Let it be
It’s the most famous songwriting credit in pop music history but now Sir Paul McCartney has turned the classic Lennon-McCartney signature on its head.
In his new live album, Back In The US, he has put his name before John Lennon’s on 19 Beatles songwriting credits – a controversial move which has reportedly sparked a possible legal battle by Yoko Ono to prevent further “tinkering”.
Historically, the pecking order of the two former Beatles’ names in the band’s songwriting credits has been a major source of conflict between Ono and McCartney.
Sir Paul’s biggest grievance has always been that Lennon had the first billing in the writing credits for Yesterday, the most recorded song in the world to date, despite the fact that Lennon had no input in the creation of the track, nor did he even play in it.
But Ono is not impressed. Her lawyer, Peter Shukat said of the way Sir Paul has credited the songs on his new album: “This was done against her wishes. It‘s ridiculous, absurd and petty. Paul is hurting his own legacy with this.
“He and John made an agreement 40 years ago that they would share credit in this way. To change it now, well, John’s not here to argue.”
But Sir Paul’s spokesman Geoff Baker says it is common knowledge that he had been the sole author of tracks such as Hey Jude and The Long And Winding Road: “This is not a divisive thing. It‘s not Lennon or McCartney. Even if Paul did 95% or more on these songs, he’s not asking that John’s name be taken off – he just doesn’t think it should be first.”
Colin Larkin, Editor of the Virgin Encyclopaedia Of Pop Music, claims the reason Sir Paul has decided to change the song-writing credits now is that he still desperately wants to be loved by the public: “Paul has fame, money and success but the one thing he hasn’t got is the love of the nation – people don‘t love him as much they loved John and no matter what he does over the years he will always be liked but not loved.”
Larkin thinks that Paul has subtly rewritten Beatles history over the years and not all of it has been entirely good: “It was the same with George Harrison - when he died Paul said they were like brothers when in fact they spent most of the last 20 years not talking to each other,” he argues.
Larkin sympathises with McCartney’s predicament to an extent: “I think its tough for anyone to come to terms with the greatness of a partner who dies and who can’t speak back and Paul now speaks for him.
“John was a genuine one off and that is what the public recognise, but they also see that they were a great, great team, that they needed each other and that only together could they write such wonderful songs,” he adds.
However, Larkin does feel that a man in Sir Paul’s position today doesn’t need to justify his standing as part of what he sees as the greatest songwriting team of the 20th century: “It is silly to try to re-establish his greatness on songs that he has written more of because Paul still wrote some classics and everybody knows that.”
Sir Paul’s public image is unlikely to be affected by any legal wrangle says Larkin: “It won‘t damage him – nothing he can do will change the fact he is universally liked.
“I do think that some Beatles fans will be disappointed in him but the Ono haters will always rally around him,” he adds.
Jerry Goldman, Director of The Beatles Story Exhibition on Albert Docks in Liverpool, has sympathy with Sir Paul’s actions. “I would say that we have to understand an artist being proud of his work – Paul has produced magnificent work and he’s very proud of it.
“If I was in his shoes I would say that for all the years he has happily seen the Lennon-McCartney label on everything even though it was a partnership of equal proportions – for once he’d like to see McCartney-Lennon and I don‘t blame him,” he adds.
Goldman says Beatles fans fall into a number of categories, from those that adore the group as a whole to those that love the individuals: “We once had a delegation from Russia who presented me with vodka and a religious calendar - they turned out to be The John Lennon Religion who toasted him on certain days of the year and thought he was a prophet! People can actually see the evidence in a display case at the exhibition.
“But apart from them thinking it is sacrilegious I can’t see the Beatles fans being upset at Paul – the vast majority can understand him having some pride in what he’s done and they will know that it certainly doesn’t detract from John Lennon.”
