John Lennon or Paul McCartney?

[The Batman]

Which Beatle is/more talented?

 

[Tangled Web]

Paul McCartney IS more talented.

 

[Telekinetic]

So im a young'en so ive only heard one song by john lennon which
i like i think its called give peace a chance?

anywhoo
i like that song so my vote goes to john lennon.

 

[The Dude]

I got to go with Lennon, the thinking man's Beatle.

 

[Rorschach II]

You kidding?

The one that didn't write Silly Love Songs.

 

[Catman]

Paul. He wrote the best Beatle songs: Yesterday, Hey Jude, Let it Be, etc. He did some pretty cool songs with Wings. Live and Let Die, anyone? And, his solo career has been alright. That new song of his, "Dance Tonight" is great.

 

[Tangled Web]

Ok seriously now, if we're talking about talent it's definitley Paul. Technically he's very good; he taught John how to play.

Better personality? John.

I don't know who to vote for, as I love them both.

 

[Memphis Slim]

Paul had mega success beyong The Beatles.........

Wings was huge.....I loved that Group!!

Not to mention his duets with Michael Jackson.

Paul showed he was more versatile.

 

[ThePenguin]

Other, George was always my favorite.

All Things Must Pass is the best Beatles solo album to date.

 

[Catman]

Not to mention his duets with Michael Jackson

[YT]MLDt_bgYVgs[/YT]

 

[Tangled Web]

Ok I decided to go with John for his contributions outside of the music world.

 

[Memphis Slim]

I think anyone who is famous and gets assassinated or dies young in some tragic way, always gets propped up higher than they really were.

Marilyn monroe
James Dean
Kennnedy
Lennon
Malcolm X


These people were significant. But I think their deaths made them even more legendary. Face it...Monroe was not that great an actress.

Dean was ok. He just brooded a lot.

Cuban Missle Crisis was his big moment. But he had the Bay of Pigs. Johnson was the real civil rights hero.

Malcolm. All he did was scare white people. MLK was the one who really got us the legislation we needed.

Lennon....made some good stuff after the Beatles. But Yoko pulled him down and he kept sounding too Beatle-ish.

 

[donk70]

Trying to decide which of the two is more talented is like trying to decide what is the greatest song ever written.

I'm a huge Beatle fan and I think neither would have been a success initially without the other, or Ringo or George.

The four of them coming together to make music was a happen chance. None were exceptionally virtuoso at their instrument (all though Paul did help define the electric bass), but put all 4 together and something wonderful happened. Something that we will not likely ever see again in our lifetime. Call it magical, special, or cosmic, or whatever you want.

 

[Tangled Web]

I think anyone who is famous and gets assassinated or dies young in some tragic way, always gets propped up higher than they really were.

Marilyn monroe
James Dean
Kennnedy
Lennon
Malcolm X


These people were significant. But I think their deaths made them even more legendary. Face it...Monroe was not that great an actress.

Dean was ok. He just brooded a lot.

Cuban Missle Crisis was his big moment. But he had the Bay of Pigs. Johnson was the real civil rights hero.

Malcolm. All he did was scare white people. MLK was the one who really got us the legislation we needed.

Lennon....made some good stuff after the Beatles. But Yoko pulled him down and he kept sounding too Beatle-ish.

Monroe was very signifigant. Sex symbol, Playboy, all that.

Johnson just took it from where Kennedy left off when it came to domestic policy.

Martin Luther King was also assasinated. Though I do agree with you that X was overrated.

And I agree with you on Dean to an extent.

Lennon sounded too Beatle-ish? How much Lennon stuff have you heard?

 

[Catman]

Lennon sounded too Beatle-ish? How much Lennon stuff have you heard?

Didn't he only do like one album after the Beatles broke up? And the best song was a never recorded Beatles song.

[YT]jEOkxRLzBf0[/YT]

 

[Warhammer]

Paul, most definitely.

 

[Catman]

Paul, most definitely.

Paul is so great that he can make stupid songs great!

[YT]QShSmpI0r9k[/YT]

 

[JP]

Paul.

 

[Memphis Slim]

Monroe was very signifigant. Sex symbol, Playboy, all that.

But what real "value" to society or her craft is that? I think her early death the mystery around it, boosted her.

Johnson just took it from where Kennedy left off when it came to domestic policy.

John F Kennedy is not automatically associated with civil rights issues as Kennedy's presidency is more famed for the Cuban Missile Crisis and issues surrounding the ColdWar. Also, no obvious civil rights legislation was signed by Kennedy. However, Kennedy did have a major input into civil rights history - though posthumously. Kennedy put political realism before any form of beliefs when he voted against Eisenhower’s 1957 Civil Rights Act. The route from bill to act nearly served to tear apart the Republicans and the Democrats were almost united to a politician in their opposition to the bill/act. Kennedy had aspirations to be the Democrats next presidential candidate in the 1960 election. If he was seen to be taking the party line and demonstrating strong leadership with regards to opposing the bill, this would do his chances no harm whatsoever. This proved to be the case and Kennedy lead the Democrats to victory over Richard Nixon in 1960.

Regardless of his promises, in 1961 Kennedy did nothing to help and push forward the civil rights issue. Why? International factors meant that the president could never focus attention on domestic issues in that year. He also knew that there was no great public support for such legislation. Opinion polls indicated that in 1960 and 1961, civil rights was at the bottom of the list when people were asked "what needs to be done in America to advance society ?" Kennedy was also concentrating his domestic attention on improving health care and helping the lowest wage earners. Civil rights issues would only cloud the issue and disrupt progress in these areas. Kennedy also argued that improving health care and wages for the poor would.

Martin Luther King was also assasinated. Though I do agree with you that X was overrated.

King was killed. But he actually did some things before that happened.

And I agree with you on Dean to an extent.

Lennon sounded too Beatle-ish? How much Lennon stuff have you heard?

Enough to know it sounded like the psychodelic Beatles.....not the earlier "Hard Days Night" stuff.

 

[Tangled Web]

Paul is so great that he can make stupid songs great!

[YT]QShSmpI0r9k[/YT]

That song's not stupid. It's juxtaposition at its best. Lennon's dancing rules though.

 

[Tangled Web]

Enough to know it sounded like the psychodelic Beatles.....not the earlier "Hard Days Night" stuff.

Hardly.

 

[Catman]

That song's not stupid.

It's a silly song but its awesome!

 

[titan101]

they're both extemely talented , but if i had to choose one , i guess i'll pick john .

 

[The Chairman]

As pointed out, Paul is more talented. His knack for melodies and hooks is second to none, his range of instruments is incredible, vocally he was lightyears ahead of the other three, and he is the most successful of the group. So I vote for him as the more talented one.

But John was easily a better songwriter lyrically and his songs definitely had more of an impact. It's irritating that people think his solo stuff was too Beatle-y.

 

[The Chairman]

Enough to know it sounded like the psychodelic Beatles.....not the earlier "Hard Days Night" stuff.

Haha, no.

"Imagine", "Instant Karma", "# 9 Dream", "Mother", "Whatever Gets You Through The Night", "Nobody Told Me", "Nobody Loves You When You're Down And Out", "Borrowed Time", "Bless You" and all the othe great Lennon solo cuts are as far removed from any period of The Beatles' career as you can get.