Comments on: Teddy Boy

By: No one in particular

No one in particular — Thu, 08 Nov 2018 04:10:45 +0000

One of the best comments I’ve read on this site.

By: Kalle

Kalle — Tue, 21 Aug 2018 22:56:28 +0000

Irritating that some of McCartney’s more charming songs still described using those shit Americanisms – syrupy, smaltzy etc. so beloved of Rolling Stone magazine. I don’t see the song as maudlin. I know he can be overly winsome at times but even so. Wonder how all the non beatles songs out there that really are mushy are called. Perhaps too much is read into John’s reaction to Teddy Boy. It may be about Paul himself when told as a young boy he may have to join the army and kill men. Maybe I’m Amazed – I liked it at first but now it’s neediness puts me off.

By: wborys

wborys — Mon, 20 Aug 2018 20:17:35 +0000

sorry, I cannot listen to more than a few seconds of this song. too syrupy, sing-songy, sweet, freshfaced pap; Macca at his maudlin worst. just my two cents worth. (this is from the McCartney lover who went catatonic with awe after hearing ‘Maybe I’m Amazed’ for the first time).

and after all the remarkable comments on its possible effects on John, I’ll give him a pass for not wanting to be involved in it.

By: Yeah Boy

Yeah Boy — Fri, 09 Mar 2018 08:19:20 +0000

In the Glyn Johns version there is a second Acoustic Guitar IMO played by John.

By: Sean O'Hagan

Sean O'Hagan — Fri, 04 Nov 2016 12:18:12 +0000

Yes, I learned more about the song in the comments section than I did in the article. The more I read about the Beatles and understand their internal environment, the more I understand John. He was my fav Beatle, and sometimes I thought he was a real dick. But when you get a passive aggressive McCartney writing these type of songs that hit below the belt, I can understand John more. I’m sure John was thinking or maybe saying, if you have something to say, don’t hide behind an instrument or lyric……be a man and step up.

By: Beatrix Oliveira

Beatrix Oliveira — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 14:28:05 +0000

I agree. It seems to me that he related too much to the subject matter, and did not want to release a song that obviously would remind people of his own story. Not because it was painful, but disrespectful as well. Would you like your band mate, with whom you’ve been quarrelling for a while, to tell the whole world about your painful past through his eyes?
Plus the song was not that good.

By: Eric Thespian

Eric Thespian — Sun, 03 May 2015 12:43:43 +0000

I agree entirely with you, Rose – Ted is John, and that’s why he hated the gut-wrenching pathos of that song, which was way too close to the bone – the old Lennon-McCartney pact of “don’t get real with me, man”. Good point too about the song story not ending – perhaps he could already sense there was tragedy ahead of some sort for his alter ego. (For his part, Paul would have hated the trivial version of himself portrayed in the film “Nowhere Boy” – how unfair was that, whether intentional or inadvertent).

The irascible schizoid self-loathing Lennon was the unrequited love of McCartney’s life, as he was (to a less extent) of Harrison’s and Starkey’s. Jude of course was also Lennon – acknowledging and forgiving both himself and Cyn being pushed aside for a new muse. And who was Macca thinking of in LAWR when he plucked up the courage to say, “Anyway, you’ll never know, the many ways I’ve tried.” It was “Here Today” two decades ahead of time.

Dear, but many us are going to cry a lot when Paul passes away – so much of our own dreams and lives subconsciously buried in the legendary teamwork of those young scouse lads… weren’t they fantastic? The ultimate male fantasy.

By: rosefromthegallery

rosefromthegallery — Tue, 05 Aug 2014 11:16:50 +0000

I have always thought that Teddy Boy was unquestionably about John Lennon. And knowing how John was affected by the entire scenario in his life about his mother – not just her death; if all else had been right he could have mourned his mother’s death normally – it made sense that he would just want to put his hands flat on his ears and block this song from entering his mind. In real life, he simply mocked it out loud and continuously until he couldn’t hear it. It is a marvel how closely knit John and Paul must have been for John to act the way he did and for Paul to simply digest all of John’s rude behaviour as if it was only the wild behaviour of one of his own (Paul’s) strands of hair.

Another thing I have always thought is that Paul McCartney never finished the lyrics to Teddy Boy. The lyrics distinctly start with a “story” to be told, yet there is clearly no ending to the tale, even the music evokes chaos and questions as to the fate of “Ted”, on the album McCartney.

John had often wondered at Paul’s ability to write songs that described him (John). This one just struck the target in the bull’s eye.

By: stuartgardner

stuartgardner — Sun, 25 May 2014 13:02:49 +0000

Perhaps an irritant for John was the subject matter. A song about a boy and his mother dealing with an absentee father could have been painful for him. The subtext of the Teddy Boys might have made two calls back to unhappier days in one song for him.

By: stuartgardner

stuartgardner — Sun, 25 May 2014 12:10:30 +0000

Apart from singing “Do-si-do,” just how did John sabotage McCartney’s early attempts to teach it to the group?
I love the tune.
Nothing said here, perhaps because it’s so obvious, of the song being a poke at the Teddy Boy subculture.

By: Bungalow Bob

Bungalow Bob — Tue, 01 Oct 2013 22:48:57 +0000

I always thought Teddy Boy was one of McCartney’s most forgettable tunes, and the lyrics didn’t do the song any favors, either. I can see why the other Beatles were less than enthusiastic about it. I’d really like to hear Spector’s trademark treatment of the song, if only for a laugh. There is only so much a “Wall Of Sound” can do to take a sad song, and make it better.

By: Billy Shears

Billy Shears — Tue, 01 Oct 2013 17:30:36 +0000

I disagree with the masses on this one. It is even one of the weaker songs on the” McCartney” album. I think that the Beatles made the right choice in leaving it off an LP. I have a bootleg with the long version – it is meandering and searching for a hook of some sort. I think that John was bored and wanted it to end.

By: James Ferrell

James Ferrell — Tue, 20 Aug 2013 03:57:40 +0000

The McCartney version is delicate, beautiful, haunting. I especially like the descant. The Beatles versions sound uninspired, casualties of the Let It Be ennui.

By: GeorgeTSimpson

GeorgeTSimpson — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 15:45:30 +0000

I wanna hear the spector mix. Yes I don’t like him but Spector always did mixes for le it be which sound like normal songs and i want to hear a version of teddy boy by the beatles which does this

By: Stephen Anderson

Stephen Anderson — Sat, 02 Apr 2011 00:08:03 +0000

After hearing the uncut version (from either 24 or 25 January 1969, two dates given in this article and I don’t have the Recording Sessions book right now to look it up) I prefer the Anthology edit. The intro is much superior to that of the full take I think, with even more Lennon goofing. Wonder how the second half sounds? Though a few caveats about the Anthology version: from a musical perspective, it sounds weird fading out on a full lyric like it does. If I recall correctly one whistling part is removed, why not tack that on and fade on whistling? Or cut to the real ending? Beatles nerd-ery, oh my!!!

By: RGowran

RGowran — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 01:31:52 +0000

“Get Back” version from Anthology is the best. It is truly awesome.

By: Paul Angel

Paul Angel — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 00:14:28 +0000

In my opinion, I love the original Get Back version than the Anthologized version. I feel that the Anthology version took away its purity as to the original 1969 Glyn Johns mix. I also love the Get Back version to the McCartney lp version. I guess cause it was the first original attempt of the song and that it had the Beatles on it. I suggest buying the unreleased Get Back album on CD and judge for yourself.