BOOK REVIEW: This Bird Has Flown: The Enduring Beauty of Rubber Soul, Fifty Years On

The 2010s are a remarkable decade as every year seems to be a 50th anniversary for something or other that happened in that most epochal of decades (at least in terms of music and cultural change), the 1960s. Since 1965 is often considered the year that pop music truly transitioned to "rock," it only makes sense that there would be a book dedicated to the groundbreaking album released by the biggest band of them all at the tail end of that year. In this new book (with a rather unwieldy title), author John Kruth aims to delve into the Beatles' first masterpiece in terms of both songwriting and production, placing it in the context of its time as well as detailing the aftereffects of its impact to the present day.

***special thanks to Wes at Backbeat Books for sending a copy of the book to review!***

Upon starting the book and noticing that it was two hundred pages, I was a bit skeptical as to how the author was going to fill it all up talking about a single album and its two associated non-album singles ("Day Tripper" and "We Can Work it Out") that clock in at less than an hour total. The first couple of chapters were of a personal nature, with the author describing his childhood and how he got into the Beatles, as well as what was happening in the 1960s around him. However, it didn't really make a lot of sense as he was describing 1960s America which was across the pond from London where the Beatles were living and working. This US/UK dichotomy ended up being one of the most confusing and frustrating things about the book...the author used both the original UK Parlophone edition of the Beatles albums (which is how the band always intended them) as well as the bastardized Capitol US versions interchangeably. For seasoned Beatles fans such as myself it was an annoyance, but I could see how a more casual fan would be thrown off by this.

In fact, this is but one of the many small annoyances I had with this book that made it a frustrating and unsatisfying read overall. The author's writing style was not to my particular liking, coming off a bit too youthful and somewhat clunky. There were some typos and grammatical errors throughout the book, although I'll chalk those up to editors rather than the author himself.  The general layout of the book after the personal introduction consisted of a couple of chapters setting up the recording and release of Rubber Soul, followed by chapters dedicated to each song. It got a bit confusing, however, in that the author included the songs from the American version of the album (arguably the only time a Capitol-altered version of a Beatles album didn't ruin it, and according to many fans, actually improved it) as well as the British version. This means that many songs from the UK Help! album are discussed, which in my opinion doesn't really make sense since those songs were written and recorded six or more months before Rubber Soul (with the exception of "Wait," written and initially recorded during the Help! sessions but not finished or released until Rubber Soul). The end of each chapter then includes a short section called "Rubber Covers" detailing notable cover versions of the particular song discussed. Most chapters include some basic session info for each song as well as the inspiration behind each song, although there was nothing new for obsessive Beatles fans and much of the source material and quoted passages were instantly recognizable as being from various books or the Anthology. There were also a lot of factual inaccuracies throughout, although how many were due to the author's ignorance as opposed to his clunky writing style I can't say. One glaring instance is where he mentions how very shortly after John met Yoko in late 1966, they recorded the infamous Two Virgins album and became a couple, leading to John abandoning his wife Cynthia and son Julian, which actually didn't happen until almost two years later. Now, it's very possible that the author is well aware of this (and he should be...it's incredibly well documented) but the way the passage is written makes it seem as though it happened mere weeks after their initial meeting. There are many sections of the book like this which became increasingly frustrating to read. Whether they were because of Kruth's lack of knowledge or his confusing writing style, either reason is unacceptable and, in my opinion, should've been corrected at the editing stage.

I had more problems with this book that I'd like to bring up, too. First, the background chapters on the 1960s and Beatles influences ended up feeling more like a general history of the decade (and of Bob Dylan in particular). While I get what the author was trying to do here and readily acknowledge the huge influence Dylan had on the Beatles (and John in particular), it began to distract from the point of the book and dragged on far too long. Second, the "Rubber Covers" sections didn't really add anything interesting to the chapters and in many cases became very repetitive as the same tribute albums and/or artists were mentioned over and over. Third, there seemed to be more of a focus on 1964 and 1966 in many of the chapters than on 1965, the year in which Rubber Soul was actually conceived and created. While I can at least see that the trends and experiences of 1964 factored into the creation of the album, 1966 and beyond had nothing to do with it. While the Beatles certainly built off of the achievement of Rubber Soul as they went into 1966 and beyond, the book didn't really need to expound as much on what they did after as it did, at least in my opinion. Finally, Kruth clearly has a lot of admiration for John Lennon, which shone through loud and clear, but while he also credited Paul McCartney for his talents, there were a lot of subtle and snide swipes at McCartney's personality, shortcomings, and his solo career. It got tiresome reading the same tired tripes about how John was the better of the two (as I've said repeatedly, they were BOTH essential) and really, in a book about an album smack dab in the middle of the Beatles' career, why is Paul's solo career being repeatedly brought up and picked at?

While a scholarly, thoroughly detailed look at Rubber Soul and its place in both the 1960s and 20th century history would be a welcome addition to the Beatles literature, This Bird is Flown isn't that book. To me, it felt exactly like I thought it would when I first started reading it: a short book about a single album that was padded with a lot of blandly-written extraneous material in order to justify its length as a book rather than a pamphlet. I will come right out and flatly say that I didn't enjoy this book and I didn't learn a single new thing from it. Perhaps being as fanatical and knowledgeable about the Beatles and their music as I am is the reason I feel this way, and I'll concede that this point may very well color my opinion. But unless one is a very casual or ignorant (in the literal, not pejorative sense of the word) Beatles fan, this book is far from essential.

MY RATING: 5/10

Read More

Another Year Remembering John Lennon

This is how I like to think of John...smiling, happy, and a bit cheeky

Every year when this day pops up, I get a little bit sad. Today is, of course, the day in 1980 when John Lennon was needlessly, shockingly, and cruelly taken from us for reasons we still cannot comprehend other than the fact that it somehow made sense in the mind of a madman. I've written about how John's death (as well as George's, which was fifteen years ago this past couple of weeks ago) has affected me, but I was moved to write a little memory of it on a message board that I frequent and I thought it was worth sharing here as well. 

I wrote: "I was 10 months old in December 1980, so obviously I don't remember it [hearing about John's death] firsthand, but I take solace in the fact that I was alive when all four Beatles were. I also get a bit sad this time each year knowing that I can mark how many years he's been gone by the same number of years I've been alive. I've been a Beatles fan literally from birth thanks to my parents. I remember when I was in kindergarten in 1985 and a schoolfriend told me "did you know John Lennon was shot?" I remember running into my house after school crying and telling my mum "somebody shot John!" and she had to explain to me it had happened five years before.

I try to not let the deaths of famous people that I've never met affect me, but the Beatles have touched me on such a deep level over my entire 35+ years on this planet that in the case of John (and George), it does affect me and I'm OK with that. The beautiful thing is that every time I hear his songs and I hear his voice, I feel good inside."

For me, today, as it is every year, is a day for listening to the Beatles and solo John, enjoying the music, and remembering the supremely talented, complicated, flawed, conflicted, and ultimately good man he was. Gone but never forgotten, and somehow a little piece of him belongs to all of us who love his music, his artwork and writing, and his overall message. Thanks for what you gave us, John.

Read More

BOOK REVIEW: The Beatles

The actual cover of my well-worn copy of this classic book

You're probably asking yourself "another Beatles biography?" as you start reading this post. You'd be entirely justified in wondering just how many biographies on the band are really necessary. Indeed, while there have been many excellent books on the various aspects of the band's life and career, the publication in 2013 of the first volume of Mark Lewisohn's epic three-volume biography of the band almost instantly made it the definitive Beatles bio, just about relegating all that has come before as superfluous. However, the biography by Hunter Davies that is the subject of the present review is still required reading for any serious fan of the Fab Four. Why is that, you may be asking yourself? While it's quite a good book in its own right, the fact remains that it is and always will be the only authorized biography of the Beatles, done with their consent and direct input, written, researched, and published in 1968 while they were still a vibrant, active, and working band at the height of their powers. For that fact alone, it has a secure place in history; the fact that it's an interesting book and a true product of its time and circumstances enhance its standing.

Seasoned Beatles fans will know that Hunter Davies has written additional books on the Beatles in the years since 1968, notably his recent John Lennon Letters and Beatles Lyrics books, both of which have been reviewed on this site previously. However, he is first and foremost known amongst fans of the group for this biography, which has been continually in print since 1968. There have been several updated editions, all of which are worth seeking out as the prefaces and afterwords Davies has written in the intervening years are quite enlightening (and in actuality, adding the prefaces and afterwords up gives a page tally approximately equal to the original biography itself!). Much of the prefaces are taken up with describing the backstory of how he came to write the book, as well as how much editing went into the final manuscript. These are fascinating bits of information to read and worth discussing in their own right. Davies was a published author and columnist in 1966 whose novel Here We Go 'Round the Mulberry Bush was being made into a film. While interviewing Paul McCartney in the summer of 1966 for a feature on the Beatles' upcoming album Revolver and the single from it, "Eleanor Rigby," Davies asked Paul two questions: would he compose the soundtrack for the film? (Paul was interested but ultimately passed...the soundtrack ended up featuring the Spencer Davis Group and their new offshoot, Traffic). And what would Paul think if he (Davies) were to write an authorized biography on the Beatles? Paul seemed interested in this and gave Davies permission to broach the subject with manager Brian Epstein. After getting approval from all of the Beatles, their family, and their friends, Epstein and Davies negotiated a contract in early 1967 and the project was started. Davies began by interviewing Beatles family members, friends, and associates, and then reported back to the individual band members to corroborate facts, see how it spurred their own memories of events, and conduct in-depth interviews with them. He also shadowed them for much of 1967 and 1968, both in the studio, in their homes during songwriting sessions, and as a fly-on-the-wall for many day-to-day occurrences. His involvement with the band ended shortly after their return from India in the spring of 1968 as they began work on their self-titled double album (aka the White Album).

The cover of the 1st edition, published in late 1968

The book roughly follows the lives and careers of the Beatles chronologically, starting off with their childhoods in wartime Liverpool and, in the case of John and Paul, the tragedies of them both losing their mothers while they were teenagers. From here, Davies traces the meeting of the two in the summer of 1956 and, bringing George (a childhood friend of Paul's) into the fold a year later, the origin of the band that would eventually become the Beatles. The story of how they morphed from the skiffle Quarrymen to the rock and roll Beatles, settling on a line-up that also included Stu Sutcliffe on bass and Pete Best on drums, is well known and doesn't bear further repeating here. The same goes for their apprenticeships in Hamburg at the various clubs and dive bars they played while there. However, an interesting part of Davies' book is that he did manage to interview Pete Best, who offered some rather pathetic (in the literal sense of the word) yet interesting morsels of information regarding his time in the band and his feelings about being sacked. Once Ringo entered the picture in the summer of 1962, their story is so well known that, again, I won't waste your time or insult your intelligence by repeating it here. The Beatles recording career, as the public acknowledges it, is covered in the book from 1962 through early 1968, again in roughly chronological order. First tracing their slow but steady rise to the top of the UK scene under the tutelage of Brian Epstein, Davies spends the bulk of the book on the Beatlemania/touring years of 1963-1966, with a handful of revealing tidbits from the Beatles themselves. However, it's the section of the book dealing with their lives and careers between 1966 and mid-1968 (when his interviews ended as he prepared to go to publication) that offer the most revealing insights into the inner workings and hive mind of the band. It's almost certainly with the benefit of hindsight, as no one at the time could have predicted what was to come with the band's unraveling in 1970, but there are numerous candid comments by all of them, but mainly George and John (no surprise there) at how Paul was now their defacto leader, how they wouldn't care if it all went away in a flash, and how they on one hand could see the band continuing on for a long time, yet on the other hand knowing it wouldn't last. Even those around them, such as George Martin, Neil Aspinall, and Mal Evans (all also interviewed for the book) offered some off-the-cuff remarks to the same effect. What's interesting is that the comments about Paul being their driving force post-Brian were made not in snide, accusatory tones, but with almost thankful admission. This was particularly revealing coming from John, who would later use this aspect of Paul's personality as a verbal cudgel once they commenced their very public feud between 1970 and 1973 (keeping in mind that anything John said about the Beatles and McCartney in the immediate aftermath of the band's split was said out of hurt and anger, often hyperbole, and said just to be contrarian and dramatic, as Lennon himself admitted years later).

The book is rounded out with chapters on their dalliances with drugs, Indian religion (with Davies none-too-subtle Maharishi-as-charlatan bias coming through, to which I've long agreed), and their songwriting process. The last of these chapters is interesting as he was a fly-on-the-wall for many writing and recording sessions. In the book, he documents the making of the Sgt. Pepper album and the Magical Mystery Tour film and album. While commenting on their haphazard and time consuming creative process, he also paints a rather bleak picture for Ringo, who is depicted as sitting in the studio at his drums, set apart from the others crowded around their guitars, amps, and microphones, waiting to record the backing tracks and any percussion overdubs, for which after his services are not really required. Ringo himself has confirmed as much of being rather bored with many of the sessions post-1966, but this must have been a bit of a shock for fans to read at the same time as the band were at their zenith and most perceptions at the time were of the four as constantly happy-go-lucky. The last four chapters are each dedicated to an individual Beatle. Again, nothing groundbreaking in terms of what is revealed, but there is some subtle context that once more comes through with benefit of hindsight. John comes off as proud of the Beatles, but bored with life and marriage and cognizant of the fact that the entire machinations of fame, wealth, and critical acclaim and acceptance are all a farce. Paul is painted fairly accurately as a likable yet driven, ambitious, and supremely talented musician who has been the engine of the band post-1966. Ringo is very self-deprecating and seems almost a bit lost, puttering around the house with his wife and two young sons, while George even at this stage is fairly cynical and negative about the band, their music, and the trappings of fame. However, they all do admit that they need the other three in their lives and that there is a bond that only the four of them will ever understand. This is confirmed by their wives and closest associates (Martin, Aspinall, Evans). Again, fascinating to read since we all know what happened two years later...

This one and only authorized Beatles biography is a time capsule of an age gone by, one that was changing at a rapid pace yet was still more innocent, fun, and naive than the present. Hunter Davies did an admirable job capturing this essence and really humanizing the Beatles, who at the point he got them were already viewed as gods removed from the rest of us by fans, critics, and academics alike. The book did a great job in stripping away a lot of the myth in order to show them as they really were: four very young, very talented, very successful men who got to where they were by skill, sheer hard work and determination, and smatterings of luck along the way. It also froze them in place and time as they never would be again; in mid-1968, John was married to Cynthia, George was married to Pattie, Ringo was married to Maureen, and Paul was engaged to Jane. Within less than six months of the book's publication, John was with Yoko, Paul was with Linda (both of whom the two Beatles would respectively marry in early 1969 and remain married to until Linda's and John's deaths); within five years Ringo and Maureen were separated and headed for divorce, as were George and Pattie.  Combined with the chaos of Apple Corps., the arrival of the wicked Allen Klein, the eventual bitter lawsuits, the acrimony, and the sniping in public and private between the four of them, the entire Beatle empire began to crumble to dust around them almost as soon as this book was released. Indeed, Davies' postscript, added to the 1985 edition, is along these same lines and is as valuable and worthy an addition to the book as anything originally in it. Speaking of that, while there are some surprisingly candid admissions throughout (such as Cynthia Lennon admitting that if she hadn't gotten pregnant, she and John wouldn't have gotten married), Davies laments the censoring he had to agree to after finishing the manuscript in order to appease the four Beatles, or in reality their families. Unsurprisingly, the two most difficult thorns in his side were John's aunt Mimi and Brian Epstein's mother Queenie, both of whom wanted their respective son's lives whitewashed, facts be damned. In Mimi's case, she took issue with John's recollections of his bad behavior at school and with his friends during his childhood, while in Queenie's case any mention of Brian's homosexuality was off limits. Davies did leave in some daring and rather cheeky references to Brian as "gay" in the original book, playing off the original connotation of the word as a synonym for "happy" while still making it obviously clear in context what he really meant. But the mores of the time, as well as the need to please everyone involved, meant that some major cuts needed to be made. Because of this, I've long hoped for an unedited original manuscript of the book...Hunter, if you're reading this, how about it?

The book is very readable and enjoyable although it does tend to read as a series of Davies' shorthand notes fleshed out into sentence and paragraph form, at times the prose coming across a bit stilted. There are also several small errors, mainly in dating certain photos or events. However, he achieved some real coups for the time, such as tracking down and interviewing Pete Best, Richard Starkey (Ringo's estranged father), and Fred Lennon (John's estranged father). Apart from the errors and the rather repetitive nature of several passages, the book holds up remarkably well and must be resonating well enough to remain in print continuously since the first edition almost fifty years ago! Essential reading for any Beatles fan, Hunter Davies book is a slice of life directly from the Beatles that chronicles their story from (mostly) their own recollections, catching them at their peak when the possibilities seemed endless and the successes effortless. Like the band, the book is of its time yet also timeless. It also holds up well to repeat readings, something I can personally attest to. While he was rather self-deprecating in his forward, Davies should hold no regrets with respect to his achievement with this book, although somehow I think that deep down he must know what the rest of us do when it comes to The Beatles: nothing has changed. Just as the prevailing thought in 1968, the Beatles will go on forever in some form or another, and so will this book.

MY RATING: 8/10

Read More

BOOK REVIEW: Paul McCartney: A Life

He's one of the most famous musicians on the planet, a former member of the most famous rock band of all time, and one half of the greatest songwriting partnership of the 20th century. He's been in the public eye for 53 (and counting) of his 73 years on this planet and every aspect of his life has been gone over with a fine-toothed comb. Still, Paul McCartney remains somewhat of an enigma as he has always guarded his emotions and true feelings from all but the handful of people closest to him.  Published in 2009, Peter Carlin's biography Paul: A Life is usually held up alongside Howard Sounes' Fab: An Intimate Life of Paul McCartney as one of the better biographies on Paul (not counting Paul's autobiography Many Years From Now).  I've previously reviewed Sounes' book so I was eager to read and review Carlin's book, which I've heard good things about, in order to see how it compared.

***special thanks to Courtney at Touchstone Press for sending me a copy of the book to review!***

While overall I liked Sounes' book, it had flaws that marred my enjoyment of it; these were mainly misinformation that he cited and his lack of emphasis (and seeming disinterest) in Paul's music.  One of the first things I noticed about Carlin's book was that he had a list of references and endnotes at the end of the book, giving me confidence that it should be for the most part a fairly accurate book.  Starting with a vignette of Paul onstage in Liverpool in front of thousands of adoring fans, we are then transported back to post-War Liverpool and the story of how Paul's parents, Jim and Mary McCartney, came to meet, marry, and settle in Liverpool. Soon after, Paul and brother Michael arrived and the family was complete.  There isn't anything new in the author's telling of Paul's childhood and he breezes through it quite rapidly: the period covering Paul's school years and the sudden death of his mother in 1956 were covered in roughly twenty-five or so pages before we finally get to the big event of 1957...the day John and Paul officially met each other.  Carlin takes Paul's story through the Beatles years without anything that will surprise any seasoned Beatles fans although it is clear that, unlike Sounes, Carlin is a fan of their music; his discussions focuses mainly on the various albums and songs Paul worked on and released throughout his career in a way the other book didn't. He does a good job capturing Paul's anguish and the sorry state he was in during the immediate aftermath of the Beatles split and how he transitioned first into a solo career before forming Wings. From here, we get through the Wings years with a nice history of the band including some perspective on Linda as a musician.  While she clearly wasn't too talented (and she would have been the first person to admit this, as she did many times over the years as well as in this book) everyone Carlin either spoke to or quoted mentioned that what she lacked in talent she made up for in perseverance and a good attitude. Again, a nice contrast from the Sounes' book where he was much more backhanded in his praise of Linda when discussing anything about her life and considered her little more than a predatory groupie who nabbed a Beatle.

From this point onward to the end it seemed as though the book was a bit rushed.  The overall length of the book is only 350 or so pages and the period from Paul's 1980 bust in Japan to the end took up a bit less than a hundred pages.  When discussing Paul's struggling career in the 1980s there are quite a few instances of people recalling haughty and arrogant comments he made when things weren't going his way; none of it was too surprising and many have been discussed previously, but it does paint the portrait of someone who was losing their grip and not taking it well.  There is an interesting discussion on his collaboration with Elvis Costello in the late 1980s and early 1990s that yielded his comeback album Flowers in the Dirt and the subsequent tour (his first since 1979). Part of what made his collaboration with Costello so effective and also short lived was the same type of relationship that also seemed to be Paul's lifelong bugbear: John Lennon.  More specifically, Carlin portrays Paul as endlessly tilting at windmills when it comes to his relationship with John Lennon and how other people perceive it.  As any longtime Beatles and/or Paul fan knows, he has made it almost his life's mission to reclaim his place in the hierarchy of the Beatles and his partnership with Lennon.  While his behavior can get a bit tiresome, even for his fans, Carlin does a good job pointing out the many ways in which Paul is actually justified in doing this: there's the famous Philip Norman biography of the Beatles titled Shout! which paints Lennon as a genius and the other three Beatles as imbecilic lackeys who were lucky to ride John's coattails to fame and fortune.  I've read the book and this is indeed how Norman portrays them, from his constant swipes at Paul, George, and Ringo to his incessant mentions of the "cow-eyed McCartney."  There has been the almost canonization of John since his tragic murder in 1980, much of it aided and abetted by Yoko Ono, where all of John's flaws and foibles have been whitewashed out of existence and he's become an almost holy figure.  Perhaps the worst bit, which Paul is quoted on in the book and for which I commend the author for pointing out, is over his frustration at how in order for John to be elevated, Paul always has to be simultaneously diminished. While Paul's effort to combat this over the years has sometimes even made his biggest fans (myself included) cringe, while reading this book you can at least understand why he has felt the need to fight it (and for the record, I agree with him).  Carlin's portrayal of Paul and Linda's thirty year marriage is very touching and the way he describes her death and its effect on Paul was very moving.  The book was published around the time that Paul had started dating (but had not yet married) his current wife, Nancy, so he does have the chance to describe the disastrous second marriage to Heather Mills.  While he doesn't get as in depth as in the Sounes book in talking about it, he does show how Paul was vulnerable and on the rebound after Linda's death and how all involved (except for Heather) like to pretend as though this never happened (not counting the young daughter Paul adores who  arose from the marriage).

At just around 350 pages, Paul McCartney: A Life seems a bit lightweight in terms of any depth or profound insight into Paul's life and career.  However, whatever it may slightly lack in gravitas it makes up for with the style of the writing. Each major event in Paul's life is written in a breezy, almost situational vignette style that puts you there with him as it happens. While some of the dialogue attributed to those involved is obviously made up so as to reflect what could have plausibly been said, quite a lot of it is taken from reputable sources; in either event, there is a good balance and it helps to make each chapter seem almost like a scene in a play. Carlin's writing style is enjoyable and he doesn't seem to have too much of an agenda.  While it is clear that he's a big Paul fan (something that Sounes didn't necessarily seem to be in his book), Carlin doesn't fall into the trap of trashing John at the expense of Paul.  There are a few unnecessary (in my view) cracks at Ringo's expense, but he's obviously a Beatles fan at heart.  There are some instances where old Beatles tropes that have been debunked or misattributed over the years are brought up that will stick out to any serious fan, but overall it's a solidly researched book. There are endnotes at the end of the book, as well as a list of people Carlin interviewed for the book so he clearly put in a lot of work researching material. While this book isn't a definitive biography, it's a solid and worthy take on Paul's life. It might not have the weight of the Sounes book, but on the whole it's much more enjoyable and satisfying. I suggest Paul fans get and read both books, but if you're only going to choose one, Carlin's book is the one you'll like more.

MY RATING: 7.5/10

Read More

Interview with Chuck Gunderson, author of Some Fun Tonight! The Backstage Story of How the Beatles Rocked America: The Historic Tours of 1964-1966

Author Chuck Gunderson

The Rock and Roll Chemist is very excited to bring you today's interview with Chuck Gunderson, author of the excellent book Some Fun Tonight which has previously been reviewed here on the site. Chuck Gunderson was raised in San Diego, California, the site of the Beatles’ eighth stop on the 1965 North American tour. He was too young to attend the show, but he fondly recalls his older siblings spinning the records of the Fab Four as he grew up, which perked a life-long love for the band. He has worked in the outdoor advertising industry most of his life, although his true passion is history. He holds two degrees in history—a B.A. from San Diego State University and an M.A. from the University of San Diego. Having published a few articles over the years, Chuck turned his sights to researching and writing this epic two-volume set on the history of the Beatles’ North American tours of 1964 to 1966. Chuck is married to Christina, and they are the parents of four children, each a self-described Beatles fan.  After reading both information-packed volumes of his book, I had a LOT of questions and Chuck was kind enough to answer them.

RNRChemist: Chuck, thanks so much for taking the time to discuss your excellent books; it's a real pleasure.  Can you tell us a little bit about yourself? How did you first get into the Beatles?

CG: I am almost a first-generation fan (born in 1962), but fortunately for me, I had older brothers and a sister who were constantly spinning 45's and albums of the Beatles.  I fondly recall the Capitol swirl and later the Apple label revolving on our cheap turn table-so a fan from the very beginning of my life.

RNRChemist: What made you decide to write this book? Why focus on these specific tours from the Beatles' career?

CG: My favorite period of Beatle history is their live performances. Let's face it, they didn't start in a sterile studio but the rough and tumble stages of Liverpool and Hamburg where they logged thousands of playing hours.  Mark Lewisohn's book, "The Beatles Live!" was for certain a catalyst.  Others had written books on one or two of the tours, but they lacked detail and great photos.  I waited and waited for someone to do a definitive book on the tours like Bruce Spizer, but when no one stepped up to the plate I decided to do it myself.  I have a Master's in history, so I know how to write, research, and organize and being a huge fan made it all work out!

RNRChemist: How did you go about researching each show, tracking down the people involved, etc.?

CG: Most firsthand accounts of the Beatles playing in a city in North America were scant at best.  Newspapers of the day devoted a paragraph or two about the concert and maybe printed one photo, and almost never printed a set list of what was even sung!  So in the 8 years of research I conducted in assembling the books, I interviewed lots of people that were connected with the shows: promoters, DJ's, photographers, hotel managers, venue personnel, newsmen, fans, people from GAC (The New York talent agency that booked the shows) and of course, the Beatles' inner circle like Tony Barrow and Bernard Lee.  I'm glad I started to conduct the interviews several years ago as many have passed on.

RNRChemist: Along the same lines as above, your attention to detail is impressive, down to describing what the Beatles ate for room service. How on earth did you find all that stuff out?

CG: One interview led to another which led to another; someone would tell me, "Hey, that guy still works at the hotel the Beatles stayed at!" Great, let's find that guy and conduct an interview.  Some of the finer details of what they ate for breakfast was usually printed in primary sources like the newspaper or teen magazines.

RNRChemist: How did you track down all of that great memorabilia? Hardest piece to find? Most expensive?

CG: The vast majority is from my own personal collection.  Along with loving the music, I've been a collector for many years.  Knowing I would go broke if I collected all you can collect of the Beatles, I decided to concentrate my efforts on North American tour memorabilia: tickets, handbills, programs, posters, photographs, and documents. All of it is in the book and printed in a high quality format so you can easily read every line of a Beatles tour rider. Luckily, they weren't 50 pages long like they are today! The riders for the Beatles tours only consisted of about a page and a half.

RNRChemist: What is your overall assessment of the Beatles as a live band? I always feel that aspect of their career gets overlooked and unfairly dismissed as subpar.

CG: I think they were a fabulous live band.  I would have given anything to have seen a performance at the Cavern or any of the small cinemas they played throughout the U.K.  In America, I would have loved to have seen them at the Paramount (about 3500 seats) and of course, Shea just to say, "I was there!"  Remember, they didn't have the sound technology they have today and I just marvel how they even played a set at Shea with 55,000 plus fans screaming their lungs out!  The reason they endured as a live act was because they had had logged thousands of hours together on stage.  It was a beautiful sympathy to watch as everyone knew exactly where they were in the song despite the sound challenges.

RNRChemist: Can you discuss your thoughts on the scale of those tours relative to the time? It's always seemed as though the band grew too big for the venues they ended up playing and outpaced the logistics as well as the amp/PA technology of the era.  Fair assessment?

CG: Somewhat of a fair assessment.  Nothing on the scale of the Beatles' 1964 tour had ever been done before.  Elvis had played the Cotton Bowl in Texas in the mid to late 50s but he normally played much smaller venues than the Beatles did.  The music they were to create later, Revolver, Rubber Soul, Sgt. Pepper simply could not be recreated on stage due to sound technology limitations.  The venues they played in North America were the biggest around and were the only options Brian and GAC had to satisfy the fans.

RNRChemist: If they'd hung on another year when amps and PAs caught up do you think they could have kept touring? Obviously they wouldn't have been able to reproduce much from Revolver or Sgt. Pepper, for example, but they could have at least been heard if they'd done stripped back versions of some of those songs.

CG: Great question! I'm just not sure on that.  I think Paul would have gone on, but George was the most vocal in giving up the stage.  Had they been able to recreate some of the newer music they were releasing, Brian may have asked them to continue touring to create more fans and make more money. It seems to fit that after they quit touring in August of 1966, Brian died a year later.  He was instrumental in creating those tours with promoters from around the world.

RNRChemist: Along the same lines, we've all read about how they were invited to play Monterey Pop in '67 and Woodstock in '69.  There is also credible evidence they had booked the Roundhouse in London for some shows in December 1968 before pulling the plug.  Given what you know about their American tours, could you have seen them actually doing those shows in an alternate universe?

CG: I don't think so.  Again, if they did Paul, most likely, had pushed for it.  Later shows featured groups that stayed on stage for an hour or two...would the Beatles do that?  I don't think so....Paul does now, but I don't think the four of them would have post-1966.

RNRChemist: Back to the American tours that are the subject of your book: what's your opinion on their musicianship on these tours? What do you think they could have done differently/better?

CG: Under the circumstances, I thought it was good.  How did Ringo hold down a beat amongst the screams? The answer: experience.  They were playing venues where the sound system was installed in the 20s, like Maple Leaf Gardens...I don't think they could have introduced anything to make the music sound better as it wasn't invented yet.

RNRChemist: Brian Epstein's business ineptitude has been detailed a lot over the years. His tour planning left a lot to be desired in terms of logistics and how the Beatles criss-crossed the country in an apparently random pattern. Do you think it all could have gone smoother had he been a better businessman and more versed how to plan the travel, for example?  I've recently read a book about their UK tours and the same thing happened where they zig-zagged all over the country with no logic behind it.

CG: Brian relied on GAC (the New York talent agency) to book the tours.  GAC knew America and knew the venues.  They presented Brian with everything but the kitchen sink as many cities wanted them.  I think Brian and the Beatles wanted to see particular cities (Las Vegas, New Orleans) that GAC may have frowned on due to size.  It was haphazard, though, playing Montreal then flying down to Jacksonville, then back up to Boston.  It seemed they were inventing the tour as they went along because they cancelled reservations of hotels they were booked to stay at.  The 1965 and 1966 tours were more logical in terms of flight plans.

RNRChemist: All of those tours and the Beatles had a road crew of two: Neil and Mal. Talk about a skeleton crew! You can't imagine anyone these days, let alone even from the early 1970s onward, going out with a crew smaller than 100. It was truly a different era...can you comment on the job Neil and Mal did on these US tours?

CG: I had Ed Freeman, who worked on the 1966 tour, tell me it took four people to set up the stage: him, Mike Owen, Mal Evans, and Neil.  They fit all the Beatles equipment into one stretch van!  For sure Mal and Neil were the backbone of the tour and I feature an image of them sitting on an amp during the 1965 tour for my dedication page on the second volume.

RNRChemist: The Beatles almost split for good after the '66 tour because of everything that had happened on the road that year.  How much do you think the sheer insanity (the endless mania, lack of privacy, screaming, etc.) of these tours contributed to their stopping playing live and never wanting to go back on the road (apart from Paul?).

CG: Even Paul called it the "Lark of touring."  Even though the U.S. '65 and '66 tours were much shorter in duration than the 1964 tour, the group was yearning to be in the studio creating new music.  Bob Eubanks, who promoted them all three years in L.A., told me that he made more money in the promotion of the 1965 Hollywood Bowl shows than the Beatles earned on stage.  Yes, they made a ton of money during the 1964 tour (over a million) but it was becoming more costly as venues were getting larger and logistics more complicated.

RNRChemist: Speaking of the mania, why do you think the crowds (mainly the girls in the crowds) felt the need to scream and shout nonstop? It's been endlessly debated over the years but I'm interested in your view of it.

CG: The Beatles, as viewed by the girls, were mostly looked at as good looking guys rather than serious musicians.  Plus they added elements into their shows that created the gasps and screams from the girls: the clothes, the hair, the head shake, the scream going into the bridge, PLUS they were handsome, let's face it!

RNRChemist: Can you comment on how spartan the conditions were for the Beatles, the biggest band in the world, on the road? Especially compared to what it would be like a few years later, they had minimal comforts and their tour rider was so innocently simple.

CG: One promoter I interviewed booked them to play in San Diego during their height of superstardom in 1965.  He only spent $33.96 on food for the ENTIRE entourage of the Beatles camp!  He had it listed on his statement which I feature in the book. In 1965 they only added these additional requests from the 1964 tour rider: four cots, mirrors, a portable T.V. set, and clean towels. Yes, very sparse compared to today's spoiled rock stars.

RNRChemist: Let's dive into the actual performances on stage.  First, how bad must it have been for the support acts? No one wanted to see them and they were shouted down by crowds who only wanted to see the Beatles and paid them very little attention. Do you think they only agreed to the support slots because of the exposure they'd get?

CG: Bill Black reportedly paid GAC a bribe to book his group on the 1964 tour.  Sadly, Bill never made it on tour as he became sick and died a year later, so he for sure wanted the exposure.  The Righteous Brothers, however, were not very happy with their slot on the tour.  In trying to sing their soulful melodies, they gave it up after 9 dates on the 1964 tour.  They were sick of fans screaming, "We want the Beatles!" Plus they made more money doing venues on the West Coast.  Brian and GAC were gracious to let them out of their contract.  All the support acts, however, were consummate professionals and played every gig. I still can't imagine what King Curtis, who was used to performing in small jazz clubs, must have felt appearing on stage at Shea Stadium to kick off the 1965 tour!

RNRChemist: Now, regarding the Beatles, here is a theory of mine that I've held to for many years and I'd like to get your opinion on it.  I've always thought that the fact that the crowds didn't even try to listen to the music was a bigger factor in their decision to stop touring than its given credit for? I mean, they've got older teenagers and adults buying their records and really listening to the records and trying to understand their more complex music, while on the other hand their concert audience is made up almost exclusively of young girl teenyboppers who do nothing but go nuts screaming without listening. As John said, they used the concerts as "bloody tribal rites" and an excuse to go crazy at the Fabs' expense. That has to wear on an artist who takes their work seriously and is trying to share it with their fans, no? Am I making too much of this?

CG: I agree with you.  Especially in 1965 and 1966.  Before the tour began in 1965 the Capitol "Help!" soundtrack was released and "Beatles VI" was released only a few months prior.  The Beatles only played three songs off those two albums and one was a cover: Dizzie Miss Lizzie. In 1966 "Revolver" was released right before the tour and not ONE song was covered on stage!  The teenie-boppers would have loved at least to hear "Yellow Submarine."  Ringo said it best in Anthology: he felt people were only coming to see them and not listen to the music.  In 1964 they could pull it off, but not for the subsequent tours that followed.

RNRChemist: Let's talk about the massive and groundbreaking 1965 tour, where they finally made the leap from theatres and auditoriums to stadiums and arenas.  They sure didn't have any problem selling out venues across the country but it seems like they were flying by the seat of their pants and barely doing it given the state of 1965 infrastructure in the USA.  Tell me what you think of this tour.

CG: Many people consider the 1965 tour the "Stadium Tour" when in fact, of the 10 cities they performed in, 5 were stadiums and 5 were arenas, the difference being if they played an arena they would always do two shows.  Plus, they didn't sell out every venue.  Of the stadiums in 1965 only Shea was a sellout and there were plenty of tickets to be had in places like San Diego and Minneapolis.

RNRChemist: Now, let's discuss the final tour of 1966: the fallout from John's "bigger than Jesus" comments, death threats and protests, Beatles memorabilia burnings, a significant amount of unsold seats, and a press that was finally antagonistic (with the Beatles responding in kind). It seemed like a perfect storm of everything that could go wrong going wrong all at once. How much of the press' behavior do you think was due to Beatle fatigue?  And how much do you think this contributed to their already fragile attitude toward touring?

CG: The press went after them in 1966.  They were asked serious questions during all three tours about politics, Vietnam, race relations and such, but it seemed the group was much too flippant for the American press to handle, especially  during the 1966 tour.  They just didn't care anymore and looked at the tours as a business obligation to be fulfilled.  In 1966 they cut back on formal press conference and preferred "Press Tapings" where a reporter would get with an individual Beatle for a series of questions. They did 25 formal press conferences in 33 days in 1964, but by 1966 they only did 6 or 7 formal sessions with the press.  Fatigue was a factor, but they were tired of answering the same "type" questions from city to city.

RNRChemist: Even considering all of what happened in 1966, it's always seemed as though the Beatles were adored much more in the US than in their native UK. This seems to hold true even more today, where the UK press has no problem taking swipes at Paul or Ringo whereas they are almost 100% loved here.  Why do you think America did and still does hold the Beatles dearer than their native England?

CG: America put the "stamp" on the Beatles.  In a worldly sense, I would say New York City is the center of everything Beatle.  Plus the Beatles were not here on American soil a ton as everyone seems to think.  As a matter of fact, the group as a whole only stood on American soil for a total of 90 days...maybe limited exposure? People always want more than they are getting!

RNRChemist: What was the most surprising and/or interesting thing you discovered when working on the book?  Were there any crazy rock and roll stories from the road you uncovered that didn't make the final cut that you can share with us?

CG: I pretty much shared everything.  It was a planned one volume book of about 350 pages, but when I started uncovering stories and photos that had never been seen I just had to share. I'm a fan first and wanted to give the fans the best I could give them for the money.  So it morphed into 2 volumes and over 600 pages and I even threw in a slipcase!  Some people are taken back on the price of $175, but if Genesis did a project like this fans would be paying $600 to $800.  Plus, I put all the bells and whistles on this project: extra thick paper, spot varnish on all the photos and memorabilia, just a complete quality project, plus hundreds of unpublished photos.  I busted lots of myths that had been held for years, so read the books to find out!

RNRChemist: You did indeed do a great job with the presentation of the books...they are gorgeous and as nice to look at as they are to read!  Okay, now for some personal questions:

Which of the American tours do you think was the best, and why?

CG: 1964: new and fresh. Exhaustive in that they did 32 shows in 33 days!

RNRChemist: Musically, which is your favorite concert (I'm assuming you've heard recordings? My personal favorites from the US tours are the Hollywood Bowl shows from '64 and '65, Shea Stadium '65, and Atlanta '65. Philly from '64 is a great one, too).

CG: Atlanta 1965 is my favorite and not because they had feedback monitors; they didn't... another myth broken and a great story in the book.

RNRChemist: What's your favorite song they did live? Least favorite? How about one you wish they played in concert?  What about one they played live that you wish they hadn't?

CG: Most favorite: without a doubt, "Long Tall Sally:" it's a cover song but was the inspiration for my title and the last song they ever sung live, albeit only just over 30 seconds on tape because Tony Barrow's tape ran out...aagghhhh! Least favorite: Yesterday (Sorry, Paul). My wish: I Saw Her Standing There...One, Two, Three, Faaaoorrr!!! Great starter.

RNRChemist: Did you ever see the Beatles live? How about any of them solo?

CG: I wish I had; they came to San Diego in 1965 but I was only 3! I've seen Paul and Ringo several times...if you haven't, you need to see them!

RNRChemist: I saw Paul in 2013 and Ringo last summer and I agree, they were fantastic and must-see for any Beatles fans! Any future Beatles project coming up? Maybe a book on other tours they did?

CG: I would love to do another project and have some ideas in mind, but right now I'm concentrating on selling this book, so please buy it! Thanks so much for the interview...great questions!

RNRChemist: Chuck, thanks so much for enlightening us with your Beatles knowledge and discussing your book with us...it was a real pleasure to speak with you! And to my readers, I cannot recommend Chuck's books enough; if you're a serious Beatles fan, you need these! Once again, thank you, Chuck!

Read More

Concert Memories: Radiohead at Suffolk Downs Racetrack, Boston, MA 8/14/01

I've previously written about some concerts I've been to on this site...these have included Blur, Gorillaz, Peter Frampton, Paul McCartney, Damon Albarn, and Ringo Starr.  I thought it would be fun for both me and you, my loyal readers, if I wrote up more of the shows I've seen in the past. There are two reasons that finally convinced me I should do this: 1) I thought it would be fun to share my experiences and hopefully spur conversation with those of you who may also have seen these (or similar) artists, and 2) it would force me to think back and dig up my memories of these experiences before I forget them!   There are a lot of them so I'm going to do them one per post in order to spread them out.  I'm going to keep the order random so that it doesn't get too predictable and hope that you enjoy reading these as much as I've enjoyed thinking back on them and writing them up.

Without further ado, first up will be...

Radiohead/The Beta Band Live at Suffolk Downs Racetrack, Boston, MA August 14, 2001

I'd been a huge Radiohead fan since their second album, the exquisite The Bends, came out in 1995.  I finally got the chance to see them in 2001 while they were supporting their latest two records, 2000's Kid A and 2001's Amnesiac. The concert was at the historic Suffolk Downs Racetrack in East Boston on a typically muggy August night in New England.  I went with my wife (then my fiancee), brother, and sister.  We drove down to Charlestown from our home on the New Hampshire seacoast and took the T to the racetrack.  I'd never seen a show there before so I wasn't sure what to expect as far as seating arrangements; turns out, there were none!   It was 100% general admission, with the stage set up toward the end of the racetrack infield.  We got there relatively early so if I recall correctly we were about thirty feet from the stage, standing the whole time.   There were no barriers, just a rope between posts running across the entire infield to keep the crowd out of the "pit" area in front of the stage where the photographers and press were.  There were two opening acts: first up was Kid Koala, a DJ who did some crazy things with a turntable. Not really my cup of tea but I remember being impressed by the bit he did at the end when he was spinning and dancing around doing all of these crazy moves and working his turntables without missing a beat. He later joined Radiohead for a a song during their set.  As for the second opening band, they were an indie rock band from Scotland who I'd only ever heard of but never actually heard called The Beta Band.  I'll cut right to the chase and say that they were absolutely fantastic. I was blown away by their set and it made me a fan right from that very moment. I think I went out that same weekend and bought all of their albums and continued to follow them until they sadly split up in 2004.  It was one of the rare times when I enjoyed a support act so much that I became a full-blown fan.  Finally, after a long wait, the headliners hit the stage...

What I remember most about the show was that it was overall very, very good. They played a nice cross-section of material from every album of theirs to that point (apart from the debut), with the only glaring omission being "Optimistic." I was really surprised and disappointed that they didn't play it, as it's one of my favorite songs of theirs and was the big single from Kid A released just a year before. Kid Koala joined them for a very long, drawn-out, and awesome version of "The National Anthem" to open the show.  There was a comical screw-up during the first section of "Airbag" that caused the band and crowd to laugh as it fell apart. They started it again and pulled it off flawlessly.  They hit all of the big songs from Kid A and Amnesiac, as well as numerous classics from OK Computer and The Bends. I remember being really pleased to hear two of their obscure (and great) b-sides like "Pearly*" and "Talk Show Host." I also can still feel the incredible atmosphere of brooding, majestic songs like "Lucky," "Pyramid Song," and "Like Spinning Plates" as they soared on the thin breeze that blew through the muggy night.  At one point, a teenager bumped into me from behind and when I turned around, he looked up into my face (I'm 6'5") and said "are you a cop?" When I said no, he offered me his joint, to which I told him to get lost (I've been proudly drug-free my entire life).  Later on in the show, something happened at the back of the crowd which brought a big roar from behind before everyone started pushing forward in a massive crush. It was actually quite scary and I remember my brother (who is 6'3" and solidly built) and I (as stated, 6'5" and also solidly built) tell my wife and sister to get in front of us as we locked elbows and held back against the crush.  It was probably the most scared for my safety that I've ever been a show as the crowd was really surging hard and had they not let up, I'm not sure we could have remained standing more than another few minutes. It hurt!

In any event, the show ended up being excellent and one I'll always remember.  It was at the height of my Radiohead fandom; I'm still a fan but it's cooled off quite considerably since then. I was pretty disappointed with their 2003 album Hail to the Thief and they then disappeared for ages before coming back with 2007's excellent In Rainbows. However, the 2011 follow-up The King of Limbs was a crushing disappointment and all of the momentum and excitement they'd generated as one of the most innovative rock bands of the late 1990s/early 2000s was squandered.  To date it's the only time I've seen them live and while I certainly wouldn't say no to seeing them again, if I never see them again I'm perfectly content with the fact that I saw them once and that it was a great concert.  Bonus points for turning me into a lifelong fan of the Beta Band, too!

Set List:

The National Anthem 
Airbag (w/false start) 
Morning Bell 
Lucky
Knives Out
Packt Like Sardines In A Crushed Tin Box 
No Surprises 
Dollars & Cents
Street Spirit (Fade Out) 
Pearly* 
Just 
I Might Be Wrong 
Pyramid Song 
Paranoid Android
Idioteque 
Everything In Its Right Place
 
Encore: 

Like Spinning Plates 
Talk Show Host 
You And Whose Army? 
The Bends
Karma Police 
The Tourist

(Within a month or two of the concert, I was lucky enough to track down someone who had taped the show and I have a complete audience recording of this concert on CDR. I always try to get recordings of the shows I've been to so that I can relive them whenever I want)

Read More

BOOK REVIEW: Beatlemania: The Real Story of the Beatles UK Tours 1963-1965

The Beatles' legendary tours of America between 1964 and 1966 are etched in rock and roll lore, as are their various tours around the world. Which Beatles fan doesn't know about their Australian tour when Ringo was ill and a substitute filled in for a fortnight? Or their disastrous experience in the Philippines in 1966? These are all part of rock tour legend, but a vital part of their touring history is often overlooked, and for reasons which are at once confusing and inexcusable.  I refer to, of course, the six UK tours they undertook between 1963 and 1965. These tours were what set the band on their path to superstardom and were the genesis of the phenomenon known as Beatlemania, yet they are often overlooked when the bigger picture of their touring years are considered.  Clearly this shouldn't be the case and an in-depth look into these tours and their import in the Fab Four's career is the subject of Martin Creasy's book Beatlemania.

***special thanks to Neil at Omnibus Books for sending me a copy of the book to review!***

Having read and reviewed the definitive work on the Beatles' American tours, I was very interested in reading Beatlemania as I viewed it as a companion work in the sense that it focused on the same aspects of the UK tours that Some Fun Tonight did with regards to the US tours.  However, it does this in a completely different format: whereas Some Fun Tonight is a mammoth tome full of photographs, memorabilia, and breaks each tour down by show, Beatlemania is more of a narrative chronicle of each UK tour. Martin Creasy has exhaustively researched each tour and takes the reader through them in chronological order from beginning to end.  There are details and background on each of the support acts, cities and venues, and in most cases the tour managers and venue support staff as well. Additionally, the memories of numerous audience members from each show who were interviewed for the book help put each show into proper context. There are also quotes from interviews the Beatles gave to newspapers in each city they visited as well as what contemporary reviewers in the press said about each concert. Photo sections corresponding to each tour show the reader some of the tour posters and ticket stubs (see photo below), as well as photos of the Beatles and their tour mates onstage and backstage.  There are even some great never-before-seen pictures, most notably the only surviving photographs of the band from their first UK tour in early 1963 (supporting Helen Shapiro).

This is the inside of the dust jacket...VERY cool!

As the book progresses, the Beatles go from being an unproven supporting band far down on the bill who were virtually unknown outside of northwest England to the the biggest headliners the country (and later, the world) would ever see.  Indeed, on their first two tours, supporting Helen Shapiro on the first and Chris Montez/Tommy Roe on the second, the band won over new fans and eventually made such an impact that by the end of them they had usurped the headliners. Concurrent with these tours were their first #1 singles, "Please Please Me" and "From Me To You," which cemented their status.  However, even on their third tour they were not headlining and were supporting the great Roy Orbison (of whom they were all big fans). To his credit, Orbison graciously gave up his headlining slot when he saw the riotous reception the Fab Four were getting although in doing so, he put them in the unenviable position of following directly after him!  By their fourth tour of 1963 there was no doubt that the Beatles had arrived and were bonafide headliners.  The success of "She Loves You," "I Want to Hold Your Hand," and their first two albums solidified their spot as the top rock band in all of England.  The mania was at fever pitch but the band, though exhausted, didn't seem to be tired of it. A different picture is painted for their final two tours, though. The 1964 UK tour saw slightly dampened crowd frenzy, but it was still a harrowing adventure getting into and out of every gig. The band were physically wearier and also tired of the incessantly banal and stupid questioning they were subjected to before and after every show.  By their final UK tour in December 1965, it was clear they'd had enough and were nearing the end of their touring rope.  That final UK tour consisted of only nine dates, although they had support from the Moody Blues as well as the Paramounts (who would eventually form the nucleus of Procul Harum).  While the Beatles should be commended for continuing to add their new material to their set lists, they were hamstrung by the state of concert equipment in the mid-1960s and could no longer reproduce their ambitious material onstage. As we all know, this was the primary (but not the only) factor in their decision to stop touring after their summer American tour of 1966.

Beatlemania is, overall, an enjoyable book to read although it does tend to get monotonous the further along you get into it. This is down to its construction, which consists of very similar paragraphs for each show of each tour. After the first few tours, it becomes a repeated cycle of the band getting smuggled into the venue, the crowd shouting down the support acts with "we want the Beatles!" and the band playing into a hailstorm of screams and constant crowd mania before making a mad dash for their lives to escape the venue.  The excerpts of archival newspaper, radio, and TV interviews with the band and their support that are sprinkled throughout, as well as new interviews with the support acts and fans who were at the shows, help break the monotony up and place the reader back in that moment in time.  As an added bonus, at the end of the book there is a list of every UK tour date and venue the Beatles played between 1963 and 1965 as well as a splendid appendix with more in-depth interviews the author conducted with many of the central figures from the tours. These include tour promotion staff, support acts, and fans.  I actually would have preferred more of these interviews were included in the main body of the book in place of the repetitive analysis of every show.  I do still think this is a valuable and fun book for the hardcore Beatles fan, though. While it doesn't do for the Beatles' UK tours what Some Fun Tonight does for their US tours, it is still a worthy and impressive reference work. Creasy's attention to detail and his level of thorough research are certainly impressive and commendable, making this a valuable and substantial Beatles book that I am happy to have in my library.

MY RATING: 7.5/10

Read More

BOOK REVIEW: Some Fun Tonight! The Backstage Story of How the Beatles Rocked America: The Historic Tours of 1964-1966

Volume 1: 1964

Volume 2: 1965 & 1966

The Beatles as a live band have always gotten a bit of short shrift when the history of rock music and the band itself are both discussed. The myth (and it is just that, a myth) is that they were a lousy live band who couldn't hear themselves or be heard. The truth, as always, lies somewhere in the middle. The fact of the matter is that, as anyone who has heard their BBC sessions or the best sounding live recordings from their touring years of 1962-1966 will tell you, they were a great live band who generated some incredibly exciting live performances. Their problem was that they were hampered not only by the mania that followed them everywhere, but also by the primitive limitations of the amplifier and PA technology of their day. Indeed, it was right after they stopped touring in August 1966 that bands like The Who, Cream, and the Jimi Hendrix Experience helped pioneer louder, clearer, and better amps and PA systems that we've all taken for granted since 1967. However, the Beatles' touring years overall were years of fun and innocence, and that feeling of wonder and excitement comes across loud and clear in Chuck Gunderson's wonderful 2-volume set, Some Fun Tonight.

As he states in the introduction to the book, Gunderson decided to focus on the three North American tours the Beatles undertook in the summers of 1964, 1965, and 1966, both as a collector of memorabilia and as an author. While there are two excellent books on concerts from these tours by author Dave Schwensen, who focused on Shea Stadium in 1965 and Cleveland in 1964 & 1966, Some Fun Tonight takes you through the entirety of those tours, from the planning of each show, the support acts, travel and hotel arrangements, and press conferences all the way through to the concerts. The book is split into two volumes: Volume 1 covers the groundbreaking 1964 tour, while Volume 2 covers the massive 1965 tour and the final tour of 1966. Each touring year is prefaced by an introduction giving a broad overview of the concerts played and the organization of the tour, followed by brief biographies of the supporting acts. Then, we get to the meat of each entry, which is the actual concert. Each chapter focuses on one show, running in chronological order from the beginning of each tour to the end. Along with the date, venue, and showtimes, each chapter has wonderful photos of the Beatles traveling, hanging out backstage, speaking at press conferences, and onstage in each city. There are also numerous photos of memorabilia for each show within the chapters: tickets, posters, handbills, contracts, correspondence, hotel bills, and more. The author has done a painstaking job researching each and every concert in order to present an immersive visual and reading experience. It really does transport you back in time to that moment and into the eye of the hurricane,  when the Beatles were storming through each city and whipping everyone into a frenzy with not only their music, but also their mere presence.

It is perhaps this last point that is most striking when reading through the books. The fans were really and truly insane during the peak Beatlemania years. It's one thing for massive groups of fans to be rabid in their devotion and to cheer, shout, clap, holler, cry, and burst forth with excitement. But the Beatles had to put up with so much more than all of that.  They were constantly besieged, physically manhandled, and aurally assaulted by screams and shouts by fans whenever the got into or out of a car, plane, bus, hotel, etc. They were trapped in their hotels and dressing rooms for these very reasons, and they often couldn't get a good night's sleep because of the fans who kept all night vigils outside their hotel windows. Sightseeing wherever they were was out of the question. The concerts were excuses for the fans to shout, scream, climb over barriers, run away from chasing police, and jump onstage and grab the Beatles.  In a couple of cases, there were full-on riots during concerts that caused the shows to be stopped and had the Beatles literally running for their lives. Fans used increasingly creative (and oftentimes bizarre!) methods to sneak into the bands' hotel suites, press conferences, and dressing rooms.  There were even several incidents when the band's safety was seriously in jeopardy when their cars would be surrounded by fans, who would climb on top and bang on the windows to try and get at them. Most shockingly, there were instances where the fans themselves were in danger, such as the time fans broke through a barricade and rushed the Beatles plane on the tarmac when it had just landed and the propellers were still spinning! One thing that struck me is that is was an absolute miracle that the Beatles and their entourage weren't seriously hurt and that none of the fans were hurt or killed.  It's even more striking when you consider how new and uncharted the territory was for large scale rock concerts. The Beatles were the first to go through all of this and were the industry's pioneers in the truest sense of the word. Given the laughable scale of the security and logistical planning of those times when compared to the massive crowds at each concert, it is a testament to everyone involved that for the vast majority of the tours, everything went off without a hitch. It's also no surprise that the Beatles grew increasingly tired of all of this. In all honesty, it can be said that as much as the valid artistic reasons the band has given over the years as to why they quit the live stage, the cumulative effect of the mania surrounding them is just as much to blame. In essence, it was largely the fans' fault that the Beatles stopped touring after August 29, 1966.

The book also does a great job putting into perspective what rock and roll touring was really like in its infancy. For every nice hotel the Beatles stayed in (mainly in the major cities they played), they also put up with a lot of subpar, rundown motels and motor inns in some of the more rural backwaters they played (New Orleans, LA instantly springs to mind).  There was nothing really fancy about their transportation other than the fact that they had a private chartered plane to fly them from concert to concert. Yet even here, it should be noted that the planes were far from luxurious and, in a few case, suffered mechanical issues severe enough that the Beatles had more than a few terrifying close calls.  Limousines were increasingly a luxury, and a rare one at that since, by the time the mania became too much (and the numerous death threats they received needed to be taken more seriously), they spent most of their time driving between venues in armored vans, laundry trucks, ambulances, box trucks, and school buses. Their tour rider was almost primitive in its simplicity: the band simply wanted cots, clean towels, a case of Coca-Cola, a TV set, and a stereo backstage. Their only other stipulation was that they would never play before a segregated audience. Compared to the pampered existence rock stars have had on tour since the early 1970s, it's shocking how simply and spartanly the Beatles existed on those grueling tours.  The photographs really help bring all of this to life, showing some of the venues and hotels the band were booked into as less than stellar.  Speaking of the photographs, there are loads of never-before-seen images in this book, including Bob Dylan arriving at the band's hotel in New York City in 1964 on the fateful night he introduced them to marijuana. Along with the rare documents, ticket stubs, and more than accompany each concert, these books are a veritable museum of memorabilia and information from all three of the band's American tours.

So many books have been written on the Beatles that it is a full-time exercise trying to sift through all of the shoddy ones just to find the worthwhile books: the truly good books are the ones that bring something new to the table and do it in a fun, interesting, engaging, and informative way. Some Fun Tonight is definitely in that category and the books are pure joy to explore from beginning to end. The only negatives, and I'm being incredibly nitpicky here, are a few minor typos and a couple of mis-captioned pictures (for instance, one photo shows Paul and George singing into a mic but the caption says John and Paul. The other states John playing his 12-string Rickenbacker when a look at the tailpiece reveals it's his 6-string). Otherwise, there isn't anything I can knock this book for. In fact, the enjoyment I derived from reading this book extended beyond the pages, as it made me go through all of my live Beatles bootlegs and listen to the various shows I have between 1962-1966. It gave me an even greater appreciation than I already had for their live years (I was already a huge fan of their live stuff) because I was able to listen to the individual shows knowing the background about each one; the venue, the size of the crowd, how it was booked, and how the Beatles received and were received by each city. Beyond being an information-packed tome, the greatest thing about Some Fun Tonight is the magic and innocence of a bygone time it manages to capture on every page...that and the way it breathes new life and interest into the most overlooked aspect of the Beatles' remarkable career, which took place on the concert stage.

MY RATING: 10/10

Read More