|
Post by stavros on Mar 11, 2010 16:55:49 GMT -5
We all know that John formed the band, Paul joined then George and finally everything started to click once Ringo joined. At first things seemed to run smoothly as the Beatles climbed to the pinnacle of success. And of course media was a lot kinder in those days so not a lot of 'gossip' got out anyway. Divisions only seemed to show after Sergeant Pepper and Brian's death. Ringo left the band. George left the band. John wanted out but couldn't quite do it. Paul never really announced a Beatles split but one thing followed another after his infamous statement accompanying his "McCartney" album. By 1970 they had ceased to be a working band. Although they had not ceased working together entirely, four Beatles never recorded together again.
For a few years in the early 70s it seemed that Paul was isolated and John, George and Ringo were getting along fine. Then George and John fell out. Ringo managed to get everyone to write and record for his "Ringo" album and it seems never lost touch with any of the guys at all. John and Paul even jammed together during John's famous lost weekend. Although things thawed a little after his re-union with Yoko it seemed that they were starting to communicate again. As for George he seemed to resent Paul's 'controlling' personality most of all. And although he looked up to John I think that he also felt suppressed by John and Paul's dominance of the group. I always felt George enjoyed his time as Beatle until about 1966 and then saw it as more of a chore from then on until the split. I always thing he would probably be the last to be convinced to re-form had it ever happened.
That all said he appeared to be getting on with Paul a lot better by the late 80s. Even though he would always be slightly acerbic in comments about Paul. Things seemed to go relatively well for the Anthology project between the remaining Beatles. Although I am not sure what relationships were like during the sessions when all 3 of them were present.
So is it true that deep down they all knew they were eternal brothers and could never get away from being Beatles? Paul and Ringo seem to have accepted it a long time ago. I am never sure with John as his life was ended so brutally and prematurely 3 decades ago. And as for George I think he did accept they were great as a band. But I detected a lot of reluctance to ever go back to playing in it again.
Anyone else want to throw in their thoughts on how the band felt about each other at various times?
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Mar 11, 2010 17:42:28 GMT -5
So is it true that deep down they all knew they were eternal brothers and could never get away from being Beatles? Paul and Ringo seem to have accepted it a long time ago. I am never sure with John as his life was ended so brutally and prematurely 3 decades ago. And as for George I think he did accept they were great as a band. But I detected a lot of reluctance to ever go back to playing in it again. Anyone else want to throw in their thoughts on how the band felt about each other at various times? Well, according to Paul, he and John did patch things up prior to John's murder, and that they had great phone conversations about family and kids. There's the story that Carl Perkins tells about recording with Paul during the 'Tug of War' sessions and he plays to Paul his song 'My Old Friend', and Paul suddenly burst into tears and left the room, and Carl didn't know what happened. Linda explained to Carl that some of the lyrics in Carl's song were similiar to words Paul and John spoke on the phone to which John refered to Paul as "my old friend".
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Mar 11, 2010 18:32:29 GMT -5
Here's some of what's probably John's last on-camera interview in the studio, from 1980 (at the very end it sounds like Bob Gruen whose voice is speaking from behind the camera). At approx. 4:15 John talks about Paul. The interviewer asks John if he was ever surprised by any songs Paul ever wrote, and John says "No, he never surprised me. Can you be surprised by your brother?" I've always loved this moment. (The original interview source is actually several minutes longer, but most of the sound was obscured, so this version here deletes those moments. As a result, it's missing a bit when John says he likes the "freaky version" of COMING UP and feels sorry for Paul that the radio stations turned it around on him and played the "live" version):
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Mar 11, 2010 18:59:28 GMT -5
My favorite line is from Paul: "We were all in love with John. It was like having our own Elvis in the group."
|
|
|
Post by leadfootlarry on Mar 11, 2010 20:54:54 GMT -5
I agree that George was the most umcomfortable with their past and by 1980 probably would have been the one most reluctant to get together. Also, I think once it was clear that Allen Klein was trouble the John/George/Ringo clique was pretty much dead. Paul seemed to get along with most of the other 3 throughout the 70s at least overall. It's a shame that He and John never "Really' got close again, I think they would have. All 4 were definatley proud of the group and loved each other.
Even George could enjoy the Beatles in 1976
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Mar 11, 2010 22:06:19 GMT -5
We all know that John formed the band, Paul joined then George and finally everything started to click once Ringo joined. At first things seemed to run smoothly as the Beatles climbed to the pinnacle of success. And of course media was a lot kinder in those days so not a lot of 'gossip' got out anyway. Divisions only seemed to show after Sergeant Pepper and Brian's death. Ringo left the band. George left the band. John wanted out but couldn't quite do it. Paul never really announced a Beatles split but one thing followed another after his infamous statement accompanying his "McCartney" album. By 1970 they had ceased to be a working band. Although they had not ceased working together entirely, four Beatles never recorded together again . . . This no joke. I think you should try to get a job with Cliffs Notes. In a few well written paragraphs you have saved people the expense and time needed to read all the Beatle books out there. Good job!
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Mar 12, 2010 4:32:11 GMT -5
For me the most fascinating relationship amoung the four was between Paul & George. It was the earliest relationship since Paul & George knew each other and hung out occasionally together as boyhood friends long before either were musicians. Paul was acquainted with George before he met John. I am sure the age difference of 8 months established Paul as dominant in the relationship from the beginning. It was Paul who brought along George to audition for John's group in the infamous (as Paul tells it in the Anthology) "rooftop bus" encounter where John first met George. During the Hamburg days it appears their relationship was on an even keel for the most part; George sang many lead vocals on their cover material in the Hamburg clubs, and when Stuart left the group, it was Paul who took up the bass while George held on to lead guitarist. When the Lennon/McCartney songwriting became a serious pastime with the band, it doesn't appear George was too threatened initially by it, as his keen interest in submitting original songs to the group didn't really take hold until the band was quite famous. My guess as to when the first evidence of real friction began between Paul & George had to have it's genesis around the Revolver sessions, when George had problems coming up with a lead guitar riff for his own composition "Taxman", and Paul wound up putting down the lead guitar on that track. That had to have had an effect on George. And Paul was going off more on his own by then laying down solo tracks like Eleanor Rigby, & For No One, while for George, it was beginning to be an effort to get his compositions on the albums. George's negative attitude towards touring in late 1966 while Paul continued to advocate live playing had to contribute to the friction between the two bandmates, which lasted right thru to the break-up. Then along comes Brian Epstein's death in 1967, and Paul begins to exert more control over the band's direction. The trip to India in 1968, with Maharishi, which George very much favored but Paul found eventually tiresome and he gave up on long before George & John did. Then we have the infamous "Get Back" sessions where Paul & George's relationship took a serious turn for the worse over musical disagreements that were caught on film, and George's subsequent walking out on the band for a temporary period. And finally the rift reaches a breaking point when George sides with John and Ringo advocating Allen Klein as their defacto manager against Paul's desire to have John Eastman fill the role. It seems George & Paul's relationship was pretty much non-existant from the break-up until the Anthology period in the early 90's, except for the disolution of the band meeting in New York in the late 70's (which John chose to skip, infuriating George) and Ringo's wedding to Barbara in 1981 when George & Paul attended the wedding and actually jammed together w/Ringo at the reception. But it couldn't have helped early on in the 70's when George joined John for the recording of "How Do You Sleep" and this was documented on film. IMO; I think after John was killed in 1980, and the subsequent settlement of the lawsuits against each other in the 80's, Paul re-assessed his acidic relationship with George and by the time of the Anthology interviews in the early 90's he made a concerted effort to re-build a relationship with George. The reunion song sessions and the joint interviews for the project seem to confirm this was happening. By the time of George's cancer diagnosis in the late 90's and the attempt on his life in his own home in 1999, Paul & George had firmly re-established a relationship probably closer than it had been since 1966. This was evident when Linda died in 1998 as well as when they traveled together to see Cirque du Soleil in Las Vegas in 2000, and George began to formulate the LOVE project idea. When it was fairly clear George was not going to beat the cancer, Paul was right there for him providing his home when George needed a place of privacy in Los Angeles to spend his final days with his family. One can only imagine what they said to one another in October, 2001 in George's hospital room on Staten Island, NY a month before George died, when it was clear this would probably be the last time they would see each other in this lifetime. And finally, Paul's statement outside his home upon hearing of George's passing, when he was clearly distraught over losing his bandmate and friend, a much different looking Paul from the one we saw back in 1980 upon first learning of John's untimely murder. It was indeed a fascinating relationship that reached peaks and valleys throughtout the years and was to me the most interesting relationship in The Beatles.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Mar 12, 2010 6:22:57 GMT -5
Nice post, Lowbasso. You've pretty much nailed it.
I think, with George and Paul, George suffered a bit of the "my friend back-stabbed me" syndrome, which sometimes happens in groups of ambitious people. In George's mind (and, indeed, in reality) he and Paul were professional and musical equals in the late 50s through about 1963 (bearing in mind that George was only a teen in this whole period!). I think George preferred to view The Beatles as John-the-spiritual-leader, with he and Paul together as his (slight) underlings.
This all began to change as Paul's commercial stock and more omniverous musical talent manifested themselves around 1963-65. Suddenly, George was relegated to Beatle #3, with only Ringo trailing him in signficance due to longevity. I'm not suggesting that George was jealous at all -- the evidence in fact suggests that he was more than happy to support Paul's compositions and I think he was (deservedly) proud of what The Beatles were collectively achieving in this era. But I think where Paul started to rankle with George was when Paul didn't support George's efforts in front of John and George Martin. George said many times that Paul would come in with his 10 songs and push the guys to record them all; then they probably had to work on John's because of John's position within the group and his fragile ego needing a push... then, if time permitted, they might (half-heartedly) attempt one of George's songs.
Whereas Paul has the kind of energetic, fight-for-my-rights kind of personality that would thrive when relegated to a subordinate position (and eventually eclipse those ahead of him), I think it was more George's personality to quickly tire of the effort required to have the "big-balls" in the group, and he (at a very young age, still) turned to the sitar and other forms of music as -- so I'm suggesting -- a kind of silent protest against being relegated.
Nevertheless, from about Rubber Soul through Sgt. Pepper, I think George was still satisfied with his role, more-or-less. As long as John was there to at least balance-out Paul's hyper efforts, they were still The Beatles. But once Yoko and the heroin and John's flakey-period arrived, John went off the rails a bit, started losing interest in The Beatles, and that meant Paul was in some sense now "the band-leader". I can understand why George felt this was intolerable, given how he and Paul had come up together. I also guess that George made a fair effort then to make-up for John's apathy (and he succeeded, with some of his greatest compositions in 1969), but still Paul would not enter the studio and treat George's compositions as the equal of his own.
This all sounds a bit sad, but I'm sure George wasn't exactly miserable all the time. For example, George brought Bob Dylan the tapes of Abbey Road to play to him in August 1969, so clearly George was still proud of the work they were doing right up to the end.
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Mar 12, 2010 8:33:17 GMT -5
I was always fascinated at their (Paul and George's) relationship in the solo years, and felt that a non-Beatles collaboration would have yielded some excellent music if they could indeed collaborate.
There were several times they were together with some music involved.
George was at Wings' record launch for Venus & Mars.
Paul and George played with Ringo and others in 1979 at Clapton's wedding celebration, then with less instruments at Ringo's wedding in '81. Only one photo has been seen from '79, and Life Magazine captured the '81 event.
Of course there was the "All Those Years Ago" session, though Paul's back up vocals were pretty generic.
Carl Perkin's daughter claimed in a book that George was also at Monsterrat when Carl Perkins was there (1981), supporting the rumors at the time that all three surviving Beatles flew into the island to record at George Martin's studio.
There are the unplugged and electric (with Jeff Lynne) jams during Anthology. So far we've only gotten a tease, but there is much more, including electric jams of Sgt. Pepper, I Saw Her Standing There, Love Me Do and Besame Mucho.
And I guess we'll never know if they indeed collaborated on "All For Love". That has been heavily debated even in Steve's past columns.
|
|
|
Post by stavros on Mar 12, 2010 8:47:29 GMT -5
Panther - I think Paul actually treated George's songs better than John in the late 60s. John often couldn't even be bothered turning up on George's tracks but Paul at least put in a shift on most of George's tracks and his bass line makes "Something" an even more outstanding track. Strange how the last Beatle track (excluding the 90s singles) ever recorded "I Me Mine" was also notable by John's absence. That said I think it was Paul basically using him as a session man in later years which irritated George. George Martin often said Paul always had a good idea of how he wanted his songs recorded whereas John was a lot less clear. With John's dismissal of some of his tracks, and Paul's attention to every fine detail, I think George was eventually glad of the freedom to do his own thing.
After the split I think George remained proud of the band as much as the others. But people easily forget that he organised a forerunner to "Live Aid" with his Concert for Bangladesh and almost single handedly kept the British film industry going with handmade in the late 70s to mid 80s. He also had a keen interest in Formula 1 and of course his gardening. George had a lot of distractions in life and took a lot of time out of music in the 80s to concentrate on them. Whether the Anthology was all about money for George I am not sure. I think he would have done it anyway. Britain was going through a "Cool Britannia" era in the 90s with a lot of 60s and 70s nostalgia and I think George felt it was time to show the world how good the Beatles really were. But my guess is he felt working with Paul on the 3 Lennon tracks was enough.
I can never quite tell with George whether he is joking or not though. on some things
Here's an interesting clip with both Ringo and George from about 20 years ago. And George comments on John's death "...shocked and stunned" about 6:00 mins in. Very Rutles.
The sound is out of sync but it's an interesting interview as the 2 Beatles rarely ever appeared together on UK TV.
|
|
|
Post by Panther on Mar 12, 2010 11:15:11 GMT -5
I've always wondered when was the last time George saw John. On Part 4 of the Interview Stavros linked, George says (re: John's death) that he'd not seen John "for a couple of years" when the murder happened. In theory, that means they met in 1978.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Mar 12, 2010 13:01:40 GMT -5
George once said: "I'd join a band with John Lennon in a second. I'd never join a band with Paul McCartney."
I don't know what George's personal relationship was with Paul. But he always gave the impression that he wasn't much fun to play with. And that John was a helluva hoot. I think it was during the "Imagine" sessions when George called up John out of the blue, asked him if he could stop by the studio. "Hell yes," said John. "Get down here and help me finish this middle eight."
Course, in John's last interview in Playboy he's bitching about George. He's indignant that George failed to mention him once in his book "I Me Mine." "Every two-bit saxophone player gets mentioned but not me. . ." John felt George looked at him as a father figure who had abandoned him. Even likened George to a "disciple" of his.
In May Pang's book there's a tense scene between George and John during George's disastrous 1974 tour. I think George was hoping John would make a cameo appearance at his concert to beef up the buzz, and John let him down. George is screaming at John "I did everything for you! I did everything you ever asked of me! But you were never there when I needed you." He even ripped off John's glasses from his face and stomped them into the floor. A day or two later Pang was further shocked to see George and John having a loving, friendly interaction, as if nothing had happened. She was amazed at the volatile and unpredictable emotions that always seemed to be flowing back and forth between the Beatles.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Mar 12, 2010 16:29:22 GMT -5
Paul was becoming a real bitch to George in the studio from Rubber Soul. At the time George didn't say anything but there is a quote from an engineer along the lines of " it's amzing that George put up with it ".
Also, I don't get John's comment regarding Taxman. He said that George came to him for help because at the time Paul would not have helped him. Why ? According to George John offered one line and we know that Paul came up with the solo. It sounds like they were starting to get on each other's nerves.
|
|
|
Post by stavros on Mar 12, 2010 16:46:17 GMT -5
I've always wondered when was the last time George saw John. On Part 4 of the Interview Stavros linked, George says (re: John's death) that he'd not seen John "for a couple of years" when the murder happened. In theory, that means they met in 1978. According to one of our posters in this thread "nine" : "In September 1980 (or was it July?) John flew to Los Angeles and met up with George and Derek Taylor where they all attended a Python show." This posted in an old thread about John & George I have been unable to verify this and add any further info. from the net. Maybe "nine" will assist?
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Mar 12, 2010 17:04:29 GMT -5
In May Pang's book there's a tense scene between George and John during George's disastrous 1974 tour. I think George was hoping John would make a cameo appearance at his concert to beef up the buzz, and John let him down. George is screaming at John "I did everything for you! I did everything you ever asked of me! But you were never there when I needed you." He even ripped off John's glasses from his face and stomped them into the floor. May missed her calling. She should have written a book about George after his death too.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Mar 12, 2010 18:12:35 GMT -5
In May Pang's book there's a tense scene between George and John during George's disastrous 1974 tour. I think George was hoping John would make a cameo appearance at his concert to beef up the buzz, and John let him down. George is screaming at John "I did everything for you! I did everything you ever asked of me! But you were never there when I needed you." He even ripped off John's glasses from his face and stomped them into the floor. May missed her calling. She should have written a book about George after his death too. Patty Boyd beat her to it. Pretty good book about life with George and Eric. But there's a bit of rock trivia for you. Has any woman in history had two classic love songs written about her by two different artist, "Something" and "Layla."
|
|
|
Post by stavros on Mar 12, 2010 18:34:32 GMT -5
Patty Boyd beat her to it. Pretty good book about life with George and Eric. But there's a bit of rock trivia for you. Has any woman in history had two classic love songs written about her by two different artist, "Something" and "Layla." Liverpool prostitute Maggie Mae. The Beatles sang about her in an old folk song and then Rod Stewart paid his own tribute whilst cunningly disguising the title with a swift letter change from E to Y ;D
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Mar 12, 2010 18:44:28 GMT -5
I've always wondered when was the last time George saw John. On Part 4 of the Interview Stavros linked, George says (re: John's death) that he'd not seen John "for a couple of years" when the murder happened. In theory, that means they met in 1978. According to one of our posters in this thread "nine" : "In September 1980 (or was it July?) John flew to Los Angeles and met up with George and Derek Taylor where they all attended a Python show." This posted in an old thread about John & George I have been unable to verify this and add any further info. from the net. Maybe "nine" will assist? It's in the Keith Badman book.
|
|
|
Post by stavros on Mar 12, 2010 19:02:31 GMT -5
According to one of our posters in this thread "nine" : "In September 1980 (or was it July?) John flew to Los Angeles and met up with George and Derek Taylor where they all attended a Python show." This posted in an old thread about John & George I have been unable to verify this and add any further info. from the net. Maybe "nine" will assist? It's in the Keith Badman book. Would that be "Beatles after the Break-Up"?
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Mar 12, 2010 19:08:58 GMT -5
George once said: "I'd join a band with John Lennon in a second. I'd never join a band with Paul McCartney." I don't know what George's personal relationship was with Paul. But he always gave the impression that he wasn't much fun to play with. And that John was a helluva hoot. I think it was during the "Imagine" sessions when George called up John out of the blue, asked him if he could stop by the studio. "Hell yes," said John. "Get down here and help me finish this middle eight." Course, in John's last interview in Playboy he's bitching about George. He's indignant that George failed to mention him once in his book "I Me Mine." "Every two-bit saxophone player gets mentioned but not me. . ." John felt George looked at him as a father figure who had abandoned him. Even likened George to a "disciple" of his. In May Pang's book there's a tense scene between George and John during George's disastrous 1974 tour. I think George was hoping John would make a cameo appearance at his concert to beef up the buzz, and John let him down. George is screaming at John "I did everything for you! I did everything you ever asked of me! But you were never there when I needed you." He even ripped off John's glasses from his face and stomped them into the floor. A day or two later Pang was further shocked to see George and John having a loving, friendly interaction, as if nothing had happened. She was amazed at the volatile and unpredictable emotions that always seemed to be flowing back and forth between the Beatles. The concert stuff is covered in Keith Badman's book. It's been ten years since this book appeared so some posters here may not be aware of it but it's a great read and a book you can pick any page at random and find yourself absorbed. I believe Badman has intentions to update it. The title is - I think - The Beatles After The Break Up.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Mar 12, 2010 19:15:02 GMT -5
Liverpool prostitute Maggie Mae. The Beatles sang about her in an old folk song and then Rod Stewart paid his own tribute whilst cunningly disguising the title with a swift letter change from E to Y ;D Ha ha. So Patti Boyd is in good company.
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Mar 12, 2010 19:19:44 GMT -5
Panther - I think Paul actually treated George's songs better than John in the late 60s. John often couldn't even be bothered turning up on George's tracks but Paul at least put in a shift on most of George's tracks and his bass line makes "Something" an even more outstanding track. Strange how the last Beatle track (excluding the 90s singles) ever recorded "I Me Mine" was also notable by John's absence. That said I think it was Paul basically using him as a session man in later years which irritated George. George Martin often said Paul always had a good idea of how he wanted his songs recorded whereas John was a lot less clear. With John's dismissal of some of his tracks, and Paul's attention to every fine detail, I think George was eventually glad of the freedom to do his own thing. After the split I think George remained proud of the band as much as the others. But people easily forget that he organised a forerunner to "Live Aid" with his Concert for Bangladesh and almost single handedly kept the British film industry going with handmade in the late 70s to mid 80s. He also had a keen interest in Formula 1 and of course his gardening. George had a lot of distractions in life and took a lot of time out of music in the 80s to concentrate on them. Whether the Anthology was all about money for George I am not sure. I think he would have done it anyway. Britain was going through a "Cool Britannia" era in the 90s with a lot of 60s and 70s nostalgia and I think George felt it was time to show the world how good the Beatles really were. But my guess is he felt working with Paul on the 3 Lennon tracks was enough. I can never quite tell with George whether he is joking or not though. on some things Here's an interesting clip with both Ringo and George from about 20 years ago. And George comments on John's death "...shocked and stunned" about 6:00 mins in. Very Rutles. The sound is out of sync but it's an interesting interview as the 2 Beatles rarely ever appeared together on UK TV. I think Paul put in 100% with George tracks once the decision to record them had been made. It is strange that George aimed his frustration at Paul when as you mention above John didn't even bother turning up. During the Let It Be sessions it's a shame Paul didn't listen properly to the songs that George had. That album could have been so much different with All Things Must Pass and Let It Down etc.... It might have spurred John out of his lethargy too being relegated to third songwriter and third in the pecking order. He only had Don't Let Me Down and Paul was the one that really turned it into something decent.
|
|
|
Post by acebackwords on Mar 12, 2010 19:20:37 GMT -5
In May Pang's book there's a tense scene between George and John during George's disastrous 1974 tour. I think George was hoping John would make a cameo appearance at his concert to beef up the buzz, and John let him down. George is screaming at John "I did everything for you! I did everything you ever asked of me! But you were never there when I needed you." He even ripped off John's glasses from his face and stomped them into the floor. May missed her calling. She should have written a book about George after his death too. Joe: I will add, since this subject seems to keep coming up in our posts: You've made it clear that you have a distaste for the gossipy kind of tell-all books. And its certainly your perogative not to read them. Or not to read my posts (they're pretty easy to skip over and avoid, and I suspect many people do). Just as its the perogative of the moderator of this site to define the standard of discourse however he sees fit (we're all guests in his home is how I look at it). Its a tricky subject. Like with Tiger Woods. He's a GOLFER. His sex life is none of my business and I could care less. But I put the Beatles in a little different category. To me, the Beatles were important historical figures who had a profound cultural impact. For that reason, like with most important historical figures, their personal lives goes beyond that of mere celebrity gossip, and are worthy of a bit more scrutiny. The Beatles were icons, and symbols, of an unprecedented period of social change. How they lived out those social changes in their personal lives is an intruiging question to me. Sort of along the lines of: "They talked the talk, so you want to see how they walked the walk." Thats my take anyways.
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Mar 12, 2010 19:27:38 GMT -5
It seems George & Paul's relationship was pretty much non-existant from the break-up until the Anthology period in the early 90's, except for the disolution of the band meeting in New York in the late 70's (which John chose to skip, infuriating George) and Ringo's wedding to Barbara in 1981 when George & Paul attended the wedding and actually jammed together w/Ringo at the reception. They also jammed at Eric Clapton's wedding and George joined the party for the release of Venus and Mars which was I believe on a boat. I don't think there were any pics of them taken together at the launch.
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Mar 12, 2010 19:29:31 GMT -5
It's in the Keith Badman book. Would that be "Beatles after the Break-Up"? Yep.
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Mar 12, 2010 19:33:46 GMT -5
Carl Perkin's daughter claimed in a book that George was also at Monsterrat when Carl Perkins was there (1981), supporting the rumors at the time that all three surviving Beatles flew into the island to record at George Martin's studio. Hasn't there been some speculation that George played a guitar part on Wanderlust which was never released? If this is the case maybe Paul removed it because George mixed All Those Years Ago in such a way you can hardly hear Paul, Linda and Denny on it.
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Mar 12, 2010 19:38:22 GMT -5
Nice post, Lowbasso. This all sounds a bit sad, but I'm sure George wasn't exactly miserable all the time. For example, George brought Bob Dylan the tapes of Abbey Road to play to him in August 1969, so clearly George was still proud of the work they were doing right up to the end. George brought along Free As A Bird with him to Australia in 1995 when he was here to see the Grand Prix. He played that to folk too and was quite proud of it. This is a bit off track but I often wonder if his reluctance to record a third song for Anthology was because of the backlash they received for Free and Real Love. One of the BBCs banned Real Love from their playlist.
|
|
|
Post by stavros on Mar 12, 2010 20:06:34 GMT -5
Nice post, Lowbasso. This all sounds a bit sad, but I'm sure George wasn't exactly miserable all the time. For example, George brought Bob Dylan the tapes of Abbey Road to play to him in August 1969, so clearly George was still proud of the work they were doing right up to the end. George brought along Free As A Bird with him to Australia in 1995 when he was here to see the Grand Prix. He played that to folk too and was quite proud of it. This is a bit off track but I often wonder if his reluctance to record a third song for Anthology was because of the backlash they received for Free and Real Love. One of the BBCs banned Real Love from their playlist. That's true it was BBC Radio 1. In the 70s and 80s it was Britain's most popular radio station. But suddenly in the 90s it was decided that anything over a year old was pretty much off the playlist. Consequently it's more "conservative" station BBC Radio 2 became the nation's favourite. It still is to this day! How times change.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Mar 12, 2010 22:44:19 GMT -5
It seems George & Paul's relationship was pretty much non-existant from the break-up until the Anthology period in the early 90's, except for the disolution of the band meeting in New York in the late 70's (which John chose to skip, infuriating George) and Ringo's wedding to Barbara in 1981 when George & Paul attended the wedding and actually jammed together w/Ringo at the reception. They also jammed at Eric Clapton's wedding and George joined the party for the release of Venus and Mars which was I believe on a boat. I don't think there were any pics of them taken together at the launch. Yes, you're right, I had forgotten about Clapton's wedding in 1979. My guess is Paul & George wound up at the weddings only because of their friendships with Clapton and Ringo. The fact that they jammed together is interesting given the lawsuits were still not settled amoung them at that time. Ringo's wedding was post John's death, so it is a little easier to see them together as I mentioned in my post that I felt Paul might have been re-evaluating his relationship with George in light of the murder. And if anyone can explain why George attended the Venus & Mars party, I'd love to hear it. Was he there due to a friendship with one of the Wings bandmembers? In 1975, one would have thought George & Paul were about as far apart in their relationship as it ever got given their current events surrounding that period. But there is an element of mystery to their relationship in these periods; the mid-70's and 80's. It is the most difficult period to ascertain how they really felt about each other. As late as 1988, when The Beatles were inducted into the R&R Hall of Fame, Paul refused to attend the ceremony alluding to the fact he felt it would be hypocritical of him to appear with George & Ringo in public when the lawsuits were still pending a resolution at that point. Anyone care to offer opinions?
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Mar 12, 2010 22:59:49 GMT -5
May missed her calling. She should have written a book about George after his death too. Joe: I will add, since this subject seems to keep coming up in our posts: You've made it clear that you have a distaste for the gossipy kind of tell-all books. And its certainly your perogative not to read them. Or not to read my posts (they're pretty easy to skip over and avoid, and I suspect many people do). Just as its the perogative of the moderator of this site to define the standard of discourse however he sees fit (we're all guests in his home is how I look at it). Its a tricky subject. Like with Tiger Woods. He's a GOLFER. His sex life is none of my business and I could care less. But I put the Beatles in a little different category. To me, the Beatles were important historical figures who had a profound cultural impact. For that reason, like with most important historical figures, their personal lives goes beyond that of mere celebrity gossip, and are worthy of a bit more scrutiny. The Beatles were icons, and symbols, of an unprecedented period of social change. How they lived out those social changes in their personal lives is an intruiging question to me. Sort of along the lines of: "They talked the talk, so you want to see how they walked the walk." Thats my take anyways. I agree with you ace. May's book shed a lot of important light on John's frame of mind in the mid-70's when he was briefly out of Yoko's control, and we finally got some insight into the guy we hadn't had since 1968 when he hooked up with Yoko. Flippancy is a common occurance on this board. I appreciate your comment.
|
|