|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Jun 16, 2012 10:32:44 GMT -5
Many Beatles fans know the story of how Stu had just purchased a bass and was learning how to play it he he joined the group. Fans also know he sang "Love Me Tender" and "Loving You" when they played the clubs of Hamburg. He was shown doing this in the the movie "Backbeat" (singing rather badly). But did you know that Stu really could sing? He was not only in the choir as a teen, but was head chorister!!! When he sang with The Beatles he often got the biggest ovation of the night!!!
He took piano lessons as a kid and even owned an acoustic guitar. In fact there are photos of Stu during the time he shared a flat with John where Stu's guitar is clearly visible in the shot.
Stu's influence on the early years of The Beatles, especially John Lennon, was HUGE. When he came into the picture he became John's mentor and even took over as manager of the band. It wasn't Brian Epstein or Allan Williams who was The Beatles first manager. It was Stuart Sutcliffe!!! When he came on the scene, McCartney & Harrison were bumped down a peg and the new pecking order went...
1. John Lennon 2. Stuart Sutcliffe 3. Paul McCartney 4. George Harrison.
"When Stuart came in, it felt as if he was taking the position away from George and me. We had to take a bit of a back seat. "
- Paul McCartney on Stuart Sutcliffe
That's the biggest reason McCartney hated Stu so much., not because Stu couldn't play bass.
Like I said, his influence on Lennon was huge. If Lennon was a genius as he claimed, well Stu was too. Maybe more so. Just look at what the two of them had to say about each other.
“I looked up to Stu. I depended on him to tell me the truth. Stu would tell me if something was good, and I'd believe him”
- John Lennon on Stuart Sutcliffe
"He was self-centered yet at the same time he was always a loyal friend. A frustrated and misunderstood child not given its due need in affection ends in a man without roots. In rebellion or bewilderment, almost embittered; this was John."
- Stuart Sutcliffe on John Lennon
Lennon would spend his whole life examining himself trying to discover what was already obvious to Stu as a teen.
When was the last time you ever heard any of the facts listed above in a Beatles documentary? You certainly didn't hear it in The Beatles Anthology.
Here are links to watch a great documentary on Stuart Sutcliffe, original bassist for The Beatles. It contains a lot of the same info found in other Beatles Documentaries, but also has a lot of info you won't find including some evidence backing up some of what I just said. Check it out. I am not saying to blindly trust everything you see and hear (especially from Stu's sister who has been accused of revising history a bit regarding her brother), but if you are a real Beatles fan and interested in knowing real truths about their early years, I am sure you will find it worth your time.
Stuart Sutcliffe - The Lost Beatle
1of4
2of4
3of4
4of4
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Jun 16, 2012 13:39:26 GMT -5
But did you know that Stu really could sing? He was not only in the choir as a teen, but was head cloister!!! Oxford Dictionaries online: Cloister noun: a covered walk in a convent, monastery, college, or cathedral, typically with a colonnade open to a quadrangle on one side: the shadowed cloisters of the convent verb: seclude or shut up in a convent or monastery A man of rare talents, clearly! NB Chorister noun: 1 a member of a choir, especially a choirboy or choirgirl. 2 US a person who leads the singing of a church choir or congregation.
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Jun 16, 2012 14:24:17 GMT -5
But did you know that Stu really could sing? He was not only in the choir as a teen, but was head cloister!!! Oxford Dictionaries online: Cloister noun: a covered walk in a convent, monastery, college, or cathedral, typically with a colonnade open to a quadrangle on one side: the shadowed cloisters of the convent verb: seclude or shut up in a convent or monastery A man of rare talents, clearly! NB Chorister noun: 1 a member of a choir, especially a choirboy or choirgirl. 2 US a person who leads the singing of a church choir or congregation. In Backbeat, they made it seem as though Stu couldn't sing and almost ruined The Beatles chance at a German record deal with his crappy droning for Asttrid. They made it seem like he didn't care that he was hurting the band. Clearly that wasn't true. More than one person who was there in 1960/61 says that when Stu solo'ed, he got the biggest applause of the night! As head of the choir as a teen, clearly Stu knew how to sing and wasn't as musically inept as The Fab Four and many of their fans would have you believe.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Jun 16, 2012 14:41:18 GMT -5
Oxford Dictionaries online: Cloister noun: a covered walk in a convent, monastery, college, or cathedral, typically with a colonnade open to a quadrangle on one side: the shadowed cloisters of the convent verb: seclude or shut up in a convent or monastery A man of rare talents, clearly! NB Chorister noun: 1 a member of a choir, especially a choirboy or choirgirl. 2 US a person who leads the singing of a church choir or congregation. In Backbeat, they made it seem as though Stu couldn't sing and almost ruined The Beatles chance at a German record deal with his crappy droning for Asttrid. They made it seem like he didn't care that he was hurting the band. Clearly that wasn't true. More than one person who was there in 1960/61 says that when Stu solo'ed, he got the biggest applause of the night! As head of the choir as a teen, clearly Stu knew how to sing and wasn't as musically inept as The Fab Four and many of their fans would have you believe. If that version of "Love Me Tender" was really Stu (and Klaus and I believe Pete didn't think it was), he wasn't that good.
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Jun 16, 2012 15:24:04 GMT -5
If that version of "Love Me Tender" was really Stu (and Klaus and I believe Pete didn't think it was), he wasn't that good. I doubt it is him. Just someone trying to make a buck. As for him not being good. Everyone who knew him says he was very dedicated at everything he did. Never heard of someone being head chorister in a church choir and not being able to sing. That doesn't make a lot of sense.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Jun 16, 2012 19:34:02 GMT -5
I wonder if the choristers were cloistered?
|
|
|
Post by beatlesattheirbest on Jun 16, 2012 20:06:36 GMT -5
I wonder if the choristers were cloistered? Ok, so I was a bit slow picking up on this. I think I got it now. lol
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 17, 2012 6:55:51 GMT -5
My feeling on Stu is that he was a gifted artist, but was not cut out to be a musician. It was never where his heart truly lied, and he knew that, which is why he left the band and embarked more on his own painting and artwork.
Stu was very important to John, and his too-early death also probably left a mark on John's already rather large shoulder chip.
I don't think there is much else to say. History does prove that Stu not being in the band worked out wonderfully.
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Jun 17, 2012 11:13:39 GMT -5
Many Beatles fans know the story of how Stu had just purchased a bass and was learning how to play it he he joined the group. Fans also know he sang "Love Me Tender" and "Loving You" when they played the clubs of Hamburg. He was shown doing this in the the movie "Backbeat" (singing rather badly). But did you know that Stu really could sing? He was not only in the choir as a teen, but was head chorister!!! When he sang with The Beatles he often got the biggest ovation of the night!!! He took piano lessons as a kid and even owned an acoustic guitar. In fact there are photos of Stu during the time he shared a flat with John where Stu's guitar is clearly visible in the shot. Stu's influence on the early years of The Beatles, especially John Lennon, was HUGE. When he came into the picture he became John's mentor and even took over as manager of the band. It wasn't Brian Epstein or Allan Williams who was The Beatles first manager. It was Stuart Sutcliffe!!! When he came on the scene, McCartney & Harrison were bumped down a peg and the new pecking order went... 1. John Lennon 2. Stuart Sutcliffe 3. Paul McCartney 4. George Harrison. "When Stuart came in, it felt as if he was taking the position away from George and me. We had to take a bit of a back seat. "
- Paul McCartney on Stuart SutcliffeThat's the biggest reason McCartney hated Stu so much., not because Stu couldn't play bass. Like I said, his influence on Lennon was huge. If Lennon was a genius as he claimed, well Stu was too. Maybe more so. Just look at what the two of them had to say about each other. “I looked up to Stu. I depended on him to tell me the truth. Stu would tell me if something was good, and I'd believe him”
- John Lennon on Stuart Sutcliffe
"He was self-centered yet at the same time he was always a loyal friend. A frustrated and misunderstood child not given its due need in affection ends in a man without roots. In rebellion or bewilderment, almost embittered; this was John."
- Stuart Sutcliffe on John LennonLennon would spend his whole life examining himself trying to discover what was already obvious to Stu as a teen. When was the last time you ever heard any of the facts listed above in a Beatles documentary? You certainly didn't hear it in The Beatles Anthology. Here are links to watch a great documentary on Stuart Sutcliffe, original bassist for The Beatles. It contains a lot of the same info found in other Beatles Documentaries, but also has a lot of info you won't find including some evidence backing up some of what I just said. Check it out. I am not saying to blindly trust everything you see and hear (especially from Stu's sister who has been accused of revising history a bit regarding her brother), but if you are a real Beatles fan and interested in knowing real truths about their early years, I am sure you will find it worth your time. Stuart Sutcliffe - The Lost Beatle 1of4 2of4 3of4 4of4 I bought this DVD and it is a worthwhile item for the true Beatlefan who wants a clearer picture of Stuart's place in the band's history. Just like Pete's DVD's are worthwhile as well. Stu (for obvious reasons) was not in much of The Anthology DVD's (Astrid should have been), and Pete (who should have been granted some interview space) wasn't either. Also; after hearing Olivia and Patti's comments about George in Scorcese's recent film on George, and Cynthia and Yoko's comments on John in various video projects about him over the years, it is also a shame the Beatle wives (and ex-wives) were never allowed any video or written comments on the band in the original Anthology.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jun 17, 2012 11:26:49 GMT -5
I guess my feeling is that Stu and Pete had important early roles in The Beatles that should never be forgotten or written out yet everything happens for a reason and neither man was destined to be a Beatle as they finally evolved to and as we have come to know and love The Beatles.
Thus I also think their place in history shouldn't be overstated either and there was just no way either man could have made it to that first Ed Sullivan Show in early February 1964 as Beatles.
I really like both men in that context of their actual roles early on. I do resent any claims that the Beatles would have been better had Stu and Pete remained in the band or that the Beatles should have kept both men no matter what out of loyalty(in Stu's case that would have required them talking him into staying but he was doomed to die anyway).
|
|
|
Post by beatlesfansunite on Sept 17, 2013 0:41:26 GMT -5
Stuart Sutcliffe, often referred to as “the Lost Beatle,” was born June 23, 1940, in Edinburgh, Scotland. By the time he died at 21, he had established himself as an abstract expressionist artist of considerable potential, fallen in love with the woman he planned to marry, and helped to found the most celebrated band in the world. Although he was the original bassist for the Beatles – known as the Silver Beetles when he joined them — Sutcliffe did not live to see the worldwide acclaim heaped upon the band. His life has been dramatized in films, documentaries and biographies, yet misconceptions and inaccuracies about this tragic figure still persist. One thing is clear: Stuart Sutcliffe’s short life – and his musical legacy – seem to contain more than their fair share of contradictions and ironies.
In 1967, Stuart Sutcliffe made his final appearance with the Beatles, as a photograph featured amid a crowd of cultural icons on the cover of the Sgt Pepper album. Although Stuart Sutcliffe’s tenure with the Beatles lasted a mere 18 months, he was a major factor in their early development. He not only performed with the Beatles, he often helped to book them, along with providing the embryonic group with rehearsal space. It is no exaggeration to say that this young artist and musician played a vital role in altering the face of pop music forever.
|
|