|
Post by sayne on Apr 25, 2017 22:48:43 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2017 8:15:16 GMT -5
After i read that composition i had to check if the author was Geoff Emerick, i'm now wondering if this dude and Emerick were related, or maybe they were besties...
|
|
markc
Very Clean
Posts: 447
|
Post by markc on Apr 26, 2017 8:47:46 GMT -5
It's always a dead giveaway when writers actually believe that Patti and Clapton appear on Bye Bye Love.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Apr 26, 2017 9:30:13 GMT -5
I get the ultimate point of the writer but I was uneasy through the first part much like Fabfour was. "Where are you going with this," I thought.
I ultimately agree with Mr. Sheffiield that the band The Beatles was not meant for the Seventies or beyond. I think in hindsight each ex-Beatle's Solo career is more remarkable than they were given credit for at the time because of the long shadow cast by The Beatles.
I see no point though to buy this book as interesting the thoughts are of the writer.
But thanks sayne for sharing as it was interesting and I am glad to know this is out there.
|
|
|
Post by stavros on Apr 27, 2017 16:29:09 GMT -5
According to Amazon this book is So it's aimed at people like me and the generations who followed. Those of us who always had all of the Beatles. .Always. We never saw them as loveable mop tops, power popsters, psychedelic gurus and finally indie pioneers until they were just John, Paul, George and Ringo. They were always ALL Of those things to us and will be for generations to come. The author says I agree in part. But I would debate that the Beatles 'could' have carried on into the 1970s if only they'd taken breaks for their own solo projects as many bands now do. In 1970 there was no template for such an exercise. Maybe we were spared a series of "bad Seventies collective Beatles albums". Yet I would argue that the best tracks would be reserved for a Beatles release and there is enough material in those solo albums for 3 or 4 great Beatles albums in the 1970s. However I did detect a very subtle tongue in cheek humour in that essay as well and it all ended where it ended. So I am not as sure as the author that the Beatles are as popular now as they were in the latter decades of the 20th century. Although they may finally be more popular than Christ now
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Apr 28, 2017 0:06:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Apr 28, 2017 8:40:15 GMT -5
According to Amazon this book is So it's aimed at people like me and the generations who followed. Those of us who always had all of the Beatles. .Always. We never saw them as loveable mop tops, power popsters, psychedelic gurus and finally indie pioneers until they were just John, Paul, George and Ringo. They were always ALL Of those things to us and will be for generations to come. The author says I agree in part. But I would debate that the Beatles 'could' have carried on into the 1970s if only they'd taken breaks for their own solo projects as many bands now do. In 1970 there was no template for such an exercise. Maybe we were spared a series of "bad Seventies collective Beatles albums". Yet I would argue that the best tracks would be reserved for a Beatles release and there is enough material in those solo albums for 3 or 4 great Beatles albums in the 1970s. However I did detect a very subtle tongue in cheek humour in that essay as well and it all ended where it ended. So I am not as sure as the author that the Beatles are as popular now as they were in the latter decades of the 20th century. Although they may finally be more popular than Christ now Thanks for that supplement Stavros on what this book is about. A series of essays makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by winstonoboogie on Apr 29, 2017 13:41:41 GMT -5
Interesting essay. I love the line, "[George] won custody of Dylan in the Beatle divorce".
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Apr 30, 2017 11:51:10 GMT -5
Interesting essay. I love the line, "[George] won custody of Dylan in the Beatle divorce". I agree that it is a very clever line but I am not sure by 1969 or 1970 how accurate it was because Paul didn't seem to even care about courting Dylan and John was kind of hostile towards Dylan in the RS interview of 1970, slamming the album New Morning(which I like a lot btw). It is like George won him by default but it was a thought-provoking line for sure!
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on May 2, 2017 10:16:32 GMT -5
John was kind of hostile towards Dylan in the RS interview of 1970 Probably because Dylan threw him and Yoko out of the post-gig knees-up after the IOW Festival for poor personal hygiene.
|
|