Yoko Ono Won't Fight Over Lennon-McCartney Credits [Archive]

beatlz

Apr 24, 2003, 03:32 PM

Yoko Ono Won't Fight Over Lennon-McCartney Credits
Thu Apr 24,11:00 AM ET

Billy JohnsonJr

John Lennon's widow, Yoko Ono, says she will not fight with Paul McCartney over the changes he made to the songwriting credits on some of the Beatles songs he's recently re-released. Since 1962, every song John Lennon (news) and Paul McCartney (news) wrote for the Beatles was credited as "Lennon-McCartney," even if the two songwriters worked independently. McCartney surprised fans and raised Ono's ire when he reversed the order of the names to read "McCartney-Lennon" on some of the Beatles songs he re-recorded on his 2002 live album, Back In The U.S., and this year's European release, Back In The World.

McCartney insists it wasn't his intention to discredit Lennon, but rather it was his way to "put the record straight." In an interview with Reuters last year, McCartney defended his position, saying, "I personally don't see any harm in John's songs, such as 'Strawberry Fields' and 'Help,' being labeled 'Lennon & McCartney,' and my songs, such as 'Let It Be' and 'Eleanor Rigby,' being labeled 'McCartney & Lennon.'"

In a recent interview with Rolling Stone magazine, Beatles drummer Ringo Starr stated that he believed McCartney should have consulted with Ono before making the switch. "He's wanted to do it for years," Starr said. "I'm not going to tell you his reasons--he'll tell you them. But I think the way he did it was underhanded. I thought he should have done it officially with Yoko. But he didn't. It was the wrong way to go about it."

Ono and McCartney have always had a strained relationship at best. After McCartney's credit switch, many people assumed Ono would take legal action. However, in an interview with Britain's Daily Record, Ono said, "I find it very strange and petty that he would want to do something like this after so many years. If it's something he feels he has to do, then I'll just let him get on with it."

Apr 24, 2003, 03:42 PM

What's interesting is not the credit fight- which seems never-ending, but Ringo's comments on it. I had never heard Ringo commenting on this before. OBVIOUSLY he knows something we don't. It's telling his comment about he won't tell us why-

Anyway, YOU KNOW, this doesn't matter much. I mean, how many LIVE albums can Paul put out before now and when he dies. He CAN'T switch it on the BEATLE albums EVER. The way APPLE is set up, changes like that have to approved unanimously by all four Beatle estates, so that means just ONE VETO will prevent it. Granted, Sean and Julian could possibly agree after Yoko passes away, but I wouldn't bet Junior's Farm on it.

Guitar Devil

Apr 24, 2003, 06:57 PM

Yeah, I was also surprised by Ringo's comment, but I'm glad this is not turning into an all out fight. Let the man do it once and be done with it.

onosideboards

Apr 25, 2003, 09:41 AM

Originally Posted By walrusegg:
What's interesting is not the credit fight- which seems never-ending, but Ringo's comments on it. I had never heard Ringo commenting on this before. OBVIOUSLY he knows something we don't. It's telling his comment about he won't tell us why-

Anyway, YOU KNOW, this doesn't matter much. I mean, how many LIVE albums can Paul put out before now and when he dies. He CAN'T switch it on the BEATLE albums EVER. The way APPLE is set up, changes like that have to approved unanimously by all four Beatle estates, so that means just ONE VETO will prevent it. Granted, Sean and Julian could possibly agree after Yoko passes away, but I wouldn't bet Junior's Farm on it.that's a good point i hadn't thought of before...that he could never change it on any beatles albums which are really the only ones that matter.

i agree with paul in theory, but mostly i agree with ringo. it was very underhanded.

but didn't yoko already make a huff about it...or was that just smoke from the macca camp? she seems so nice otherwise that i wonder if half the stuff paul or anyone else says is even true.

Rellevart

Apr 25, 2003, 09:44 AM

Gee, let's paste together quotes from several articles, many of them several months old, and see if we can drag THIS tired old dead horse up yet again......sigh......

beatlebangs1964

Apr 25, 2003, 10:09 AM

Yeah, it IS rather tired at that.

Well said, Rell. Let's hope they've worked it out amicably.

ChrisG134

Apr 25, 2003, 01:46 PM

It's just a discussion,let them discuss it.What's the big deal?

Penny Lane

Apr 25, 2003, 05:26 PM

wait - yoko won't FIGHT about it??? she was the one that brought it up in the first place and started the whole damn argument!!! give me a break!!!

SF4-EVER

Apr 25, 2003, 08:32 PM

Without the credit switch, there would be nothing to argue about.

Penny Lane

Apr 26, 2003, 08:02 AM

yea, but paul did it before when john was alive and neither yoko nor john said anything about it. this time, yoko was the one that brought it up and made a big deal over something that really ISN'T a big deal!!!

beatlebangs1964

Apr 26, 2003, 10:21 AM

Well put, Sandra. If there is no credit switch, then there really is nothing to fight about.

"we can work it out..."

onosideboards

Apr 26, 2003, 08:54 PM

Originally Posted By Penny Lane:
yea, but paul did it before when john was alive and neither yoko nor john said anything about it. this time, yoko was the one that brought it up and made a big deal over something that really ISN'T a big deal!!!when did paul do it before john died?

and as for beating a dead horse...i hope you meant the media is responsible, Rellevart.

Penny Lane

Apr 26, 2003, 09:24 PM

on the album "wings across america" from 1976. he credited the beatles songs he did "mcartney lennon". didn't hear yoko making a big deal then.

HMVNipper

Apr 27, 2003, 06:00 AM

Penny, I really must say something, because your argumentative tone has been bothering me in your last few posts. I believe you are using this thread to Yoko-bash. I do not believe this is the point of the discussion or the reason Beatlz posted the article -- and while it is certainly okay for you not to like Yoko, there is no need to be so nasty about it.

As for this topic and "beating a dead horse," I totally agree -- the media keeps bringing it up and bringing it up and bringing it up -- and Paul and Yoko don't even want to talk about it anymore! They've let it drop, I wonder why the media won't? (And BTW, the reason Yoko didn't say anything about the credit switch when John was alive was because NOW THAT HE'S DEAD she is the one overseeing his estate...I think she had a right to say something now. And when Paul switched those credits in the 70s, he ASKED before he went ahead and did it...)

[ Apr 27, 2003, 06:04 AM: Message Edited By: HMVNipper ]

IWantToTellYou

Apr 27, 2003, 07:46 AM

The reason why the media keeps bringing it up is because they know it sells. What a better way to see the papers when "Paul & Yoko Fight!" is on the cover.

That is all the media does...The media's job is to "beat a dead horse" heck, I see it on CNN everyday!

What was done is done, people should just leave it that way.

HMVNipper

Apr 27, 2003, 07:55 AM

Originally Posted By IWantToTellYou:
The reason why the media keeps bringing it up is because they know it sells. What a better way to see the papers when "Paul & Yoko Fight!" is on the cover.

That is all the media does...The media's job is to "beat a dead horse" heck, I see it on CNN everyday!

What was done is done, people should just leave it that way.Hear, hear! graemlins/thumbsup1.gif

angelgodiva

Apr 28, 2003, 12:58 AM

It's fodder for a slow news day.

Rellevart

Apr 28, 2003, 04:46 AM

Originally Posted By onosideboards:
and as for beating a dead horse...i hope you meant the media is responsible, Rellevart.Yes, that's what I meant. We've had about 7 or 8 topics on this in the last 6 months because reporters keep pasting together the same quotes over and over again, trying to make it sound like a new, breaking story.

Apr 28, 2003, 02:59 PM

I don't know, if Ringo is getting into it, then it's not that much of dead horse. I really like discussing this, because there is a bit of a mystery over it that has not been resolved. I mean, what does Paul mean by "setting the record straight." That would imply the record was not straight before. Does he really believe that with Lennon's name first, most people don't know McCartney wrote it, even though he has always been the singer on the songs? See, I don't think it's just about "setting record straight." I think it goes deeper than that. Is he angry and disappointed at himself for his own solo output in the last ten years and this is his way of handling his anger at himself?

Also, I don't understand Paul. I mean, in the 70's, when the Beatles were a done deal and they made up the agreement about the Beatles, he had to have known then by signing it, he would never be able to switch it to McCartney/Lennon on any future Beatle albums. How easy would it have been to include that in the paperwork? He seemed perfectly fine with Lennon/McCartney at least on Beatle albums, I know he switched the credits on a Wings album in the seventies, so it had to be on his mind and he had to have known by the agreement, he would lose that option forever. He said there was an oral agreement they could switch it when they wanted, so why didn't he put it in the contract?

Apr 28, 2003, 03:08 PM

Also, about the Yoko bashing. I mean, for Ringo to sympathize with Yoko and call McCartney underhanded in PRINT and ON THE RECORD is important. Yoko can't be all bad if Ringo is defending her. Also, RINGO NEVER NEVER NEVER says bad things about the other Beatles in print. He has always been the Beatle who held back from that. If Paul thought he would ride rough-shot over Ringo since George died, I think Ringo just gave him a wake-up call.

Rellevart

Apr 28, 2003, 03:08 PM

Originally Posted By walrusegg:
Does he really believe that with Lennon's name first, most people don't know McCartney wrote it, even though he has always been the singer on the songs? As much as I hate to get into this yet again, yes, he really does believe that people don't know he's responsible for the songs. And for good reason. People DON'T know. It seems inconcievable for people like us to realize that most people haven't the faintest clue which Beatle is responsible for which songs, but it's true. I can't tell you how many non-Beatles fans I've run into over the years who express surprise when I say Paul's my favorite - "....but didn't John write all those great songs???" Eeesh. Surprising, but no, not everybody does know.

Lynner

Apr 28, 2003, 03:27 PM

Originally Posted By walrusegg:
If Paul thought he would ride rough-shot over Ringo since George died, I think Ringo just gave him a wake-up call.I don't believe Paul would ever try and do that and I think it's insane that anyone would think that he would. Paul and Ringo are friends. I'm sure they have differences of opinion from time to time just as friends do.

While we all want our idols to be perfect, they're human and so will never be. I just can't understand why we fault them for not being the world's absolute best things in the world.

Apr 28, 2003, 04:09 PM

I don't believe Paul would ever try and do that and I think it's insane that anyone would think that he would.

How is it insane to think that? Can you elaborate and show examples? I mean, Paul's dominating manner is what helped break the Beatles up in the first place. Him telling them what to do was a big factor for the other three to quit. He would redo Ringo's drum solos after Ringo went home. He would tell George how to play the guitar. I mean, he usually had a point and many times it was for the benefit of the group, but it was still riding rough-shot over them. Even he admits he was too bossy. And wasn't there a phone conversation taped between Ringo and Paul that was leaked in the 80's where Paul agreed to do Ringo a favor and then said something like 'You just better agree with me on all Apple decisions from now on for this.'

i don't think it's insane to think this at all.

Lynner

Apr 28, 2003, 06:40 PM

Originally Posted By walrusegg:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

I don't believe Paul would ever try and do that and I think it's insane that anyone would think that he would.

How is it insane to think that? Can you elaborate and show examples? I mean, Paul's dominating manner is what helped break the Beatles up in the first place. Him telling them what to do was a big factor for the other three to quit. He would redo Ringo's drum solos after Ringo went home. He would tell George how to play the guitar. I mean, he usually had a point and many times it was for the benefit of the group, but it was still riding rough-shot over them. Even he admits he was too bossy. And wasn't there a phone conversation taped between Ringo and Paul that was leaked in the 80's where Paul agreed to do Ringo a favor and then said something like 'You just better agree with me on all Apple decisions from now on for this.'

i don't think it's insane to think this at all.<hr /></blockquote>You're entitled to your opinions just as I'm entitled to mine. How can I give proof of something that I don't believe exists?
I'm not saying that Paul is never bossy, but Paul alone did not break up the Beatles.

Apr 28, 2003, 06:47 PM

Of course you're entitled to your opinion, I'm not saying that at all- it's just that when you say I'm insane to think it- those are such strong words I would think you would have instances of the contrary. I mean, can you name any instances where the Beatles wanted to do something that Paul didn't and he went along with it happily?

Lynner

Apr 28, 2003, 07:06 PM

Top of my head, no, I have no examples of Paul not wanting to do something, but going along with it happily. Not really sure how something like that would be documented. I'm sure there were many times he didn't get his way. Of course, when I don't get my way, I hardly go along with the other plan happily, but I guess that's another story.
Sorry if the word insane bothered you. Certainly didn't mean to be rude. I just feel that Paul would not totally run rough-shod over Ringo, esp. not that John and George are no longer with us. If you have concrete proof otherwise, then I guess I'm wrong, but I've never heard of him acting that way.

My apologies to everyone for going off topic, just re-read my last few posts and realized I didn't go into the Lennon/McCartney discussion. I have on other threads on this topic - really! images/icons/smile.gif

beatle_babe

Apr 28, 2003, 07:19 PM

i have never been a fan of paul mccartney. i think he is self- centered, and im unsure about his wife but i think this whole dispute about him and the lennon/mccartney is stupid. i mean does anybody really care who wrote the song? Isnt it about the song. I also think some people are blowing this whole thing way out of proportion. If this is the worst thing happening in the music business then im gunna say that were pretty well off.

Apr 28, 2003, 07:28 PM

Lynner,
you're right, Paul did not alone break up the Beatles- i should not have said that- if anything- he saved it. If Paul had not kept prodding John, there's no doubt that we would not have LUCY and DAY IN THE LIFE the way we have it today.

And sometimes his bossiness is dead on right. I mean, George's guitar at the beginning of Hey Jude would have lessened it- he was right about that. Did anyone read GET BACK- the LET IT BE sessions- Paul was practically begging John to bring in something new.

But Back on topic; it can't be easy for Paul after working so hard- i mean, even on a poll in here- he's a distant 3rd! That would crush him to see that.

[ Apr 28, 2003, 07:29 PM: Message Edited By: walrusegg ]

onosideboards

Apr 28, 2003, 09:25 PM

Originally Posted By HMVNipper:
Penny, I really must say something, because your argumentative tone has been bothering me in your last few posts. I believe you are using this thread to Yoko-bash. I do not believe this is the point of the discussion or the reason Beatlz posted the article -- and while it is certainly okay for you not to like Yoko, there is no need to be so nasty about it.

As for this topic and "beating a dead horse," I totally agree -- the media keeps bringing it up and bringing it up and bringing it up -- and Paul and Yoko don't even want to talk about it anymore! They've let it drop, I wonder why the media won't? (And BTW, the reason Yoko didn't say anything about the credit switch when John was alive was because NOW THAT HE'S DEAD she is the one overseeing his estate...I think she had a right to say something now. And when Paul switched those credits in the 70s, he ASKED before he went ahead and did it...)thanks for clarifying that. i hadn't heard about the '76 reversal until recently.

in fact, this was reaffirmed when this month's SPIN heralds macca's reversal as the #6 all-time sleaziest moment in rock. a very interesting paragraph is included, which mentions the '76 case.

onosideboards

Apr 28, 2003, 09:30 PM

Originally Posted By beatle_babe:
i have never been a fan.i couldn't agree more, yet i STILL keep listening to him singing and playing music nearly every day. images/icons/smile.gif i'm starting to get over not liking him because when it comes down to it, his music really is good--some of the best ever. i listen to him more often than john whom i normally call my "favorite" beatle. i'm pretty self-centered too so i feel i should be more understanding anyway images/icons/smile.gif

Lynner

Apr 29, 2003, 06:00 AM

Originally Posted By onosideboards:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />Originally Posted By beatle_babe:
i have never been a fan.i couldn't agree more, yet i STILL keep listening to him singing and playing music nearly every day. images/icons/smile.gif i'm starting to get over not liking him because when it comes down to it, his music really is good--some of the best ever. i listen to him more often than john whom i normally call my "favorite" beatle. i'm pretty self-centered too so i feel i should be more understanding anyway images/icons/smile.gif <hr /></blockquote>So I guess you're more of a fan of his music than of him? I think that's reasonable. I mean, there are artists whose songs I like, but I'm not a "fan" of the group, singer whatever.

[ Apr 29, 2003, 10:28 AM: Message Edited By: Lynner ]

paul:coolerthanyou

Apr 29, 2003, 09:54 AM

I just have to say... well I can't really say what I want to say!
First of all, yes of course Ringo knows more than he lets on. Ringo is entitled to have secrets from all of us. Secondly, NO ONE knows what was agreed upon, or said about this EXCEPT John and Paul, so we sortof have to take Paul's word for it now. I don't see the problem, now if Paul were trying to take credit for songs such as "Strawberry Fields" then yes, that's wrong. I did a quick search at my local library (on line) and found that when you type John's name in, Beatles compositions are pulled up, not so with Paul's name, only his solo work. So, he wants to get credit for writing some of the century's most brilliant songs? Gee, what an ass! graemlins/images/icons/rolleyes.gif *

Oh, and "Spin" magazine weighing in? That's wonderful, since it was started by the son of the man that started "Penthouse"! I guess they know from sleazy!

Would Paul be crushed to know he's coming in a "distant third" in a poll here at this site? Maybe so. But I think the fact that he sold out every show on his US tour last year and made millions of dollars will console him that he's not everyone's favorite Beatle. He has NEVER made his love for the other three a secret! He's the biggest Beatles fan of us all!
So, really, I'd like to know from everyone, what should Paul do? Maybe go lock himself in a cage until he dies? Stop speaking to anyone? Turn people away when they try to talk to him? What would make the Paul-haters happy?

*shrugs* I guess I thought this was a Beatles fan board.

Lynner

Apr 29, 2003, 10:34 AM

Hi Paul:coolerthanyou. You've made some interesting points. I hope you don't think that everybody here is antiPaul. We all have our faves and we all have our opinions. I agree if one is considered a big Beatles' fan, they they should certainly not hate a member, but can certainly favor some over the others.
Hope you'll check out some of the other forums share your opinions!

Welcome aboard. images/icons/smile.gif

beatlebangs1964

Apr 29, 2003, 10:38 AM

Yeah, welcome.

Well said, Lynner! graemlins/smile1.gif

PaulROCKStheCasbah

Apr 29, 2003, 10:45 AM

There are so many things here and the media is just stirring up trouble if you ask me. I think the media has been causing trouble since Beatlemania. After all, if you so good that you're at the top, they have nothing better to do than put you down. They seem to have always created or exaggerated "fights" between them all anyway. It's disgusting! (Sorry, I'm just anti media!)

I'm glad Yoko isn't going to "fight" Paul over this. I'm sorry Paul changed it without asking, but there's probably more to this (on all sides) than we'll ever know.

I'm glad that Ringo (if he really said anything) pointed out that there's probably more to this than we know (and probably more than we'll ever understand because we weren't there. I'm glad he's not commenting! Good for him!

I don't really care whose name is first and all that. I mean, most people who don't know if John wrote it or Paul wrote will NEVER care. Beatlefans like us, we will always question and as long as we pass the information down to the next generations, I think the true fans will always know.

Just my opinion...

Cassie