The Instigator
moletrap
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Amyj17
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

John Lennon became jealous of Paul Mccartney's genius as he began to take leadership of the group.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/28/2014 Category: Music
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,207 times Debate No: 53558
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

moletrap

Pro

I submit that at the beginning John was the leader as he brought Paul into his band the Quarryman and was clearly the leader and continued in that position as the Beatles became popular. John and Paul were both equally creative at the beginning. John was more a 50's style rocker (what is popularly refered to as 3 chord turn overs) and most of his songs continued to have this influnce even into the later years of the beatles. Paul was more innovative and pushed the Beatles into more progressive direction, using more complicated chord progressions and bringing in influnces of classical variations. Evenually John resented the bottomless pit of creativetivity which was Paul and the popularity of songs that Paul brought to the table. John resented Paul contantly telling him exactly how to play the parts in the songs that Paul had creative. By the way George also resented Paul telling him exactly how to play parts and said so in a famous televised recording session. Eventually John retreated into reclusion as far as over all day to day operations and decided to leave to reclaim some control over his musical existance. I love the Beatles and John was ingenius but not a genius. He was no Mccartney.
Amyj17

Con

For this debate, I would like to acknowledge John Lennon and Paul McCartney's different writing styles. Because of this, it is very difficult to wage which artist is better at their art. I would also like to point out that 180 songs (most of which played by the Beatles) were Paul McCartney and John Lennon collaborations. Yes, there is evidence that John and Paul did not get along. The same issue happened with The band queen, who also made outstanding music. If John was jealous of Paul, it would also be very possible that paul was intimidated by John as well. This environment could very well be the reason they were competitive, producing amazing records that were high on the charts
Debate Round No. 1
moletrap

Pro

Collaboration at the beginning but clearly created their own songs and at that point they participated on each others songs, contributed ideas. Know one knows exactly because they were distributed as Lennon/McCartney but the styles are unmistakable and easy to discern who's song was who's. With out a doubt Paul had tremendous respect for John and his creative talent but was never intimidated. I submit that Paul was excited by John's music and gladly added his ideas. The problem was that John grew to resent his input and impulsive nature to re-direct ideas toward his point of view. It wasn't Paul who decided to leave the group. Obviously there is a measure of tension in a group of people especially when creative juices are flowing, and both Ringo and George had threatened to leave near the end but I would not say that Paul and John did not get along. It just became a matter of personal musical direction. George at one time stated to Paul "I'll play whatever you want me to play, or I won't play at all if you don't want to me to play. Whatever it is that will please you, I'll do it." As the Beatles were winding down Paul had as he continued to have and still has today a never ending vault of energy and ideas and was just quite simply a little over bearing in his push to produce their art.











Amyj17

Con

I completely agree in that Paul is still a great artist who has unbelievable talents, but, again, a lot of this has to be with personal preference and the difficulty of music. John Lennon once said that Paul "provided a lightness, an optimism, while I would always go for the sadness, the dischords, the bluesy notes" with music, the minor chords are usually the most difficult, and require a high amount of musicality in order to compose with a full band. Not only that, but John would layer his lyrics with different meanings and symbolism. However, I would like to counter your statement of how Paul was not intimidated, or at least in awe, of Lennon. There was a dispute of how the credits of the Beatles songs would be. For instance, "yesterday" had the credit John Lennon/ Paul McCartney. While "love me do" was credited McCartney/Lennon. In fact, after Lennon died, McCartney had wanted the credit of "yesterday" to be switched back to his name first. An in-depth analysis of the legal issues surrounding the dispute is the subject of a 66-page Pepperdine Law Review article from 2006. If Paul was not intimidated by John, why would he care about such a silly thing as name order? They were both extremely popular, and still are.
Debate Round No. 2
moletrap

Pro

Because at that stage of the game everyone craved their own identity which just compounded their resentment of Paul's influence into their personal musical space. Paul would dictate how he wanted Ringo to play drum parts, how George should play lead (every note ) and John how to play and sing vocals. All began to rebel but John had the most difficult time because he was once 50/50 but that was not the reality anymore and he had no choice but to go out on his own.
Amyj17

Con

Amyj17 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.