Although John and Yoko was a genuine love match she did her best to isolate him from the others in the 70s. Paul talked of trying to call John at the Dakota and Yoko screening the calls and never telling John. George also famously dislike her
Hi John, great video as usual. Bob Wooller was actually the DJ at the Cavern. He was the man that John assaulted at Paul's 21st birthday party. Wooller allegedly goaded John and insinuated that the holiday Brian and John had recently taken together had romantic overtones. This was probably the reason they asked him about it when they interviewed him, hoping he would spill the beans.
@@stevena9305 err yeah, really sorry for getting it so wrong! I would correct you on the spelling; it's compere not compare, if I was weirdly pedantic enough to care
@@Chucklea9 hello mate. No you didn’t get it wrong and no need to apologise. I was just expanding. If anything it should be me apologising for the typo - thx for painting that out. Will correct it.
I don't know whether or not anyone else has ever noticed this McCartney interview anomaly throughout the years but I first noticed it in an old early 1980's Rolling Stone interview, where the cover and or interview header excitedly stated something like it was the best McCartney interview ever and he really opened up about everything! So I was reading the interview and thinking man this is really great, it was like the voice of freaking God! But then I noticed that he would answer a question with like ten to 15 long paragraph (long monograph actually) answers and when I re-read them it was glaringly clear that he hadn't answered the question at hand, just danced around it and or just inanely rambled on about everything while avoiding what the actual question was. He has done this ridiculous evasive song and dance routine through to the early 2000's so for the last 20 years or so whenever I see a magazine touting that they have a in depth McCartney interview that beats all other interviews, I stop, and run in the other direction.
I read this. Good book. With all the interviews taking place before John died they have a sense of honesty......they're just talking about John and not the Saint he became after he was killed.
Great video John..I don’t buy Paul’s version of how him and John were buddies in the end..I think that best suits Paul’s narrative! Great variety of people interviewed in this book!
Neither do I. In an interview not long after John's death, Paul did say that he felt badly that he and John weren't on the best terms when John died. But ever since then he's gone with the "we were good friends again when he died" story. But hey, we all lie to ourselves so if that helps Paul deal with the loss of John, so be it.
@@edavis1066 the kojak comment..Paul saying it’s a drag..I honestly I think put yourself in their situation..10 years apart from an old friend..add fame, money, drugs.. Paul also loves pointing out how John and George hadn’t made up..Paul being the good guy..it’s how Paul work!
@martinmcgrath1985 Reminds me of when Harrison was doing a publicity tour during the Cloud Nine release. It was said people wanted to hear from the Silent Beatle because Lennon was dead, Ringo's memory wasn't sober, and McCartney rewrote history. (Quite literally with 'McCartney-Lennon' crediting.)
I enjoyed The Love You Make very much when I read it back in the early '80s. As a bona fide inner circle guy, Peter Brown comes off as credible. IIRC, it was the first of "insider" stuff to come out. Of course there's been mountains of it since. Looking forward to reading this one.
Hey, interesting backdrop! The guitar sitting there reminds me of a Lyle Lovett concert 30 years back where before the concert there was a Stetson hat sitting on a chair, brim up. ALSO at 2:46... Actually they were going to remove the word shoulder but John Lennon said "No you won't, that's the best bit." They protested "Nobody will understand it" but John said "I understand it." At least, that's what I heard ;-)
I wish there were more UA-cam channels like Johns. He is honest and sincere. The latter being very rare in today's world. His thoughts on the phenomenally expensive prices of these box sets especially the latest Mind Games are very apt. The line all you need is love rings so false now with these disgusting prices. I know others vehemently disagree with me that Cash Grabs exist. By my definition they do. Just based on the argument the masses don't have to buy it is weak to me as it ignores the manipulative marketing techniques and many other issues. Paul certainly repeats the same lines over and over again in interviews. Some of the discussions about songs like Blackbird seem to have morphed into slightly different aspects and emphasis than in earlier interviews. I don't know if I am being unfair but Paul seems to be trying to pull out all the stops to promote his legacy as John's writing partner in the Beatles as if cramming whilst he still remains with us. However, part when Paul talks about his later visit to John and the ensuing argument I have read about before.
I think he has been concerned about his legacy, yes, especially over the years since Lennon's murder. But to address this specifically: "Some of the discussions about songs like Blackbird seem to have morphed into slightly different aspects and emphasis" I assume you are referring to the civil rights angle which has attracted a lot of reflex scepticism. But it is part of the historical record that McCartney told Donovan about this, on tape, in 1968, so recent accusations of "rewriting history" are misplaced. He didn't mention this publicly prior to about 2000, indeed he didn't mention anything much at all publicly about the song before that, but it was certainly one original inspiration for the metaphor that is Blackbird.
@@strathman7501 Interesting. I am not disagreeing with you but I hve many cd's that incklude Paul chatting with Donovan over the formation of Blackbird (as he is creating it) and I still have never heard any words. I will simply put my faith in others I decide tom believe it, but it would have been lovely to hear an audio sample of when thiis statement(s) were made. It remains one of the most beautiful of songs for me.
@@triplejazzmusicisall1883 Hi Tripplejazz, you can find it on UA-cam. This is a transcript I made of the main part a while ago: Donovan [over Paul playing Blackbird]: *"[You'll] see so many blackbirds now..."* Paul: [stops playing]: *I sang it to Diana Ross the other night - she took offence. Not really [laughter]. But I did mean it like that originally, I remember..."* Donovan [surprised]: *"Really?"* Paul: *"... yeah, I'd read something in the paper about the riots and that..."* [Paul then plays Donovan the first verse, "blackbird singing in the dead of night, take these broken wings and learn to fly", semi-speaking the lyric this time, with careful enunciation, evidently to allow Donovan to appreciate the metaphor.] As he reaches "All your life you were only waiting" Donovan interjects with a realisation showing that he now understands: Donovan: *"Aah. It's funny because when you were singing it just now I was thinking, what a way to colour a blackbird, you know, so many beautiful [things to lift?] a blackbird, into people's eyes... So /that's/ why."* If you search Mary Hopkin Postcard sessions you should find it...
Talking of errors in books was surprised at the recent Phil Norman book on George.he said that to spite George there were no Harrison songs on the red and blue compilations. He also said the concert for Bangladesh was four months after they split when it was August 1971 and Paul’s announcement was in April 70
In a recent interview with Something About The Beatles, Steven Gaines said that the book's title was pushed on him by the publisher, not his first choice.
Their first book together is my favorite Beatles read & yeah some of it is done to sell more copies but it's a more or less accurate account of their years together & i've ordered the new book & i'm looking forward to reading it.....
I bought Peter Brown and Steven Gaines first book 'The Love You Make: An Insider's Story of the Beatles' the day it was released in 1983 and it was fraught with both editing and publishing problems, all of the copies at the book store had all of the photos in them faded from either top or bottom into just blank space, along with problems of justifying paragraphs, and words not making sense within simple sentences. I bought it anyways.
Keith Richards wasn't trying to dictate the Rolling Stones' management and business decisions while addicted to heroin. He was just writing songs and playing shows -- and not doing so with the same amount of psychological baggage John Lennon brought with him on becoming rich and famous. But in Keith's case as well as in John's, heroin took a toll. It didn't break up the Rolling Stones, but it did do great damage to the friendship and songwriting partnership between Keith and MIck Jagger and precipitate the Rolling Stones' premature decline into essentially an oldies act after Exile on Main Street. You're underestimating how detrimental heroin is in cases like this. No one wants to think of musical heroes like these as junkies brought low by substance abuse. But that's a tragic aspect of many of their stories which we have to face. PS: We don't know that John was on heroin for "less than a year." It seems more likely that he was on and off heroin intermittently for the rest of his life. It certainly seems clear that Yoko Ono was.
I know it doesn’t prove anything any more than what you said but when I met Yoko twice in 1998 she drank iced coffee whilst I sank several beers! I would be wary of believing some accounts of J & Y’s heroin abuse post ‘69
@@johnheaton5667 I didn't say Yoko was using heroin the day you met her, nearly 20 years after John died. I said it seems clear -- based on the historical evidence we have -- that she was still using it intermittently up to 1980. How long John himself used it is not as clear. But it's much more likely that he did it off and on well after 1969 than that that was the only time he did it. My main point though is that it's unrealistic to say that John's heroin use played no part in the breakup of the Beatles. Paul McCartney, for one, is on record as saying it played a significant role. I don't see how it could not have.
Shame Peter didn't pick a better collaborator, someone who would've done a better job drilling down on the details. Sometimes a careful approach can yield even more information than the sensationalistic straight-forward method employed by Gaines. Still it's a shame they didn't get to talk to John before his murder, as John's 1980 interviews show a real willingness to look back at his past
Hi Got this book a few weeks ago, and I am halfway through. Quite enjoyable, but nothing new for Beatles fans. By the way...... Bob Wooler was the Cavern Clubs DJ. Take care.
Try And in the End the Last Days of the Beatles - Ken McNab. This focuses on 1969 month by month and goes into details about how Clive Epstein sold NEMS , how Dick James sold Northern Songs when Lennon & McCartney wanted to buy it and the tussle between Klein and The Eastmans over who manged the Beatles. There ,s also some really interesting chapters covering the Get Back and Abbey Road sessions.
the yoko whitewashing will likely burst after her death, apropos to say, "infamous." Paul quote at 16:05 sounds like him projecting his own insecurities. point a finger you point 3 fingers back at you.
@@maxwelleddison6717 as a 64 year old beatle fan i was surprised to see another book about the beatles bust up lets face weve heard or read about it many times in the past well i have who cares if yoko ono split the group up yes its history lennon and harrison have been long gone mccartney and starr are in there early 80s let it be oh and i love johns mind games album
Transcribing from audio tapes is gruelling work - - time-consuming & tedious. It sounds from what you say that the publisher/author used software to minimise the time & tedium & expense. That would explain the incoherence. Now given that the selling point of this book, & the only reason for duplicating a purchase of the earlier book, is the verbatim extended interviews, this sloppy cheapskate transcribing that puts words in the mouths of interviewees is a dealbreaker. I wanted to buy it for research. But if I can't confidently quote the bloodything without worrying whether interviewee actually said it, forget it. Yet more evidence that the publishing industry is going down the pan along with the rest of the culture. Could ANY profession care less any more?
Although John and Yoko was a genuine love match she did her best to isolate him from the others in the 70s. Paul talked of trying to call John at the Dakota and Yoko screening the calls and never telling John. George also famously dislike her
Maybe John asked her to do that.
Hi John, great video as usual. Bob Wooller was actually the DJ at the Cavern. He was the man that John assaulted at Paul's 21st birthday party. Wooller allegedly goaded John and insinuated that the holiday Brian and John had recently taken together had romantic overtones. This was probably the reason they asked him about it when they interviewed him, hoping he would spill the beans.
Compere and DJ.
@@stevena9305 err yeah, really sorry for getting it so wrong! I would correct you on the spelling; it's compere not compare, if I was weirdly pedantic enough to care
@@Chucklea9 hello mate. No you didn’t get it wrong and no need to apologise. I was just expanding. If anything it should be me apologising for the typo - thx for painting that out. Will correct it.
I don't know whether or not anyone else has ever noticed this McCartney interview anomaly throughout the years but I first noticed it in an old early 1980's Rolling Stone interview, where the cover and or interview header excitedly stated something like it was the best McCartney interview ever and he really opened up about everything! So I was reading the interview and thinking man this is really great, it was like the voice of freaking God! But then I noticed that he would answer a question with like ten to 15 long paragraph (long monograph actually) answers and when I re-read them it was glaringly clear that he hadn't answered the question at hand, just danced around it and or just inanely rambled on about everything while avoiding what the actual question was. He has done this ridiculous evasive song and dance routine through to the early 2000's so for the last 20 years or so whenever I see a magazine touting that they have a in depth McCartney interview that beats all other interviews, I stop, and run in the other direction.
I read this. Good book. With all the interviews taking place before John died they have a sense of honesty......they're just talking about John and not the Saint he became after he was killed.
Thanks for the review, John - I haven't picked it up yet.
Great video John..I don’t buy Paul’s version of how him and John were buddies in the end..I think that best suits Paul’s narrative!
Great variety of people interviewed in this book!
Neither do I. In an interview not long after John's death, Paul did say that he felt badly that he and John weren't on the best terms when John died. But ever since then he's gone with the "we were good friends again when he died" story. But hey, we all lie to ourselves so if that helps Paul deal with the loss of John, so be it.
@@edavis1066 the kojak comment..Paul saying it’s a drag..I honestly I think put yourself in their situation..10 years apart from an old friend..add fame, money, drugs..
Paul also loves pointing out how John and George hadn’t made up..Paul being the good guy..it’s how Paul work!
@martinmcgrath1985 Reminds me of when Harrison was doing a publicity tour during the Cloud Nine release. It was said people wanted to hear from the Silent Beatle because Lennon was dead, Ringo's memory wasn't sober, and McCartney rewrote history. (Quite literally with 'McCartney-Lennon' crediting.)
Pizza and fairytales!
Cheers for this, mate!
I enjoyed The Love You Make very much when I read it back in the early '80s. As a bona fide inner circle guy, Peter Brown comes off as credible. IIRC, it was the first of "insider" stuff to come out. Of course there's been mountains of it since. Looking forward to reading this one.
Thanks for the review. One for Xmas!
What a fantastic video have a wonderful weekend ❤😊
Glad you enjoyed the book too, John. Enjoyed interviewing Steven a few weeks' back
Hey, interesting backdrop! The guitar sitting there reminds me of a Lyle Lovett concert 30 years back where before the concert there was a Stetson hat sitting on a chair, brim up. ALSO at 2:46... Actually they were going to remove the word shoulder but John Lennon said "No you won't, that's the best bit." They protested "Nobody will understand it" but John said "I understand it." At least, that's what I heard ;-)
I wish there were more UA-cam channels like Johns. He is honest and sincere. The latter being very rare in today's world. His thoughts on the phenomenally expensive prices of these box sets especially the latest Mind Games are very apt. The line all you need is love rings so false now with these disgusting prices. I know others vehemently disagree with me that Cash Grabs exist. By my definition they do. Just based on the argument the masses don't have to buy it is weak to me as it ignores the manipulative marketing techniques and many other issues. Paul certainly repeats the same lines over and over again in interviews. Some of the discussions about songs like Blackbird seem to have morphed into slightly different aspects and emphasis than in earlier interviews. I don't know if I am being unfair but Paul seems to be trying to pull out all the stops to promote his legacy as John's writing partner in the Beatles as if cramming whilst he still remains with us. However, part when Paul talks about his later visit to John and the ensuing argument I have read about before.
I think he has been concerned about his legacy, yes, especially over the years since Lennon's murder. But to address this specifically: "Some of the discussions about songs like Blackbird seem to have morphed into slightly different aspects and emphasis" I assume you are referring to the civil rights angle which has attracted a lot of reflex scepticism. But it is part of the historical record that McCartney told Donovan about this, on tape, in 1968, so recent accusations of "rewriting history" are misplaced. He didn't mention this publicly prior to about 2000, indeed he didn't mention anything much at all publicly about the song before that, but it was certainly one original inspiration for the metaphor that is Blackbird.
@@strathman7501 Interesting. I am not disagreeing with you but I hve many cd's that incklude Paul chatting with Donovan over the formation of Blackbird (as he is creating it) and I still have never heard any words. I will simply put my faith in others I decide tom believe it, but it would have been lovely to hear an audio sample of when thiis statement(s) were made. It remains one of the most beautiful of songs for me.
@@triplejazzmusicisall1883 Hi Tripplejazz, you can find it on UA-cam. This is a transcript I made of the main part a while ago:
Donovan [over Paul playing Blackbird]: *"[You'll] see so many blackbirds now..."*
Paul: [stops playing]: *I sang it to Diana Ross the other night - she took offence. Not really [laughter]. But I did mean it like that originally, I remember..."*
Donovan [surprised]: *"Really?"*
Paul: *"... yeah, I'd read something in the paper about the riots and that..."*
[Paul then plays Donovan the first verse, "blackbird singing in the dead of night, take these broken wings and learn to fly", semi-speaking the lyric this time, with careful enunciation, evidently to allow Donovan to appreciate the metaphor.]
As he reaches "All your life you were only waiting" Donovan interjects with a realisation showing that he now understands:
Donovan: *"Aah. It's funny because when you were singing it just now I was thinking, what a way to colour a blackbird, you know, so many beautiful [things to lift?] a blackbird, into people's eyes... So /that's/ why."*
If you search Mary Hopkin Postcard sessions you should find it...
Talking of errors in books was surprised at the recent Phil Norman book on George.he said that to spite George there were no Harrison songs on the red and blue compilations. He also said the concert for Bangladesh was four months after they split when it was August 1971 and Paul’s announcement was in April 70
Brilliant video and really interesting.
In a recent interview with Something About The Beatles, Steven Gaines said that the book's title was pushed on him by the publisher, not his first choice.
Their first book together is my favorite Beatles read & yeah some of it is done to sell more copies but it's a more or less accurate account of their years together & i've ordered the new book & i'm looking forward to reading it.....
Great the book looks fabulous thanks for the recommendation.
Thanks for review. Got the book couple of weeks ago and put on stack of Beatle book and forgot about it. Will read and reread The love you make.
Great video,John!
I bought Peter Brown and Steven Gaines first book 'The Love You Make: An Insider's Story of the Beatles' the day it was released in 1983 and it was fraught with both editing and publishing problems, all of the copies at the book store had all of the photos in them faded from either top or bottom into just blank space, along with problems of justifying paragraphs, and words not making sense within simple sentences. I bought it anyways.
Also a lot of self-congratulatory nonsense about stories “revealed here for the first time” when in fact we’d read it before elsewhere..
This book sounds very interesting. Too bad it wasn't edited well. I like your commentary.
Hi John. Could you make a video on the Canadian band Klaatu, who in 1976, recorded their first album and it was rumoured this was really the Beatles.
If it turns out that AI/Chat GPT was used to write this book then that is unforgivable.
This looks like an interesting book, I will have to pick up a copy. Great review, and thanks for sharing.
Keith Richards wasn't trying to dictate the Rolling Stones' management and business decisions while addicted to heroin. He was just writing songs and playing shows -- and not doing so with the same amount of psychological baggage John Lennon brought with him on becoming rich and famous. But in Keith's case as well as in John's, heroin took a toll. It didn't break up the Rolling Stones, but it did do great damage to the friendship and songwriting partnership between Keith and MIck Jagger and precipitate the Rolling Stones' premature decline into essentially an oldies act after Exile on Main Street. You're underestimating how detrimental heroin is in cases like this. No one wants to think of musical heroes like these as junkies brought low by substance abuse. But that's a tragic aspect of many of their stories which we have to face. PS: We don't know that John was on heroin for "less than a year." It seems more likely that he was on and off heroin intermittently for the rest of his life. It certainly seems clear that Yoko Ono was.
Agreed! Well said🙏
@@gailg2327Thanks!
I know it doesn’t prove anything any more than what you said but when I met Yoko twice in 1998 she drank iced coffee whilst I sank several beers! I would be wary of believing some accounts of J & Y’s heroin abuse post ‘69
@@johnheaton5667 I didn't say Yoko was using heroin the day you met her, nearly 20 years after John died. I said it seems clear -- based on the historical evidence we have -- that she was still using it intermittently up to 1980. How long John himself used it is not as clear. But it's much more likely that he did it off and on well after 1969 than that that was the only time he did it. My main point though is that it's unrealistic to say that John's heroin use played no part in the breakup of the Beatles. Paul McCartney, for one, is on record as saying it played a significant role. I don't see how it could not have.
Great job
Shame Peter didn't pick a better collaborator, someone who would've done a better job drilling down on the details. Sometimes a careful approach can yield even more information than the sensationalistic straight-forward method employed by Gaines. Still it's a shame they didn't get to talk to John before his murder, as John's 1980 interviews show a real willingness to look back at his past
Hi
Got this book a few weeks ago, and I am halfway through.
Quite enjoyable, but nothing new for Beatles fans.
By the way...... Bob Wooler was the Cavern Clubs DJ.
Take care.
A book from the business/legal perspective would be interesting. I just hate even thinking about the Manilla thing.
Get a copy of You Never Give me Your Money. It’s about that exactly and a fascinating insight.
Try And in the End the Last Days of the Beatles - Ken McNab. This focuses on 1969 month by month and goes into details about how Clive Epstein sold NEMS , how Dick James sold Northern Songs when Lennon & McCartney wanted to buy it and the tussle between Klein and The Eastmans over who manged the Beatles. There ,s also some really interesting chapters covering the Get Back and Abbey Road sessions.
@@dennisosborne4368 Thanks
the yoko whitewashing will likely burst after her death, apropos to say, "infamous." Paul quote at 16:05 sounds like him projecting his own insecurities. point a finger you point 3 fingers back at you.
Thought this book was rubbish.
Every. One contradicting everyone else
Really poor effort
That's life. Recollections don't always fit neatly together.
i dont care about these type of books anymore bringing up old auguments who said this who said that the music still sounds fab thats all what matters
@roywatson8133 it's history. You can't ignore it.
@@maxwelleddison6717 as a 64 year old beatle fan i was surprised to see another book about the beatles bust up lets face weve heard or read about it many times in the past well i have who cares if yoko ono split the group up yes its history lennon and harrison have been long gone mccartney and starr are in there early 80s let it be oh and i love johns mind games album
@roywatson8133 it's history. And source material will be uncovered for years to come. Same.with any Historic event.
Transcribing from audio tapes is gruelling work - - time-consuming & tedious. It sounds from what you say that the publisher/author used software to minimise the time & tedium & expense. That would explain the incoherence. Now given that the selling point of this book, & the only reason for duplicating a purchase of the earlier book, is the verbatim extended interviews, this sloppy cheapskate transcribing that puts words in the mouths of interviewees is a dealbreaker.
I wanted to buy it for research. But if I can't confidently quote the bloodything without worrying whether interviewee actually said it, forget it. Yet more evidence that the publishing industry is going down the pan along with the rest of the culture. Could ANY profession care less any more?