In George's disadvantage?

[Legs]

An article I read awhile ago, and I am sorry that I don't have the link anymore, made me think about something.

When you look at the way some Beatles albums after 1966 were programmed, there is a happy lightweight Paul song after every indepth George song. "When I'm 64" after "Within You Without You". Maxwell after "Something". The article seems to imply that this was because EMI wanted to keep an as broad as posible buying public. They figured that if there were to many deep songs the would lose some of the buying public. So after every song where one would have to think very hard about the meaning, they would want a lightweight song for people to relax. The way this would work in George's disadvantage is because people wouldn't think about the meaning of "Within You, Without You" anymore cause it's taken over by "When I'm 64", saying don't think about the songs to much, it's still us 4 sweet innocent guys without much to say.
So that EMI can relax and be sure that people would still buy the albums.

I don't know if this is true, I always thought the Beatles and George Martin decided on the running order of the later albums. Before 1966 sure, it was in the hands of the record companies but after?

[beatlebangs1964]

Good points and there probably is something to it. I read years ago that the record companies, Powers That Be and other involved persons tried to create a more "balanced" Beatles collection; that is, intersperse Harrison songs with those of his bandmates.

The Beatles had gone into their experimental phase of their music in late 1965 with Rubber Soul, and by 1966 were well into musical adaptation and experimentation. In listening and looking at the juxtaposition of songs on the old Beatles Yesterday and Today LP, Revolver, the album and the CD as well as their subsequent works, I think there is something to this theory.

George's actual work - music and lyrics are anything but filler. His work was serious, thought provoking and very intense. "Think For Yourself," "If I Needed Someone," "I Want to Tell You," and the subsequent Harrisongs are proof positive that George was and remained a musical force to be reckoned with.

[FPSHOT]

There are many cynical remarks cropping up in my mind about this...

Like.... "OMG...before people are to listen to that one...we better have a good one first..."

It's interesting though Legs, it may very well be the other way around as well...maybe I can manage to think like that :wink1:

Were they always Paul?

Let's have a look....and Legs...nice conversation material this is...

Rubber Soul - 2 John songs (ok, 1965)

Revolver - I Want To Tell You which can be called "confronting" followed by Got To
Get You In To My Life....not a leightweight?

White - Happiness Is A Warm Gun...maybe While My Guitar is not indepth?

Yellow Submarine - It's All Too Much which is quite heavy? followed by All You Need Is Love (John)

Abbey Road - Because (John) but then, Here Come The Sun is not indepth ..

Let It Be - I Me Mine / Dig It (John) ...food for thought...

[Pepperland Kamer]

I always thought the Beatles and Martin decided the running order of the songs too (For the U.K at least). I don't think EMI interfered like Capitol did and if EMI really did want to have that broad range on the albums, then they got lucky cuz The Beatles gave em just that.

[sourmilkpinky]

It must have been hard to decide what to put on after George's masterpieces....
anything would be fluff

[twovirgins]

yes !!George is just as good as Paul or John
3 of the best best song writters in the world in the same band what are the odds???
"Within you without you " is one of the best songs on Sgt Pepper

[matt5]

An article I read awhile ago, and I am sorry that I don't have the link anymore, made me think about something.

When you look at the way some Beatles albums after 1966 were programmed, there is a happy lightweight Paul song after every indepth George song. "When I'm 64" after "Within You Without You". Maxwell after "Something". The article seems to imply that this was because EMI wanted to keep an as broad as posible buying public. They figured that if there were to many deep songs the would lose some of the buying public. So after every song where one would have to think very hard about the meaning, they would want a lightweight song for people to relax. The way this would work in George's disadvantage is because people wouldn't think about the meaning of "Within You, Without You" anymore cause it's taken over by "When I'm 64", saying don't think about the songs to much, it's still us 4 sweet innocent guys without much to say.
So that EMI can relax and be sure that people would still buy the albums.

I don't know if this is true, I always thought the Beatles and George Martin decided on the running order of the later albums. Before 1966 sure, it was in the hands of the record companies but after?

Sorry to nitpick but I actually feel that When I'm 64 is a deep song. Much deeper then what people give it credit for. It deals quite effectively with themes of loneliness and old age. It also deals with the human condition of wanting "the perfect life", of domestic bliss and happiness which unfortuneately is just a dream for so many of us. In this sense the song has a real pathos. It is also tinged with darkness and a certain existentialism as seen in the passage "you'll be older too". What a line! The rest of the song operates as sort of an open love letter but that line is actually almost like a threat as in "you are mortal also" made especially more mournfull by Lennon's "ahhh ahhh ahhh". Of course the rest of song is more upbeat in style as if trying to mask the serious implications of the song which works well within the context of the lyrics. The lyrics themselves are indeed "cute" in many instances with "granchildren on your knee" and "i could be handy mending a fuse" but there is a definate sense of desperation in the way these lines or delivered, perhaps almost to the point of being pathetic but ultimately the lyrics present a story of a man who is scared of being alone and is doing his best to cover up how he actually feels. Touching actually.

So I don't think When I'm 64 is "lightweight" when put next to Within You Without You. Within You Without You is about the inward projection of love and When I'm 64 is about the outwards projection of love and in this way it actually makes sense for them both to be one after the other.

[beatlebangs1964]

So I don't think When I'm 64 is "lightweight" when put next to Within You Without You. Within You Without You is about the inward projection of love and When I'm 64 is about the outwards projection of love and in this way it actually makes sense for them both to be one after the other.

Well put Matt, and I agree with all you have said above. To recognize the depth of one song is not to overlook or minimize the depth of others.

[sourmilkpinky]

nice take....as usual ;)

[DizzymissLizzy909]

Very interesting, Matt! I've never looked at 'When I'm Sixty-Four" that way, but it got me thinking. :smile1:

[beatlebangs1964]

I always thought "When I'm 64" was a gentle, upbeat pean to reaching senior status. The "will you still need me, will you still feed me when I'm 64" speaks to hope of not being left in lonely limbo upon reaching this point in life. It does have a sort of "yin and yang" balance of light deftness mixed with the darker, as Matt5 pointed out themes being sung about with the warning of "you'll be older too."

Yeah, but another way of seeing it is NOT so much as a warning, "you'll be older too," but as a reminder to us all that we are, in effect our brothers' keeper and to respect senior citizens and make whatever concessions necessary. It is a song about life's circle - the grandchildren "Vera, Chuck & Dave," the idyllic portrait of a peaceful home and happiness during one's golden years is indeed a heartwarmer. Paul's classic is indeed an intense song, no less so simply because of its order on the LP/CD. "Within You, Without You" also carries some "yin and yang" contrasting themes. It is an extraordinarily high caliber work that is no less so because of its place on the collection. Both have a lot to offer, but from different perspectives and covering different issues and reaching and meeting different needs.

[lennonluvr9]

I agree with you too, matt. Even though I never thought of those songs like that before, it totally makes sense!

[Jongo McHarrison]

yes !!George is just as good as Paul or John
3 of the best best song writters in the world in the same band what are the odds???
"Within you without you " is one of the best songs on Sgt Pepper

You know I can't remember where, but I recently read a suggestion that Within You Without You was placed at the start of Sgt Pepper's B Side so that if you wanted to easily skip it, you could just place the needle on the next song and proceed from there. Can't remember where I read this, maybe the Mojo Ten Years That Shook the World book.

The idea itself that a lightweight Paul song followed a George tune just sounds like yet another writer has found a roundabout way to disparage Paul. Besides, I can't imagine the Beatles not having control over the order of their songs. They were afterall, the group that was so annoyed at how their records were being chopped up in America (combining single releases with the UK album releases and using less songs per album so they could build up a larger Beatle catalogue) that they had the butcher sleeve done as commentary. I doubt they'd have tolerated anyone in a suit coming in and saying "Right boys, we need the album to sound like this..."

[beatlelover45223]

Sorry to nitpick but I actually feel that When I'm 64 is a deep song. Much deeper then what people give it credit for. It deals quite effectively with themes of loneliness and old age. It also deals with the human condition of wanting "the perfect life", of domestic bliss and happiness which unfortuneately is just a dream for so many of us. In this sense the song has a real pathos. It is also tinged with darkness and a certain existentialism as seen in the passage "you'll be older too". What a line! The rest of the song operates as sort of an open love letter but that line is actually almost like a threat as in "you are mortal also" made especially more mournfull by Lennon's "ahhh ahhh ahhh". Of course the rest of song is more upbeat in style as if trying to mask the serious implications of the song which works well within the context of the lyrics. The lyrics themselves are indeed "cute" in many instances with "granchildren on your knee" and "i could be handy mending a fuse" but there is a definate sense of desperation in the way these lines or delivered, perhaps almost to the point of being pathetic but ultimately the lyrics present a story of a man who is scared of being alone and is doing his best to cover up how he actually feels. Touching actually.

So I don't think When I'm 64 is "lightweight" when put next to Within You Without You. Within You Without You is about the inward projection of love and When I'm 64 is about the outwards projection of love and in this way it actually makes sense for them both to be one after the other.

well said Matt! I have been where you have with When I'm 64

[darkhorse]

Okay, I liked Matt's analysis but we must recognize one thing: musically, when you put "When I'm Sixty-Four" after "Within You Without You" you percieve a relief of the musical tension that's almost incredible.

After the laughter and the ethereal chord games of "Within You Without You", "Sixty-Four" has a lot more simpler arrangements, with simple bass notes and a "happy-go-lucky" arrangement. Even if the subject is not 'light', the arrangement certainly is, so I agree that the transition is not easy.

I do believe, though, that it was not meant to put George's tune in a position of disadvantage. It was just the way it was because The Beatles wanted to. I think it sounds especially fine, and even more accentuated when "Your Mother Should Know" follows "Blue Jay Way" in Magical Mystery Tour.

I wouldn't look further than that.

[Rellevart]

I do believe, though, that it was not meant to put George's tune in a position of disadvantage.

Right. Just "contrast". Something that sounds more conventional and less experimental or unusual...not anything nefarious, but contrast. They contrasted Paul with himself ("Why Don't We Do it in the Road" followed by "I Will", anyone?) too. They just liked to change up the style and the mood to make things eclectic. Something to appeal to everybody.

[beatlebangs1964]

And also, I think to reflect the wide range of their musical expansion.

I don't think there was any plot or conspiracy involved in the song juxtaposition or to put any Beatle at a disadvantage.

[Legs]

Some good comments so far. No I don't think there was a conspiricay, like I said at that time the Beatles were very much in control of things. But it's sure interesting to think about.

[Zimmerman The Gnome]

Paul's songs have a tendancy to sound like fluff because of the musical arrangements but like Matt pointed out, look at the lyrics and they can be quite deep.

[FPSHOT]

they can... like deep blue...