In answering whether the world needs yet another Paul McCartney solo album, one must first answer an even more pressing question: can one ever have too much money?
And the answer, like the answer to the original question, is no.
First, let me just say that I have nothing against Paul McCartney, at least not against his Beatles-era work. Those were great: Yesterday, Hey Jude, and all the other classics. Although I do slightly begrudge him for writing “When I’m 64”, which I felt totally out of place on Sergeant Peppers, but that is a debate for another time and place.
Hell, I even find his earliest solo work fine.
But by God, what is a man doing when the pinnacle of his music was fucking FORTY years ago? What does he have to prove? Paul McCartney does not need to put out shitty solo albums in his 60s to prove that he’s still relevant. I mean, for Christ’s sakes, the man wrote some timeless songs that my grandchildren’s generation will still be listening. So instead of playing those three goddamn fucking chords over and over again on his ukulele on “Dance Tonight”, that utterly lame, insipid lead-off single for his new album, Paul McCartney should just shut the fuck up and enjoy his millions and millions of money in peace.
Which brings us back to the first question: can one ever have too much money? How much of a corporate whore does McCartney have to be when he releases an album on a record label owned by Starbucks? Star-fucking-bucks!! It’s not like the guy is panhandling outside of Abbey Road for crack.
All in all, another Paul McCartney solo album just doesn’t make any sense. And if I hear “Dance Tonight” one more time in the Starbucks that I go to every morning for coffee, I’m going to have to burn down the motherfucker.