Beatles Biography by Mark Lewisohn (fifth edition)

They are. It's a bit like 'I've Just Seen a Face' isn't on Rubber Soul- Americans beg to differ!

 

Well, this mysterious acetate was removed prior to the auction's close, because "the item is no longer available". With about two hours remaining it was up close to £4000. Wonder how high the bids went, and whether the seller would've been wiser to wait until after December 31st!

 

The seller would have been wiser, in my opinion, to have included a link to a 5-10 second sound sample that PROVED that this is not the Decca Audition tape. Considering the fact that such proof would probably results in bids thousands of dollars higher, this person either isn't a very good businessman or it IS the Decca version.

 

Someone may have made a high offer in exchange for the auction being terminated. Or the seller may have been threatened with litigation if the sale continued.

Or........(???)

 

Yup.

 

Those were my guesses, as well...

 

Now that's there's funny, I don't care who you are.

JcS (with acknowledgement to Larry The Cable Guy).

 

Yes, as was Ray's previous post that he's beginning to feel like Roebuck (of Sears...and Roebuck)

 

I've been purposely avoiding reading this thread so that I don't get any spoilers. I am now almost 500 pages into the Deluxe Extended Edition and I have to say that this is, by far and away, the best book on The Beatles I have ever read. Even the chapter notes reveal a ton of things I didn't know before. The number of times that I've broken out into a grin over the coincidences have been many.

 

I'm somewhere towards the end of 1961 (abridged edition), and I'm jonesing to re-re-re-re-read "Revolution in the Head" and buy the 2009 mono box.

 

Is there any benefit in purchasing the standard British edition over the American one, or the other way around ?
(mostly, regarding quality of paper / printing, general layout, typeface)

 

Prolly not worth replacing - my first copy was packed *exactly* the same as yours...and not surprisingly arrived quite damaged on three corners. I complained - I can't believe someone thought that 1.8m of brown paper could cushion a 3.5kg object in an oversized box! Amazon.uk agreed to send me out a new copy and promised it would be packed better. Well, it was...this time the book itself had a thin layer of white foam around it (about 1mm thick). Then surrounded by 1.8m of brown paper in an oversized box! Again, three damaged corners...although thankfully this time they were pretty minor. I cut my losses...

 

Same, only the spellings and the covers are different.

 

I've done quite a bit of business with amazon - and I sell on amazon as well occasionally. I am astonished how poor their systems are. Even simple things (for this day and age) such as their search function for buyers.

But the bottom line is obvious - we continue to give them our business. So why should we expect them to change?

 

Just a quick question that I'm sure has been answered many times (forgive me!)--are the notes endnotes or footnotes?

Still hoping for a US release of the extended version in February but surprisingly have been able to avoid too many "spoilers."

 

The print book (USA) has both. There are 100s (if not over 1000) of endnotes. They come at the end of the main text of the book, and they explain a lot of stuff. There are much fewer footnotes (maybe a few dozen), which appear on the bottom of a printed page.

Arnie

 

I believe the technical term is leakery

 

Yes. Philip Norman is the kind of Twunt that should hopefully die before he manages to ******** a biog of Paul.

 

Agreed on Miles but the one I'd really want to recommend would be

"The Beatles Story (A Story of Pop Special)" which was the first 'book' I ever read, or more accurately 'my first graphic novel that used photos instead of drawings and text blocks instead of speech bubbles'.

A hell of a ride for a first contact. After reading about these lot and seeing the pictures of them mutating from this to that, I decided here were REAL superheroes. I hadn't heard a half dozen of their tracks at that stage.

I was quickly on to Hunter Davies via a library but I'd only say it's passable.

Really I can't see Miles being anything but a solution. It's got The Beatle on the cover. The one they'd know. And it rocks as a narrative.

 

Have to say I thought this quote from Johnny Guitar read like a scene out of a bad Beatles biopic. Paul being the strategist and charmer, I somehow doubt he comes in and says he's having their drummer as a 'Morning', ESPECIALLY if they actually needed to get him (which they did) but the 'Mr.Epstein' bit presumably goes with the sneer on Paul's lip and the way they all follow him around until he turns to say it.

Another Liverpool yarn. You only have to go there to meet one of these. I get the feeling Lewisohn bought quite a few.

 

I think the truth of Hunter's book is that it's really an account of his hangout with them in '67.
The preceding is really just homework he'd rather not do and it's also easy to see how the new Beatles, as they 'replaced' themselves throughout the 60's were always making the old ones look staid and obsolete. This is still pretty much how things were by the time I came to The Beatles in the late 70's. It was all about the psychedelic quartet until The Jam came along and revived the moptops.
The inadequacy of Davies' accounts of the preceding years is sharpened by the fact of his presence in 1967/8. It's the only time, of course, this problem occurs in Beatles biography unless you count Michael Braun's day or two in their presence.

 

Most money seems to be on the idea that Paul caught Philip Norman's interview promoting the book rather than ever read the book.
That's the interview where he proclaims 'John Lennon WAS The Beatles'.
NOW who can blame Paul for his one-word review?

 

Didn't Braun spend two months with them? He recounts things in late 63 and at the Ed Sullivan show in Feb 64. Maybe it was two separate days.

 

Paul tells this story every week. Usually on the Wednesday.

 

That's a bit harsh, are you Paul McCartney ?