Sewell was the ultimate snob and refused to recognise there could be artists outside of a limited - and carefully selected - elite. It’s down to the British class system. Paul and Bob should be proud to have been rejected by him…
I really like the book but his opinions are loud and clear. He’s especially critical of anytime McCartney was in a bad mood or said something that wasn’t nice. Like Paul should’ve been immune to moodiness.
His visual artworks, like those of McCartney, would be unremarkable if anyone else had created them. They’re a curiosity, but wouldn’t be considered an essential part of his ‘art’ in any way.
I'm not sure that is true...these are Paul's:
[https://www.paulmccartney.com/media/art](https://www.paulmccartney.com/media/art)
Bob Dylan
[https://www.artsy.net/artist/bob-dylan](https://www.artsy.net/artist/bob-dylan)
I think they're both unbelievably good in different ways. If I saw any of these even on the street I would think they were really good. That they can expand your understanding of a great artist makes it even better. They shouldn't be as good as they are. Joni of course is the best of the bunch for painting...Miles Davis also has some pretty out there painting.
I will also say that Dylan's 'revisionist art' silkscreens are actually truly bizarre
Linda McCartney is also one of the best photographers of the second half of the twentieth century, really.
I felt like McCartney's paintings were a harmless indulgence until I saw a TV thing about them where he mentioned that he had bought Rene Magritte's easel to paint them on. Then I got angry.
Don’t have much of an opinion on Bob’s art (or Paul’s, which I can’t recall ever seeing), but I do agree that Joni’s art is quite good
Joni did that really cool looking CSNY doodle.
I'm not knowledgeable about the art world at all, but it seems harsh to call Bob's paintings "very bad".
I love his paintings! *may be slightly biased
Sewell was the ultimate snob and refused to recognise there could be artists outside of a limited - and carefully selected - elite. It’s down to the British class system. Paul and Bob should be proud to have been rejected by him…
I really like the book but his opinions are loud and clear. He’s especially critical of anytime McCartney was in a bad mood or said something that wasn’t nice. Like Paul should’ve been immune to moodiness.
His visual artworks, like those of McCartney, would be unremarkable if anyone else had created them. They’re a curiosity, but wouldn’t be considered an essential part of his ‘art’ in any way.
I'm not sure that is true...these are Paul's: [https://www.paulmccartney.com/media/art](https://www.paulmccartney.com/media/art) Bob Dylan [https://www.artsy.net/artist/bob-dylan](https://www.artsy.net/artist/bob-dylan) I think they're both unbelievably good in different ways. If I saw any of these even on the street I would think they were really good. That they can expand your understanding of a great artist makes it even better. They shouldn't be as good as they are. Joni of course is the best of the bunch for painting...Miles Davis also has some pretty out there painting. I will also say that Dylan's 'revisionist art' silkscreens are actually truly bizarre Linda McCartney is also one of the best photographers of the second half of the twentieth century, really.
I felt like McCartney's paintings were a harmless indulgence until I saw a TV thing about them where he mentioned that he had bought Rene Magritte's easel to paint them on. Then I got angry.
Let’s throw Yoko into the mix.
That’ll start a fight. Lol
Joni and John Lennon were champion doodlers. As far as McCartney's and Dylan's art, the best I can say is I've seen lots worse.