Beatles Biography by Mark Lewisohn

YES! I agree, this is a book that should be reprinted, it goes all the way through to 1977 and is a very enjoydable, factual, light read, he was an excellent writer and historian, a great pity he died so young.

Too many fabrications and falsifications. For instance, he mixes up who said what and dwells too much on the wives.

 

Looks like I'm going to have to flip a coin here.

 

I can't read a Giuliano book without hearing his voice (from all those interview discs he put out), nor can I read him without imagining him on a bed looking deranged (remember seeing this in a book of his).

 

Shudder!Yes, horrible photo!

And I always remember Olivia Harrison's quote, regarding his bizarre rant on McCartney: "I'm sick of this guy".

 

Another vote for "The Beatles Forever". I bought it around 1998 when I was 11 and I remember reading it back to forth while listening to the Anthology series (my very first taste of Beatles music).

Love it!

 

I'm really surprised no one has recommended the Spitz book. I've read them all, multiple times (I'm a little obsessed) and I think his book is definitely the most comprehensive. I also find it to be balanced and overall a pretty good read.

 

Another vote for the Beatles Forever. It feels good. It's not the most comprehensive, it's not awash in dirt and I haven't read it in years, but my memory tells me is it felt right and captured the time and the excitement really well.
I also thought the Spitz book was pretty good...very comprehensive. It got some flack when it first showed up for some historical gaffs...but with the Beatles story that almost seems to be expected anymore.
Although' when the Lewisohn books come out, I'll be shocked to see any mistakes.
I'm guessing paperback version of the Spitz book may have had some corrections, but it's only a guess.
Whitewashed and all, I thought the Anthology book was great! My biggest problem was it was so unwieldy. I would still welcome a text only version, with maybe a few choice photos. You know, the kind you could sit in a chair and read with the book in your lap, without fear of cutting off the blood circulation to your legs.

 

It's hard to find Beatle books without a bias towards one of them. I'm sure Mark Lewisohn will not have any biases and will present facts.

 

I can't believe I forgot the Spitz book. Yeah I liked that one, it's pretty good.

 

I've read a baker's dozen of Beatle's books over the years and, IMO, "Can't Buy Me Love" is the best (especially for those who want more writing on the songs themselves).

 

Agreed! The book, in its present format is virtually unreadable. You could argue that it makes a good coffee table book, but I really think they overdid it with all of those photos that feature overlaid snippets of random, almost unreadable text culled from telegrams, letters, and other artifacts. A little of that "three-dimensional" layering goes a long way, and they went way, way overboard with the technique. Too bad, too, because the extra-large page sizes presented an enormous canvas on which they could have presented some of classic, unadorned portraits and photos.

 

Oddly enough I just picked up The Beatles Forever last night and started re-reading it (I've owned it for decades, just hadn't read it in awhile). It is one of the most exceptionally written books about the band AND the times AND how it felt at the time being there.

His writing is excellent, he is not showing any bias, and given that when it was written (1970s) there are still a few light myths here and there that had not yet been clarified or debunked yet, but for the absolute best contemporary writing about the group and the 60s, THAT is the book to get.

 

Agreed!

One of the best books on them,

 

I really enjoyed reading Philip Normans John Lennon-Bio. Ok, it's a Lennon- and not a Beatles-Bio but 80% of the many many pages are about the Beatles.

 

The Beatles Forever is fantastic, I remember having it as a kid (maybe 8 years old) and being shocked at the picture of Two Virgins in the book . It does a great job of putting you "in the moment" of the events. And perusing it recently, it's amazing how it still holds up factually some 35 years on.
Revolution In The Head I also quite like. The early passage of the book describing Western civilization through a pop culture eye is essential, and I think the fact that it's opinionated makes it an interesting read instead of coming off as a textbook.

 

It's a riveting piece of writing, yes. To me still the single most honest - and interesting - book about the band. I do have a weakness for Hunter Davies' work as well, though. His insights into the writing process are unique and fascinating.

 

Oh, how I miss the days when I had plenty of time to read a book multiple times. "The Love You Make" was one of the books I read twice or three times, I'm not sure. And many others. Nowadays I can hardly read all the books I buy and they keep piling up.

 

My favourites from over 30 years of beatles books (no particular order) are Revolution in the Head, Beatles Forever (fantastic), Love Me Do, Beatles Recording Sessions (Lewisohn) and, the first proper one I read and still the best, An Illustrated Record, by Carr and Tyler. Quite harsh criticism about a lot of the solo stuff overall, especially George's stuff but very well written. And they were right, Extra Texture and Dark Horse are a bit boring and preachy.

I still don't think I've read all of Anthology. Looks nice on the shelf though.

 

If anyone wnats to know what it was like to BE there, Love Me Do- The Beatles Progress is a fascinating book, and highly recommended. Compare the energy of the Beatles lives in 1963-4 and the portrait revealed in the Hunter Davies book of 1967-8 and be amazed it's the same band just three years on.

 

If I had the time, I would re-read "Shout" to see why everyone is saying it's biased against Paul. I read it when it came out and I don't recall it being particularly biased one way or another.

 

Could there be anything new in a book that we don't know already?

 

I'm wondering -- when the last of Lewisohn's three volumes come out, will that pretty much be it for the Beatles? What with the 2009 remasters, the ton of supplementary material released by Purple Chick, and this multi-part biography, might it be safe to say that any new information, revelations, etc. about the Beatles, things that enabled fans to relive that history from a different perspective, will be tapped-out? Those who have kept Beatlemania alive for almost fifty years will begin dying off soon -- I'm wondering if the release of these volumes will mark the point where we say goodbye to reliving that particular era, and begin to consign the Beatles to "the past."

P.S.: The Spitz book is quite good in many respects, but I'm still trying to figure out where he got the information (other than out of his own gluteus maximus, that is) to claim that George Harrison, in his later years, turned to evangelical Christianity?

 

It's funny- I keep thinking that The Beatles will be resigned to "the past" as well, but their marketing machine appears to still be firing on all cylinders. You couldn't go 2 miles around L.A. over the past 4 months and not see Apple billboards promoting their arrival on iTunes.

As to the P.S. about Spitz- I agree, especially when I remember quotes around the time of his death stating he was able to accept his fate with dignity in no small part due to his deep Eastern beliefs. Wish I could remember the source of those quotes...

 

You must be joking.

 

Hardly, I guess, unless it's not a biography in the traditional sense. But there is always new ground to be uncovered when a writer goes out of his way to conduct original research instead of relying on previously published books and papers. Some stories in Philip Norman's "John Lennon, a Life" did surprise me, especially Aunt Mimi's boyfriend and the real inspiration for John Lennon's "Norwegian Wood". And the fact that Pete Best's mother had an affair with Neil Aspinall and Roag Best is his son remained a secret for decades.

But I know what you mean. I used to be a sucker for David Bowie biographies. Now I'm beginning to wonder whether I really need to read the ones that were published after the definitive "Strange Fascination", by David Buckley. The recently published "Any Day Now - The London Years", by Kevin Cann, is mandatory, but it's not exactly a biography, it's a detailed and fully illustrated chronology and only goes as far as 1974. On the other hand, I have already bought the ones written by Marc Spitz and Paul Trynka and I'm beginning to think I might only waste my time with rehashed information if I read them.

In the case of the Beatles, I don't think Mark Lewisohn would publish such huge tomes if he didn't have anything new to offer.