Who was the leader ot the Beatles?

[Blue Meanie]

Muscially towards the end of the Beatles run...I would say '68 - '70 it was definitely McCartney that was the "Leader". He was the one that pushed the other 3 into getting into the studio to make records. IMHO, without Paul's pushing them there would have been no Abbey Road. That being said he was also repsonsible for what made the Beatles look really bad and that was 2 films...Magical Mystery Tour and Let It Be. Let It Be was the straw that broke the camels back. You can see it in the movie. Where they are supposed to be rehearsing for what would be a tour and get them back to basics as a Rock and Roll Band...the one scene where they are rehearsing and George says to Paul..."I'll play what you want me to play, or I won't play at all". Right there you knew that Paul's perfectionist ways were starting to wane on the others.

That being said...John was the leader of the Beatles up until around Pepper. After that they were in flux until Paul started to push them to record starting in '68.

[Joe90]

Looks like the question's been answered. John was the originator, and early leader of The Beatles, but after the death of Brian Epstein, and the arrival of Yoko Oh-No! John faded. It was Paul who took it upon himself to lead the group after that.

In the documentary The Compleat Beatles, John makes an interesting comment about being "Big-Headed" about their talent and making a claim they'd last for 10 years... That's exactly how long they lasted.

George was always my favourite Beatle -- I thought he was the coolest. George Martin actually publicly apologized to George Harrison for not encouraging him to write more songs while he was a Beatle. And Richard Lestor said he had the best Beatle on-screen. If you ever get a chance to watch the Ed Sullivan tapes (Check out The Beatles First US Visit a combination of Maysles brothers documentary and the Ed Sullivan show) you'll see that George is the most engaging Beatle and looks completely at ease. Paul bravely puts on a show, but John looks scared stiff.

[apes3978]

Without a doubt John Lennon!! The competition between the two made Paul rise to the occasion. Without John, Paul's Bubblegum, writing songs like "Coming Up".

I totally with you here... Some of McCartney's solo stuff isn't bad (like "Live and Let Die") but the few good solo tunes he had are heavily outweighed by crappola like the already mentioned "Coming Up" and the even worse "Silly Love Songs" (one of my most hated songs by anybody). And don't forget his duets like "Say, Say, Say" and the way too corny to say the least "Ebony and Ivory", both duds in my opinion.

But even though you're right that Paul needed John to bounce off of, the same worked for Lennon. He needed the same type of competition. He also had very few good solo records ("Instant Karma" being one of them), but they're outweighed by junk like "Woman" or "Give Peace A Chance".

[grayhank]

You've got to appreciate the humor of "Silly Love Songs" it was in direct response to Lennon's statement about Paul, that all he writes is silly love songs.

So after Lennon's comment, Paul responded: "Some people want to fill the world with silly love songs and what's wrong with that?"

There's alot of back and forth slaps in the face on both McCartney's and Lennon's solo albums. Especially McCartney's "Ram" album and Lennon's "Imagine" album. One of the pictures on Ram show's two beetles in mating mode. John took it as very "frak you John". John responded by enclosing a picture with his Imagine album of himself posed with a Pig to mimic McCartney's pose with a Ram. Then really let loose on Paul with the song "How Do You Sleep?" They kept the fight going back and forth on their albums for much of the early 70s. Even George got into it a little bit with his song "Sue Me Sue You Blues". Only Ringo positively recorded how he felt about the other three in his song "Early 1970" where he talks about wanting to play with all three.

[Blue Meanie]

You've got to appreciate the humor of "Silly Love Songs" it was in direct response to Lennon's statement about Paul, that all he writes is silly love songs.

So after Lennon's comment, Paul responded: "Some people want to fill the world with silly love songs and what's wrong with that?"

There's alot of back and forth slaps in the face on both McCartney's and Lennon's solo albums. Especially McCartney's "Ram" album and Lennon's "Imagine" album. One of the pictures on Ram show's two beetles in mating mode. John took it as very "frak you John". John responded by enclosing a picture with his Imagine album of himself posed with a Pig to mimic McCartney's pose with a Ram. Then really let loose on Paul with the song "How Do You Sleep?" They kept the fight going back and forth on their albums for much of the early 70s. Even George got into it a little bit with his song "Sue Me Sue You Blues". Only Ringo positively recorded how he felt about the other three in his song "Early 1970" where he talks about wanting to play with all three.

Actually, John took offense also to the song called "Too Many People". The one line was "You took your lucky break and broke it in two". Which was a dig at John and Yoko. There is also another line in the song that says "Too many people preaching practices" which is a dig at John and Yoko's Bed In's etc. John came right back at Paul and wrote and sang "How Do You Sleep" which George plays slide guitar on. The song was vicious in it's attacks. Right from the opening lyrics "So Seargent Pepper took you by surprise..." The song also goes further by this line "The only thing you've done is Yesterday...and since then it's been Another Day" Paul came back at John on the first Wings Album with a song called "Dear Friend" which was basically an open letter to an old friend (John). George's "Sue Me Sue You Blues" basically put the final nail in the coffin so to speak. After that, John and Paul actually got together to jam in Hollywood on John's lost weekend. I have a CD of them Jamming called "A Toot and A Snore"...with Stevie Wonder on Drums.

In the end they really were 4 brothers that made some great music together...apart they would never equal the output of the Beatles as a group.

[misterdroid]

I just read an old life magazine from 1970 about the Beatles and they credit McCartney as being the leader and lead singer of the Beatles. I greatly dispute this assumption. One beautiful thing about the group was that 3 out of 4 were soo talented that no one part was dominate. No one except Ringo was expendable. I felt John and Paul equally shared most of the singing with George supporting them with a song or two an album. Am I wrong to think of the Beatles as being equals and not 3 sabordinates to one dominating member?

It's not really a fair question, as each member brought something to the group. Paul writes amazing pop songs, he could pen a lullaby everyone would want to sing. John (the genius of the group) would write a lullaby that would challenge your very notions of what a lullaby could be. George would write a lullaby that would stretch your notions of what sleep REALLY means. And ringo would play the drums on several or all of the above-mentioned tracks. I don't think that makes anyone the leader, as solo artists, no one beatle ever captured people the way that the group did. Even Ringo's solo stuff is pretty good. Take from that what you will, I'm rambling.