John vs. Paul

I remember once having a discussion with a friend about one of my favorite subjects, The Beatles. Been a Beatle freak all my life, I have, and this year being their 50th anniversary, wanted to get some thoughts down.

My friend was saying that he thought Paul was a little more talented than John. Now everyone is entitled to their own opinion, this is no communist state here, but I have to clear this up. This is hogwash. I'm not just saying this because I'm a John guy, but it's impossible to compare the two. Sure they churned out most of the Beatles' catalog together, but their writing and musical styles were miles apart. This is what made them a good partnership; they complemented each other.

 You can say that Paul had a knack for a melody. No argument here. But so did John. Listen to "This Boy", "If I Fell", "Across the Universe", "Yes It Is" "And Your Bird Can Sing", "No Reply", "Because". All John songs, and all stunningly beautiful melodies.

John's songs were more gutteral, more viceral, and at times, more desperate. Paul's love songs could get a woman's panties around her ankles, but John's love songs broke your heart, and made you think.

You can say Paul is a better singer. Listen to "Baby It's You", "Eight Days a Week", "Nowhere Man", the disturbingly haunting vocal on "A Day In The Life", not to mention the lead and backing vocals on "Rain". All sung by John with flawless execution.

I'm not down on Paul. I love his songs just as much as John's, but to say one is more talented than the other is missing the point. They were a major talent together, and accented each other's strengths, and built on each other's weaknesses. There had never been a partnership like this one, and there never will be again. Happy Anniversary, guys. Rock on.