The Beatles: Sgt. Pepper - Why was Harrison only allowed One song?

Same difference.

 

Maybe Trite is not exactly what I mean. How about 'lightweight' and 'of marginal artistic value'?

 

We had already had "Love You To" on Revolver...so I don't see Within You Without You as any great musical invention. In fact, I just thought of it as another longer, boring Indian piece from George that totally felt out of place on this album and killed the overall flow.

 

Actually that list sounds kind of cool i think i might try it out, I understand your point, But The Beatles choice of leaving off songs that were on singles wasn't a hard and fast rule, (see Eleanor Rigby & YS, Also Come Together & Something) They could have at first decided to leave them off and Later while compiling the albums running order decided to add them on during the final mixing sessions.

 

You may want to listen to them again they are very very different. Or not if you prefer

 

That's my assessment as well. Apart from playing the album, I've never been compelled to pay WYWY. In fairness that's not the only track I feel that way about on SPLHCB.

I don't know if it's pharmaceutical as you suggest, but George's recorded output for 1967, WYWY and BJW from MMT, less than stellar IMO. There's definitely an Indian-influence on "Love You To" from "Revolver" and I like that more than WYWY.

 

That's your opinion. Hard for me to imagine it coming from anywhere other than the Psychedelic 60s, 1967 to be more exact.

 

78 RPM

Lyrically yes, musically no.


imo.

 

The songs in question address common concerns in a simple direct manner, if you think that makes them lightweight, fair enough. As for marginal artistic value, depends on whose doing the valuing

 

I rather like this alternate line-up I've always thought of the title track as somewhat of a novelty (with wonderful guitar work mind you) and think the overall theme of the album was at least partially abandoned and in the end not fully realized.

One side note however: I've noticed that people rarely think to break up SFF and PL... I think they have different artistic merits when sequenced one before or after the other, but I think if they were stand alones on the album, they might find better places sequenced with other songs... I think that simply alternating between Lennon and McCartney and Harrison songs is not the best way to go about it, although the contrast fits sometimes, and not for others.

 

That's an interesting question. I had never thought about it, but now that it has been mentioned, the first thought that crossed my mind was exactly as stated below:

 

Not really talking about lyrics, lyrics to me are generally pretty inconsequential anyway.

 

Only a Northern Song is easily in my top 10 favorite Beatles tracks of all time. I think the lyrical concept is completely original and the chord changes brilliant. Ringo's drumming (listen to those sweet fills) and Paul's bass playing are colorful and groovin' at the same time. I love the cacophany of sounds that illustrate the lyrics. Pretty ballsy move for George. The song (along with WYWY) just gets a bad rap because it's not commercial. It's a great piece of pop art from the year "rock as pop art" was most popular.

Within You Without You gets lost on people mainly because it's long, missing the other Beatles and it doesn't rock. But if you like music it doesn't get much better than that. Add the other Beatles into the equation and voila! you have the coolest track on the Love release.

 

I wanna play

I agree no room for OANS.. it's George at his sardonic worst, like it's purposely bad.

Side One

1. Good Morning Good Morning
2. Fixing A Hole
3. Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds
4. Lovely Rita
5. Strawberry Fields Forever
6. She's Leaving Home
7. Being For The Benefit Of Mr Kite

Side Two

1. Penny Lane
2. Within You Without You
3. Getting Better
4. When I'm 64
5. With A Little Help From My Friends
6. A Day In The Life

I like this track listing.. as I hum it in my head, I think the last chord of WALHFMF would fade nicely into the beginning of ADITL. And i think GMGM would be a killer opening track!

 

Single - Within You Without You/ Only A Northern Song (Parlophone Indian 78 rpm)


side 1
1 Sgt Pepper
2 With A Little Help From My Friends
3 Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds
4 Getting Better
5 Fixing A Hole
6 She's Leaving Home
7 Being For The Benefit Of Mr Kite

side 2
1 Penny Lane
2 Strawberry Fields Forever
3 When I'm Sixty Four
4 Lovely Rita
5 Good Morning Good Morning
6 Sgt Pepper (reprise)
7 A Day In The Life

 

If you dislike WYWY...
Seriously, play it again, and listen to that instrumental part. The sitar complimented by the strings arrangement... and then the pizzicato hit. It's heaven...

 

I haven't strictly alternated John and Paul songs ... even though John gets one more song in this line up. With Sgt Pepper eliminated a nice new uptempo opener was needed ... and what is more uptempo than Getting Better?

I think I'm the first person to think of putting Penny Lane near the end of the album. Eliminating both the "Sgt Pepper" tracks certainly opened up a nice hole that needed to be filled. I kept SFF and Penny Lane together because I thought they made a great 1-2-3 punch when followed by A Day In The Life!

OANS could have been used as the b-side of a hypothetical 1967 single ...

 

WYWY is to good to be on Sgt Pepper.

 

I was going to say something along those lines.

WYWY takes up more than enough real estate on it's very own.

 

I love the personal conjectures that people present as fact: If "Only a Northern Song" was rejected as being "too negative," why wasn't "Strawberry Fields Forever" rejected for the exact same reason? "Living is easy with eyes closed / misunderstanding all you see / It's getting hard to be someone but it all works out / It doesn't matter much to me." Now that's a real positive message, there!

"Only a Northern Song" towers over John's two "I copied these lyrics from a circus poster" and "I was inspired by a box of cornflakes" Pepper throwaways: "Mr. Kite" and "Good Morning Good Morning."

Pepper might actually be the greatest album of all time if George had gotten three songs, just as he did on Revolver: "Within You Without You," "Only a Northern Song," and "It's All Too Much."

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't John and George first take LSD around Revolver? If that's the case, I'd say he at least got three of his best done after the "tea incident".

 

Head of the nail, meet mfp's hammer.

To my ears, "Within You Without You" is a masterpiece, easily one of the finest contributions the Beatles made to modern music. It's a concerto of sorts, with George's vocal serving as the solo instrument in the first and third parts of the song, and the sitar as the solo instrument in the brilliant middle part. That the orchestra is comprised of both Indian and Western instruments playing, in turns, off of and in concert with each other only makes the achievement all the more remarkable, especially in the context of a pop album.

I do realize, of course, that the triumph here is not exclusively George's or even George Martin's. Like most of the best Beatles' recordings, the interplay between musicians is what elevates this performance, making it very much a collaborative victory.

That said, it's easy to understand why people might find this an interruption of an otherwise well-integrated cycle of songs. It's a challenge within a challenge, a particularly off-the-path digression in an album that depends more heavily on "flow" than any the Beatles had ever put out. In that context, it is disruptive, but that, too, is part of its success for me. It confronts the listener and almost forces a strong opinion (whether it's "I love it" or "I have to skip it every time"). That's one of the primary purposes of art, no?

By the way, I doubt very much that George was "allowed" only one song on Sgt. Pepper. I have no support for my opinion, but I can only imagine that, if George had forced the issue, room would have been found for "Only a Northern Song." I have a hunch that he didn't put up much of a fight when George Martin suggested the song be dropped from consideration for the album. (Count me among those who do love the song for what it is, even as he agrees that it would not have fit on Sgt. Pepper.)

Brian

 

With apologies to fans of 'Mr Kite', I have thought it would have been cool if 'Kite' could have been replaced with 'It's All Too Much', preferably the nine minute version. I think 'Much' was recorded shortly after the Pepper LP release, if I remember correctly. Would have been a great way to recognize and promote George's increasing importance as a third songwriting force in the group.

 

I agree with everything you said. I'll mark it on my calender (I never Agree with anyone) I think As a standalone song it's beautiful, On SPLHB it serves as a great contrast amongst the other songs carnival of sounds. It gives the album Nuance and interplay...in my opinion anyway

 

There is such a thing as critical consensus. Strawberry Fields Forever is generally regarded as one of the all-time best Beatles songs ... and part of the best Beatles single ever.

I'm pretty certain that Only A Northern Song has never placed in the Top 10 in any of those "Best Beatles Songs" articles magazines are fond of publishing. I'd be willing to bet that it might have placed in the Bottom 10 in at least one of them.

So it may be "personal conjecture", but it's also a fairly popular conjecture that Only A Northern Song is negative, depressing, cynical, uncommercial etc etc. You might think that Strawberry Fields shares all the same qualities, but you'd be wrong ... it certainly wasn't uncommercial since it did quite well on the charts.

Strawberry Fields Forever is a great song despite its negative aspects. Part of the genius of The Beatles was that they consistently got commercial material from ideas that seemed far from the pop norm. A Day In The Life is another example. Only A Northern Song, on the other hand, just isn't commercial.

I like the song personally, but I wouldn't have put it on Sgt. Pepper.