Paul McCartney: The Life --> my book review

But as I posted in another thread, Jane made her views known in a secretive manner:

Well, if the truth be told, Jane has indeed "told" her side of the story. But she did it in a secret way. Here (shown below) is her book "Jane Asher's Calendar of Cakes", and in that book you can clearly read about her relationship with Paul.

For instance, there are recipes for the following cakes:
Rotten-Paul Strawberry Shortcake
Not-Such-An-Angel Cake
Paul-Is-A-Devil Food Cake
Wish-I-Could-Pound-Macca Cake
Paul-Used-Me-Like-A-Sponge Cake

 

I don't understand how a responsible biographer can just plain ignore the fact that Ram, once derided for reasons that had little to do with the album itself, is now widely praised as brilliant and considered one of the best solo albums by an ex-Beatle. Even if Norman doesn't personally like the album, why ignore this major turnaround that's taken place?

Interestingly Norman actually likes Dear Friend. He did an interview with Esquire about the book (10 Things You Didn't Know About Paul McCartney ») where he praises Dear Friend as "just as good as anything he's ever written." I'm sure Norman likes the song because it's about John.

Of course Norman says that he now sees some of Paul's solo work as "magnificent" but which albums is he talking about? He doesn't really say in the interview, or in the book really. This is a book about Paul's life -- as uberfamous celebrity -- and clearly not a book about his music, which I guess is a good thing as Norman seems ill-equipped to analyze the music.

 

^the danger lies in the fact that no matter what he, or any biographer, says they like or dislike, there will always be a segment of fans who will deride them for their opinion. So in that way, perhaps it's better that he didn't comment too much on the music. Ya can't please everybody!

 

The book is ~825 pages long, and the Beatles split is finished (i.e. the outcome of the lawsuit in 1971) around page 475, so the remainder is solo years (keeping in mind that he discusses the making of McCartney and Ram parallel to the lawsuit to dissolve the partnership). It's almost a 50:50 split, which I was pleased to see.

 

My point was not that Norman should like or not like Ram. My point was that the complete turnaround in the public/critical consensus of Ram is a fact, and one that a responsible biographer should include in the book (talking, for example, about how Ram turned out to be indie pop decades before indie pop emerged as a genre) -- and not ignore that turnaround (as Norman does) simply because he doesn't like the album. I would argue that a good biography of McCartney should actually spend quite a few pages examining how that onslaught of unfair vicious criticism impacted McCartney as an artist and as a person. That's part of his story but of course this book doesn't go that route, which is yet another reason why it is not the "definitive account." Missed opportunity, IMO.

But yes, I think in this sort of biography, it's best that Norman didn't dwell on the music too much as he doesn't seem to have much new/interesting to say about it anyway.

I'm liking the opening chapters. They definitely bring life in postwar Britain to life, as well as Young Paul. I'm already dismayed, however, that Norman chose to spend 80 to 100 pages on the already well-documented details of his divorce. It's pointless. Fab already covered that ground (along with every paper in the world), and there's not a single significant piece of new info in the divorce section. A four-year marriage should be covered in 50 pages. But Norman dwells on it, while completely rushing through the past 8 years (post-divorce) of Paul's life in about 10 or 20 pages. It's ridiculous.

 

^Yeah, he did maybe spend too much time on it, especially on Heather's charity work. BUT, as a mini-story within a story of how she kind of lied and hoodwinked Paul (and the world's press), it was kind of interesting. I thought he did a good job there not editorializing but laying out the facts and letting them speak for themselves, which came to the same conclusion the rest of us did when it actually happened. But I agree, it could've been pared down a bit. Very revealing quote from Paul about acknowledging it was "up there" with the biggest mistakes of his life, apart from the daughter he got out of it.

 

Wish I had known before I ordered the book! Too late to cancel...!

 

Why? Read it and judge for yourself. Not everyone thinks "Junk" and "Every Night" are fantastic songs like we do (John Lennon probably didn't, for example). "Outdated and tired" is another way of saying "doesn't think the same as me." I love those songs, as Fivebyfive obviously does... but not everyone does. Maybe Norman doesn't...so what?

I don't care either way what people's opinions are on things, but it's frustrating when people don't give themselves a chance to see for themselves how something is, whether it's a book, a record, a movie, etc.

 

No kidding

 

I had the McCartney book on pre-order and backed off, as the excerpts and reported errors turned me off just enough to tip the scales. I appreciate Dr. Beatle's quest to present a fair and balanced assessment of the book, though. Since I was eager to give thrift books a shot (New and Used Books from Thrift Books | Buy Cheap Books Online »), I decided to get the Lennon book (which I have not read) and let that one decide for me whether to follow up with McCartney. With a coupon code, I wound up getting 4 books for $12 with free shipping at thrift books. Hard to beat that.

 

I just don't personally see what it adds to the book; why do we need to know that he dislikes those two songs?

I would rather the biographer not give his opinions regarding individual songs; instead it would be best just to relay the critical and commercial success and failures that each single and album had. If he had to also give his opinion as well, it should have been given alongside an acknowledgement that the songs were fan favourites that were praised in many reviews of the album (especially Every Night), in order to show the bigger picture.

 

I wouldn't trust the judgment of a biographer who trashed Penny Lane or Hey Jude, why should I trust the judgment of someone who does the same to an obviously great song like Every Night? It's not a reason NOT to buy the book; it's just one of many factors to weigh in considering whether you want to spend money on a book that doesn't actually say anything new about Paul, other than that Philip Norman has decided he now admires Paul and sees what the rest of us saw decades ago: That Paul is every bit the genius that John was. Stop the presses. I'm finding I don't always understand Norman's choices on what he decided to include or omit. Why wouldn't he mention the complete turnaround in Ram's reputation -- to provide a full picture in the DEFINITIVE biography (as Norman keeps saying)? Glaring omission.

Another example of a strange omission: Norman repeats the Anita Cochrane story (saying Paul was the father of her child) and how she was paid to keep quiet in 1964. One of the things Howard Sounes book did was discover that a blood test had definitively proven that another man was father of Anita's child. She'd been falsely claiming for years that Paul was the first and only guy she slept with at that time. We now know she was lying. But you won't find that out by reading Norman's account. He rehashes Anita's allegation but never bothers to report that Paul was not, in fact, the father of her kid. WTF? Why leave out such a relevant fact?

And if you're going to spend pages repeating Heather Mill's fabrications, why just repeat them without doing any new research/interviews to prove that she was, in fact, making all this sh-t up? It just seems like lazy tabloid journalism, rather than a thoughtful biographer. I think people should definitely read the book (from the library) and decide for themselves. But it's good to be aware as you do of the curious motivations and omissions and biases of its author.

 

I hated a lot of the early McCartney solo albums when they were released, including Ram. Red Rose Speedway and Wildlife too. After being a Beatles fanatic since 64 these albums just seemed weak and soft. Most of friends who were fans of the fab four felt the same. We were expecting Beatles Paul songs. Truthfully, I probably didn't give them a chance. It was still too close to the band splitting up. Four decades or so has a way changing ones views and opinions and these days I can appreciate what McCartney was going through and the music he was making in those early solo years.

 

What you've described -- your changing view -- is precisely what I mean by presenting a full picture. Those early albums, once widely panned, are now widely praised. Both reactions -- the panning and the praising -- are part of Paul's history and should be part of his biography. I just find it to be glaring omission that Norman ignores the fact that those early albums are now widely praised. He tells half the story about those albums. That's all I'm saying.

 

Just picked up the hardcover from B&N. Listed at $32.00 USD. 20% off on sale. Now I have to juggle the Deluxe Edition of Tune In and The Life.

 

Jane is evidently a classy person, but she must have some amazing stories about her time with Paul. Let's hope she's got this documented somewhere such that her heirs might one day make them public. After all, her sons never promised to keep the lid on the stories.

 

I'm sure Peter Asher, her brother, has some insights too. And he is still friendly with Paul.

 

Agree with both of you. I don't necessarily think there's anything too salacious or anything that would paint Paul in a bad light...I think Jane is just a private person and not the kind to kiss-and-tell. But I bet there's some interesting stuff she could shed light on. As you said, Arnie, Peter would probably had more in the "hanging out with Paul" vein as opposed to Jane who was actually WITH him, y'know? Either way, could be fascinating, or it could be mundane and terribly boring!

 

Yes. I don't think they really have, or even would provide, any salacious info.

The one thing that both Jane and Peter Asher would be useful for, as far as Beatles history goes, would be to provide info on how the individual Beatles interacted with one another. I mean Jane was there when they first met the Maharishi in 1967, when they found out that Brian Epstein died; and then she was there again in India in 1968. Just anything that she could say about those things would be interesting.

And Peter ran the A&R department at Apple in 1968-69, so that too would be informative.

 

I'm going to buy the damn book despite the good Doc only giving it an "8" (instead of his usual "9").

 

Hah! "Usual?" I've rated quite a lot of books in the 4-7 range, too! It's a fine line because I have publishers sending me these books (and often times the authors themselves) so I try to be fair without being unduly harsh. Although in the case of some of the books that merited 4's or 5's, I couldn't help it...they were that bad.

Definitely to all of that. Hell, John and Paul wrote a fair number of songs in her house and she also spent a lot of time with the group and their wives on holidays, at clubs, etc. Would be fascinating to get her perspective on all of that stuff. And Peter practically roomed with Paul at Wimpole Street and as you said, worked for them, too. So much interesting stuff could be mined from those two.

 

Do you get to keep the books publishers send you?

 

I was just kidding...though I don't think I ever have seen one of your low reviews.

 

Yes, that's one of the perks of doing this gig. Although I'm now getting to the point where it's starting to eat up a LOT of space in my house. I'm planning on purging the books I'm less inclined to read again and give them away or donate them...maybe I'll do a giveaway on my site for some of the excess books. I've thought about it!

 

The two worst books I've reviewed were The Beatles Through Headphones and This Bird Has Flown: The Beatles Rubber Soul Fifty Years On. I think I gave them both 4's or 5's. Lousy books, both (they're on my site if you want to read them).