That second book is never going to see the light of day. ML is procrastinating - he's making all kinds of excuses to delay its publication. It was supposed to have been released in 2020.
Mark Lewisohn is a conman in my opinion. He has been pussyfussing for years concerning the release of Volume 2, finding all sorts of feeble excuses (the lack of funds being one). He also claims to be scholalastic (which he most certainly is not). I read his Volume 1. Yes, his work abounds with a plethora of obscure and irrelevant details (the result of painstaking research, granted) but it is far from critical and analytical in the true tradition of scholarly discourse. He is essentially an archaelogist digging, unearthing and presenting. His work is, in the final analysis, a lumping together of many personal and intimate minutiae (often vulgar and offensive) without interrogating these details to present a synthesis and objective assessment as the scholarly historian ought to. How far should the historian go in respecting the privacy of his subjects? I doubt whether the Beatles - Lennon in particular - would be very impressed. McCartney has also expressed reservations about Lewisohn's work. I shall give Volume 2 (if it ever sees the light of day) a categorical miss. I shall spend the time, instead, listening to the music of my beloved band.
Tune In is far more than a simple presentation of facts. It does a fantastic job of placing The Beatles firmly in any number of contexts - social, cultural, geographical, etc. As for Lewisohn being a 'conman'...
@@JMoruzzi Lewisohn ought to learn to respect the privacy of his subjects ... to write with a sense of dignity ... not to expose lurid details ... which cheapens his work in my opinion. I repeat: he has the penchant for the sensational instead of the scholastic ...a true historian would never mention some of the things he does ... he is CHEAP and VULGAR ...
@@richbailey8174 Your opinion is respected, good friend. Just one question: do you approve of historians/biographers revealing intimate details of your favourite stars - personal details those stars would have preferred to have remained private?
@@charliewest1221 It depends. If it's key to a story yes. I don't think the details in Lewishons books are lurid but very interesting. Of course, we all would like OUR details not to be out there, but we aren't public figures.
Could listen to this man all night.
I absolutely loved "Tune In" and am looking forward to the second book. Lewishon does his research and writes extremely well.
That second book is never going to see the light of day. ML is procrastinating - he's making all kinds of excuses to delay its publication. It was supposed to have been released in 2020.
Unfortunately the rail strike prevented us from attending Mark’s talk but it was great when Mark did the introduction at the Analog’s gig.
Mark Lewisohn is a conman in my opinion. He has been pussyfussing for years concerning the release of Volume 2, finding all sorts of feeble excuses (the lack of funds being one). He also claims to be scholalastic (which he most certainly is not). I read his Volume 1. Yes, his work abounds with a plethora of obscure and irrelevant details (the result of painstaking research, granted) but it is far from critical and analytical in the true tradition of scholarly discourse. He is essentially an archaelogist digging, unearthing and presenting.
His work is, in the final analysis, a lumping together of many personal and intimate minutiae (often vulgar and offensive) without interrogating these details to present a synthesis and objective assessment as the scholarly historian ought to. How far should the historian go in respecting the privacy of his subjects? I doubt whether the Beatles - Lennon in particular - would be very impressed. McCartney has also expressed reservations about Lewisohn's work.
I shall give Volume 2 (if it ever sees the light of day) a categorical miss. I shall spend the time, instead, listening to the music of my beloved band.
Tune In is far more than a simple presentation of facts. It does a fantastic job of placing The Beatles firmly in any number of contexts - social, cultural, geographical, etc. As for Lewisohn being a 'conman'...
@@JMoruzzi
Lewisohn ought to learn to respect the privacy of his subjects ... to write with a sense of dignity ... not to expose lurid details ... which cheapens his work in my opinion. I repeat: he has the penchant for the sensational instead of the scholastic ...a true historian would never mention some of the things he does ... he is CHEAP and VULGAR ...
I can't disagree with you more....Having read nearly all of the books about them I find his work to be the best I've seen.
@@richbailey8174
Your opinion is respected, good friend. Just one question: do you approve of historians/biographers revealing intimate details of your favourite stars - personal details those stars would have preferred to have remained private?
@@charliewest1221 It depends. If it's key to a story yes. I don't think the details in Lewishons books are lurid but very interesting. Of course, we all would like OUR details not to be out there, but we aren't public figures.