Nov 17th, 2008 // 15 Comments

So Paul McCartney wants to release a wanky 11-minute “experimental” piece the Beatles recorded for an electronic music festival. He wanted to put it on Anthology, but the rest of the band vetoed it. Now, look. It’s trendy to rip on Paul. But if you had these things you created and you wanted to mess around with them but when you made any small move people howled about corrupting history and disturbing their memories, wouldn’t that drive you kind of crazy? None of these are George Lucas moves that will put the originals out of business; they’ll always be there. If the guy wants to release shitty songs he thinks are interesting, then hey, go nuts. [Reuters]

  1. Al Shipley

    Recording over John Lennon demos from well after the band broke up was a “George Lucas move.” Releasing something the band actually recording while they were together that might show a different side of the band is a great idea and something they should’ve done ages ago, whether it turns out to be shitty or not.

  2. Anonymous

    As someone who’s sat through George Harrison’s “Wonderwall Music”, I can testify that “beatles” + “experimental electronica = dental drill

  3. Marth

    I kind of want run my hand through George’s hair in that photo. Is that wrong?

  4. mackro

    I’m excited about seeing thousands of Beatles fanatics being disappointed again.

    I mean if “What’s The New Mary Jane?” was accepted (and sorry guys, I barely remember that track after a dozen listens) and “Carnival Of Light” was vetoed, what does that say about “Carnival Of Light”?

    And I’m a big fan of “Revolution 9″ here, and a good chunk of the experimental side of the Beatles and thereafter. I’m not a melody-only Beatles guy.

  5. Hyman Decent

    Hasn’t it occurred to anyone that the reason the others vetoed it is, it didn’t fit? It is 14 minutes long, after all.

    They should offer it as a free download.

  6. mackro


  7. Captain Wrong

    Sure it’s popular to rip on McCartney, but he makes it so easy. This seems like an extension of his stance in Anthology that really he was the avant garde guy and John was just along for the ride.

    Honestly though, who cares? Releasing/not releasing isn’t going to change my day either way so let him knock himself out.

  8. Chris Molanphy

    @Hyman Decent: DING. All of the Anthologys were fully stuffed as it was.

    I’m also glad “Carnival of Light” didn’t make those albums, because (don’t laugh) I think it would’ve wrecked the flow. I particularly love Anthology 2, which I have ripped to my iPod and still listen to, in toto; it’s this wonderful summation of the most fruitful phase of their recording (roughly 1965-very beginning of 1968). I even enjoy the multiple takes of everything; the three-draft build of “Strawberry Fields Forever” is like a Beatles ur-text.

    Since I assume the 1967 “Carnival” would’ve qualified for A2, I’m really, really relieved it didn’t make it on there. Again, not that it would have fit without making it a three-disc set.

    (For the record, A3 is nearly as good as A2 but a little puffed up. And I never listen to A1 unless I want to hear something for archival reasons; it’s the most odds-and-endsy of the three Anthologys. Ironically, because it was released the same week as the ABC special, it sold the best, by far.)

  9. Anonymous

    Nobody has heard this thing…
    Calling it “shitty” is a bit much don’t we think?

    It’s a piece of history…and nobody has heard it since….the versions that are being put up on the internet are just creepy fan-boy frauds…nothing to see there…move along…

    It’s The Beatles…we’re fascinated…now please get those mono mixes out already!!!!

  10. Anonymous

    Wanting to put half-assed, self-ingulgent crap out on a Beatles album? Who does he think he is? John Lennon?
    It can’t be more useless than #9.

  11. cheesebubble

    I’m with Al Shipley and sydbarrett05 on this one. If it’s crap then so be it – but at least it’s out there for us to judge. I’ve known about this fabled recording and, although I don’t expect to be riveted, I am interested in hearing it.

  12. Silverfuture

    @Captain Wrong: @Lucas Jensen: Yeah. I think that Paul brought John into the avant-garde world with him, and John kinda ran with it, but I think Paul was the weird one first…

  13. Nicolars

    My only objection to this song is that it dredges up bad memories of the mediocre Ride album.

  14. Lucas Jensen

    @Captain Wrong: I would argue that Paul is at least as avant if not more.

  15. riffraff

    slapping it on to an anthology is one thing,
    now if old man Paul were just to release into the wild NIN style? who could complain then?

Leave A Comment