Who's the best/most important Beatle?

[Eja117]

No wise guy answers like Pete Best or George Martin or Apu.

Aparently Rolling Stone just ranked the top 100 Beatles songs with some interesting results.

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-08-25/entertainment/beatles.songs.roll_1_lennon-mccartney-lennon-and-mccartney-lyrics?_s=PM:SHOWBIZ

There was an interesting analysis in yahoo.com, but I can't find it.

It seemed to say most music critics give the nod to John because of edginess, but also because he was killed early, so he gets extra sympathy that he maybe shouldn't get


I think John had about 10 more songs, but Paul's were often a little higher off the list and Paul had more notable songs left off surprisingly

[Casperian]

The list is utter crap. Hey Jude and Let It Be ahead of Eleanor Rigby, I Am The Walrus or Happiness Is A Warm Gun? The Rolling Stone isnīt worth the paper it is printed on.

I think the only one who gets "sympathy-points" here is McCartney for his life after the breakup, because of his "Gooder" image until this day, how he stood by Linda and what happened with Heather Mills, while Lennon is remembered for his time with Yoko Ono...and everyone hates Yoko Ono.

My vote definitly goes to Lennon. To simplify, John was the artist, Paul was mainstream. Lennonīs "edginess", as you call it, was so influential to what the Beatles represent and stand for until this day, that thereīs just no way around him, imho.

[Donoghus]

John Lennon.  And its not even a debate.

[RAcker]

Ihate lists or this reason.  Bias and taste is a huge factor in ranking art.

Honestly it's between Paul and John because they were the primary song writers.  However, neither was as good without the other. If you take away Paul within The Beatles framework, John suffers a little and vice versa.

If forced to choose with a "warm gun" to my head, I'll choose John due to his introduction of artistic experimentation into the mix above and beyond the other 3.

My personal favorite is Ringo.  "They'll just reject me in the end and I'll be frustrated."

[RAcker]

Blackberry typing caused the typos above...just saying.

[Lucky17]

If Beatles were Celtics:

McCartney = Pierce
Lennon = KG
Harrison = Ray
Ringo = Big Baby

[BballTim]

  The sixties are over.

[Donoghus]

  The sixties are over.

That's an astute observation.

[ACF]

  The sixties are over.

But the music they (the Beatles) made is better than around 80 % of what has been put out since then.

[BballTim]

  The sixties are over.

But the music they (the Beatles) made is better than around 80 % of what has been put out since then.

   [dang]ing with faint praise...

[CelticsWhat35]

The list is utter crap. Hey Jude and Let It Be ahead of Eleanor Rigby, I Am The Walrus or Happiness Is A Warm Gun? The Rolling Stone isnīt worth the paper it is printed on.

I think the only one who gets "sympathy-points" here is McCartney for his life after the breakup, because of his "Gooder" image until this day, how he stood by Linda and what happened with Heather Mills, while Lennon is remembered for his time with Yoko Ono...and everyone hates Yoko Ono.

My vote definitly goes to Lennon. To simplify, John was the artist, Paul was mainstream. Lennonīs "edginess", as you call it, was so influential to what the Beatles represent and stand for until this day, that thereīs just no way around him, imho.

I agree with you that Hey Jude and Let it Be are overrated, although I still like the songs.  And I would put Eleanor Rigby and I Am the Walrus ahead of both.  So I figured that "Happiness Is a Warm Gun" was just one of those songs that everyone knows, but not everyone knows the name.  I can honestly say I've never heard that song before until just now.  Now this is obviously just my opinion, but I thought that song was just plain bad.

[SalmonAndMashedPotatoes]

There is no such thing as the 'best/most important Beatle.'  What made the Beatles special is the collaborative magic that occurred when those 4 gentlemen where in the same room.   Take a George, Paul, John, or Ringo away and the magic changes and becomes something less than Beatlemusic.

Questions like these mistake musical talent as the driving factor behind good music when in fact great music is created collaboratively in the moment among empathic musicians who are both listening and communicating on a non-verbal level. 

The reason super-talented musicians fail to produce timeless music is because they don't work well with others, or are too ego-driven to accept outside input, much like great basketball players who can't sacrifice their individual stats and glory to fit into a winning team ethic.

[Redz]

There is no such thing as the 'best/most important Beatle.' 

Maybe there's no "most important", but I always considered Ringo the "least important".

[Eja117]

There is no such thing as the 'best/most important Beatle.' 

Maybe there's no "most important", but I always considered Ringo the "least important".

I never liked saying it or thinking it but I gotta agree.

My bro bought a poster that said nothing but Bealtes at the top and Ringo wasn't in it and my bro was like "Who cares"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68edB_Q1e4g

[Eja117]

  The sixties are over.

But the music they (the Beatles) made is better than around 80 % of what has been put out since then.

I'm going to go with 97% myself.