smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | Bill <billm45s@verizon.net> |
| Subject | Re: Paul McCartney |
| Date | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 21:08:00 +0000 |
[Part 1 text/plain ISO-8859-1 (1.4 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
>
> From: Michael Bennett <mrhonorama@ameritech.net>
> Date: 2005/01/20 Thu PM 04:20:58 GMT
> To: audities@smoe.org
> Subject: Re: Paul McCartney
>
> This piece might be more meaningful if Mr. Lefsetz
> knew how to write. This could be edited down to about
> a paragraph or two, and make the same points much more
> effectively.
>
Michael, as one attorney to another (who are cursed to read a certain type of writing), you are of course correct - it could have been edited to a couple of simple bullet points. But, that wasn't the whole point. Such editing might make the rational arguement easier to digest. However, the rational arguement is secondary to the emotive and I think he makes that arguement quite well, as he trys to portray the emotional reaction within a context of the time. Sure it is scattered and never quite direct, but as someone who was around at the time, it had the ring of truth and I was glad Bob posted it.
"Band on the Run" was the post Beatles statement. And at the time you said damn McCartney really did it, which was a suprise because Lefsetz was right, his prior solo albums were "slight". The sad part is that "Band on the Run" proved he could do it, but overall despite all the subsequent great tracks and even enjoyable albums, he went backwards towards "slight". Lefsetz's writing, to me, captured that sense better than the straight rational arguement.
Bill
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.