The thing about McCartney, and many successful songwriters from his era, is that they rebelled against, but had already absorbed the main tenets of professional songwriting when it was at its peak a generation before the Beatles. They may have rejected the music of the 1930s and 1940s, but they used the same harmonic structure and melodic figures, and it was guaranteed to appeal to the ear of those who also had subconsciously absorbed those tenets.

I will not say that contemporary songwriters are not as good, that is too subjective, but it is evident to anyone who understands the evolution of Western music, that today's song writers do not have the solid musical foundation of previous eras.

Setanta wrote on Apr 29^th, 2017 at 10:25pm:


That may be so, but there is always the claim that its just a matter of taste. To most people "music" is popular music, and its not particularly necessary to be musically inventive. The main thing is to have words. Hence the popularity of Rap based offerings, but it is generally true of R and B etc.

One big hurdle for songwriting as an art, is expectation. Unfortunately, the rise of commercial recorded music has created a continual anticipation of the next big thing. Singers are somewhat reluctant to record songs they did not write. Of course, there is a serious financial incentive, but the reluctance is presented as a kind of self-imposed duty to one's own originality. The trouble is originality is no guarantee of artistic value, anymore than a desire to perform in public is a guarantee of talent.

Just going through the motions is not good enough. When great art forms reach their peak of creativity, they do not level off, they go into decline. Greek and Egyptian art are excellent examples of this, when the true artistry is replaced by uninspired and watered down imitation. It is my view that Western popular music has entered its "Hellenistic" period, and needs to die before something truly original can arise.