This article was linked to today by Walrus Gumboot and fleshes this out a bit. The article politely leaves out some details, such as, when Jackson bought the catalog from under Paul's nose, it was with Yoko Ono's implicit blessing-- she refused to go in on the purchase with Paul, even though it surely would have been a good investment, and she later said that she approved of the way the sale had gone, noting that the catalog was with a "friend." Presumably a better friend than, you know, the guy who freaking wrote half the songs. I really, really, really try not to be of the Ono-hating variety of Beatles fan-- I happen to think she's talented in her own way, yeah yeah, blast me in comments, I'm too lazy to defend this now-- but this was what I would judiciously call a dick move. For what it's worth, Sean Lennon seems to have made a brief appearance in Jackson's strange child-harem, and was in the movie Moonwalker.
Clearly allegiances had been decided.Other than that Walrus Gumboot note, the Beatles sites I read are all talking about the Thriller and Pipes of Peace duets from the early '80s, which, God, must we be reminded?
I'm sorry if I sound down on Jackson. I was never a huge fan, but sure, it's sad when people die and stuff. It's just... well, this Heather Havrilesky article on Salon today sums up my feelings clearly enough.
Posts
So, how exactly is Yoko Ono talented? Is it her ability to excel at being weird?
ReplyDeleteYou know, maybe that's as good a way of saying it as any. There's just some kind of compelling weirdness to her work.
ReplyDeleteTwo things: first, THANK YOU MEGAN for not chiming in about how MJ was the greatest thing since blah blah blah. Yes, uniquely and extremely talented, produced a lot of good material, definitely a pioneer, but also sort of limited. I couldn't avoid him in the 70s and 80s, but I could never get sufficiently energized about his music to actually purchase any. Or maybe I bought Thriller and immediately gave it away? Can't remember...
ReplyDeleteAlso, I actually liked maybe one Yoko Ono song (Walking on Thin Ice(?) I think it's called, but otherwise, ehhh...She and John were probably some of the first performance artists on a grand scale, but I don't think she helped him musically. I admit I'm willfully ignorant on the subject of Yoko. But her sitting in a chair *right* in front of John at the Abbey Road rooftop concert and in recording sessions?...who else would do that?...is creepy the right word? Tom R.
Regarding the Beatles library of songs, which Michael Jackson stole out from under Paul when he was trying to buy it back. To me, it's not a question of Paul becoming richer, rather it is control of how the material can be licensed and used. I remember when MJ sold the use rights for Revolution to Nike. Paul was really upset by it, saying the song was about revolution NOT about selling sneakers. Here, here. I could go on and on about the ripping off of our culture in this manner, but i shall resist.
ReplyDeleteFrank, you're absolutely right, of course. When MJ allowed "Revolution" to be used in the Nike commercial, it was one of the first such uses, right? Now that kind of thing happens all the time. I wonder if Paul now sees it as so normal that he would allow Beatles songs to be used that way if he got control of the catalog. But, I mean, ultimately, it would be up to him, which seems right.
ReplyDeleteTom, yeah, Walking on Thin Ice is good enough, and I admit to occasionally playing the Season of Glass album, which is a whole album basically devoted to mourning John. There are decent moments on there. But basically I agree that their musical ethoses didn't mesh. You can hear that on Double Fantasy.
You are right, it is way common now to hear established songs used in advertising. Perhaps Paul holds a different attitude about it today. I hope not. I never thought i would see the day when a Led Zeppelin song helped sell cars, but it happened. While i agree it is up to the artist, and if he/she/they agree to see their music used in this manner, then that's that. But, i still hate it.
ReplyDeleteHow about the Panasonic Ad "Have to Admit It's Getting Better"? Well, with friends like Michael Jackson who deliberately "buy out" (steal) the creativity of another friend like Paul McCartney in order to make a financial profit, I would say "It's Not Getting Better at All." I think it stinks that Jackson made such an inconsiderate move against a friend who he actually wrote and recorded two songs with. My question is: If people think that Jackson was more popular and talented than the Beatles, than why does he need Beatle songs in order to survive?
ReplyDeleteGood call, Hummy. I can't stand that ad. And I also like how you frame your question... His own songs were never enough to make a profit on, I guess!
ReplyDelete