|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 15, 2015 7:13:05 GMT -5
I said: “George, can you explain this to me? You appear to have signed them before you saw them.” And he appeared genuinely befuddled by it. ...he was very old and very frail by then, and I genuinely think he doesn’t remember it anymore. He’s told the story so many times the other way, that for him, it’s what the story is. Good summary, and I think these highlighted parts are really key to why Lewisohn's work is so necessary. Principals in The Beatles' story have a lot of relationships to protect, positions in history to underline, and oft-tales tales to repeat for dramatic effect. It's very true that George Martin (and Paul McCartney, and Ringo, in particular) have told the same stories so many times that they actually believe the falsehoods to be true. The Beatles Anthology turns up countless such examples -- one being Ringo's (and Paul's) claim that he didn't drum on the original "Love Me Do", when Ringo knew very well in 1962 that he had. These guys have told the stories so many times that their main memory is of telling the story, not of what actually happened. George Martin is elderly and probably a bit crochety now (see also: Paul) about Beatles' history and his place in it. Although he's enjoyed a good relationship with Mark Lewisohn over the years, it's only natural that Lewisohn's incessant digging and challenging of memories and facts will begin to grate on Martin in his silver years, especially when a high-profile book discusses (albeit tactfully) Martin's secret relationship in the late 50s/early 60s while he was married to someone else. None of this, by the way, takes anything away from Martin. Although he likely had his arm twisted a bit to record The Beatles for Ardmore & Beechwood's publishing hopes, it's still George Martin who had the switch flipped very quickly in late 1962 and decided to record an album with The Beatles (before they'd had a big hit) and it's George Martin who allowed two sides of the first single to be Lennon/McCartney tunes -- even if this latter point was a concession to Ardmore & Beechwood. Yet it's still George Martin who allowed the second single to be Lennon/McCartney tunes, too. Needless to say, it's George Martin who made The Beatles a great studio band for all those years. So it takes nothing away from Martin to reveal that his arm was twisted a bit in 1962. But he's just a bit old and crochety now, which is fine. I completely agree with you on all of Martin's well-deserved kudos. But while I don't think it's a big deal that Martin may have had his arm twisted, I do think it takes at least a little something away from his rep if he was having an affair.
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Sept 15, 2015 7:51:58 GMT -5
With the woman he's been married to for 50 odd years. Mistakes happen and it looks like he found the right solution.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 23, 2015 0:38:32 GMT -5
With the woman he's been married to for 50 odd years. Mistakes happen and it looks like he found the right solution. That's our AndyB, a nice romantic him!
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 23, 2015 8:54:25 GMT -5
With the woman he's been married to for 50 odd years. Mistakes happen and it looks like he found the right solution. Hey, I'm very happy for George Martin and yes, for HIM I'm sure he made the right decision -- congratulations! But how about the first woman? Did she get the right solution, or was she a victim? In 1962 nobody could have known that Martin would be with that woman for another 50 odd years. Whatever the fortunate turnout for him, it was still an unfaithful affair.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 23, 2015 9:51:37 GMT -5
Hey Joe, George Martin did his penance having to work with The Beatles!
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Sept 23, 2015 11:56:21 GMT -5
With the woman he's been married to for 50 odd years. Mistakes happen and it looks like he found the right solution. Hey, I'm very happy for George Martin and yes, for HIM I'm sure he made the right decision -- congratulations! But how about the first woman? Did she get the right solution, or was she a victim? In 1962 nobody could have known that Martin would be with that woman for another 50 odd years. Whatever the fortunate turnout for him, it was still an unfaithful affair. The fact that George "Chopper" Martin was having an affair does nothing to hurt his reputation as a Record Producer in my eyes. His first wife may have got the right solution. Perhaps George had been the victim. I'd need to reread the deluxe inflatable Tune In to see if this is discussed.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 23, 2015 12:56:13 GMT -5
The fact that George "Chopper" Martin was having an affair does nothing to hurt his reputation as a Record Producer in my eyes. I should clarify that his affair does nothing to hurt his rep as a RECORD PRODUCER for me, either.
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Sept 23, 2015 13:30:08 GMT -5
It doesn't hurt his reputation as a human being either. Like all the Beatles, bar one, "Chopper" had one marriage fail and then made a success of his second one. I don't understand why you think that takes away from his reputation as part of their signing story. Mr Lewisohn backed up his conclusions with evidence and it does explain them being signed before the "audition" etc . , , , , ,
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 23, 2015 14:01:44 GMT -5
It doesn't hurt his reputation as a human being either. Like all the Beatles, bar one, "Chopper" had one marriage fail and then made a success of his second one. I don't understand why you think that takes away from his reputation as part of their signing story. Mr Lewisohn backed up his conclusions with evidence and it does explain them being signed before the "audition" etc . , , , , , It's one thing to have a failed marriage and make a success of a second one. But having an affair while still married (and I'm thinking that's what's implied there) is nothing to hang one's hat on. Especially when it was always thought that Sir George Martin was some kind of English Gentleman, that's all. Coming from John Lennon -- not so unusual. Coming from GM, quite a surprise. As for taking away from the signing story, it really doesn't, except that Martin always liked to act like it was HIS idea, and HE saw something charming about them, when we now know he was forced into it. And we also know that Martin also did not like Ringo's drumming either, the first time. So Martin has told tall tales as well... another shocking trait coming from the refined Sir George. And I say all of this as someone who is still a fan, and considers Martin the true Fifth Beatle.
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Sept 23, 2015 14:29:26 GMT -5
No matter the background (and George's was quite humble), education or accent, we've all got our noses in the trough!
He did tell the porkies to safeguard the honour of his second wife. So while the revelation that George hasn't been straight with us all these years is jarring, we can at least understand his motives. Either that, or he genuinely forgot. The signing story is very convoluted.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Sept 23, 2015 18:04:51 GMT -5
So, how did they fire Pete if he was signed. You are saying they were signed before Martin even heard them play, right?
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Sept 23, 2015 18:52:15 GMT -5
The Beatles broke up and reformed with Ringo.
Martin had heard them. There was a tape involved somewhere. I can't remember the exact order, from the book Tune In, but Martin thought June 6th was am audition but they were already signed.
I'm only relating what I remember from the book.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Sept 23, 2015 19:31:44 GMT -5
The Beatles broke up and reformed with Ringo. Martin had heard them. There was a tape involved somewhere. I can't remember the exact order, from the book Tune In, but Martin thought June 6th was am audition but they were already signed. I'm only relating what I remember from the book. That's what I supposed earlier, that maybe they were signed but not by George Martin. But then again Paul says in Anthology that by September, they were already signed. Maybe they were "as good as signed" but no one told them or Martin. Maybe Martin was somewhat on the outs and they were calling shots behind his back. I think I need to get the book so that I can dispute in better. although I know what will happen. I get the $30 book and make a point and you guys will say "No, No, in the big book it says this..."
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Sept 23, 2015 21:13:29 GMT -5
The Beatles broke up and reformed with Ringo. Martin had heard them. There was a tape involved somewhere. I can't remember the exact order, from the book Tune In, but Martin thought June 6th was am audition but they were already signed. I'm only relating what I remember from the book. That's what I supposed earlier, that maybe they were signed but not by George Martin. But then again Paul says in Anthology that by September, they were already signed. Maybe they were "as good as signed" but no one told them or Martin. Maybe Martin was somewhat on the outs and they were calling shots behind his back. I think I need to get the book so that I can dispute in better. although I know what will happen. I get the $30 book and make a point and you guys will say "No, No, in the big book it says this..." When JP & G decided to replace Pete, Brian was afraid Pete might sue them for being let go, so Brian was advised legally to disband The Beatles with Pete and then reform the band with Ringo as their legal member. So I believe that was done to prevent any possible lawsuits by Pete. I believe that is how Lewisohn describes this episode. The breakup and reforming did not involve Martin at all. I believe Martin didn't even know Pete had been replaced until Ringo showed up at the first September session at EMI. Martin had already engaged Andy White for that session and had no idea Pete was gone and Ringo was now the drummer. So when Ringo was introduced as the new drummer at the session he was given a tamborine to play as White was there to do the drumming.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Sept 23, 2015 22:02:23 GMT -5
That's what I supposed earlier, that maybe they were signed but not by George Martin. But then again Paul says in Anthology that by September, they were already signed. Maybe they were "as good as signed" but no one told them or Martin. Maybe Martin was somewhat on the outs and they were calling shots behind his back. I think I need to get the book so that I can dispute in better. although I know what will happen. I get the $30 book and make a point and you guys will say "No, No, in the big book it says this..." When JP & G decided to replace Pete, Brian was afraid Pete might sue them for being let go, so Brian was advised legally to disband The Beatles with Pete and then reform the band with Ringo as their legal member. So I believe that was done to prevent any possible lawsuits by Pete. I believe that is how Lewisohn describes this episode. The breakup and reforming did not involve Martin at all. I believe Martin didn't even know Pete had been replaced until Ringo showed up at the first September session at EMI. Martin had already engaged Andy White for that session and had no idea Pete was gone and Ringo was now the drummer. So when Ringo was introduced as the new drummer at the session he was given a tamborine to play as White was there to do the drumming. So, this little nobody band that caught a lucky break getting signed to begin with, was advised to disband and reform just to fire a member? Who's advising Brian to do that? I'm sure EMI didn't care one way or the other. After all, it had nothing to do with Martin not liking his playing and the band wanting to bring in Ringo. I'm sure EMI would have just said "we'll sign everyone but the drummer". It was only because Pete was liked too much by the ladies and the band was jealous? (Insert any picture of Pete here.) To me, that sounds so far fetched. So they got signed and "OOOPS, we forgot to get to get rid of Pete. What are we going to do now?" "Now you're going to have to split up, making your signing contract void. Trust me. They'll sign you again." So the story that Martin had heard Ringo play and still hired a session guy was a farce. That's good to know. After all that craziness, maybe they did have to blackmail Martin to get involved.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Sept 23, 2015 22:31:01 GMT -5
When JP & G decided to replace Pete, Brian was afraid Pete might sue them for being let go, so Brian was advised legally to disband The Beatles with Pete and then reform the band with Ringo as their legal member. So I believe that was done to prevent any possible lawsuits by Pete. I believe that is how Lewisohn describes this episode. The breakup and reforming did not involve Martin at all. I believe Martin didn't even know Pete had been replaced until Ringo showed up at the first September session at EMI. Martin had already engaged Andy White for that session and had no idea Pete was gone and Ringo was now the drummer. So when Ringo was introduced as the new drummer at the session he was given a tamborine to play as White was there to do the drumming. So, this little nobody band that caught a lucky break getting signed to begin with, was advised to disband and reform just to fire a member? Who's advising Brian to do that? I'm sure EMI didn't care one way or the other. After all, it had nothing to do with Martin not liking his playing and the band wanting to bring in Ringo. I'm sure EMI would have just said "we'll sign everyone but the drummer". It was only because Pete was liked too much by the ladies and the band was jealous? (Insert any picture of Pete here.) To me, that sounds so far fetched. So they got signed and "OOOPS, we forgot to get to get rid of Pete. What are we going to do now?" "Now you're going to have to split up, making your signing contract void. Trust me. They'll sign you again." So the story that Martin had heard Ringo play and still hired a session guy was a farce. That's good to know. After all that craziness, maybe they did have to blackmail Martin to get involved. You know what? I am fed up with answering your questions only to have you ridicule them because you are too damn cheap to buy Lewisohn's book. The lawyer Brian talked to about this issue is listed on Pg. 1240 of the extended version, as is the whole story of how they got around any chance of Pete coming back to sue Brian over the sacking. If you want to know Lewisohn's point of view on the subject, or for that matter, any other subject of the band's history up thru 1962 that you are so damn sure you've got the whole picture already figured out thanks to The Anthology and it's pinpoint accuracy, then buy the fu$#ing book and read it for yourself and decide whether it is bullshit or not. I've had it with your put downs and accusations about a book you have never read. I'll have nothing more to say about Lewisohn's view of anything from his book here with you.
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Sept 24, 2015 3:14:08 GMT -5
Andy White was employed on the 11th September session, most likely by Ron Richards. Ringo played on the 4th September session, obviously not making a great impression. On one song he was playing drums while shaking a tambourine and maracas.
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Sept 24, 2015 3:21:08 GMT -5
Brian wasn't stupid and knew the problems that could arise for him if Pete was fired. Brian had a contract with him to find him work or something like that. Brian took advice and decided on the best course of action. The Beatles broke up and signed a new contract with Brian.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2015 3:34:23 GMT -5
It doesn't hurt his reputation as a human being either. Like all the Beatles, bar one, "Chopper" had one marriage fail and then made a success of his second one. I don't understand why you think that takes away from his reputation as part of their signing story. Mr Lewisohn backed up his conclusions with evidence and it does explain them being signed before the "audition" etc . , , , , , It's one thing to have a failed marriage and make a success of a second one. But having an affair while still married (and I'm thinking that's what's implied there) is nothing to hang one's hat on. Especially when it was always thought that Sir George Martin was some kind of English Gentleman, that's all. Coming from John Lennon -- not so unusual. Coming from GM, quite a surprise. As for taking away from the signing story, it really doesn't, except that Martin always liked to act like it was HIS idea, and HE saw something charming about them, when we now know he was forced into it. And we also know that Martin also did not like Ringo's drumming either, the first time. So Martin has told tall tales as well... another shocking trait coming from the refined Sir George. And I say all of this as someone who is still a fan, and considers Martin the true Fifth Beatle. I just can't imagine George Martin having the "wherever i lay my "hat" that's my home" motto. Good on him for bedding his sexretary, adds a bit to the Old George Martin story, i think. Wife No.1 must have been boring.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Sept 24, 2015 6:13:29 GMT -5
So, this little nobody band that caught a lucky break getting signed to begin with, was advised to disband and reform just to fire a member? Who's advising Brian to do that? I'm sure EMI didn't care one way or the other. After all, it had nothing to do with Martin not liking his playing and the band wanting to bring in Ringo. I'm sure EMI would have just said "we'll sign everyone but the drummer". It was only because Pete was liked too much by the ladies and the band was jealous? (Insert any picture of Pete here.) To me, that sounds so far fetched. So they got signed and "OOOPS, we forgot to get to get rid of Pete. What are we going to do now?" "Now you're going to have to split up, making your signing contract void. Trust me. They'll sign you again." So the story that Martin had heard Ringo play and still hired a session guy was a farce. That's good to know. After all that craziness, maybe they did have to blackmail Martin to get involved. You know what? I am fed up with answering your questions only to have you ridicule them because you are too damn cheap to buy Lewisohn's book. The lawyer Brian talked to about this issue is listed on Pg. 1240 of the extended version, as is the whole story of how they got around any chance of Pete coming back to sue Brian over the sacking. If you want to know Lewisohn's point of view on the subject, or for that matter, any other subject of the band's history up thru 1962 that you are so damn sure you've got the whole picture already figured out thanks to The Anthology and it's pinpoint accuracy, then buy the fu$#ing book and read it for yourself and decide whether it is bullshit or not. I've had it with your put downs and accusations about a book you have never read. I'll have nothing more to say about Lewisohn's view of anything from his book here with you. Sorry. Just making conversation.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Sept 24, 2015 6:55:29 GMT -5
Andy White was employed on the 11th September session, most likely by Ron Richards. Ringo played on the 4th September session, obviously not making a great impression. On one song he was playing drums while shaking a tambourine and maracas. This is correct. To summarize the chronology: June 6, 1962: Beatles (w/Pete) go to Abbey Road for the first time. According to Lewisohn, they are already signed at this time, and the recordings are actually a "session" for the first single. (Not surprisingly, Pete Best has always agreed with this, while Paul and, I think, George Harrison remember it as a more of a artist-test, as in "let's show him what we do".) Most likely, Brian wasn't 100% sure of the purpose of the session -- he was just happy to be asked there -- and The Beatles themselves probably didn't know anything about it. Songs recorded (though many more were rehearsed) were: Bésame Mucho, Love Me Do, P.S. I Love You, and Ask Me Why. August 1962: Beatles/Epstein fire Pete. As mentioned above, Epstein legally dissolves "The Beatles" and reforms them anew, with Richard Starkey as a full member. This second contract for the "new" Beatles went into effect in October, 1962, for a period of five years (this is why his contract was up for renewal in October, 1967 -- two month after he died). Sept. 4, 1962: Beatles (w/Ringo) go to Abbey Road to re-do their attempted first single. Martin has already sent them "How Do You Do It?" and expects this to be the first A-side. They record it (with Ringo), and then record "Love Me Do" (with Ringo), which presents a number of problems and takes 15 takes. At this point, either because Martin had a change of heart, or -- more likely -- because Ardmore & Beechwood via Joseph Lockwood pushed him into allowing Lennon/McCartney songs onto the first release, Martin has decided to give up on "How Do You Do It?" and decides they need yet another session to get the B-side for the single (which will now have "Love Me Do", with Ringo, on the A-side). He tells them all to come back on the 11th. Sept. 11, 1962: Having only a short session booked to finally nail the B-side for the first single, Ron Richards (probably, not George Martin) decides to take no more chances with these Scouser drummers (having had problems with both so far) and has invited Andy White to the session. Ringo does not know this and is devastated when he arrives. The Beatles, with Andy White, quickly and efficiently record "PS I Love You" as the B-side (contrary to popular belief, this was Andy White's main purpose -- to record "PS I Love You", not "Love Me Do"). With time remaining, they decide to try "Love Me Do" again -- with Andy White on drums (and Ringo on tambourine). They record it fairly quickly. They also play "Please Please Me", probably with Andy White -- and it's quite uptempo (but sans harmonica). When the single comes out in Britain on October 5th, it is the Ringo Starr version that is issued. (The B-side is Andy White on "PS I Love You".) The Andy White version is issued on the Please Please Me LP issued in March 1963. (And the USA single, which went to #1 on Billboard in 1964.)
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Sept 24, 2015 7:50:50 GMT -5
Andy White was employed on the 11th September session, most likely by Ron Richards. Ringo played on the 4th September session, obviously not making a great impression. On one song he was playing drums while shaking a tambourine and maracas. This is correct. To summarize the chronology: June 6, 1962: Beatles (w/Pete) go to Abbey Road for the first time. According to Lewisohn, they are already signed at this time, and the recordings are actually a "session" for the first single. (Not surprisingly, Pete Best has always agreed with this, while Paul and, I think, George Harrison remember it as a more of a artist-test, as in "let's show him what we do".) Most likely, Brian wasn't 100% sure of the purpose of the session -- he was just happy to be asked there -- and The Beatles themselves probably didn't know anything about it. Songs recorded (though many more were rehearsed) were: Bésame Mucho, Love Me Do, P.S. I Love You, and Ask Me Why. August 1962: Beatles/Epstein fire Pete. As mentioned above, Epstein legally dissolves "The Beatles" and reforms them anew, with Richard Starkey as a full member. This second contract for the "new" Beatles went into effect in October, 1962, for a period of five years (this is why his contract was up for renewal in October, 1967 -- two month after he died). Sept. 4, 1962: Beatles (w/Ringo) go to Abbey Road to re-do their attempted first single. Martin has already sent them "How Do You Do It?" and expects this to be the first A-side. They record it (with Ringo), and then record "Love Me Do" (with Ringo), which presents a number of problems and takes 15 takes. At this point, either because Martin had a change of heart, or -- more likely -- because Ardmore & Beechwood via Joseph Lockwood pushed him into allowing Lennon/McCartney songs onto the first release, Martin has decided to give up on "How Do You Do It?" and decides they need yet another session to get the B-side for the single (which will now have "Love Me Do", with Ringo, on the A-side). He tells them all to come back on the 11th. Sept. 11, 1962: Having only a short session booked to finally nail the B-side for the first single, Ron Richards (probably, not George Martin) decides to take no more chances with these Scouser drummers (having had problems with both so far) and has invited Andy White to the session. Ringo does not know this and is devastated when he arrives. The Beatles, with Andy White, quickly and efficiently record "PS I Love You" as the B-side (contrary to popular belief, this was Andy White's main purpose -- to record "PS I Love You", not "Love Me Do"). With time remaining, they decide to try "Love Me Do" again -- with Andy White on drums (and Ringo on tambourine). They record it fairly quickly. They also play "Please Please Me", probably with Andy White -- and it's quite uptempo (but sans harmonica). When the single comes out in Britain on October 5th, it is the Ringo Starr version that is issued. (The B-side is Andy White on "Please Please Me".) The Andy White version is issued on the Please Please Me LP issued in March 1963. (And the USA single, which went to #1 on Billboard in 1964.) Thanks for posting this. I still get mixed up on the chronology of the Love Me Do sessions. I reviewed the Lewisohn book again and he says Brian also sent a letter to Judy Lockhart at EMI informing them of The Beatles new drummer Ringo prior to their first trip to London to record in Sept. This shows how some of us who have recollections going back years of what we thought happened at critical moments in Beatles history are hard to erase now that the Lewisohn book has come out. I still mix up what happened when on the Love Me Do Sessions. I hope this post will cement in my old head what happened when.I would dearly like to get it right. Think I will re-read the Lewisohn chapters on this once more. That whole period od what happened when from when EMI decided to sign The Beatles in May/June 1962 through the recordings in the Fall of 1962 has undergone lots of revisions since the Lewisohn book came out.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 24, 2015 8:41:18 GMT -5
Good on him for bedding his sexretary, adds a bit to the Old George Martin story, i think. Wife No.1 must have been boring. Fair enough. But then you (and everyone else) must afford the same courtesy to John. He definitely found Cynthia boring.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2015 8:47:02 GMT -5
When the single comes out in Britain on October 5th, it is the Ringo Starr version that is issued. ( The B-side is Andy White on "Please Please Me".) Should that read the B side was PS I Love You, i don't recall Please Please Me being a B side.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2015 8:54:37 GMT -5
Good on him for bedding his sexretary, adds a bit to the Old George Martin story, i think. Wife No.1 must have been boring. Fair enough. But then you (and everyone else) must afford the same courtesy to John. He definitely found Cynthia boring. I'd imagine Cynthia would have seemed very boring to John when he came home from a Beatles tour laden with quite willing groupies.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 24, 2015 9:40:58 GMT -5
I'd imagine Cynthia would have seemed very boring to John when he came home from a Beatles tour laden with quite willing groupies. No, I'm pretty sure she was just dull. John only married her because he had to.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Sept 24, 2015 17:35:56 GMT -5
Should that read the B side was PS I Love You, i don't recall Please Please Me being a B side. Thanks, typo corrected (above).
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Feb 23, 2016 19:52:38 GMT -5
Not to poke at an old bruise but here's another take on why George signed the Beatles from Mersey Beats' Bill Harry. No mention of blackmail. Feel free to not comment. wogew.blogspot.com/
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Feb 23, 2016 23:36:02 GMT -5
Not to poke at an old bruise but here's another take on why George signed the Beatles from Mersey Beats' Bill Harry. No mention of blackmail. Feel free to not comment. wogew.blogspot.com/Have you decided to read the Lewisohn book yet? And his recounting of this part of the story and the footnotes that back it up?
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Feb 24, 2016 7:17:10 GMT -5
Not to poke at an old bruise but here's another take on why George signed the Beatles from Mersey Beats' Bill Harry. No mention of blackmail. Feel free to not comment. wogew.blogspot.com/Have you decided to read the Lewisohn book yet? And his recounting of this part of the story and the footnotes that back it up? The extended edition is currently $112.14 on amazon.com. That's a little more than I can currently pay. I'm now paying $300 a month more for rent so I'm even cheaper than before.
|
|