Beatles - Get Back new book

To be honest, I think John and Paul (really all of them) truly loved each other (not sexually). And this basically held true especially with John and Paul. Sure there were ups and downs, what relationships don't have them? But regardless of the all the muck that occurred from their business dealings and the break-up, that deep love for each other was always there, and never really faltered.

 

I hope so, I know there wasn't any animosity between them when John died. I don't know how much they contacted each other though. I think they'd have worked together again, it's almost certain. A sad thing about John is that a lot of the post Beatles interviews that get played and printed now are from when he was angry and up his own and Yoko's backside in the early 70s. Because he stayed away from the limelight for years, we never got to see much of the more laid back solo era John. He seems very content in his final interview and in his final music. He'd have patched up any problems but I can imagine him stopping short of going for a full Beatles reunion. John and George might not have wanted the hype, pressure and hysteria of that, possibly Paul and Ringo too.

 

Lennon could be the worst guy in the world at times.

Emerick tells the tale of how the staff at EMI were kind of afraid of John, and then John would sing something like "Strawberry Fields" or "Day in The Life" and they were amazed that such an acerbic guy could deliver these child like vocals.

Probably one of the worst stories is The Turtles forming a line and meeting the Beatles in a club, Lennon is drinking quite heavily, and by the time the guitarist Jim Tucker meets him, Lennon verbally destroys him, and he quits music on the spot, and heads back to the USA. Story below as told by Harold Kaylan

"Kaylan recalls how an apparently drunk or high Lennon mean-spiritedly mocked The Turtles' then-rhythm guitarist Jim Tucker, making fun of his unfashionable clothes and his unruly hairdo, then launching into a dirty rendition of Shirley Ellis' "The Name Game" rhyming "Tucker" with a certain expletive. Howard says Lennon continued his verbal attack until tears began welling up in Tucker's eyes. Kaylan's band mate eventually fired back at Lennon, "I thought you were the coolest guy on the planet. I can't believe I met you [and] you turned out to be this ass," to which John responded, "You never met me, son. You never met me."

Howard says Tucker, who had worshipped Lennon, was so upset by the incident that "he ran out of the club, he got into a taxi, he flew back to Cal"

 

Biopic Film About Beatles Manager Brian Epstein Abruptly Shuts Down

 

John and Paul were very close at one point, but the involvement of Klein put an end to that. As for the posts just above, Lennon declared the Fabs to be the biggest bastards on the planet at one point. He was obviously keeping his hand in. One another day he'd probably have been shocked by himslef.

 

I'm a bit of a Lennon apologist, because I have my own issues with fear of abandonment and anger, and I see in John a scared, immature guy who above all wanted to hold on to what and who he had, especially his own sense of self, and that drive could and often did manifest in cruelty. That being said, I think he had a good heart.

Your mileage may certainly vary.

 

Sometimes I wonder if John may have had bipolar disorder or 'manic depression' as it was called back then...

 

Lewisohn certainly doesn’t pull any punches with John, who comes across as charismatic but not at all pleasant.

 

I have to listen to the audiobook again - and perhaps order the Extended UK edition.

 

You're in good company. Paul McCartney is the biggest Lennon apologist on the planet. He is John's biggest fan and absolutely loves him.

That's why I always smile at the sort of Lennon fans who put McCartney down as they're dissing their own. No matter how much they may worship John and think he embodied all that is cool, creative and worth celebrating they still come in a distant second to McCartney who knew the real John and loved and idolised him long before they'd ever even heard of him.

 

This book is a must read

 

Fair point; I try to see all the Beatles (and generally everybody) in a nuanced way

Paul can be demanding, ruthless and cold, yet warm, kind, and romantic

George unfaithful, hedonistic and acerbic yet spiritual, thoughtful, and intelligent

Ringo stubborn, hard-edged, and guarded yet affable, humble and willing to help out,

and John violent, biting, and insensitive yet loving, peaceful and righteously principled.

Sometimes the Beatles seem more like mythological characters than humans, and we not being these four humans themselves can only know parts of who they are, in my opinion anyway.

 

I would imagine the fact that there were cameras all around them recording may have something to do with George's "I'll play whatever you want me to play" comment? Without the cameras and recording devices maybe you would have got a less passive aggressive response that would have sounded something like... f*** off?

We do have to take the unnatural situation into account when reading the transcripts and watching footage and the use of some odd hard edits.

Why do they seem more like mythological characters than humans? By stating they could have both good and bad moments and embody diametrically opposite strengths and weaknesses - you are making the case for them being human. We are all like that.

 

We seem to be saying the same thing.

I only say rhat because I sometimes make the mistake of thinking of them that way: it almost seems like a story rather than something that happened in real life.

And I see it in uncritical media: John the saint or devil, Paul the darling or bastard.

it's late where I am, so I'm sorry if I'm not making sense. I don't know why I felt the need to respond in the first place, lol.

 

I understand what you mean and I agree. You are saying because this happened a long time ago and to lionized celebrity figures we forget they were just humans. Time I suppose does to a degree turn people into historical figures and we can forget their humanity and as you rightly say much of the nuance is lost to over-simplifications. The Beatles were very human and very young. They were exploited and treated badly in a number of ways despite their success there remained power imbalances simply because they were ill-equipped to defend their own best interests in a number of ways. They were more sinned against than sinning. They shared their gifts with us and it would be nice, though idealistic I suppose, to hope we could just remember with fondness four boys and not judge them too harshly regardless of what very human mistakes they made at times.

 

Thank you so much for clarifying. When I started reading that sentence I was like "Wait, were The Beatles all boning each other?". But then I got to the parenthetical and was all "phew! It wasn't sexual". I didn't even know that it was possible to love someone nonsexually before reading this post.

 

They are mythological because of what they accomplished.

There is something close to Arthurian legend here, or as close as you can find in the modern world. Four young guys form a band of brothers, and head out on a quest to conquer and change the world.

They succeed beyond their wildest imaginations, but in the end the group is torn apart by success, anger, jealousy, and incrimination.

You would think the passing of time would explain or diminish their feat, (which has never equaled by any other group) but their tale and accomplishments have only become more legendary as the years pass.

Even the iconography is mythological, there is no group photo where they are all over 30. They will always be young, brilliant, and in a sense, incased in amber.

 

Have you watched the documentary understanding McCartney on YouTube? It is the best thing I’ve seen on him

 

thanks for the recommendation, going to try that today

 

I more or less agree.
But I also think what the band needed at that point was a break. Not a permanent one. Just some time to let everyone take a deep breath. Let everyone have their freedom. They recorded 3 albums in in less than 2 years. One of which was a double album and half a soundtrack album in between. I mean, it is what it is now. But at the time, it was not necessary to keep working like this. Paul wanted to work when the band needed a break. John and George's resentment for that is justified in my opinion. But Paul is not the bad guy here either for wanting to do what you said. Doing what a band is supposed to do. Maybe it comes down to bad communication.

 

It is a wonder John never got beaten up....imagine if he had pulled a similar stunt with Roger Daltrey for instance!

 

I have always thought, that had he not become famous, he could have picked on the wrong guy and died in a bar fight.

 

*HONK! HONK! HONK! HONK!* "My love don't buy me presents! I know that she's no peasant!"

Some Fun Tonight! CAME!!

 

I have now begun this book while waiting for the PJ film:



and need to keep reading these: