The Beatles: All These Years by Mark Lewisohn | Page 25 | Fab Forum | The Beatles Bible

I’ve finished the book and posted my full review on my site: http://rnrchemist.blogspot.com…..years.html

Hope you enjoy reading my review and then the book.

MOD NOTE: Should have done this earlier, only just struck me reading Joe’s warning on his. SPOILER ALERT! mja6758

Please remember, there is also the spoiler thread. I’m not sure you’ve mentioned your review there, DrBeatle

walrusgumboot said
DrBeatle- hope I enjoy reading the book as much as reading your review. Excellent!

Aw, thanks for the kind words! I’m sure you will enjoy the book, it was literally one of those “can’t put it down” kind of books, and not just because it’s about the Beatles. I cannot WAIT for volumes 2 and 3.

Thank you for the kind words . I think Joe will agree with me that the book exceeded expectations. It was even better than I expected, and I don’t think anyone here, there, or anywhere ( ) will be disappointed with it.

I don’t think you’ll be disappointed! I fully intend to read the entire thing again once I get the deluxe, that’s how much I enjoyed it.

There was a lot of talk on the Steve Hoffman forums that the book is pro-Lennon and anti-Paul (and Joe can chime in on this since he posts over there) but I didn’t find that to be the case, I found it to be very balanced. It just can’t be denied that John was the “leader of the gang” in the early days, the one they all looked up to (and maybe even slightly feared crossing), and Paul did rub some people the wrong way (Stu in particular). However, if anyone comes out looking worse than before, I say it’s Pete, although I don’t feel bad about this. I think it’s been UNDERSTATED how shitty a drummer and personality he was during his time in the Beatles. Especially as I’ve been listening to Pete-era bootlegs…man, was he lousy!

Joe said

DrBeatle said
There was a lot of talk on the Steve Hoffman forums that the book is pro-Lennon and anti-Paul (and Joe can chime in on this since he posts over there) but I didn’t find that to be the case, I found it to be very balanced. It just can’t be denied that John was the “leader of the gang” in the early days, the one they all looked up to (and maybe even slightly feared crossing), and Paul did rub some people the wrong way (Stu in particular). However, if anyone comes out looking worse than before, I say it’s Pete, although I don’t feel bad about this. I think it’s been UNDERSTATED how shitty a drummer and personality he was during his time in the Beatles. Especially as I’ve been listening to Pete-era bootlegs…man, was he lousy!

The talk on SH was really by someone who worried that it would be too pro/anti L/M, but they hadn’t actually seen the book. I think the worry was caused by the Mojo review. I didn’t really detect any bias – Lewisohn’s too good at his job for that. If someone was behaving badly or doing something particularly good, it’d get mentioned regardless of who it was.

Nice review btw.

Thanks, Joe. Likewise…I really enjoyed reading yours.

I agree, I think the Mojo review was typical in taking a dump on Paul and worshipping John, but Lewisohn himself in the book didn’t do that. And as much a Paul fan as I am, I can readily admit and accept he probably was a pain in the ass to many people in those days, as was John, George, all of them. It’s just a fact and Lewisohn is honest and impartial. To compare him to Philip Norman, for example, as some on there have done, is ludicrous.