Tag Archives: Liverpool

There’s No Such Thing as Paul McCartney

10 Oct

That’s not literally true, obviously.  Even though newspapers seem incapable of omitting the ‘Sir’ he got awarded long long after the stuff he did that was worth rewarding.

But it’s kind of true in a way that relates to the debate still commonplace amongst musicians and Beatles fans.  The debate being, of course, “Who was the better musician?”

There are three conventional answers.  I’m going to sum them up very briefly, and therefore inadequately and by caricature:

  1.  Paul, because he could sing better and was dead good on the bass, whereas John wasn’t that hot even as a guitarist.
  2. John, because he wrote more meaningful and harder-edged songs.
  3. Neither was ‘better’ than the other, because each had very different strengths.  Those strengths, in combination, formed the power of the Beatles.

The last answer, if I had to choose, would be the one I’d go for, and is similar to the case made by Conrad Brunstrom yesterday that started me off on this whole train of thought.  But there’s a fourth answer – nearly compatible with it – that I’ve never yet seen written as such, despite it being implicit in the legal name of their songwriting partnership.

This is simply that neither Paul McCartney nor John Lennon existed in a meaningful way as separate musicians from their first meeting at Woolton village fete until the Beatles ceased to exist.  The personal struggles that led to the death of the Beatles as a band were their process of being born as musical individuals.

In political philosophy it’s not particularly unusual to stick together schools of thought, or even individuals, to indicate their closeness or inseparability.  This can be done with good reason, and often even with accuracy. Fukuyama referred to Hegel-Kojeve as a ‘systemic philosopher’.  Both left and right (for better and worse and every shade of thing inbetween) spent much of the twentieth century talking about Marxism-Leninism.  Anarchists and communists have stuck together, and divided, their beliefs by reference to anarcho-communitarianism; anarcho-syndicalism and a host of variations of equal obscurity.    Feminists (and anti-feminists looking for a handy insult) have hyphenated their beliefs with pretty much everything else.

So why should accepting the joint process of creation implied in the term “Lennon-McCartney” create such difficulties?

I think it’s because we have grown up in a world where the myth of individual genius is paramount, and accepting artistic production as a communal and cooperative exercise is difficult.

Even when that cooperative exercise produced what for many is still the defining musical art of the last century – and, for some, of all the centuries.

Advertisements

Fragment of thought on visiting Liverpool: number 2

12 Apr

In praise of ‘Philosophy in Pubs’

 After Only in England I revisited the painting I first went to the Walker to see; Daguerre’s Ruins of Holyrood Chapel. I’ve never lost the first sense of wonder that came to me on first seeing it half a generation ago, and it still touches me now.

A film crew on the street corner dominated our perceptions of Lark Lane as we walked down to Keith’s. That, and a sky precisely the colour of the painting I’d just seen …

images.duckduckgo

… gave me a sense of history about the occasion.

So often in life the auguries mislead. But in this story, at least, they don’t. I”m still engaged with working out angles of understanding on the themes half-a-dozen people around a table raised in a couple of hours’ discussion.  Which puts this informal and open philosophical environment a mile ahead of most of the seminars I’ve ever seen within universities.

But for now, the point is this:

There’s a growing network of Philosophy in Pubs discussion groups, centred in Liverpool, but reaching southwards to Brighton, north to Scotland and westwards into Wales and Ireland.  They are bringing people together in a beautiful and important way. There should be more of them. Hopefully some of the vanishingly small number of readers of this blog would enjoy making something like that happen round their way.

Here’s the PiP website address.

Without attempting to question our world(s) we are poorer – often literally but always in understanding. Working out and developing ideas in isolation can be difficult for a world of reasons, whilst academia can be deeply hierarchical and conformist.  Philosophy in Pubs, from what I saw, manages to escape the straitjackets imposed by both milieu.

Just in case you didn’t see it before, here’s the website address. 

Fragments of thought from visiting Liverpool, number 1.

10 Apr

The Girl On the Contact Sheet – Some comments on “Only in England” at the Walker Gallery. 

She’s there three times over. And the shots are straight into her face. Nobody else gets that much attention from the camera of Tony Ray-Jones.

What caused him to lose his artistic focus in those few moments? Certainly this woman has a beautiful face. But when photographing a beauty contest, he’s sparse in the photos he takes: pausing seconds and hours so he can catch the most profoundly poignant unguarded yawn.

This is of a piece with the instructions he wrote to himself in one of his notebooks. I didn’t have notebook, camera or pen with me on this visit, so I’m probably paraphrasing. Two of my favourites, though, were “Don’t take boring photos”, and – concluding the list and in contrasting coloured pen as if for emphasis – “no middle distance”. Another artistic command-to-self on the same page (which only an obsessive could really benefit from or struggle with) was to take fewer pictures.

His priorities are immaculately professional. He appears to have devoted his working life to getting the perfect shot, rather than to getting it on.

Except, perhaps, for those three short clicks.

Martin Parr on the other hand, appears from the evidence here, to have decided way in advance what he and his camera would see of England’s Nonconformists, and to have required few photos to capture it.

We catch no unguarded moments of couples snogging outside the chapel window on the bleak oh-so-Northern hillsides, no accidental proofs of youth or light or sun compromising the greyness of the black and white picture. Even though it’s the 1970s in these pictures, there are no long-haired kids on racers with handlebars turned up, no Cortina-driving Lotharios, no graffiti, no life.

There are beaters and hunters on the moors; and the last generation of chapel-goers photographed without their families, without love, and without wit.  The old, in these shots, are eccentric at best. They do not speak to us, and it is hard to believe that they ever had voices.

This is the second time I’ve seen this exhibition.  The first time was last year in Bradford, close by the old heartlands of English Nonconformity.   There, just like in Liverpool, the punters looked intently at Parr’s work, seeking hard for something to relate to; but turned away, having found only boring photos.

Then they laughed and pointed and smiled at Ray-Jones’ pictures, and told each other stories and jokes about themselves and their grandparents; and “that time in New Brighton when”. The stories were mesmerising and the jokes were funny, and everybody was immortal.

Just like the yawning beauty queen and the girl with the Dansette.

When Was England?

“Only in England” is an inaccurate title – or perhaps an oddly revealing one – in several ways. I’ll note four here.

  1. Ray-Jones studied, and formed his ideas about the social role of photography, in America. He may, as far as he was concerned, have been fighting the Americanisation of culture – but his way of doing it was through an Americanised artistic culture.
  1. Not all the photographs were taken ‘in’ England. Some were from Wales, and one from the Isle of Man. None were from Scotland or Northern Ireland. Even Americans knew those places weren’t in England.
  1. There’s a great deal of seaside featured. The culture of the ‘English’ seaside may have been unique – but a momentary glance at the cover of ‘Greetings from Asbury Park, N.J.’ shows that uniqueness to be less unique than you’d think. Similarly, Cuxhaven and Hunstanton in the off-season are alike in the way that football grounds and multi-storey carparks everywhere resemble each other.
  1. ‘England’ is a small and shrinking country these days. It doesn’t even definitely include Liverpool anymore, as the Walker and Liverpool Echo‘s tie-in competition neatly and unintentionally demonstrates.

It’s called ‘Only in Merseyside’.