The essence of “The Beatles” always emanated from John

Lots of great points very nicely brought out here; you basically explained the reasoning behind what I’ve sensed for the last forty years or so concerning Paul. Just to clarify how I perceive the representative part; while I do feel that Paul always was *that* from a public standpoint, the essence of “The Beatles” always, effortlessly and naturally, emanated from John. This was a huge thing to successfully represent and always be taken seriously in doing so. I always thought that with every step of “representation”, whether in speaking about the band, it’s music or whatever, Paul was always aware of the “shadow of John” looking over his shoulder….much more so after John died and to this day.

Of course I agree with that but for me, there was an inner quality about John which, even when he wasn’t out front with all the hits or project ambitions, superseded the other three. One example that sticks in my mind for the last 56 years is how I perceived him in Revolver the very first time I heard it (the Capitol version). While he only had two songs on it, they were-to me-the most powerful musical statements and had the final word on each album side. This showed John, to me, stepping up from the back of the room as the omnipresent leader and main force, even if not in evidence outwardly. When I think “Beatles”, the first name that instantaneously comes to mind is “John Lennon”. This does NOT imply that he could’ve done it without the other three. But that he’s the natural, representative force behind their essense and unity. Much as Paul tried to be that, the point is he had to “try”. If, for example in 1969, John had said, “I want us to stay together”, I strongly feel that for a time at least, they would have. His simple words had more power and influence over the others than the three of them combined. My opinion.