MAY 17th, 1971: RAM IS RELEASED
❝ Ladies and gentlemen, this is an album from a long, long time ago, when the world was different. This is an album that is part of my history – it goes back to the wee hills of Scotland where it was formed. It’s an album called RAM. It reminds me of my hippie days and the free attitude with which was created. I hope you’re going to like it, because I do! ❞
Genre: indie pop, psychedelia SIDE ONE: 1. Too Many People 2. 3 Legs 3. Ram On 4. Dear Boy 5. Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey 6. Smile Away SIDE TWO: 1. Heart of the Country 2. Monkberry Moon Delight 3. Eat at Home 4. Long Haired Lady 5. Ram On (Reprise) 6. The Back Seat of My Car
PAUL: Linda and I were travelling through Scotland, heading north from Glasgow. As I’m driving, I’m just thinking. Linda often used to say she can see my brain working, my face would get a look on it and it’d be just filing through ideas. And I just hit upon the word ‘ram’. It’s strong, it’s a male animal, and then there is the idea of ‘ramming’, you know, pushing forward strongly.
⊱ The cover photo was Linda’s and the surrounding border was something I did. It was all very homemade and quirky, but I think that added to the charm of it. I remember when we were doing the layout for the gatefold, we put a little piece of grass from the garden and stuck it on. There were all sorts of little things that just came from our lifestyle at that moment. […] when we went to Scotland, we had a very free, sort of hippie lifestyle. It meant I could sit around in the kitchen in the little farmhouse we lived in, with the kids running around and me just with my guitar, making up anything I fancied.
⊱ I’d been serious long enough with the Beatles, and I wanted to see if I could do something that played more into my love of the surreal. As far as art’s concerned, I probably like modern art more than traditional art. […] For me, it manifested itself in things like “Monkberry Moon Delight” or “3 Legs”. They were slightly wacky; it was nice having an opportunity to do that rather than having to write for someone else’s preconceived notion.
⊱ I tried to avoid any Beatles clichés and just went to different places. So the songs became a little more episodic or something. I took on that kind of idea a bit more than I would’ve with The Beatles. I suppose I was just letting myself be free. So if I wanted to do “Monkberry Moon Delight” with a “piano up my nose”, then I figured, that’ll be ok.
listening to the album imagine (1971) by John Lennon is a rollercoaster because why are the songs like "I wish we had peace everywhere, I suck, Paul McCartney I hate you kill yourself, I love you Yoko"
I finally watched the Rupert and the Frog song (We all Stand Together). I still see people (mostly older, mostly on Facebook) dunking on “the frog chorus” and it’s just so clearly an outdated notion for it to be lame for a musician to make content explicitly for children. It’s so common now for artists who’ve become parents to make something their kids will enjoy. Jack White sang a song with the muppets on Sesame Street because he loves his fucking kids. It’s so normal now.
I get where Mary Had a Little Lamb released as single by a rock band went down wrong .. but this is creative, whimsical content explicitly *for* kids. The SONG, in particular, is beautifully composed, imaginative. Lovely! I keep listening to it.
He was 20 years into his career. The Beatles were never Led Zeppelin. It’s hard for me to wrap my head around people still being so weird about this. He such a well rounded musician; it’s all like an exploration in another part of his creativity. There are elements of the classical composing that would come later… and the playful, experimenter who made Robber’s Ball (my beloved), McCartney II, the Fireman records.
But anyway, watching this today reminded me of this moment from Behind the Scenes of BBC Radio where someone presented Paul and Mike with their childhood Rupert book. The title page filled in by their parents reads “This book belongs to Paul McCartney and Michael McCartney”.
It was either Paul or Mike who said they didn’t get many gifts as kids and for Christmas they’d usually get one toy addressed to Paul and Michael from Father Christmas. It makes me really consider why this Rupert project was so important for him that he held onto it for 15 years, always sort of considering ideas for it. There were those RAM era songs that were specifically for the “Rupert project”. It comes up so much in the McCartney legacy book.
Then there’s the element of the frogs and his history with frogs, from growing the tadpoles in his own hand made frog pond in the backyard and checking on them every day until one day they were frogs that hopped away. Then there was the dark, frog killing episode that shocked his brother and he probably felt some shame about.
But here, in this story, there are guard frogs on duty protecting their mostly undisturbed world. Happy and content, it’s the frogs that create this magical chorus.
There’s even a father and son frog pair who’ve come to see this event that only happens every couple of hundred years.
The father is rather Jim McCartney-esque with his pipe and 1940s style hat and manner. There’s a moment where the son inadvertently annoys his father and instantly recoils like he’s about to get hit and momentarily it looks like the father is considering it but gets a hold of himself.
But later, wrapped up in the music together, the father hugs his son.
I don’t know what I’m saying exactly but I think there’s some exploration of his childhood here and something about Rupert and the frog chorus that’s particularly meaningful to him.
Maybe he’s reconciling the dark, frog killing episode of childhood with the vegetarian, animal lover he’d become by giving the frogs their own hero’s story. Rupert, Jim, the threat of violence, the presence of love, the frogs he loved but also was violent toward.. and music at the center of everything. Unifying, healing. We all stand together.
For anyone interested, the full BBC clip is here
The full Rupert short is here
Horse riding. 1995 / 2025. First photo taken by LINDA McCARTNEY and second photo taken by PAUL McCARTNEY. (x)(x)
The Quarry Men’s banjo player, Rod Davis, recalls, “I had bought the banjo from my uncle and if he’d sold me his guitar, I might have been a decent enough guitarist to keep McCartney out of the band. I might have learnt guitar chords, I might not, and that was the big limitation really. McCartney could play the guitar like a guitar and we couldn’t, and let’s face it, a banjo doesn’t look good in a rock’n’ roll group. I only met Paul on one other occasion after the Woolton fête and it was at auntie Mimi’s a week or two later. He dropped in to hear us practising. From my point of view, I was the person he was replacing – it’s like Pete Best – you’re the guy who doesn’t know. Some things had gone on that I was unaware of.”
(Best of the Beatles: The sacking of Pete Best by Spencer Leigh, 2015)