Why isn't 'Electric Arguments' a Paul McCartney album instead of a Fireman album?

  Paul McCartney's "Electric Arguments" album is listed as by
  the Fireman. Should it have said Paul McCartney instead?
  (Photo by Steve Gullick. Courtesy MPL Communications Ltd.)

Is "Electric Arguments" by the Fireman? Or is it really Paul McCartney?

There's a lengthy interview with Paul McCartney talking about "Electric Arguments" in the Liverpool Daily Post. In it, he addresses this issue, something we commented on when we reviewed the album on our website -- why does the album have the Fireman's name and not his?

"It (the McCartney name) can get in the way sometimes," McCartney tells interviewer Andy Welch. "Your reputation walks ahead of you. Think of 'Sgt Pepper.' That was the idea behind that album, too."

He adds, "When we made that album, we became those characters. I mean, you’re not stupid, so you’re not really fooling yourself, but it’s enough of a trick to make you look at things differently. With 'Electric Arguments,' I wasn’t stepping up to the microphone thinking ‘This is a Paul McCartney vocal, this must be a certain way’ – I was thinking ‘This can go any way, because this is The Fireman, and he can do anything he wants’."

If I have any (electric) arguments with Paul about "Electric Arguments," that would be it. Why couldn't this have been a McCartney album?

In fact, I'll say outright. I think "Electric Arguments" should have been by Paul McCartney. 

People expect certain things from Paul McCartney albums. Ballads. Tender moments. "Yesterday" relived. Maybe that's the solution, Paul. People expect things of you. Don't always give them what they expect. Surprise them. You did with "Electric Arguments" and it worked. Very well, in fact.

One could argue that calling it a Fireman album contributed in a small way to the album's quick descent on the Billboard charts. It's now #158 on the Billboard Comprehensive Album chart for the week of Jan. 10 after only four weeks.

One could also argue that as non-commercial (putting it mildly) as the previous Fireman albums were, this one isn't. In fact, it's very much commercial by today's musical standards  -- as Paul McCartney albums try to be and always are.

Having an album like "Electric Arguments" under your belt -- under your name -- would have forced critics and listeners, not to mention your fans, to adopt a whole new perspective about you. With "Electric Arguments" under the name of the Fireman, that perspective gets pushed aside a bit. And maybe forgotten sooner.

That's not to say Paul McCartney's resume is a failure. It's anything but. But in these days of branding and thinking outside the box, which you've said in interviews you did with this album, is it wrong to surprise people as you did with this album? Not at all. In fact, we'd be glad to hear many more similar surprises.

Maybe, though, the message that using the Fireman label is not to expect more where "Electric Arguments" came from. We hope that's not the case.

There's nothing wrong with being a bit edgy musically. "Electric Arguments" clearly makes that argument for Paul McCartney.

Well, the Fireman. Or was it really Paul McCartney?

(Do you think "Electric Arguments" should have been a McCartney album? I'm interested in your comments. Let's hear what you think.)