Cry For A Shadow | Fab Forum | The Beatles Bible

A ‘FACETIOUS’ TITLE??

I don’t know if this has been covered, specifically, elsewhere?  There’s a lot of useful facts about this number on The Beatles Bible here:  A to Z of the songs (though, strictly speaking, I would never describe an instrumental as a ‘song’, but we let that pass for the moment!).

And I research this also, and can find no direct indication that the – eventually chosen – title ‘Cry For A Shadow’ was intentionally facetious.

 However, here agreeing with another poster on the thread ‘Cayenne’ in The Beatles Bible A to Z, I too have opined that it seems to be stretching things too far to talk about any Shadows instrumental ‘influence ‘ – of which there were a whole ‘rash’ of them as hit singles in the early ’60’s, as I have pointed out on that thread (which see, if you are interested).

If The Shadows were any kind of ‘influence’ on The Beatles at all, then it was – emotiionally at least – a negative one.  In short, as the poster on ‘Cayenne’ rightly said (and I have agreed) they hated  The Shadows, and thought of their instrumentals, as that poster rightly said, as ‘pap’. The Beatles in those early (pre-recording contract) days still thought of themselves as ‘somehwat hard’ rock ‘n’ rollers.  in fact, as we know, they NEVER, even at the absolute height of their fame, called themselves a ‘pop group’ or a ‘beat group’; they went on insisting that what they played was ‘Rock ‘N’ Roll ‘ – which raised a few eyebrows among their fans here in UK (true; the Amercians never really made a distinction, and I think many of them, even now – unbelievably, I would say – still call it all just ‘Rock ‘N’ Roll ‘, no matter how sophisticated, artistic and sublte and thought-provoking some of this music may indeed be today).  [The term ‘rock’ (originally ‘acid rock’ or ‘sour rock’ – a curious designation if ever there was one… to describe any of this, does one not agree?) this did not come in as a kind of (limp?) subsitute term, not here in Uk anyway, until around 1970 – and The Beatles’ split was then imminent in any case.]

Howbeit, it would be stretching the term ‘Rock ‘N’ Roll ‘ far beyond beleif, in my view, to call, say ‘Yesterday ‘, ‘She’s Leaving Home ‘, ‘If I Fell ‘, ‘In My Life ‘, ‘Eleanor Rigby ‘ etcetera etcetera ‘Rock ‘N’ Roll ‘.  NO.  In fact, as some musicologists have noted, during the 60s – unbeknown to their fans at the time – while composers of the classical world were rejecting conventional chordal and pitch key harmony altogether … with their own experiments in ‘tone rows’ and their ‘twelve note music’ – and all kinds of other ‘experiments’ (and this, as a reaction, to a belief among so many of them that popular music had degenerated into a ‘primitive three chord muzak’ (which was not entirely fair in any case, in my view)…  and that thus conventiional Western harmony had nothing more to offer (gulp!)) – well, unbeknown to The Beatles’ fans at the time, Paul Mc. Cartney actually studied the forms and theory – yes, as an actual sit-in class student, for a time – of this new ‘experimental’ music of the mid-twentieth century classcial composers. And he learned from it.  And it infleunced him.  But not in any simplisitc or obvious way. And there’s the point, I think.

And then, of course, as we know, George in particular – from about the time of the movie ‘Help ‘ in which Indian musicians and Indian music is very much in evidence: George in particular, of course, went through a phase of being deeply influenced by Indian music (whch is based on very different musical theory from (modern) Western music, I know – I have studied it a little too) … and even Indian philosophy and Indian religion and mysticism George in particular studied too – all this at a time when the most all but a tiny handful of people here in UK knew about any of tihs was that ‘Indian curries are very hot and give you heartburn!’  Ug!

And then there was, by about 1966, the influence upon all The Beatles – as upon so many (later in that decade emerging) 1960s pop/beat groups (even though The Beatles eschewed that term!): the influence then  of the whole ‘West Coast’ sound and ‘thing’ that was beginning to happen in the States, with iits own unique drinking in of electro-folk and other intrguing roots and of ‘progressive music’ (as it was then being called) generally.  This coincided, by perhaps good fortune also, with quantum inprovements in studio recording techniques, and George Martin, as we know, was well adept not only as a musician in his own right but also well ‘up to speed’ with all this new tech as well.   Often, he used it all most tellingly.  Lucikly for the Beatles, there were no budgetary restraints here! By some, as we know, George Martin  was being called ‘the fifth Beatle’.  Even the Beatles admitted, as early as 1965 actually, that they were now being influenced, for example, by the music of Bob Dylan (which is interesting all by itself, as he, in the earlier 1960s had been influenced, in his turn,  by them!).  ‘Hey, You’ve Got To Hide Your Love Away ‘, for example, is about as ‘elctro-folksy’ as one could ask to be satisified by, is it not? Call all this ‘just Rock ‘N’ Roll ‘? Hell, no! No way!! 

Well, this is all very interesting (is it? I hope so!) – but what has all this to do with ‘Cry For A Shadow’?  Quite a bit, in fact, as I am wanting to argue here.  The Bealtes actually NEVER were – not even in the days when they first became The Beatles and got some sort of stable line-up together (circa 1961) – not even then were they EVER reallly the ‘simple unpretentious purveyors of good ol’ Rock ‘N’ Roll ‘ that they, and especially John (who was often their spokesman in those days) kept on insisting to the world that they were.  In short: it never really did ring true. Even then there was the early Tamla infleunce, for a start. That shows clear enough in some of the (covered) material on both of their first two albums (‘Please Please Me ‘ and ‘With The Beatles ‘) – which albums they admitted were both pretty much full of typical material from their earlier stage sets.  If you want to hear a fascinating aural ‘glimpse’ into the kind of maerial that they were playing then… check out some of the surviving – but at one time almost lost – recordings of The Bealtes live performances for the BBC radio in regular shows (compered by the  then well-known DJ Brian Matthews) of 1963/early 1964 – like ‘Saturday Club’ and ‘From Us To You’. 

Even the sleeve notes to the album ‘Please Please Me ‘ – which see (written by their then press agent Tony Barrow): these too concede that the Beatles’ music was – from the time that they emereged as a cohesive beat group at all, actually  – drawn from a fusion of influences. In fact, I can recall hearing The Beatles in radio interview even then extolling the musical virtue of some of these (it would probably then have been called, very loosely, commerical soul and commerical r ‘n’ b) of the  Tamla and Atlantic/Stax artistes of those times, and The Bealtes were therein encouraging their fans to try listenting to this stuff also.  Then there were the ballads – and not just from Paul, it should be said.  ‘A Taste Of Honey ‘ was a real oldie, to which they gave new life and made rather their own.  So was ‘Till There Was You ‘.  ‘The Honeymoon Song’ (and you couldn’t eally get much more ‘romantic ballady’ and ‘revived oldie’ than that!); this was pretty much a ‘standard’ in their early, and pre-recording contract days, stage sets [even though they never recorded this on any ‘mianistream’ recording of their career – but recorded versions of this one do survive, and have since been releasesd, from their live sesssions with the BBC radio shows of 1963/early 1964 (cf. above)]. And what about self-written ballads of their own – even from this earlier period: like ‘Ask Me Why ‘, ‘PS I Love You ‘, ‘This Boy ‘, ‘Yes It Is ‘,  ‘Misery ‘, ‘There’s A Place ‘, ‘Do You Want To Know A Secret ?’.  My cousin, co-founder of my own group in those far off days: his first wife came from Liverpool.  She was not a musician herself, but she had been a real Beatles fan back in the day (apparently, she vaguely knew John Lennon , before they became world famous) and she said that, in their days at the Cavern, numbers like this were very typical of their stage sets then.

And then, further,  there was the beatnick (as it then was) and ‘arty set’ influences that they tapped into among their fans and followers in Hamburg – from even as early as 1961.  It was this ‘set’, and Stuart Sutcliffe’s then finace Astrid (who was one of that ‘set’ really)  who persuaded them all (all but Pete Best) to adopt the then current in Hamburg beatnick hairstyle that would subsquently become world famous of course. One of these such Hamburg friends, Klaus Voorman (who did the cover artwork for the album ‘Revolver ‘ in 1966) later had a musical association with the UK group Manfred Mann, during the earlier 60s too.  No- it NEVER was all just ‘pretty hard ol’ Rock ‘N’ Roll and that’s all’.  No.  No, l say again.

In fact, The Beatles had, in those early days, almost a ‘love-hate’ relationship with the whole genre of melodic guitar-led instrumentals.  There was big demand for them then – more so than at any time in popular music since.  ‘Apache’, for example, was often a ‘standard’ item in their long stints at the Cavern and in Hamburg.- as The Beatles Bible rightly says (see the thread there on ‘A to Z’ ‘Cry For A Shadow’)  I think they may even have played other Shadows instrumentals as well.  ‘Apache’ I remember well, because, in those long distant days when I and my co-fouunder cousin, both very young,  were putting a (very much Beatles inspired in those days) beat group of our own together, our lead guitarist was effectively ‘weaned’ as a musician on Shadows instrumentals like ‘Apache’ (he even had his own arrangement of it!).

‘Cry For A Shadow’ because they hated The Shadows?  A tongue-in-cheek send-up?  No way!  It’s a nice melody actually.  It’s certainly no facetious spoof. As a musician myself, I’d say there’s a lot you can do with it.  Direct ‘Shadows influence’ then?  Again, no.  Far too simplisitic.  Listen to Hank Marvin’s very telling use of the – then rather new fangled – tremolo arm; and the ‘singing’ quality of that, now vintage and legendary, stratocaster tone.  Did The Beatles (in particular, George Harrison – who when he joined The Beatles as the youngest of the four had not long before been an ‘out and out Ted’ (as one biographer put it)): did he, and they, learn anything from all this – despite their long insistence on being a ‘good ol’ bunch of rock ‘n’ rollers’?  ABSOLUTELY they did learn from this – despite any public protestations on their part to the contrary, as there may have been.  But absolutley, too – they were always gonna do it THEIR WAY!!  I guess that was what made them The Beatles; excitng and new, and no ‘carbon copy’ of anybody (though the story of how they just got in ‘through a crack in the door’ (when EMI’s A&R men were initially so unimpressed) – well, that’s another story!).

Comments??  [PS: THANK YOU to the mods for moving this post to the correct place]

Von Bontee said
Interesting thoughts. I don’t remember reading much at all about the Beatles’ appraisal of the Shadows’ music, whether they liked it or hated it, but I think they did ridicule the dance steps (and rightly so). I like “Shadow” quite a bit, catchy tune with nice guitar, and Paul’s screams provide the excitement that Pete can’t muster. 

  

Just a little – LONG! – ‘footnote’ really, Von Bontee, if I may:- I think you will find that pretty much *all* instrumental and backing groups in those days (of the early 60s) did – I would call it not so much ‘dance steps’ as synchronised stage movements – as part of what was then considered good, neat and professional showmanship.  At any rate, the guitarists did.  Obviously drummers and keyborad players (the latter; if seated at their instruments as was, and is still, usual): these could not do this really.  If you check out any vintage footage of, say The Shadows or The Tornados, from that era (say, on youtube)… you will see the three guitarists pretty much standing in a pahlanx row, and moving together.  Why, they even slant their guitars together, in perfect synch (e.g. The Shads on the ‘middle 8’  of ‘Apache’) and, what is more, the fans loved that!  Some even scream a little when they do that!  it was what they expected. 

Go back, even to the late 30s and 1940s and the Big Band and ‘Swing’ era; bands like Glenn Miller’s outift, for example – and you’ll see a whole section get up in synch and on cue, when these take a prominent passage. I recall seeing one of Miller’s former band members (I think it was ‘Trigger’ Alpert, the bass player) in a television interview years later.  He confided how Miller (who was no great soloist, but a good bandleader and good orchetrsrator) was very meticulous about the correct (onstage) *appearance* and *presentation* – just as importantly as the actual music. “Woe betide you” Alpert confided “If your tie wasn’t straight, or your hair wasn’t combed rght!  Just as important to Glenn as was the music”.  As we know, until his tragic early death, his band was massively popular in its era and on both sides of the Atlantic.  His music stlll has its deovted fans – and has had many imitators and covers. 

The legend has it that, when Brian Epstein first discovered The Beatles, he wanted to ‘ring some changes’.  ‘Sloppy Joe’ pullovers, jeans and sneakers were OUT – for onstage performances from now on.  Having little ‘in jokes’ with just the front row of the audience, or bunging in a corny old ‘jokey’ song when their equipment was playing up, or when one of the vocalsists was getting hoarse.  Taking un-announced and unscheduled breaks and leaving the stage empty for a spell: alll this was going to have to CHANGE!  The legend has it, too, that John in particular (who, as we see, was always the acknowledged spokesman in those days) was at first not happy – until he realised that Epstein did not want to change *the music*!!

According to one biopic of The Beatles, Johnn was runnning out of patience with Brian.  To be fair; Epstien worked hard and assidusouly, all through 1962, to get a national record company interested in signing them.  There were only a handful of them in those days, and of course there were no ‘indie lables’ then.  Even the ‘punk thing’ would not happen until years later. There was simply no other way for a pop/beat group of that era to make it at all, nationally I mean (never mind; INTERNATIONALLY) – Cavern Club folllowing or no; Hamburg or no.  The Beatles had undersoodd this by then, and they knew it.  They knew that they needded Brian Epstein.  They had reached a kind of ‘dead end’. Frankly; they had taken their local following – both in Liverppol and in Hamburg – as far as they could, and they knew that too.  But none of this seemd to be helping them  with any of the record compaines.  Of course, it was frustrating – as much for Epstein as it was for them! Everywhere, Epstein was encountering closed doors and closed minds.  Had history been only slightly different; then  they never would have made it at all!! Just imagine what that might have meant  – for the entire history of popular music itself! One shudders to think! I think we all know the story of how The Bealtes, as I am apt to put it, ‘only just got in through a crack in the door’ (after having been turned down everywhere).

And this was the point at which John, apparently; complained something like “You’ve put us in these monkey suits, you’ve made us all stand in a neat row, with the microphones placed just so, you’ve made us tighten up our act, and tighten up our stage set … and it isn’t working!  I’m a patient man, Mr. Epstein… but I’m runnning out of patience with you!” (but then, in the biopic anyway, he winks at Brian – and they carry on following his advice).  Just a few months later, as we know, the obscure little ‘side label’ of EMI, *Parlophone* (which, until then, mainly specialsied in comedy and novelty records – and in which able musician and producer George Martin was well frustrated!): because of Martin’s interest, in a little ‘hearsay’ he had proabably heard in the staff canteen (about this curious band from Liverpool, whom nobody much had ever even heard of – called The Beatles) – they were called back in. ‘The rest is history’.  Yes!  Cliche, but true in this case!

Synchronised movements? No.  IDENTICAL ‘Monkey suits’ and a much ‘tighter’ act and stage set? YES!  ABSOLUTELY! All this continued – all through the years of Beatlemania.  It was part of the whole recipe for success.  And all four accepted it – even John! (now that they could all see that it WAS working!!).