Laurence Juber Makes Case For Wings in the Hall of Fame

Discussions of various topics about Paul not covered in the forums below.

Moderator: Mike

Re: Laurence Juber Makes Case For Wings in the Hall of Fame

Postby chris » Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:18 pm

maccafan wrote:Yes Wings belongs in the hall of fame, simply for the fact of what Paul McCartney had to endure to even bring them into existance!


so, paul forms a post beatle band, and had to endure the wrath of critics, hardship, building from scratch, and practicing in front of college students...and that means they should be inducted in the HOF? no. that just means he formed a post beatle band. lots of bands...most, maybe...had to endure the same hardships. maybe more. in fact, wings had the distinct advantage of having one of the worlds most famous rockstars as a front man. it would appear that they had a huge advantage right from the start.

mr h atom wrote:...but, rather, a wide range of creative instincts and a huge amount of individualistic energies that did, in fact, add nuance to the basic sound and direction of the band and its music with each change. a sound that is not exactly the same as mccartney solo, either...


h, my dear friend. wings did have a somewhat distinct sound from other solo mcartney outputs. that was in large part due to the harmonizing of denny and linda. but...it was different the way paul's FITD or OTG band was different from his current touring band. it was different...sort of. it was paul...and others. take away paul...and i'm not sure anyone cares. truth be told i'm not sure i care if paul had no involvement.

Mike wrote:...To fairly use this argument, you would have to then dissect every group in the HOF and see what value each member had on the total group success. Most bands had one or two very strong personalities either in song writing or performing.


the who were a band. great drummer, bassist and guitarist. one sang, another wrote. same with zeppelin. it was a band effort. take one away...and it just wasn't the same (with all due respect to post keith moon who...and zep thought it was better to stop making music all together than keep recording without one of the original members). with very,very few exceptions (the rolling stones) band members in a HOF band are not replaceable. in wings they were replaceable, weren't they? in fact, there was a lot of turnover. with one really big, important constant. what was his name again?

Mike wrote:Laurence actually brought out a very good point...


of course he did. but he has a vested interest in wings getting in the hall of fame, doesn't he? for if wings get in, so does LJ.

i am not anti-wings. and i don't believe those who suggest wings aren't worthy of the HOF are anti-wings either. i love the band. i own all their albums. but it is my contention that they are, in fact, already represented in the hall by paul's solo career. to me, paul' solo career involved everything post beatles. he rarely did things all by himself. a couple of obvious exceptions here and there. but each band he recorded/toured with were paul...and his band. whether or not he took the time to apply a name.

when you read about rusty or abe nowadays, they are referred to as members of the paul mccartney band. i sort of like that. and i like this band a lot. might even be able to formulate an argument that they were...instrument by instrument...better than wings (save for the whole horn section thingee). and no one is suggesting such a thing about this band. know why? because when it is all said and done...and paul no longer tours or creates new music...this new band...however inconsquentialy...will indeed have some sort of honorable mention in the very HOF we are discussing right now. just by being a part of paul and his solo career.
I want to tell her that I love her a lot, but I got to get a belly full of wine.
User avatar
chris
Supporter
Supporter
 
Posts: 3751
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:22 pm
Location: Chicago, U.S.A

Re: Laurence Juber Makes Case For Wings in the Hall of Fame

Postby mr h atom » Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:21 am

i cannot argue with brother chris...well, i could, but i won't..because i cannot kick a brother when he is down (cubs) and deluded (cubs) and clearly chris has other things (cubs) that hath bereft his usually extreme use of commom sense..

that being said...just like a profesional team, might there are different eras, different players who make up different nuances and feels...and those individual teams, while all part of the same team, are often refered to as almost seperate entities...revered for those specific eras...

as mike eloquently pointed out, as juber pointed out, as chris somewhat alluded to, the core of wings remained solid, but each addition an/or subratction left a slight, but distinct mark upon the sound of the group.. and the group as a whole had a different sound and feel as does mccartneys solo work.

if we were to follow the unenlightend path that even my woeful good friend chris (cubs) falls into; that very logic which may leave wings out...wouldn't it also, by that logic, leave paul (solo) out because paul/wings & paul/solo are just an extension of what began with the beatles..and paul has already been aknowledged for that: the rest is just a continuation of the same sound, evolved only by the passage of time.

wings was meant, at least in the grand experimental, hopeful thinking kinda way to be a real, separate, distinctive group, and mccartney made (moderate) efforts to be just that.
as a group, they were highly effective, creative and succesful: as much so, and in sales, possibly more so, as he has been as just a solo artist...

the current line-up, as accomplished as they are, do not seem to actually have that much affect upon his music.

there are no stories of them changing licks, co-writing songs...they are not singing lead...they are not bringing the sort of nuance and timber juber alluded to that many of us know is there during the wings era.

their biggest claim to mccartney immortality seems to be that they are very possibly the catalyst for getting him to dive thru the immense back catalogue to enhance his live show, but....when was that last time they appeared as a complete band on an entire album..? how many albums have they recorded together as a complete unit ?

will the next album feature them ?

and as a complete unit, as a 'band', does this era match what wings 'the band' accomplished ?

all these are albums are great..some of his best, but they do not feature this band..their only close-to-outing as a band was the somewhat less regarded 'driving rain', and a few songs here or there.

the answer is, unfortunately, no.
as a distinct, unique, and separate entity..wings has it all over the very accomplished current line-up.
lift up your head...and remember what your life is !
User avatar
mr h atom
Gold member :)
Gold member :)
 
Posts: 3152
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:07 am

Re: Laurence Juber Makes Case For Wings in the Hall of Fame

Postby maccafan » Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:53 pm

Great post Mr. H Atom.

Wings deserves to be in the Hall Of Fame also because and this is something I don't think has been mentioned yet, They had to follow the freaking Beatles, and with a member of the Beatles no less!

Imagine the awesome pressure not only on McCartney but on every member of the band! You know that the criticizm was immense and unrelenting (it still persist to this very day), the pressure to perform Beatle songs, and the disinterest (at first) to their original music. Their early efforts were unmercifully bashed, and yet by working their tails off, rehearsing, practicing, recording, and finally performing live, they became one of the biggest groups of the 70s!

Sounds like the classic rock and roll story to me, a story and a group more than worthy of the Rock and Roll Hall Of Fame!
maccafan
Bronze member
Bronze member
 
Posts: 637
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2002 11:53 am

Re: Laurence Juber Makes Case For Wings in the Hall of Fame

Postby flextint » Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:03 pm

One question has to be asked.Did Pauls solo albums without wings like tug of war,pipes of peace,press to play and others without wings merit him a solo spot in the hall of fame?Or was he put in the hall based on ALL his post beatle work?
flextint
Supporter
Supporter
 
Posts: 621
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 10:53 pm

Re: Laurence Juber Makes Case For Wings in the Hall of Fame

Postby 2 of 3 » Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:07 pm

It doesn't matter to me either way...in...out...fine. But...if we are talking deserving to be in.....then...there are TONS of bands that should get in before Wings. I'm sure there is a list on here somewhere. I'd say The Guess Who should be in before Wings on any ballot that comes up. Doobie Brothers? Yes? :?
The World is a tangled up necklace of Pearls
User avatar
2 of 3
Supporter
Supporter
 
Posts: 2804
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 8:12 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Laurence Juber Makes Case For Wings in the Hall of Fame

Postby Awesoman » Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:23 pm

Mike wrote:In my opinion this concept is a very weak argument. To fairly use this argument, you would have to then dissect every group in the HOF and see what value each member had on the total group success. Most bands had one or two very strong personalities either in song writing or performing. Not too many groups had the talent (such as The Beatles) where each member you can say had a vital part of the group's success.

Laurence actually brought out a very good point. The fact that though music and lyrics are copy-writable, licks and grooves are not. We have come to love the licks and grooves in many Paul's songs. It's fair to say that some of those licks that are so much part of a song we love, and play such an important part of the tune in whole, were in fact created by what has been referred to earlier in this discussion "bit players". Very unfair to the band members in my opinion.


So Wings' case for being in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame is because of their "licks and grooves"? Talk about weak arguments. I like the licks and grooves of Paul's current band. Maybe we should put *them* in the Hall of Fame!

Wings is already in the Hall of Fame--when McCartney got inducted.
Awesoman
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
 
Posts: 438
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:14 am
Location: Atlanta, GA USA

Re: Laurence Juber Makes Case For Wings in the Hall of Fame

Postby flextint » Mon Aug 23, 2010 10:00 pm

awesoman answered my question and if others feel the same way wouldn't this argument be unecessary?Love to here other opinions on this.Did Pauls solo induction into the hall of fame include or should have included wings ?simple question isnt it? :smile:
flextint
Supporter
Supporter
 
Posts: 621
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 10:53 pm

Re: Laurence Juber Makes Case For Wings in the Hall of Fame

Postby chris » Mon Aug 23, 2010 10:48 pm

to all who have passionately opined about this topic...thank you. i can see it is a subject we all feel strongly about. and like i stated before, i genuinely believe that those who do not think wings should be there, think so because they are already there.

the rock and roll hall of fame has a website. and low-and-behold, each inductee has a bio...an achievement list of sorts. you would be amazed to see what paul's qualifications are...to be a member of the rock and roll hall of fame...as a solo artist.

here goes...(and please keep in mind he was inducted in 1999, so the bio ends there)

Paul McCartney was the first of the Beatles to work on an extracurricular recording project (the soundtrack to the 1966 film The Family Way) and also the first to release a bonafide solo album of songs (McCartney, which appeared as the Beatles were dissolving in 1970). McCartney has been the most prolific ex-Beatle and has also enjoyed the greatest measure of commercial success.

Between his work with the Beatles and as a solo artist and leader of Wings, McCartney has written or cowritten more than 50 Top Ten singles. With and without Wings, McCartney has been extremely prolific, averaging an album a year since the appearance of McCartney. Moreover, he’s been eclectic as well, not only recording pop and rock but also dabbling in various classical forms and ambient dance music. In the post-Beatles era McCartney has cracked the Top Forty 35 times. When combined with the Beatles’ 49 Top Forty U.S. singles, it is a matter of statistical fact that Paul McCartney is the most successful pop-music composer ever and the second greatest hitmaker, behind Elvis Presley. Without question he is one of the most important musicians of the 20th century.

Beyond the numerical achievements, McCartney’s career is noteworthy for the purposeful way in which he demystified himself as a rock star in the wake of the Beatles. During the Seventies-a decade of ego-tripping superstars, flamboyant glam-rockers and defiant punk-rockers-McCartney modestly presented himself to the world as a family man who happened to be a working musician. His songs often celebrated the mundane pleasures of everyday life. As a songwriter who delights in the quotidian, as opposed to edgier rock and rollers steeped in mystique and risk-taking, McCartney has rarely been a favorite of rock critics. However, his body of work-some of it admittedly lightweight, much of it unjustly dismissed-has given boundless pleasure to the music-loving public. Having been the primary melodist within the Beatles, it is not surprising that McCartney’s knack for an ear-catching pop tune remained very much in evidence.

McCartney’s low-key solo debut belied the turmoil that attended the simultaneous breakup of the Beatles. Recorded on a four-track machine, this collection of simple songs and fragments found him playing keyboards, guitar, bass and drums. A one-man show that added up to an evocation of (in his own words) “home, family, love,” McCartney anticipated the singer-songwriter movement that would fill the early-Seventies void after the chaos and clamor of the Sixties. McCartney appeared in April 1970, two weeks before Let It Be, the Beatles’ last studio release. A year later came Ram, credited to Paul and Linda McCartney. (The couple were married in March 1969; it was the second marriage for Linda.) Ram became a favorite with FM rock deejays and even yielded a #1 single, the whimsical, ambitious “Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey.”

For the rest of the decade, save for the odd solo single, McCartney devoted his creative energies to Wings. Under the banner of Wings, McCartney worked with Linda (who played keyboards and sang) and a fairly stable lineup of musicians. Technically, Wings were an entity longer than the Beatles, though there occurred several personnel changes between their formation in 1971 and disbanding ten years later. McCartney clearly intended Wings to be perceived as a band, and he willingly submerged his identity within the group framework, especially on Wings’ much-maligned 1971 debut, Wild Life. Their best recording-it was, in fact, attributed to Paul McCartney and Wings-was Band On the Run (1973). Recorded in Africa by the McCartneys and singer/guitarist Denny Laine (formerly of the Moody Blues), it struck many as McCartney’s attempt to deflect criticism that his post-Beatles’ work lacked substance. The album and its three Top Ten hits-"Jet," “Band on the Run” and “Helen Wheels"-were catchy, energetic and fun, much like the best of the Beatles.

With the addition of guitarist Jimmy McCullough and drummer Joe English, Wings expanded to a five-piece band for Venus and Mars. preserved on Wings Over America, was a major rock and roll event. Commercially, McCartney had his finger on the pulse of the Seventies. Five consecutive Wings albums-Red Rose Speedway, Band on the Run, Venus and Mars, Wings at the Speed of Sound and Wings Over America (a triple live album)-topped the album charts. At the height of punk-rock in 1977, McCartney must be considered one of the most influential musicians of the 20th century. Wings’ sentimental tribute to hearth and home, “Mull of Kintyre,” became the best-selling single in British history. So popular were Wings that in 1978 the group could fill a 13-track best-of, Wings Greatest, with nothing but hits. In 1979, Wings switched labels, from Capitol to Columbia, and released their last album, Back to the Egg. The group officially disbanded in April 1981.


McCartney resumed his solo career with 1980’s McCartney II. He followed it with Tug of War (1982), which reunited him with Beatles producer George Martin and was regarded as his strongest outing since Band On the Run. McCartney duetted with Stevie Wonder on Tug of War‘s “Ebony and Ivory” and sang with Michael Jackson on “The Girl Is Mine,” which appeared on the latter’s Thriller; both songs went to #1. Another duet with Jackson, “Say Say Say,” turned up on McCartney’s Pipes of Peace (1983). Give My Regards to Broad Street, a feature film and accompanying soundtrack, released in 1984, included his reworkings of several Beatles songs.

The McCartney catalog has swelled since the mid-Eighties as he’s tackled an eclectic assortment of projects. These include a solid run of solo albums (Press to Play, Flowers in the Dirt, Off the Ground), live albums from two world tours (Tripping the Live Fantastic and Paul Is Live), an acoustic session for MTV (Unplugged: The Official Bootleg), an album of vintage rock and roll covers (Choba B CCCP, initially released only in the Soviet Union), and a pair of electronic “rave” albums issued under the alias “The Fireman.” McCartney also explored classical forms with his Liverpool Oratorio (1991), written with conductor Carl Davis, and the orchestral piece Standing Stone (1997), composed in celebration of the 100th anniversary of EMI, his record label. Also in 1997 came Flaming Pie, a modest masterpiece that nodded to the past while reaffirming his skills as a pop craftsman. McCartney claimed to have been inspired by his involvement in the Beatles’ Anthology, the 1995 TV miniseries and three-volume retrospective of the Fab Four’s recorded work: “The Anthology was very good for me because it reminded me of the Beatles’ standards and the standards that we reached with the songs,” he said.

Another project close to his heart was Wide Prairie, an album of songs by his late wife, Linda McCartney. Highly regarded in her own right as a photographer, animal rights activist and vegetarian cook-not to mention wife, mother and inseparable companion-Linda died of breast cancer in 1998. McCartney returned to his rock and roll roots for the 1999 album Run Devil Run, whose 15 tracks were cut in only one week-much like the Beatles had worked back in the early days. Erasing any doubts that he’d “gone classical,” McCartney asserted, “I still love my rock and roll.”

this is from the R&R HOF.
I want to tell her that I love her a lot, but I got to get a belly full of wine.
User avatar
chris
Supporter
Supporter
 
Posts: 3751
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:22 pm
Location: Chicago, U.S.A

Re: Laurence Juber Makes Case For Wings in the Hall of Fame

Postby mr h atom » Tue Aug 24, 2010 12:21 am

how does, say, the clapton bio compare ? does it list any/all of his various side projects/bands/affiliations ?
how many of those various associations have been voted in as separate entities ?

if not, would/should they be considered..? would you vote against one because clapton is already in ?

of course there are other bands/artists worthy of induction, and all things being fair, wings can wait if it meant some truly great artists would be overlooked, but, that is not the point, is it ?

do we now exclude someone who is worthy just because there is someone else also as worthy of introduction ?

it still doesn't mitigate the fact that juber is correct..that all the things he said are accurate

pauls current band has appeared on one full record
..they have. at best, appeared sporadically on his other current albums...
no records have been issued with them, the band, as a titled group...
not one menber of 'the band' has written or sung even one song on any mccartney album....

while great and accomplished artists, they are not THE BAND paul attempted to create and have as a successor to his previous band...nor, sadly have they proven to be as successful as wings at being a hit making, chart-topping, rock & roll event that wings was..
the times are different, and so is 'fandom', both for rock & roll, and mccartney...but, comparing the two like that is more an apples and oranges kinda deal than apples and apples

i'm not gonna keel over and die if wings never makes it in, you're all correct to some extant: mccartneys' in, so what - big deal...
but, the arguments made so far against wings inclusion as as seperate entity, especially considering jubers (a bona-fide, highly regarded, creative artist) comments, hint of more of the same old anti mccartney schtick than real reasoning: they were one of the '70's biggest groups...they participated like a group, they acted like a group, they presented themselves as a group... they were named as a group...THEY WERE NOT A MARKETING PLOY...each addition and/or subtraction of individual members did have an affect upon the 'sound' of the group...

this doesn't, and shouldn't, guarantee them anything other than the idea that, like other artist who've left behind one version/group and moved on to another, with different sounds and different musical achievements, that they may be worthy of a separate look..
lift up your head...and remember what your life is !
User avatar
mr h atom
Gold member :)
Gold member :)
 
Posts: 3152
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:07 am

Re: Laurence Juber Makes Case For Wings in the Hall of Fame

Postby RickStark79 » Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:56 am

mr h atom wrote:pauls current band has appeared on one full record


Yes, but Holly & Juber only appeared on one full record. And Jimmy & Joe only appeared on three full records! Sorry, but that doesn't warrant induction to any hall of fame in my book.

Now, if you made a case for Denny Laine to be inducted into the RNR HOF as an artist, for his work in the Moody Blues and Wings, I could get on board with that. But the rest of the members of the group didn't do enough IMO to get in. Simple as that.
Image
No one understaaaaands...
User avatar
RickStark79
Supporter
Supporter
 
Posts: 3561
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 9:10 am
Location: Roseville, Michigan

PreviousNext

Return to MACCA - all discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest