John and Paul made a marriage of inspiration, necessity, creation and functionality. Like all marriages, they had rough stretches and, ultimately, the relationship failed. You might say, though, that they stayed together for the sake of the kids — all of us fanboys and fangirls — and the sake of the family — The Beatles. Whichever figure of speech or image works for you, what works for me is this: it was a classy move, and look at what John and Paul created and gave all of us by sticking together for as long as they did.

I’d add that, in IMO, God so loved the world that he connected the Beatles with George Martin, that their music would Live and be Light forever.

Is there a grudge about John?

My thought though is many Beatles singles were highly innovative in that they offered original hits and memorable songs on both sides. Few groups offered this type of musical quality. I always considered Rain to be the A side of Paperback Writer/Rain, and so did most of my friends. Ditto for Penny Lane/Strawberry Fields; Strawberry was our dominant side. I gave about equal play to Hey Jude/Revolution, but my point is classifying most Beatle singles via their A/B sides seems a bit unfair and non sequitur. I think as someone else commented I’d have preferred an album (double, I guess) including both B and double A sides. Also adding significant non US/UK No. 1 songs like Nowhere Man and Revolution. Or, perhaps Apple could have released a compilation of Beatles top ten singles, noting their chart positions with descriptive liner notes. In any case, such a CD would have seemed more appropriate to the uniqueness of Lennon-McCartney songwriting and reflected Beatles singles better.

As for B-sides, the single sleeves often had the B-side on them, I think.

In any case what I personally meant by “double A” sides was a release that featured both an “a” song from John and one from Paul. I view Jude/Revolution this way. The picture sleeve I bought advertised “The Beatles, Hey Jude/Revolution, as if a single with two A sides (as opposed to singles with real B side “filler” not advertised on the sleeve.) Having two “A” class songs certainly helped sales and I remember lot’s of us who bought Beatle singles would favor one side or the other. Revolution did very well in US charts and was No. 1 in Australia/New Zealand. In all the Beatles had something like 45 singles released that in fact hit No. 1 in various countries (some after the breakup in 1970.) So in my view the Beatles One album is quite subjective in it’s content. Revolution should have been on it, as should (at minimum) Strawberry Fields, Please Please Me, and Nowhere Man (which was No. 1 in Canada and Australia and No. 2 In the US.)

John has said himself that he was the leader originally. In 1966, John started to get lazy and after Brian Epstein died in 1967, he lost the will to keep going. Paul helped The Beatles pull through and he became the leader.

Jude was the Beatles biggest single (i.e., biggest seller and longest time at no. 1.) It was also considered by some as something of a comeback for them after their Magical Mystery Tour television flop (although the album went straight to No. 1.) However, no one anywhere ever said Hey Jude was their “most essential” song and you really just made that up to support your own argument/criticism. In logic that’s called a circular argument and invalidates any conclusion.

BTW, the Beatles had no “leader”; they were equal opportunity show offs. They always maintained this, as Lennon himself often confirmed at press conferences where he was frequently known as the witty show off 🙂 Lennon and McCartney were a partnership, a point Lennon again repeatedly made (that from the earliest days going back to the Quarrymen, Lennon chose Paul as his song writing partner.) This is why many Beatle singles were in fact double A sides, with a song from Paul and a song from John. Not always but the best singles (such as Hey Jude/Revolution) were symbolic of that partnership. Real Beatles fans and critics always think of their albums and singles in those terms, not some silly “my mommy said” pissing match between Lennon and McCartney.

How silly. The album contains songs that were #1 on the charts. It has nothing to do with what Paul did or did not do.

Paul didn’t make up the UK or American charts, for heavens sake.