The Beatles Anthology Podcast

Last week the Beatles released a new 3-part podcast that takes a look at Beatles Anthology project from twenty years ago — “British music journalists and Beatles experts Kevin Holwett and Mark Ellen discuss the classic Anthology releases, shining a light on the fascinating stories behind these albums which tell the story of the development of The Beatles career.” — to accompany the recent addition of the Anthology to various online streaming services.

anthology-avatarThe idea of this podcast, it seems to me, is to be a quick guide to the Anthology collections for the streaming audience who is just discovering these twenty year-old outtakes collections. Holwett and Ellen discuss the content of each of the three Anthology volumes, and they put the songs from each volume into some context in the terms of Beatles history. Holwett and Ellen have a nice rapport — Holwett, the calm expert; Ellen, the excitable fan. The episodes are brief, just fifteen minutes each, yet they manage to cover the high points of each of the three collections, pointing out the songs that are worth checking out and noting how the outtakes show the way the Beatles worked in the studio.

This podcast isn’t essential listening, but even so it’s a nice introduction to these collections, even for a long-time Beatles fan like me. It’s certainly made me think about revisiting the Anthologies and some similarly themed bootleg collections that complement it.

You can find the program on iTunes, but it’s also available through an RSS feed.

Alternate Beatles

Recently I’ve seen the traffic spike on some of my Beatles writings, specifically on alt-history Beatles, so I’m going to assemble a guide to things I written on the subject over the years.

Post-Abbey Road Albums

It’s an interesting game to imagine what the Beatles might’ve done had they soldiered on into 1970. There’s interesting material on their debut solo albums, they worked together (but not as a foursome) in various capacities in 1970, so it’s not impossible that they could have made one more album. It’s just a question of picking the right tracks and sequencing them.

I took a shot at it myself with an “album” I called “Hot As Sun,” which, if I don’t say so myself, is damn near perfect. :)

I had later thoughts on “Hot as Sun,” but they’re not essential.

Others have done so, too. Sometimes, I’d weigh in with my thoughts as to whether or not they worked.

Stephen Baxter, the sci-fi novelist, did, creating an album he called “God.” (Thoughts on Baxter’s short story here.)

Spencer Leigh made on he called “Finishing School” in an article for BBC Radio Merseyside. I wasn’t a fan of this one, sorry.

We can’t forget Ethan Hawke’s “The Black Album,” a playlist he created for his daughter which was incorporated into the film Boyhood.

There was even a program on WAMU, “One More Album,” in which a group of Beatles experts discussed the subject.

Suffice it to say, this is a game people have played — and will play for years to come.

Alternate Beatles Albums

The Beatles considered making a Lord of the Rings film. I pondered what the film and soundtrack album would have been like.

What if The Beatles, commonly known as the White Album, wasn’t a double album? Here’s my edit.

Other Stuff

BBC Radio 4 broadcast a radio play, Sorry, Boys, You Failed the Audition, which looks at a world where they failed to secure a recording contract with EMI. My thoughts here.

Mark Shipper wrote a fictitious, comedic biography of the Beatles and their reunion in his 1970s novel Paperback Writer, and I reviewed that here.

This list of links isn’t comprehensive — I’ve written much more on the Beatles than this — but it covers as much of my alternate-Beatles material as I can remember penning over the years.

Sorry, Boys, You Failed the Audition

What if the Beatles didn’t get a record contract with Parlophone in 1962?

That’s the subject of BBC Radio 4’s radio play, Sorry, Boys, You Failed the Audition, adapted by Ray Connolly from his novella of the same name. Originally broadcast by the BBC in 2013, it was rebroadcast again this week, and I streamed it at work this afternoon.

I have two reactions to the radio play, one as a work of fiction and drama on its own terms, one as a speculation on the Beatles and their history. (I should note that I have not read Conolley’s novella, though I have now bought it for my Kindle.)

Let’s talk about this as a piece of drama first.

As a piece of drama, on its own terms, Sorry, Boys, You Failed the Audition ia enjoyable. Told from the perspective of Freda Kelly, their official fan club chronicler in their Liverpool days, the Beatles fail to secure a recording contract and, having reached the limit of where they could go as, essentially, a Liverpool bar band, they go their separate ways — John Lennon marries Cynthia and becomes a comic writer, Paul McCartney goes to college and becomes a school teacher, George Harrison stays in music and becomes something of a session guitarist, and Ringo Starr disappears. Freda is the play’s narrative viewpoint and central character, and she is determined to carry on chronicling their post-band exploits. Just when she’s ready to pack it in, after a few years of carrying the Beatles’ flame, something happens that gives her a new purpose in life — to reunite John Lennon and Paul McCartney as songwriters, and maybe the rest of the band, too.

It’s a cute radio drama, and Sara Bahadori’s Freda Kelly is a charming and captivating narrator. The Beatles voices sound generally right, and the characterizations of the Beatles, even in a world without the Beatles, ring largely true. The end of the play, on a cold morning in January, 1969, isn’t at all surprise, and despite that lack of surprise I had a grin on my face when it happened. I was impressed with the production of the play; Beatles songs are used at several points in the play to give it a sense of verisimilitude such as in its recreation of the Cavern. It was entertaining and fun to listen to, and I think Sorry, Boys, You Failed the Audition is worth listening to.

Now, let’s talk about this as a work of Beatles speculation.

As a piece of alternate history, I’m critical of it. Every few minutes, it would do something that didn’t strike me as quite right.

I had three basic problems here — the 6 June 1962 EMI session, Ringo Starr, and the butterfly effects. I’ll take each of these in turn.

At New Years 1962, the Beatles auditioned for Decca Records in London. The Beatles were turned down; Decca famously said that “guitar groups [were] on the way out.” Beatles manager Brian Epstein then used the Decca recordings (of which he had an acetate made) to attempt to get the Beatles in the door elsewhere. In this, he proved successful — eventually, the Beatles came to the attention of EMI and Parlophone producer George Martin.

It has commonly been believed that the Beatles first session with EMI at Abbey Road Studios on June 6, 1962 was an audition. The Beatles themselves certainly believed that. However, that’s not what EMI’s paperwork indicates; George Martin signed the Beatles without an audition through something of a circuitous process, as Mark Lewisohn documents in Tune In, yet the play’s point-of-departure turns on the common myth that what was, in fact, their first recording session was an audition. To be fair to Ray Connolly, Tune In was published at about the same time this play was originally broadcast, and had the Beatles not impressed at the time Martin and Parlophone would have been able to cut them loose quite easily, so he does have some justification for turning history on the myth rather than the reality.

Less justifiable is the presence of Ringo Starr in the story. At the time of the June 6 session, the Beatles’ drummer was Pete Best, and he was yet to be sacked and replaced by Starr. (In our history, Best was dismissed by the Brian Epstein, at the behest of the other three Beatles, on August 16th.) The Beatles were certainly friendly with Starr — they crossed paths on a number of occasions in Liverpool and Hamburg, and Starr was certainly the most accomplished and sought after drummer in Liverpool at the time — but he wasn’t part of the band as of the June 6 EMI session.

You can almost sidestep these problems if the point-of-departure for the story comes after the September 11, 1962 recording session at EMI which, if I’m remembering Tune In correctly, fulfilled their initial EMI recording contract, but the play’s initial scene and the Beatles’ recollection of their “audition” better fits the June 6 recording session. The reason I say “almost” is that, even if you make that one change to the story, Ringo still would have been a Beatle for only a month which makes later events for Ringo less likely than they are in the story.

Or the point of departure is much earlier, say immediately after the Decca audition. Perhaps the band sacks Pete Best in early 1962, and the knock-on effects of that — Ringo instead of Pete — causes the June 6 session to go badly, which causes George Martin to write the Beatles off as a loss, which leads to the start of the play. This scenario might work.

This brings me to my third problem — the butterfly effects. To me, the world Freda Kelly inhabits in Sorry, Boys, You Failed the Audition seems a bit too familiar. Groups like The Rolling Stones and The Moody Blues exist in forms that we would recognize — we hear one of the Stones’ early recordings at one point — sidestepping the whole issue of the extent to which British music was a reaction to the Beatles. (For a really good look at this, especially as it relates to the Stones, see John McMillian’s book, Beatles vs. Stones.) I found it especially questionable that George Martin would be looking for — or even be in a position to be looking for — a band like the Beatles in 1969 in a world where the Beatles didn’t make it. As a poetic, artistic statement, I understood that creative decision; as a matter of history, I’m quite skeptical.

I’ve just eviscerated something that I enjoyed. As a writer myself, I understand that there are times where you don’t let the facts stand in the way of your story. I totally get what Connolly was doing with Sorry, Boys, You Failed the Audition. He found a unique angle to explore the Beatles’ break-up and what it felt like, as a fan, to want to see them back together.

Let me explain this thinking.

It’s notable that, in the play, it’s John who leaves the band first, and the other three attempt to carry on without him. In the summer of 1969, it was John who announced that he was leaving the band, leaving the other three to decide what they wanted to do, and they did record together without John one track for Let It Be — “I Me Mine.”

John becomes something of a house husband, as he did in real life. Paul continues to write music; in real life, he was by far the most prolific of the ex-Beatles. George becomes a session man with a passion for gardening, not unlike his own post-Beatles career. (George seemed to like being a background guitarist.) And Ringo was laid back and unambitious, which describes Ringo’s last thirty years. (This is not a knock on Ringo; I really like his solo output since Time Takes Time, but he’s doing it because he enjoys it, not because he trying to top the charts or be a name.)

Freda, when she decides to get John and Paul back together, annoys them with her incessant questioning, just as the Beatles themselves were annoyed by fans and reporters over the years asking them when they were going to get back together. Then, John and Paul have a moment, in the play, that’s not unlike the 1974 Los Angeles jam session with John and Paul during John’s “Lost Weekend,” albeit a moment that turns out to have more lasting consequence than the Los Angeles session. (Is the difference here that John was married to Cynthia instead of Yoko Ono at the time? I have to wonder…)

My point is, you can read the play as a commentary on what it was like to be a Beatles fan in the 1970s, wishing and hoping for the band to get back together, told instead through the prism of the 1960s as seen through the eyes of their most dedicated fan. In that sense, Sorry, Boys, You Failed the Audition is really quite unique and interesting, and the historical criticisms I have are wholly beside the point.

I enjoyed it more than Stephen Baxter’s “The Twelfth Album,” that’s for sure. :)

If you at all like the Beatles, give Sorry, Boys, You Failed the Audition a listen. It’s fun, Sara Bahadori’s performance as Freda Kelly is captivating and winsome, and the whole thing is enjoyable. I really did like it.

Paul McCartney and the Beatles’ Songwriting Credits

In an interview with Esquire, Paul McCartney was asked about the famous “Lennon/McCartney” songwriting credit and why he has suggested in the past that some songs should be credited with the reverse, “McCartney/Lennon.”

(Without getting overly technical, it has to do with limitations of metadata on digital music files.)

On some of his live albums (Wings at the Speed of Sound, Back in the US), McCartney has reversed the traditional Lennon/McCartney to McCartney/Lennon. In the 1970s, when Speed of Sound came out, it doesn’t seem that anyone cared. In 2003, when Back in the US came out, Yoko Ono had Issues with a capital I, she vented in the press, and McCartney ended up looking like a villain.

I think McCartney has a point, and I’d like to think that McCartney and Ono could sit down like adults and come to an agreement — these songs get the standard “Lennon/McCartney,” these songs get “McCartney/Lennon,” and some special songs get either “Lennon” alone or “McCartney” alone.

I know that won’t happen, however. You see, what I think McCartney fails to understand is that by talking about the issue he’s playing into Ono’s hands. She has an image of John as the singular genius she wants to maintain, and she enjoys tweaking and denigrating McCartney in public, like when she said he was the Salieri to Lennon’s Mozart. A conversation like this, which when you read the Esquire original and not the Rolling Stone quotes which I link to here, is thoughtful and measured (and even, shall we say, resigned), but it gives Ono the opportunity to portray McCartney as insecure. Even though one conversation would bring closure to this issue, it’s in Ono’s interests for there to never be closure.

I don’t blame McCartney for talking about this. He didn’t bring it up. He was responding to a reporter’s question. I agree with him — and I think there are many Beatles fans who do — but I wish he could let it be.

Ethan Hawke’s “The Black Album”

I haven’t seen Richard Linklater’s new film Boyhood yet, and despite the rave reviews I may not anytime soon, but there is an aspect of the film that touches on my interests.

At some late point in the film, the character played by Ethan Hawke gives his son a 3-disc mixtape of post-Beatles songs. It’s called “The Black Album.”

Imaginary post-Beatles albums made up of solo Beatles tracks! I’ve played that game before; see “Hot As Sun,” my attempt at a hypothetical post-Let It Be 1970 Beatles album.

It turns out that there’s an actual playlist for Hawke’s “The Black Album,” and BuzzFeed has the track list as well as Hawke’s liner notes. You see, it was originally created for Hawke’s own daughter, and it was incorporated into the film.

I printed off the tracklist and went to work assembling WinAmp playlist files.

(Yes, I still use WinAmp. It’s very good at what it does. Just because it’s been discontinued doesn’t mean it’s not a good piece of software. Would you stop reading a favorite book just because it went out of print? I think not!)

A couple of things jumped out at me as I reviewed the tracks chosen. Hawke picked fifty tracks total, and there’s nothing really surprising. Almost all of the radio-friendly hits are here. With a handful of exceptions there’s nothing more recent than 1980 here. There’s nothing edgy here; no “Working Class Hero.” There aren’t many surprises; Harrison’s “Blow Away” may be the most obscure track here, and McCartney’s “Mull of Kintyre,” great as it is and much as I love it, is an odd choice considering that it hit the American charts with all the success of a lead balloon.

The only place where I ran into trouble was in assembling the third disc, and both trouble spots were McCartney tracks. While I have “Dear Friend” on two live albums (Back in the USA and Good Evening New York City), I don’t have the studio Tug of War version. Nor do I have McCartney’s Unplugged album, the source of the live version of “And I Love Her” on “The Black Album” playlist.

Like any fan-made post-Beatles playlist, the playlist says a lot about the person who made it. I think with “The Black Album” Hawke was trying to create a very basic introduction to who the Beatles were in the wake of their break-up and to show that, in spite of the break-up, they went on to make very good music. He wasn’t trying to scare his real-life daughter with the edgy songs, he wasn’t trying to make his fictional son feel there aren’t still possibilities when things (like the Beatles) end.

Nevertheless, I need some edginess with my Beatles. And thus, I reworked the third disc. It started with a need to replace the songs I didn’t have, and it ended with a reconceptualization of the tracklist that achieves the same effect by delving deeper.

The third disc of “The Black Album” is eleven songs long. The first five tracks are love songs. They then segue into songs about peace (McCartney’s “Pipes of Peace,” Lennon’s “Imagine”), followed by McCartney reflecting on Lennon (“Here Today”), Harrison reflecting on how “All Things Must Pass,” and then one last “And I Love Her” from McCartney.

This was the structure I saw: Love -> Peace -> Reflections on the Past -> Closure.

I could work with that. It was missing Ringo. There were other songs that looked back on the Beatles years than just “Here Today.”

So this is what I did, with notes where I altered Hawke’s version.

  1. Lennon: “Grow Old With Me”
    Hawke uses the version of Lennon’s home demo from 2010 Lennon remasters. No, I’m going to use the version from the 1999 Lennon Anthology, with the string arrangement by George Martin.
  2. McCartney: “Silly Love Songs”
  3. The Beatles: “Real Love”
  4. George Harrison: “Never Get Over You”
    An addition! Hawke left Harrison out of the run of love songs. I can’t really criticize Hawke for that; Harrison doesn’t have any really memorable love songs in his solo career. That just wasn’t an interest of his. If you delve down into his albums, though, there are a few, like this gem from Brainwashed.
  5. Paul McCartney: “My Valentine”
    Hawke followed “Real Love” with McCartney’s “My Love.” We’ve already had a saccharine McCartney love song (“Silly Love Songs”) in the past ten minutes. We don’t need another. So, I replace “My Love” with Kisses on the Bottom‘s “My Valentine,” a darker, more mature love song. (You could also sub in something like Driving Rain‘s “From a Lover to a Friend” here.)
  6. Ringo Starr: “Never Without You”
    An addition, since Hawke left Ringo out of the third disc. From Ringorama, this is Ringo’s collaboration with Eric Clapton in memory of the recently deceased George Harrison.
  7. John Lennon: “Oh My Love”
  8. George Harrison: “Give Me Love (Give Me Peace On Earth)”
  9. Paul McCartney: “Pipes of Peace”
  10. Ringo Starr: “Peace Dream”
    Another addition, from Ringo’s Y Not album. Ringo’s work the last fifteen years has been very enjoyable and, dare I say it?, good. He’s clearly making records for the fun of it at this point. Yet, he’s producing quality work, and “Peace Dream” is a great example.
  11. John Lennon: “Imagine”
  12. Paul McCartney: “Return To Pepperland”
    Now we’re into really obscure territory. “Return to Pepperland” comes from an unreleased McCartney album from 1987. This makes a good turning point to the third segment of disc 3 — the reflections on being a Beatle. “Return to Pepperland,” besides calling back to Sgt Pepper, is a song in the style of “Eleanor Rigby,” one of McCartney’s portraits of people bustling in their lives. It synth-y, it sounds very 80s.
  13. George Harrison: “When We Were Fab”
    Now that we’ve turned the page back to Beatle-hood, we have this song from George’s Cloud Nine. It would have been either this or “All Those Years Ago,” and, frankly, I like “When We Were Fab” more because I feel that George had more distance and wasn’t approaching his Beatle years with the undisguised pain that he had in 1981.
  14. Ringo Starr: “After All These Years”
    A third Ringo track! This is from Time Takes Time, Ringo’s highly-regarded 1992 album. It’s not as self-referential as “When We Were Fab,” but it does have the feeling of reminiscence, hence its inclusion.
  15. John Lennon: “#9 Dream”
    This is as close as Lennon comes to a “Beatles reminiscence” song that’s positive. (“How Do You Sleep?” is pretty direct, but it’s also savage toward McCartney.) “#9 Dream” was, basically, Lennon’s attempt to bury the hatchet with Harrison. I considered following this with McCartney’s “Flaming Pie,” but I had a better idea…
  16. Paul McCartney: “Strawberry Fields Forever/Help!/Give Peace a Chance”
    The b-side to McCartney’s “All My Trials” single, this is a live medley of three Lennon-penned songs that McCartney performed live in Liverpool during his 1990 world tour. It doesn’t get more Beatle-y than that, and it’s a better tribute to Lennon, in my opinion, than “Here Today.”
  17. George Harrison: “All Things Must Pass”

And we end it there. There’s no reason for anything past that. All things must pass. There’s nothing more that needs to be said.

It’s a little deeper, a little edgier, a little more recent than what Ethan Hawke came up, but I think it makes the same point and does so in a more interesting way. :)

A Single-Disc White Album

Let’s talk about the Beatles’ White Album.

Recording in 1968, after the Beatles went to India to study transcendental meditation with the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, the White Album, thirty tracks long, is famously bloated. The band came back from India with a wealth of material and the intention to record it all. Then the recording became long and laborious, Ringo Starr quit the band, some songs were recorded virtually solo, and the result was a mass of music, far too much for a single album. and George Martin has said of the White Album that, pared down to a single LP of 14 or 15 tracks it could have been the best Beatles album ever.

On Twitter yesterday Mike Taylor asked me if I had looked at his blog post on making a single disc “White Album.”

I hadn’t seen Mike’s list. I was curious, so I took a look.

This wasn’t the first time I had encountered the idea of a one-disc White Album. MOJO had an article on their website (now gone) in July 2008 titled “Toward a One-Disc White Album.” There were several different configurations given. One was “Mountain and Valley,” another “The Nice Album,” a third “The Little Black & White Album.”

I put one together of my own at that time.

Side One:

  1. Blackbird
  2. Julia
  3. I’m So Tired
  4. I Will
  5. Martha My Dear
  6. Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da
  7. Long, Long, Long
  8. Cry Baby Cry

Side Two:

  1. Yer Blues
  2. While My Guitar Gently Weeps
  3. Why Don’t We Do It in the Road?
  4. Revolution 1
  5. Don’t Pass Me By
  6. Happiness is a Warm Gun
  7. Helter Skelter

Soft stuff on one side, harder stuff on the other. It’s a nice mix of songs, but look at all the things left off! No “Back in the USSR.” No “Dear Prudence.” No “Everybody’s Got Something to Hid Except for Me and My Monkey.” No “Glass Onion.” And that’s just four off the top of my head.

Honestly, I hadn’t thought of this list in more than a few years. Which is fortunate, because I sat down when I got home from work I made a new version without reference to that one.

I used the same rules that I used for “Hot as Sun,” the hypothetical 1970 Beatles album had recorded an album after Abbey Road. And I came up with something entirely different:

Side One:

  1. Helter Skelter
  2. Long, Long, Long
  3. Dear Prudence
  4. Martha My Dear
  5. Piggies
  6. Julia
  7. Revolution 1

Side Two:

  1. While My Guitar Gently Weeps
  2. Cry Baby Cry
  3. Birthday
  4. Yer Blues
  5. Blackbird
  6. Don’t Pass Me By
  7. I Will

And this has the same problem! There’s a wealth of material that’s just not there! Interestingly, I ended up using a lot of the same songs. “Dear Prudence” appears on one, “I’m So Tired” on the other. The thing is, I like them both. (The songs, that is.)

The problem with this exercise is that there’s a lot of really good material on the White Album, but not quite enough for a solid and consistent double album. Yes, there’s dross on the White Album — I cannot stand “Wild Honey Pie,” for instance — but there’s more good to great stuff than will fit comfortably on a single album.

I’m not happy with either of these playlists, not in the way that I’m happy with “Hot As Sun.” They suffice, but some things have to be sacrificed because they simply won’t fit.

No, I think I’ll stick with the White Album as is, flawed though it may be. It’s a strange, ungainly, gawky sort of thing, yet I love it anyway. :)

The Beatles Bootleg Recordings 1963

On Tuesday the Beatles issued their second major release of the year, after last month’s On Air: Live at the BBC Volume 2The Beatles Bootleg Recordings 1963.

This was a surprise release. While we knew about On Air for a few months, Bootleg Recordings 1963 was quietly announced a few days before it went on sale on iTunes. The reason for the release had everything to do with European copyrights; these tracks, some unreleased outtakes, some live tracks unheard in fifty years, were about to fall into the public domain in the European Union. Last year, Bob Dylan released a very limited boxset in Europe (just 100 copies, I think) to establish his copyright in a number of tracks that were about to fall out of copyright. Apple (the Beatles company, not the computer manufacturer) instead made these Beatles tracks available widely, albeit just on iTunes.

It’s a pricey collection — forty dollars for fifty-nine tracks. On Air had a similar number of tracks and was about half the price. Is it worth it?

No, it’s not. The Beatles Bootleg Recordings 1963 is not, in any way, an album for the casual listener, because it’s not an album in the conventional sense. It’s more of an historical artifact. It gives you studio outtakes, then a number of live sessions, and finally two demos. In that regard, it’s not terrible, but that’s also what makes it so inessential — yes, the live session tracks are interesting, but if you have Live at the BBC or On Air then you’ve already had the experience.

That’s not to say that there aren’t interesting nuggets here, especially if you’re familiar with the Beatles only through their studio albums (which, frankly, is the vast majority of us). On the albums, George gets maybe a tenth of the vocals, and you would probably be surprised by how much George was a vocal presence in the Beatles’ early days. The Beatles were a band with three pretty much co-equal lead singers in those halcyon days of 1963, and that only really changed once they started writing their own material hardcore and the albums went from having a mix of originals and covers to having all originals. This and the BBC albums have made me reevaluate why George soured on the band as early as he did; whether they intended to or not, John and Paul marginalized George by taking away part of his role.

If you have a hole in your life that only five versions of “A Taste of Honey” and four versions of “She Love You” can fill, then you may need this. Even for the Beatles enthusiast, I would say this is an inessential release. And serious Beatles enthusiasts probably have all of these tracks anyway. I have the Purple Chick BBC sessions set, so I should have every single one of the BBC live tracks here. I have other bootlegs that may have the studio outtakes on this set.

Yet I bought it anyway. Partly it was convenience. And partly it was a moral issue. I’ve acquired many of my Beatles bootlegs through mp3 sites, so i’ve paid nothing for them. I couldn’t have paid anything for them, as they weren’t for sale. Now that they were for sale, the responsible thing, in my opinion, was to pay for them.

Unfortunately, iTunes was a pain, and it took four days to successfully download the album. My files kept coming through garbled or cut short.

It’s nice, but, as I said, inessential. If you really need this, nothing I can say will talk you out of it. Honestly, though, my recommendation is to save your money for the US Albums box set that’s coming next month.

Untold Tales of the Beatles in Hamburg

Later this month, Tune In, the first volume of Mark Lewisohn’s three volume biography of the Beatles, The Beatles: All These Years, comes out. I’ve been awaiting this book for five or six years. Lewisohn, the writer behind The Beatles Recording Sessions and The Complete Beatles Chronicle, the the world’s foremost expert on the Beatles, and this set will be the definitive word on the Fab Four, no doubt.

The more I hear about Mark Lewisohn’s new biography of the Beatles and the still untold revelations it contains, the more anxious I am to read it. Case in point, this picture of John Lennon and Spock in Hamburg. The rivalry between the Beatles and the Spockamocks in the clubs on the Reeperbahn in 1961 and 1962 has never fully been documented.

We know little bits and pieces of the story. We know that Spock fronted a five-piece band that, like the Beatles, performed largely covers of American hits. (Unlike the Beatles, the there are no known recordings of the Spockamocks performing in Hamburg.) We know that, oddly for the Reeperbahn and the heavy sound the bands there had, Spock led the Spockamocks with a lyre. We know a little about the friendship between Stu Sutcliffe and Spockamocks drummer John Harrison.

But there’s so much we don’t know. There are rumors that the rivalry between the angry and garrulous John Lennon and the coolly dispassionate Spock boiled over into violence shortly after Stu Sutcliffe announced he was leaving the Beatles. Was it because Lennon was taking out his anger at Stu on Spock? Was it because Lennon tried to raid Spock’s line-up for a replacement bassist?

What was the relationship between Paul McCartney and Spock. We know that Lennon wanted Spock in the Sgt Pepper cover, like Stu, but McCartney vetoed that. Why? Was there animosity? Did McCartney simply not like Spock?

These are questions I hope Tune In answers.

On Ramping Up the Christmas Music

It wouldn’t be December without “Do They Know It’s Christmas?”

Instead of the version that you probably hear on the radio at least twice this time of year, this is the extended remix by Trevor Horn. It’s notable for a few things. The instrumentation is mixed lower so the vocals are more prominent. And there are a number of spoken messages about Christmas and feeding the poor in the latter half of the track. David Bowie makes a heartfelt plea, while Paul McCartney is strange and goofy.

It also wouldn’t be December without Beatle-esque Christmas music:

This is a track by The Fab Four, a Beatles tribute band. Ten years ago I bought two CDs of Christmas music that they had recorded. (Here’s some thoughts on those albums.) They’ve now remastered those albums and recorded two new tracks, including this “Let It Be”-style take on “The First Noel.”

Looks like I need to double-dip. :h2g2:

On Paul McCartney, the Election, and His Band

Excepting Twitter, this is my last word on politics until Wednesday, and that’s a promise. :)

Paul McCartney and his band make an endorsement in the 2012 presidential election.

I realized something watching that little video.

Paul’s band has been together together for a decade. While the Beatles were a band for longer than that, the John/Paul/George/Ringo line-up didn’t quite last eight years. Paul’s new band has outlasted that.

Keyboardist Wix Wickens has been working with Paul since as far back as 1989’s Flowers in the Dirt.

Guitarist Rusty Anderson and drummer Abe Laboriel, Jr. started working with McCartney on 2001’s Driving Rain album.

Guitarist Brian Ray started with 2002’s Driving USA concert tour.

Ten years.

While Paul didn’t work with them for Kisses on the Bottom, they are recording an album for release next year.

The things one realizes.