IT'S A GAS, GAS, GAS!!
Return to Gasx3 Board Homepage
Subject: RE: RE: Lennon & McCartney w/ no Beatles?
Date: Tuesday, May 15, 2018
Time: 8:37:20 AM
Remote Address: 18.104.22.168
Message ID: 315735
Parent ID: 315734
Thread ID: 315731
There are a few ways of looking at this question. If they had ONLY their actual solo records and no more, would we know them. I say, yes, but they would be nothing like their fame is now. The reality is that everyone now, people young and old, people into rock/pop and those not into it, know who John Lennon was. And yet they probably can't name 7 of his solo songs. So I think John would be known, but known only a little. That is, based on what he actually produced. Paul, more known as he lived, and produced many more charted songs.
But as Keno points out, if there were no Beatles, the talents of Lennon and McCartney would have come out one way or another, and their solo careers would NOT have been the same. You would have seen the best that Lennon ever had to offer musically and lyrically in his solo records. No idea what that would have been like, but it would have been good. Lennon's solo career began towards the end of the Beatles and it began with some experimental albums he did with Yoko Ono, which would NEVER have formed the basis of a solo debut under normal circumstances.
I do think George Harrison would have made some fine albums.
Our beloved Stones... very hard to say.
The other possibility is that if there were no Beatles or Stones, all these great artists end up in other bands, to varying degrees of success and fame.
Note: Do not hit the "Post Message" button more than once, even if it is taking a long time to post your message. Doing so may cause a double post to appear and could slow down your posting time even more.
Download your free, customizable Burton Networks Message Board now!
© 1998 - 2019 by Keno Internet Services, except where otherwise noted. All rights reserved.
Return to Gasx3 Board