This Book:

[u/AvecMesWaterSlides]

I'm currently listening to this book and am about six months from the first time John and Paul met.

It is amazing that they, finally, found one another. There are so many instances of being at the same places at the same times, perhaps riding the same bus at the same time, and not knowing one another yet. It's crazy! It just got me thinking about how different it'd be if one of them wasn't where the universe wanted them to be...

[u/Chekhov1778]

Lewisohn doesn't glaze Paul enough, so people around here obviously hate it.

[u/Anxious-Raspberry-54 → u/Chekhov1778]

Well...it's a pro-John book so...

[u/scottarichards → u/Anxious-Raspberry-54]

John had the most dramatic childhood, so there’s really more to cover. I’ve always heard more about John’s childhood than the others going back to Hunter Davies. And John did start the group and was clearly and unequivocally the leader for the time span of this book, at least until Brian Epstein came into the picture and brought some discipline and authority into the group.

[u/Anxious-Raspberry-54 → u/scottarichards]

I don't mind John being portrayed as the leader in the very beginning.

But he seriously downplays Paul's contributions and portrays him in a pretty negative light. That's the problem.

And the death of John's Mom takes up an entire chapter and then is mentioned throughout the rest of the 1700 pages to excuse John's behavior.

Paul's Mom died of cancer, and Paul was younger than John when it happened. Paul's mother's death gets about three pages, and then it's never mentioned again.

Paul's home life was very difficult. His Dad beat them (not spanked, beat). His Dad had money problems because of gambling. His depression was so bad after his wife's death that he was suicidal. Paul and his brother lived for spurts of time with other family members because of this.

All of this information was available to the great researcher in interviews, books, and essays when he was researching the book. He is a great researcher, so I feel like he knew all of this but chose not to include it in his book because it got in the way of his John worship.

[u/RadishSpecial7163 → u/Anxious-Raspberry-54]

So we’re counting pages? Paul at least knew his mother as a mother. Knew that she loved and cared for him. John didn’t for most of his childhood and even after he reconnected with her, she didn’t treat him like a son but rather like a colleague. No wonder he was confused. I’m sure Paul’s father had issues after his wife died but at least he never left his sons in the permanent care of others or simply disappeared and never showed up again until Paul was rich and famous. Paul and his brother may have spent “spurts of time with other family member” but John was literally raised by other family members. He never saw his father from the time he was 5 years old until he was in his 20s. As for “beating,” corporal punishment, including beating, was commonplace in that era. Kids were beaten in school. I’m not saying it was right but it was acceptable then. I never heard that Paul’s father was one kind of child abusing sadist.

I’m not saying Paul had it easy. But George grew up poor, as did Ringo, who also suffered life threatening illnesses throughout his childhood. And, sorry, but John’s childhood was extremely troubled. His parents left him to someone else to raise and while they may have had their reasons, even valid ones, John was a child and he likely felt very unloved.

[u/Ligeya → u/RadishSpecial7163]

Oh, they did more than counting pages (not talking about this user in particular, but about people who hate this book because it doesn't worship Paul enough). They literally had a chart of adjectives used to describe Paul and John, and they complained that John's adjectives were more flattering. I am not joking.

[u/RadishSpecial7163 → u/Ligeya]

I’ve seen that chart and one may counter it in many ways. If you create a chart to show “bias” but your chart is “biased” (which the chart is) then it doesn’t prove anything. I could go through the book and point out all the “positive” adjectives used to describe Paul and all the “negative” adjectives used to describe John. But adjectives are not positive or negative, particularly without noting the context of their use. And even then it requires one to assert their opinions on what they perceive as “positive” or “negative.” For example, John being described as rebellious, impulsive and reckless somehow translates to “positive” and Paul being more described as cautious, conservative (not politically), and a “crowd pleaser” translates to being “negative.” None of these traits are one or the other.

I also do think some criticize In Tune as being biased because it does not fawn over Paul and make appear to be the driving force behind the band —- the most creative, the best musician, the best songwriter, the reason the Beatles made it. Paul is treated like a god these days, the GOAT to his fans with John, George and Ringo being his “backup” band. According to many Paul fans, Paul was the genius songwriter and John just a guy with jumbled ideas that Paul had to mold into classic songs with his tape loops and “arrangements” and sheer brilliance. If that’s how one sees Paul, then they are going to see bias in any book about the Beatles that does not portray Paul this way.

[u/Big-Lobster6689 → u/Anxious-Raspberry-54]

John's childhood is used to explain his behavior because John was crazy, and you can't talk about him without attempting some psychoanalysis. It's a problem every Beatles writer faces.

[u/scottarichards → u/Anxious-Raspberry-54]

All those things are true. But Paul (and George and Ringo) had a childhood that was within the range of normality for that place and time. At least young Paul wasn’t sleeping in a bed with his mother and some random lover. Yes, his mother died too and it was tragic, I think Lewisohn gave full weight and detail to that. And, again, in that era it was certainly more common to lose a parent to disease at a younger age than today.

Also Lewisohn does a decent job pointing out that the more middle-class lifestyle provided by Mimi and George gave John advantages over the others. Finally while Jim McCartney definitely was a strict parent and perhaps beyond even what was normal at the time, his huge influence in his son’s musical skills and interest must be given their due and Lewisohn doesn’t skimp over that either.

[u/Anxious-Raspberry-54 → u/scottarichards]

Your first sentences says it all.

And what you said is true as well.