Hi,
   
  I've got mixed feelings on this.
   
  I sincerely think that McCartney was the largest talent in the Beatles though he had a heck of an editor/collaborator in John Lennon.  And the Beatles was a band with three talents that could have led bands on their own:  Paul McCartney; John Lennon; and George Harrison.  Of course, 99-percent of ya'll already knew that.
   
  I personally think that John Lennon is now overrated, due to being dead, as is Kurt Cobain too.  John has some nice solo songs, but I think that his solo albums show that he is more of a medium level talent.  And I actually think that I like George Harrison's solo work more consistently than John's solo work.
   
  Paul McCartney still has a brilliant moment or two on every album.  He just doesn't have a lot of brilliant moments anymore.  "Flowers In The Dirt" was his last consistent album, and that was what 18 or 19 years ago?  I think that some of it is that he's rooted in his era, as many older people are.  He doesn't like much innovation beyond what he was doing in maybe 1980 or 1982.  Another problem that I suspect he has is drug abuse.  If you read enough articles about Paul, somebody close to him, and not just his ex-wife either, will usually talk like Paul is basically a lush.  The drugs that 'opened the gates of creativity' in the late 1960s appear to be hindering him now.
   
  I think that it would be interesting to hear a Paul album, if he ever got totally clean.
   
  Another idea that a lot of people put forth, that I will agree with, is that Paul is basically a music/melody man, and I think that's true.  I actually like him  better when he collaborates with someone who is more of a lyricist like: John Lennon, and Elvis Costello.  They cover up his weak suit.  And in the case of John, Paul covered up John's weak suit.
   
  Peace,
   
  W.D. 

       
---------------------------------
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
 Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos.