"... And Jet..." They went looking for something wrong in his songs. Titling it as a catheter of grammatical errors, but forgetting some fundamental things.
The first one: why they did not manage to write the songs themselves? Second: the metric. To match the musical note (a 4/4 mark) with a text string, use what is called a poetic license.
What the Journal defines as indeed, many of McCartney's greatest achievements are afflicted by fundamental grammatical errors and non-sequiturs, It appears funny in the general context. Anyway, here are some excerpts of the article. Up to you decide and have your own opinion about. Here's the article by
Love Me Do
The first ever Lennon-McCartney single in the UK was composed primarily by Paul and you don’t even have to go past the title, which sounds like it was written by Yoda.
Obviously this is a complete garbling of the imperative mood and at best is missing a comma, as in: “Love me, do!” Even with the redundant third word, the correct usage should be “Do love me” or simply the vastly more efficient “Love me”. (and yet the song wouldn't work in this way)
P. S. I Love You
Ironically, in a song written about writing, McCartney commits one of songwriting’s worst faux pas (which, incidentally, is both singular and plural), which is to “rhyme” a word with the same word.
Unfortunately this is not uncommon, however McCartney manages to rhyme not just one but two words with the same two words and make this the central hook of the song:
As I write this letter, send my love to you
Remember that I’ll always be in love with you
For No One
One of the most hauntingly beautiful ballads ever written, and a centrepiece of the Beatles’ landmark album Revolver, this song nonetheless hinges on a deep logical fallacy in the second verse:
You want her, you need her, and yet you don’t believe her when she says her love is dead
Surely it is obvious to any student of human nature that if the protagonist both wants her and needs the object of his romantic affection he is unlikely to believe her when she says her love is dead.
Clearly the lyric should be:
Y ou want her, you need her, and therefore you don’t believe her when she says her love is dead
Martha My Dear
This is a love song Paul McCartney wrote to his sheepdog and yet remarkably that is not the most offensive thing about it.
Consider the opening verse:
Martha, my dear
Though I spend my days in conversation, please
Remember me
Firstly, this is a complete non-sequitur. Why on earth would a sheepdog not remember her master simply because he spends his days in conversation?
Moreover, with whom is he conversing? Obviously, if he is conversing with his sheepdog then it would be impossible for the dog not to remember him unless both were in the throes of dementia. And if he is conversing with someone else the dog would likewise be unlikely to forget him, even if he was in the next room. It is well documented that canines have excellent hearing.
Jet
Tragically, once McCartney went solo his songs made even less sense, grammatical or otherwise. Yet it appeared that the less sense he made the more successful he was. For example, the entire lyric sheet for his best solo album Band on the Run is utterly nonsensical, including one song called “Mamunia”, another whose entire chorus is “Ho hey ho, ho hey ho, ho hey ho, ho hey ho” and another in which he repeatedly declares “I’m a bluebird”.
However it is the album’s first hit single Jet which really takes the cake, with a chorus (or something) that is so devoid of any discernible meaning that it is hard to know how to even punctuate it:
Ah mater want Jet to always love me
Ah mater want Jet to always love me
Ah mater, much later
Perhaps tellingly, Jet was also the name of one of McCartney’s pet dogs, yet incredibly this fact leaves the lyrics making even less sense.
READ ALSO Paul McCartney refused to attend The Beatles Hall of Fame ceremony –
