would be more advanced song writers than George. As George caught up, I could see how it would be hard to incorporate his ideas (ego-wise and maybe not to mess with a "perfect formula"). So, they really were like brothers. And that's what happens in a band, not everyone gets what they want, people squabble, but in the end, you're very close (assuming noone is a douche). I think these guys were very tight. I just don't agree with airing private feuds or disagreements for the public to hear. That kinda shit "stays in the locker room".
George had something about him that i love and respect than that of the others.I feel like i connect with him,the rebel that he was and the ever ending search for spiritual awakenings and peace. His songs were something special too,he was not appreciated enough,respected enough by the others through their ego but i really believe George wrote some epic songs with great purpose to them.
This wasn't the point George was making, he was stating that since they had been in a band together Paul had never suggested writing a song with George. Paul only wrote with Lennon, and after he finished writing with Lennon he wrote by himself. But up until that point he had never suggested to George about writing a song.
Why was it impossible for John, George, and sometimes Paul to not say something at least a little negative about each other or the Beatles? I find it amazing the Beatles were together as long as they were, with those super egos all in the same room. Now two of them are gone and it's too late for them to finally grow the hell up.
George was my favorite. When he died in California in 2000 , I was surprised since I always thought that he died in England. However, his obituary says California.
George has always been my favorite,he had an excellent sense of humour eg: he was hillarious on the Rutles movie "All you need is cash".Also a very loving peaceful man.R.I.P. George
He was not "right there" when stacked up against the other two. And it's obvious Harrison is bitter against McCartney in this video. Just by the way he downplays everything McCartney did, And of course, the, "he ran out of good ones of his own" is pretty clear about that because Paul never ran out of good ones. Lennon himself talked about how George used to 'whine' about not getting more songs included. But George just couldn't write a lot of good songs in the early days. Simple fact!
Видеоклипы
"Paul's my mate, and that's all there is to it."
-George Harrison
When did he say that? I usually know all the quotes.
+Nico Val Aah thanks for that, it's appreciated. I've even seen the interview before, but i don't remember that bit. I know their friendship has been strained over the years, and I read recently that he used to think of that phrase from Frankie Crisp, when things would be difficult: "scan not a friend with a microscopic glass - you know his faults, let the foibles pass". Which has been a great help to me too, on occasion.
+Nico Val Is I just my imagination, or did Ringo acting really strange for most of this clip?... constantly butting in whenever George said something - with bizarre, nonsensical comments,?
He may have been drunk, don't know if he was still an alcoholic then
Harrison was never an alcoholic. Him and Paul fell out with each other for quite a few years which is why Paul never showed up to the Hall Of Fame induction.
I think George was a gentleman, and he seems down to earth and honest.
+Noelle Jordan i agree, just a cool down to earth guy with no drama games , my favorite beatle, but i love them all
+lion king Same.
That's why I admire and respect George for. Both as a man and as a musician.
Other then 700+ affairs there is more to George then you think.
@@grenda5 This video is exactly that -- George's petty little passive-aggressive drama game
They were brothers who fought. How unusual. They loved, and argued with, each other. They just sometimes did both publicly.
How often did Paul criticise George's music? Seem's a bit of a low blow, very undignified.
@@ryanblob3105 he couldn't
@@louiseanders535, easily done, George put out plenty of tripe, all of them did at some point.
@@ryanblob3105 Not really, the only album George put out that flopped completely was Gone Troppo. Even Somewhere in England has its monents. The rest of them are great, ATMP and LITMW are among the best albums ever made. As is John Lennon's Plastic Ono Band and Imagine. Paul never really put out a "solid" album, he did killer singles such as My Love and Band on the Run etc etc. But never a top tier album. Not that that matters much anyway, I'm glad Paul's still making music, he's at his best when he's making easily digestible pop
I don't know much but these remarks from George were pretty shaddyyy
George is my favorite Beatle. Amazing how someone so famous could be so down to earth
Desmond John He's quite funny too.
Desmond John Personality wise, he's my favourite. He's smart, funny and interesting and ultimately he was nicer than John and Paul imo
Desmond John HE WAS INTO YOGA,MEDITATION AND EASTERN PHILOSOPHY
+dasadist22 Yes and buying giant castles that even the worlds billionaires wouldn't touch. A bit hypocritical ya think?
Same :)
In my 55 years as a Beatle fan I’ve always enjoyed the beauty and honesty of George. He never took shit, never demanded the spotlight and always gave 1,000% and never wrote anything other than great songs. God, I miss him.
I think this is the best comment I've seen on this channel about George.
Greatness
George did take a lot of crap from Paul and John listen to the words it's only a northern song who wrote that song because if you listen to the words he didn't have the John, Paul writing machine but then he showed them when he finally got away from the Beatles his solo albums you can't touch ,there beautiful and the fact that he wrote something and tax man and don't bother me and an unknown fact is he wrote Waa Waa when you quit the Beatles during the get-back filming listen to those words really George took a lot but then he showed them
Even Paul said after his death that "George didn't suffer fools gladly".
@@hdmfself explanatory 😊
"it's funny after 30 years of being in his life he FINALLY wants to write with me" life made
Paul basically wrote Taxman, but was kind enough to give George the credit.
@@slothfromthegoonies8201 put a normal,a bit virtuous and soulless solo on it doesn't mean to write a song. Taxman is an absolutely Harrison song at all
@Crynaotlod it is a kinda sitar-like solo, so that explains a lot!
@@slothfromthegoonies8201 based on what?ive never heard that from anyone is this your assumption or can you show how you came to that conclusion
@@slothfromthegoonies8201 nah Harrison definitely wrote Taxman it’s well documented by he wrote it aswell
I think what hurt George is never feeling he got validation from Paul. Which is something that DID mean a lot to him. Paul was the first great influence in his life outside of his parents, the one who brought him into the Beatles, and basically his big brother. George was never particularly close with John. So when it came down to George finally being ready for his breakthrough, he felt he really NEEDED Paul's support and blessing. The guy who championed him to John and the others the first time around. When it became clear that it wasn't going to happen in the way George imagined, thats really where the rift began. Its not that George needed Paul to convince him that he was good. He already knew the stuff he was making whats good. It just hurts when you feel like your closest confidante essentially doesn't give a shit. I think a "wow George, you are really coming into form. This is great." from Paul would have went a long way.
I hate these people saying that George and Paul hated each other. They were pretty much the closest Beatles out of the four. Paul made sure a lot of George's songs were recorded while John didn't even show up for a lot of them. Just listen to the bass on "Something," simply amazing! The piano on "My Guitar Gently Weeps" was awesome as well, yet John isn't considered the one who had the least interest in the other Beatles songs? The reason that George seems to hate Paul is because of petty musical disagreements or George being a bit hard on Paul. They were brothers! They loved each other, and I will not let anyone tarnish their connection, many relatives, friends, and even George's widower said that they were close, Paul gave George a nice place to die in peace after all! Yes Paul and George had arguments here and there but does that mean they hated each other? That's complete and utter bullshit.
+Too Many Lives "They were pretty much the closest Beatles out of the four." It's probably fair to say that e.g. George-Ringo and John-Paul were closer friendships than Paul-George. For years George resented Paul's bossiness (and frankly probably also resented that generally speaking Paul was a better singer than he was, better songwriter than he was, and better musician than he was). "Paul made sure a lot of George's songs were recorded while John didn't even show up for a lot of them." Roughly speaking, that's true, but that's because Paul was a team player for the Beatles and John wasn't as much, not because Paul and George were terribly close. Paul gave his all to "The Ballad Of John And Yoko" not because he loved the song necessarily but because that's what Paul habitually did for the Beatles.
+Joseph Scott your right Paul McCartney was very bossy in the studio. When they had a new song or single to record he would go around and tell everyone to do this and do that, where as John or George would just show the others the song and then start playing and what ever sounded good they would keep
+John Paul Zuni That's a little simplistic, JPZ... but it's true that Paul DID know what he wanted his songs to sound like more than John or George did. Paul was the natural musical arranger in the group. Good thing, too. Ringo has said that without McCartney directing them, nothing would get done.
Paul was willing to put out "The Ballad Of John And Yoko" as a Beatles single. How bossy.
+Joseph Scott John made the decision to put out the song as a Beatles single. Paul had nothing to do with the decision nor could he have stopped it from happening.
Let's don't forget that George would not have been a Beatle had it not been for Paul. Not only did Paul introduce him to the band, he had to push Lennon to accept him because George was so much younger.
Frank Stall
If you look really deep, you will see that Paul McCartney is not the most sterling character in the world.
George is less than a year younger than Paul..
Lol! Relative time. George was "so much younger than John" (3 years). To me, Brittany Spears is so much younger than me (I won't divulge the difference).
Frank Stall Namely, Willy Campbell.
You guys are forgetting how much difference three years makes at that age. Lennon was 17, already in art college, and already had a band. Harrison was 14.
i like George Harrison's sense of humour.
He gave a lot of money to the Monty Python crew so the could continue to make films.
Just to set the record straight,John,George and Ringo wanted Klein,Paul did not because he did not trust him.John later admitted that Paul was right.Paul was always the better businessman of the four.
Agree. This video is slanted as it discusses Give My Regards to Broad Street and doesn't address all the great albums McCartney has had: Ram, Tug of War, Band on the Run, among others. I think George would have had a different response if they were getting along with Paul at the time, which he wasn't. Also, Paul reconciled with George and what you hear is the bitterness of Paul not being at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame at the time. Paul would go over to Georges house and play the ukulele with him later, before he passed.
*****
I think Paul has shown who knows his business even today....
Rob B Good point Rob B.
The others were better musicians, what's Paul ever achieved since? He had a free ride for years, very little talent, dragged along on John and George's coat tails. Without them Paul has done nothing of any value!!
+tony davies Are you serious?Paul is and was the most musical of them all.He can play just about anything.He rewrote the book on rock and roll bass playing.He is a master of melodies.Saying that he is not even my favorite Beatle,but credit goes where it is due.
I think it's funny reading comments of people looking in from the outside about what these guys say about each other and directly to each other and who inreal life were like real life brothers. Paul was at George's side at his death and george was there for Paul when his wife Linda died, and George said "Paul's my mate and that's all there is to it". Quit reading so much into it. they were close as close. Life changes things but they were tight to begin with all the way to the end,
i think you nailed it --but just if they had all gotten together on spur of the moment that one night in NYC on Sat nite live-- they were all in town --it would have been the biggest thing in TV history---and it almost happened,,,, sigh,,, oh well,,,,
Spot on.
Now you want to discuss a band that truly hated each other, read about The Ramones.
That's right!!
+Kevin Harris Yeah people trying to say the beatles hated each other with a passion is stupid. Many friends and even his widower said that it was simply not true, Paul even gave harrison a mansion so he could die in peace without millions of people screaming. The only one that could possibly have hated paul and the rest of the beatles was John really. He had a certain ego to him that people refuse to admit he had.
I think George Harrison was a talented musician in his own right. His songs are absolutely amazing.
George was straight up honest, no bull shit. Love him
Not in the first interview, he wasn't. He totally omitted that he and Ringo had sued Paul (for some business matters) just two day before the introduction party, ripping wide open old wounds. The reason Paul didn't show up was hurt feelings, not some obscure motives George is hinting at. And if you watch Ringo's and Georges acceptance speeches, they appeared both rather shaken and not at all having a good time. Honestly, I think George and Paul, along with all their lovable character traits, shared a not so admirable one: not to be able to ever admitting to a mistake.
I miss you George
Ditto.
It always mystifies me when someone says; 'I'm not a huge Beatles fan.' Even if those people had never heard a single Beatles song - or heard a few and then didn't like them, you'd think they'd at least respect the Beatles for having inspired millions of other musicians who have followed. They changed the direction of music and who knows where the world of music would have progressed to (or regressed). I grew up with the Beatles - what precious memories. And what a bold statement they made, asking for peace and love in a world that was (and still is) consumed with greed, hatred and rage. I pray that peace wins.
Exactly. That's one of the great things about Paul, other than Ringo, you never really heard Paul bad mouthing the way you would hear Harrison 'and' Lennon.
Indeed that's true. Paul really had some moral depth. At least with John though, as immature as he could be at times, he had enough moral courage to later say he was wrong in what he'd said. He could say some really nice things about Paul's songs and about Paul. George often wasn't so generous.
I miss George and John so much :( :( :(
All things must pass.
Living in the material world..
+Zlatandinho But not necessarily so soon...
Isn't it a pity
Despite George's criticism or anyone else's for that matter, time and truth walk hand and hand and Paul has continually landed on his feet and proved himself one of the greatest composers of the 20th century. This was more than 20 years ago, and although "Broadstreet" may have looked like a failure at the time, most people would kill to have written ONE successful pop song such as "No More Lonely Nights", let alone the unequivocal catalogue of McCartney tunes.
What I love about George is that there is no bullshit. He doesn't go out of his way to be hurtful, but he will always state his opinion honestly.
This guy is SO underrated...He had an uncommon amazingly funny sense of humour...He was a fantastic composer and probably the best human being to have lived on earth...Thank you George for everything you've done to humanity. I misss you so much...
The Beatles were a force, a game changer. Together, they changed the music industry. In the end though, Paul, whether some feel he was the dominant writer/player or not, was the work horse.
It got to the point where he'd be at the studio to work and the others may not get there til 3 hrs after the agreed time. Paul didn't waste that time. He'd record drum parts, bass parts, guitar parts, vox and key parts. I can only imagine they got their knickers in a wad over that, but screw 'em. Paul's time had value too. He showed up to work... and WORKED, then he went about his own personal time. If they didn't like it then they should've gotten their butts to the studio.
John was deep with a sometimes whimsical/artistic sense. Paul was whimsical and romantic who had depth as well. If John said, "Yesterday is the only good song you wrote" then he's full crap (I bet he knew it when he said it too) and a statement like that could only come from a place of envy at the time. Paul has written MANY timeless masterpieces that will be remembered and studied for millenia to come. John also said, "I couldn't keep up with his song writing."
There are two reasons Paul had such a prolific career post Beatles; he's a songwriter and composer that connects with people and he has a great work ethic.
He has great ideas. He writes and records them. He gets them into the hands and ears of people.
And, as you suggested, he has an enormous amount of energy to match his enormous amount of ambition. You're absolutely correct about his role in the band. Paul has certainly always had an enormous ego (and why not? he's effing Paul McCartney), but certainly no bigger than Lennon's, for gosh sakes. Paul's ego only became a problem in the group when Lennon lost interest and George started to. Paul became "bossy" in their eyes because he was trying to keep things on track and moving forward. As it began to slip away, he became truly bossy, and it spiraled down from there. But Paul can at least say he showed up, and showed up straight enough to work.
Well said thank youu
Paul is amazing but let’s not act like he’s a Genius like John Lennon. I’ll give Paul the workhorse part and the technical musical ability part. Lennon was the true ingenious artist of the Beatles. He was the best writer and the best singer. Paul and George (and Ringo) were all amazing as well
Andres. John and Paul were genius. PAUL had more abilities in music and John in lyrics but there were complementary. Read George martin or Geoff Emerick who told that paul was the one who have the most abilities in music Read the books about the Beatles. In the 70 everybody told John was the genius but now with the different biographies of the people who were in the studios with the Beatles we can change our mind and accepted the great work paul accomplished in the band. ringo said : « we can thank paul if the Beatles had so many songs and producted all these albums , Paul was the workaholic « Without Paul maybe revolver would have been the last album.
Liliane Lucas saying Paul had more ability musically than John is not entirely true. I think John was a better songwriter; besides having something more to say lyrically he also composed more inventive, original chords/chord sequences than Paul in both guitar and piano. However, Paul composed great melodies more consistently. Paul was technically superior as a musician, but Paul didn’t come up with guitar riffs like John did. Paul is my favorite bass player of all time. I think Bass, melody and harmonizing were his three greatest gifts, even more so than songwriting. But I still think John is the genius artist of the Beatles. He’s the one who did the truly experimental songs that still sound ahead of their time today. You listen to “Yesterday”, “Hey Jude”, “Let it Be” and many others and they sound of their era. Not so with John’s “Tomorrow Never Knows”, “Strawberry Fields”, “I am the Walrus”, etc... John was so much more ahead of his time than ANYBODY. Still, that doesn’t take anything away from Macca. He was a musical genius as well
I am glad George later got over his bitterness. He was too good for that. John had said he would never forgive George for being so mean to Yoko. Paul brought George into the Beatles. George later was an often visitor to Paul's home. George was at Paul's LA place when he did. Paul talked about visiting him and rubbing his arm. I just wish George and John would have made up.
Paul’s my favorite but I love George and miss him dearly...
You know, you seldom heard Paul or Ringo say anything disparaging about George or John. They may have been thinking some unkind thoughts, but at least they were gracious enough not to say it, or at least not much. But George and John seemed to take every opportunity to rip into each other and Paul. Ringo always seemed to be left out of their squabbles, probably because he didn't write, so there was no jealousy toward him.
but Paul started the initial fight. He released a solo album..and it had a nasty song about John...too many people. Paul is more subtle
@@rabibengali5811 Yeah if you push and push, it will eventually break. I guess Paul was tired of being the nice guy and pushed back. Lennon was very capable of hawking venom in every direction (1970 Rolling Stone interview) and it hurt Paul.
Also I think the criticisms written in ‘Too many People’ compared with the venom in ‘How do you sleep’ is a good example of Paul’s restraint. Love all The Beatles of course! They were brothers, and brothers squabble.
Uhm not really, Paul started it by making a dig at John & Paul never went to rock and roll hall of fame. George and John are HONEST - they’re sincere, Paul not so much
That's because Paul was the instigator of the majority of the rows. He started quarrels with John, George and Ringo. In fact, he caused each to quit the band at least once. But John got fed up and quit permanently.
I love George but DAMN he is too comfortable here with his legs open 1:20
Patagualian Mostly Usually people sit like that in the comfort of their own home or relaxed settings such as at a friends house but this was a interview. He even put on a button shirt and an 80's jacket for the interview suggesting he knows that it isn't a kickback hangout.
Patagualian Mostly
George considers himself a true rebel -- a rule breaker. Manners be damned. They were all like that more than a little.
I think that's a common position for Hindu meditation. He probably opened up his legs like that without noticing.
***** I honestly believe you are confused for wasting time thinking about why I noticed his legs wide open and if it bothers me.
***** Makes you feel uncomfortable, perhaps you're having thoughts you find unusual? His posture didn't bother me in the least.
As was/is the case with the Stones, the sum total of the Beatles collectively was far greater than they were as individuals. A chemistry thing, Methinks.
Exactly... The Beatles would not have been without the four of them. Everyone has a fave - fact is however the band would not exist without all four and chances are you may not have heard much of any of them had not all four played together...
As people speak in terms of song writing and talent I do not know if any of those people realize most all the Lennon/McCartney or McCartney/Lennon or Harrison songs on a "Beatle" Lp in reality should have writing credits - "The Beatles". ;) Everyone who has ever been in a band knows this. Let me elaborate... the Beatles went into the studio with ideas, likewise John wrote a lyric a melody or what not from that however evolves the "song" ... hey George add a guitar fill here, Paul says Ringo I did not like the kick drum on that last take for this track... etc... Still John retains the song credit BUT I will let everyone know "I am the Walrus" would not be the same interesting piece had they not been together just as "While my guitar gently weeps" would not cry as much without Clapton's track within it... My fave Beatle production is the Abby Road medley where Ringo short and sweet solo preludes the three Paul, George and John exchanging solo riffs - be it a diamond between golden slumbers and the end.
Tom Mack Well explained, thanks!
Tom Mack To add to your point, Paul only recently (I believe it was recently) gave George Harrison credit for the indispensable guitar figure in "And I Love Her."
Iowahawk8 yes, I heard that, but I pretty much knew it before Paul even mentioned it recently... guitar players have certain style to their playing - is like a signature... when you listen to a band you can not only tell who is playing what, but can also pretty much pick out a lot of who thought of what, as they adhere to certain style of phrasing, is similar to how one speaks... many people do not notice an instrument - is a voice.
The one who is most driven (Paul in this case) becomes the one most open to criticism from the rest, but without their efforts so much brilliant work wouldn’t have been achieved. It’s similar to Roger Waters of Pink Floyd.
And yet Paul is friends with and has collaborated with David Gilmour
So true! Toward the end they were lazy
It always makes me sad when I listen to George bad mouthing paul. It is easy to understand why he felt this way. Paul probably did underestimate him and treat him like a junior Beatle. But man, life is so short. George is gone. It would have been wonderful to see more of him, ringo and paul just hanging out and enjoying each other's company.
/Just fan talk. What do I really know about any of them irl? Not a thing. :/
Yes, it comes across as bitter. I mean he was still angry about events that were decades before. One of the things I liked about Paul is he never badmouthed any of the others. Even when John publicly attacked him in the early 70s. And he always tried to make it up. Anyway, at least George never blanked out Paul, and allowed him to visit him on his deathbed. There was still some friendship there.
I think George himself said that he was too lazy for that much songwriting especially during the Beatles days.
Jason Sanders yes and george spent his last days in paul’ s house. Do you think if there were not friends he did this?
George spoke with such power and confidence in these interviews. He was a force to be reckoned with.
Paul worked for years to get George and Ringo as solo artists in the rock n roll hall of fame. I would say they didn't hate each other. Paul inducted both John and Ringo.
As if John, who was dead, and Ringo had a choice on who was invited to induct them.
I have a very good friend that used to see the Beatles play in The Cavern during regular lunchtime gigs and I always remember him saying that George's guitar playing was quite poor to start with. But they improved and gelled together from playing so much. The Beatles knew they were different and were going to be huge and that is why they could get away with releasing 20 cover songs on their first 5 albums. John, Paul and George just ended up with musical differences so it made sense to go their own way - make sure you have listened to John's/Plastic Ono Band first album - I cannot stop playing Well, Well, Well and Working Class Hero on a loop
To me, George was, and still is, a vastly underrated singer, guitarist and songwriter. All his songs with the Beatles were really great. However, he happened to be in a band with the two greatest pop songwriters ever , so it must have been very tough to get his songs on their albums, but as the the years passed his tracks became better and better until Abbey Road where his songs were the equal of Lennon n McCartney. I am sure he was learning the songwriting art just being in the company of these two.
Exaclty!!!!
You know, it's so sad to realize that George and Paul had such difficulties getting along with one another. Heck, if it wasn't for Paul, George wouldn't have even been a Beatle. I know that Paul can be a pain at times but gifted people are usually like that. As time went on George attacked Paul more and more. Paul was the hardest working Beatle and sometimes I think that George and even John couldn't handle the creativity level that Paul was putting out and expecting from the other members.
well said, agree totally.
Also agree. McCartney is the most misunderstood Beatle. Driven personalities can be difficult to understand.
I love George harrison. I like his song, something♥♥
Love George just being like “it didn’t work” lol
Love George being lightheartedly shady
If anyone on planet earth has the right to run out of good one's of his own it's Paul McCartney, the man is a musical genius who had more good ones of his own' than any other human being did.
And did nothing but pablum after 30.
@@pacificnorthwester BS. Yeah some songs are just "good," but he still puts out gems. Stop hating
"the only thing you wrote was yesterday"
@@ewest14 Have you listened to McCartney and especially McCartney II? Paul can't write by himself.
@@southernwanderer7912 he can write greate by himself and there are always a few gems, none of the beatles wrote that well after breaking uo
George was always good with the roasts
People are people, but speaking as a Paul fan (also a Beatles' fan) George owes a lot of credit for his success to Paul.
I would say, a lot of the credit is Harrison's own talent, really. He pretty much was able to show that in his solo career.
Yes Paul introduced him to John, and that's big - but young George was gonna be a musician and had enough talent to get their notice
Can you elaborate on how Paul helped George? Details please. And links to your sources as well.
@@luveniwai but paul provided the platform, there are many talented musicians and actors in the industry who struggle because people dont notice them,talent is important but so is recognition and george never seemed grateful about it...he was literally working as an electrician when paul decided him to introduce to john and even pushed for him be included as john thought he was too young...george definitely wouldnt be known if it hadnt been for paul
@@sharmisthachakraborty287 Obviously George made an impression on young Paul for him to think of him for the band.
Also had heard of George being an Electrician (though he might have been starting a Trade), from what I know George was 14/15 and they were in High School
We always want our favorite people to get along but life's never that kind.Fighting over who was better or who was right or wrong is just a waste of time especially since two of them are now gone and there's nothing we can do about it! What we can do, however, is cherish the wonderful moments they had together and thank them for all they left us with....their music, their songs, their jokes and everything else. RIP George and John!
Some of my favorite Beatle songs were written by George. The versatile styles and sounds that came from the Beatles in every new album was one of the main reasons that I bought them. It was brilliant!
In Paul's defense, being the only surviving member of the greatest songwriting duo in history, he's got a lot to live up to. He doesn't want to slide down the totem pole and he'll do whatever it takes to remain on top (if not in the charts at least by remaining relevant in the industry). He's uncorked some very nice stuff here and there ("Sing the Changes" and "My Valentine" among them).
George is so down to the earth & such a beautiful person
George harrison was a legend, would've been great to have met him to have had a chat with about life
I've met Paul , he is very humble and he kept the Beatles together when Epstein died ; George wasn't a victim; otherwise he would have left. People badmouthing Paul should read serious books on the Beatles
Yeah i had lunch with George, John,& Robert Johnson today Good blokes all of them..
I went to the movies with Ringo. I paid for his ticket.
Yeah i went to lunch with Ringo & had to pay also.
Why are you so shocked when he said he met Paul? Paul has met millions of people in his lifetime, celebrities do meet regular people you know
romans52345 Robert Johnson was never a bloke he was a home boy. I went with him to the chicken shack and I had to pay (when I say pay I mean I had to steal chickens for both of us)
I loved George he was a really nice and talented guy..
This is FANTASTIC. ☮️💟
I love George's 'zero fucks given' attitude to his bandmates. I'm sure that was an important part of The Beatles' dynamic - keeping Lennon and McCartney's egos in check to some degree.
Rest in peace you masterpiece.❤💔💔
I don't know why George was sitting like that at 1:21 without a care. I now believe he was an alien. Very scary stuff.
It's because he's Batm..., sorry, he's a Beatle. But yeah, really weird stuff
from mexico
that is some weird wild stuff
CooManTunes George-spredding!
George was the most interesting Beatle to interview as he was so witty and honest.
+James Dunn You seem to be referring to Lennon. Harrison didn't have much to say.
Seemed a very down to earth guy, especially considering he was one of the fab 4.
You do realize this was before the Anthology project, wounds were healed and George passed??? Some of you seem to think this is breaking news. Saw Paul i Seattle last night.. His tributes to both John and George were quite heartfelt and touching. Stop rehashing the negative shit.. Best music ever recorded by the Fab4, period.
Yeah, this was like the post "Cloud 9" late 80s/early 90s era. And anyhow, it's easy to misinterpreted what is likely just "sibling rivalry" type stuff and light ribbing for some dark feud. They certainly cared about each other throughout, but there's no doubt they had very different personalities, which clashed at times.
@@bernlin2000 "Sibling rivalry" can result in life-long feuds, no conciliation, and sometimes death. It's not as "innocent" as you think.
Regardless how others might feel concerning the Beatles, and certain ones who feel they were used particularly by the enemy of souls, whenever I think about the Beatles, and what was called the "British Invasion" of their music into North America, there still remains within me, a joy that speaks of the freedom that loved music can have on the lives of people everywhere. The Beatles so far as music is concerned, are the very best, and I shall remember them with fondness, wishing them the best.
he was a cool guy. and very underrated guitarist IMO.
George could never just let it go.
Georges Leed Guitar Playing Made The Music Explode - Dont Ever Talk Bad About George.. Total Fab
George knew Paul longer and better than anyone. They had been friends years before meeting John in 1957. Anything he said about Paul in interviews was undoubtedly spot on.
St.Evelyne of the Emptiness you are. Bless you. Your charity and empathy are exemplary and shows us all what The Real World is all about.
Much as I loved George, he was always getting digs in.
true
I checked the information Eleanor Rigby was written primarily by Paul Mac Cartney and Ringo also said that 90/ of the lyrics were Paul's as well as the music and the haunting voice give him the credits he deserves for this beatiful song He was as able as John to write dark songs Listen to She's Leaving Home: it was Paul's inspiration !
Me too i want part two!!
I listened to the Beatles since I can remember.they were the ones that changed music forever! Let all the ones that have passed Rest In Peace already and let go of the past.shiit more than half of us in this mothafucka weren't even born yet and we talking about old shiit...fucking be grateful that they got together and did what they did....friendship and business doesn't always mix well
Don't know how you can miss someone you never met, but I do.
George was really cool musician but Paul is GENIUS .
Ja ja ja si aja
Don’t think that’s fair to say. Although Paul is a genius, all four of the them plus Martin is what made the genius of the Beatles. They were all great in extremely different ways. You can’t tell me Paul could’ve written even 50% of Sgt. Peppers on his own.
Grayson Howard nah, Sgt Peppers best tunes come from Lennon not Paul. Paul actually ruins the mood of the album with tracks like “When I’m 64”
@@hw343434 The whole concept of the album was Paul's idea and most of the great songs written by Paul except that Indian boring song by George.
David Slaner the best song “A Day in the Life” is a Lennon song (with help from McCartney). Case closed
guaranteed, if they could all play together again they would have a blast. After all, they are the best ever by a large margin. People forget how great they were together, look what they accomplished in their own careers to boot.
I miss George !! You are with Jesus now ! I know in my heart ! You and John are entertaining the Lord everyday!! So sad that you are gone on this Earth !!
After watching the ‘Get Back’ documentary, it puts things into context. They had no manager, Paul was the ‘leader’ and George walked out but came back. In the documentary, you can see that Paul McCartney was just trying to get some structure.
MANSPREAD
I’ve always been a big fan of both of them, I feel as if Paul was the “black sheep” of the group when they broke up, I hear that he didn’t care for George’s songs but then I hear that it was John who didn’t care, I honestly think Paul McCartney is the greatest musician of all time, most of my favorite songs are written and played by him, and I love all of George’s songs too, it’s just a shame I wish there was less bickering between them after they broke up I would’ve loved to see some cooperation with music
Say what you will but it takes some balls to sit with your legs that far apart.
I see what you did there.
Bahahaha! I noticed that - Michael Douglas sits like that YUK! why do men do that?!
Lorraine Ashby I dont, although I may start now.
atolleter Bahahaha! don't it's awful!!!!!!!
I know, there must be a middle between crossing your legs and George
I think you are right - but I can understand how this could have happened. Lennon/McCartney's shadow kept most, including their bandmates in dim light. George probably came into his own and improved because of their greatness as composers. You become what you hang around.
Well, with all due respect to George's "contributions" to the Beatles, he was just bitter. That's it in a nutshell. He knows his writing was not up to par in the early days, or at least not up to John and Paul standards. So when he says he's been in Paul's life all of 30 years, well it took all of 'about' 10 years or so for him to even learn to write a top notch hit song just from being around Lennon & McCartney and learning skills he didn't have before. He really had no basis for his resentment
Paul&George did "Free As A Bird"&"Real Love" written by John which was lovely&then it was over.R.I.P. George.:)
I wouldn't worry about it, Paul and George were at great peace with each other just before George passed and I certainly wouldn't say he even seems that bitter here, just George being George! RIP George, one of the best.
"Well, now we've got that on record...." George: "Well, that's true...." LOL.
The Beatles are great - no doubt. It is sad though for all of the "Let It Be," "Give Peace a Chance," "Hey Jude," meetings with the Maharishi, even the Beatles could not "Give Peace A Chane," nor "Let It Be." They could not get along which is sad.
the honesty of the english,goes with their tuffness,adds to their talant that no nation can touch.
The Beats we love are about ART.
Coolest member of The Beatles .
George played on 'How do you sleep?' by Lennon though. I realise it was a response to McCartney's 'Too many people' in which he was critical of John and Yoko, but the lyrics to 'TMP' weren't really ugly. They weren't eviscerating in tone. Lennon's response with 'Sleep' was nasty and utterly disproportionate. In the outakes you hear Lennon sing "ya c**t". Why would Paul want George to write with him after that public humiliation? Because Lennon had two more Beatles (George and Ringo) play on 'Sleep' it gave the song a kind of 'blessing' in terms of Beatles fans or the media - which made its sentiments more potent and damaging. I like George and he's written some fantastic songs, but it's a bit disingenuous of him to outwardly wonder why Paul passed on the idea of working with him.
+aerialkate Very insightful comment. Thank you. I have not accessed this level of information and did not realize all of this. What sources did you get this information from? I think George may have seen himself as getting on with everyone and didn't get that Paul was internally experiencing shunning by George and Ringo's collaboration with John. I am sure did not intend that and likely just wanted to create like the old days. Although I am sure John was well aware and there was likely a manipulative element to it all. There always seems to be a power struggle in a band and it usually gets nasty. Women always get in the way. Paul didn't mind Linda M being involved in everything but he could not handle Yoko. Very disrespectful.
+50hellkat2 I have seen this outake video, and John really slams Paul. Yes... he does call Paul a cunt. After Epstein died, Paul pulled the band back together and they continued recording great music. I think John especially hated this, as Paul was now the groups leader. I'm sure it drove a wedge between them. Also, their songwriting styles differed more and more by the late 60s. So Paul, in their eyes, became the bossy and temperamental overseer of the band. The truth is... that John really had a bad temper, and Paul was more easy going. But the others didn't like being told where to stand by Paul. And, he was shunned for it after the breakup. By the way, I've never seen a video of Linda in the studio while they recorded. However...I have seen several videos of Yoko in the studio again and again.
50hellkat2
I disagree with the "women get in the way" comment. Yoko was undoubtedly irritating and was probably on the make. She was ambitious as an artist. However I don't doubt that she genuinely loved John. They were very similar avant garde type artists. Clearly John was the major talent. But the point is they were so similar in terms of their world view. Like her or not, John always said they were soulmates. I've written this before, but everything we know about Lennon _screamed_ that he was his own man. Nobody dominated him. He was a man out of time and an independent thinker.
Re Linda: all that "we never spent a night apart" bit we were always reading - I wonder if that wasn't because she knew Paul would stray on the road? Paul was into touring and John wasn't. And Paul did cheat on Jane Asher quite a bit and Linda learned from her experience. I don't think Linda was really ambitious musically. I think she knew what went on on the road and kept a close eye on her husband!
Before Paul left, John had announced privately he was going to leave. But George had left before that (and had been persuaded to come back.) Even Ringo had walked out at one point.
It was Epstein's death which created a power vacuum which Paul was happy to fill. To be fair to him - he had the work ethic and was probably qualified to do the job. He was dead right about Alan Klein for example. I think he was a bit too blunt in the studio for someone like George who was a sensitive soul. "He ruined me as a guitar player" (he once said of Paul.) So for me, the domineering nature of Paul was probably well intentioned, but pissed off the other band members no end.
Lennon had spoken about the treadmill of being a 'Fab'. The tedious meet and greets with the daughters of Mayors, the tour / album / tour treadmill and what he saw as Paul's domination of recording sessions. Paul also wanted to tour and John didn't. In every interview recorded in the late 60s early 70s you can hear how "over" with it Lennon was by then. Even Paul (not Yoko's biggest fan) has said numerous times "Yoko didn't split up the Beatles". As much as I love the band, I'm glad they split up when they did. All things have to end and genius has a shelf life. For me it's better that they split when they did, rather than go on and make mediocre Beatles albums. Wouldn't that have been _awful?_
+aerialkate I did read a book on John Lennon written by an author with the last name of Seaman. Thought it was good. He hung out with John as an assistant if my memory was correct. I got the impression that Yoko and John had a complicated relationship. They both kind of had a blind eye to each other's transgressions. Both had addiction issues and the consequences of that. John depended on Yoko to manage everything and he took on a parenting role with their child. I think that John Lennon brought Yoko into recording studio with the Beatles to stick it to Paul McCartney because he knew Paul didn't like it. Paul felt that Yoko was too much of an obstacle for Paul to get around and that was an insult to John. Also John put up with Paul and Linda McCartney for years.
+aerialkate John Lennon was insulted that Paul McCartney as giving the impression that John was weak enough to be manipulated by Yoko. Which is an insult to John particularly coming from Paul McCartney.
Love you George, and the Beatles.
Love the man spreading
The great contradiction of George Harrison is that, on one hand, he was this gentle soul on a lifelong quest for inner peace and enlightenment, and on the other, he seemed deeply embittered and resentful about having been a Beatle (though he did his best to mask it behind Liverpudlian charm and sarcasm). The weight of all that fame at such an early age combined with the continued squelching of his artistic voice seemed to make him the one who least enjoyed the experience of being in the Beatles. I think he was done with the whole thing by 1966.
having been a band for 7 years or so way back when, you have to be in close proximity and work together long hours. The band has to have a united vision/drive to succeed. Paul and John had so much in common and no distractions like today and had already both began to immerse themselves in music when they met before meeting George. So, it makes sense that would be more advanced song writers than George. As George caught up, I could see how it would be hard to incorporate his ideas (ego-wise and maybe not to mess with a "perfect formula"). So, they really were like brothers. And that's what happens in a band, not everyone gets what they want, people squabble, but in the end, you're very close (assuming noone is a douche). I think these guys were very tight. I just don't agree with airing private feuds or disagreements for the public to hear. That kinda shit "stays in the locker room".
Can not agree more. Well said.
Delightful guy, always was
George had something about him that i love and respect than that of the others.I feel like i connect with him,the rebel that he was and the ever ending search for spiritual awakenings and peace. His songs were something special too,he was not appreciated enough,respected enough by the others through their ego but i really believe George wrote some epic songs with great purpose to them.
I know this is a very somber tone interview but I laughed when the camera panned to George’s open legs at 1:23 why are they so wide open? 😂
Asserting his dominance I guess? lol I've always marked this in my head as the "manspreading interview"
Always my fave Beatle,,so grounded !
This wasn't the point George was making, he was stating that since they had been in a band together Paul had never suggested writing a song with George. Paul only wrote with Lennon, and after he finished writing with Lennon he wrote by himself. But up until that point he had never suggested to George about writing a song.
George's jokes will never get old!
Why was it impossible for John, George, and sometimes Paul to not say something at least a little negative about each other or the Beatles? I find it amazing the Beatles were together as long as they were, with those super egos all in the same room. Now two of them are gone and it's too late for them to finally grow the hell up.
They were and became brothers again! Let’s never forget that
George was my favorite. When he died in California in 2000 , I was surprised since I always thought that he died in England. However, his obituary says California.
In almost every case, post mid-1964, the lead singer of the song wrote the song
George has always been my favorite,he had an excellent sense of humour eg: he was hillarious on the Rutles movie "All you need is cash".Also a very loving peaceful man.R.I.P. George
Great interview.
I wish Paul and George WOULD have written some songs together. They may well have produced a masterpiece.
He was not "right there" when stacked up against the other two. And it's obvious Harrison is bitter against McCartney in this video. Just by the way he downplays everything McCartney did, And of course, the, "he ran out of good ones of his own" is pretty clear about that because Paul never ran out of good ones. Lennon himself talked about how George used to 'whine' about not getting more songs included. But George just couldn't write a lot of good songs in the early days. Simple fact!
To this day, Macca hasn’t ran out of “good ones.”
They all downplay each other's stuff cause they all write hit songs
@@vgr112261 I would say McCartney II showed he ran out of "good ones."