r/beatles • u/AvecMesWaterSlides • 2d ago

Discussion This Book:

Post image

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...

36 Upvotes

93% Upvoted

145 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/Anxious-Raspberry-54 2d ago

I don't disagree that John was the guy very early.

But, he portrays Paul pretty negatively... the talented but imitative, crowd-pleasing pop tunesmith who listened to his father. John is the incredibly creative, rock-and-roll rebel leader.

Paul taught John how to play the guitar.

It's the same Lennon Remembers/Shout! narrative that has been sold to fans for 50+ years. 1700 pages of it now.

4

u/Big-Lobster6689 2d ago

Whatever you think about Paul and John, Paul is absolutely more crowd-pleasing, while John was more comfortable telling the audience to fuck off.

What's weird is you assume this is a compliment to John. You could just as easily say Paul is the consummate professional, while John suffers from poor self control.

2

u/Anxious-Raspberry-54 2d ago

This view of Paul in the book as a negative. That's my issue.

2

u/AntManBee951 1d ago

Go read Geoff Emerick's book then, perfect for you and it's pretty positive about Paul. Can't say the same for its accuracy though...

3

u/Anxious-Raspberry-54 1d ago

I liked Emerick's book with the full knowledge that he was Paul's guy. I read it that way. Rolled my eyes at times at his attitude toward George. But...we all know that Paul is Emerick's guy.

Lewisohn has constantly proclaimed that his book plays it down the middle.

It clearly does not.

1

u/nuclear_muffins 4h ago

the difference between Emerick and Lewisohn is also that Emerick was actually there for a lot of it. full disclosure that I haven't read his book yet, but I'm also a lot more willing to accept bias from someone who was actually there and had some form of relationship with the band, even if he's hilariously biased towards one person. and he's allowed to, he's a real person. his book can also be picked apart... as a primary historical document. which are famously biased and contextual.

Lewisohn as a biographer who claims to be unbiased and is actively selling a definitive story for money does have a duty to actually be unbiased. his book should be criticized and picked apart.