Log In
Register
5.39am
17 October 2013
Offline
Oh Bongo………BONGO….Thou know not what thou hast done??
The Adversary…..The Slanderer…SATANHIMSELF has come…….
We need some Help …….And bloody quick!!
7.01am
Moderators
Members
Reviewers
20 August 2013
Offline I’m standing here contemplating my John Lennon calendar while thinking about this question. This month’s picture is of John wearing his New York City t-shirt. John had moved on from The Beatles. As much as I love Paul, Ringo, and George, I’m siding with John on this one. He never got to say, “Yes, release these two songs as Beatles tracks.” The songs are interestng exercises in “what if” or “what might have been”, but not canon.
FWIW, I don’t consider Love as part of the canon…or the new 1+ coming out either. They are add-ons.
Can buy Joe love! Amazon | iTunes
Check here for "how do I do this" guide to the forum. 
(2017) 
(2018)
7.23am
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline Zig said
A cool canon page I stumbled across. Sorry if it’s been posted before.
Interesting that in the linked article the author writes
The official Beatles’ canon covers all songs the Beatles recorded and authorized for publication in their years as a performing group. In those years between 1962 and 1970 the Beatles released 219 songs or song variants, which are listed below in order of appearance…
‘Free As A Bird ‘ and ‘Real Love ‘ fall outwith that period of time so going by his own argument they’re not part of the main canon.
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
Ahhh Girl"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
7.55am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline
The interesting thing to note about that page is not really the slipping onto the end of the list of Free As A Bird and Real Love , but how their contradictory presence is wholly and totally ignored. Read the page properly, and they aren’t actually included, rather just listed.
How can I say they’re not included? They’re clearly there at the end!
Read the title and subtitle:
The official Beatles’ canon
A list of all 212 Beatles’ songs and covers officially released on record between 1962 and 1970
Read the intro paragraph:
The official Beatles’ canon covers all songs the Beatles recorded and authorized for publication in their years as a performing group. In those years between 1962 and 1970 the Beatles released 219 songs or song variants, which are listed below in order of appearance. In this list there are 24 covers (C), and 1 traditional (T), leaving us with up to 194 released recordings of original Beatles’ songs. Among those 194 we find 9 song variations and 1 song fragment. Of those 10 performances most authors of Beatles’ books and commentaries discard 7 tracks as just variants or invalid members of the Beatles’ songbook, leaving us with exactly 187 canonical Beatles’ originals, 24 covers and 1 traditional: a total of 212 songs.
Both totally ignore the presence of FaaB and RL clinging on to the bottom of the list.
If they are properly included in this list of the canon, why doesn’t it add up to 214? The total is 212 without them.
His definition of the canon, and his list (“219 songs or song variants”) is identical to both mine and mmm’s.
"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
8.57am
17 October 2013
Offline Remind me of the title of this thread……..’ Should “Free As A Bird ” and “Real Love ” count as canon Beatles Songs?”
The answer simply put is yes………You and other’s say they are not. I and others say that they should be.
The following people thank Wigwam for this post:
trcanberra9.10am
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline It depends on your definition of “canon”.
Going back to what i post in #4 of the thread the generally accepted definition of the Beatles canon is
all the tracks released (excluding the Christmas Messages) between October 1962 and May 1970, nothing after. Everything after (The Anthology Series, Love, BBC volumes, LIBN) are not part of that and should remain separate. Yes its the Beatles but none of it is required by fans who want to own all the original material the Beatles put out in the 60’s (and 1970). [Ron] will be able to explain it in a better way.
It can also be referred to as the “core canon”.
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
9.21am
28 March 2014
Offline Ahhh Girl said
I’m standing here contemplating my John Lennon calendar while thinking about this question. He never got to say, “Yes, release these two songs as Beatles tracks.” The songs are interestng exercises in “what if” or “what might have been”, but not canon.
John didn’t get to have his say on some of the singles like his B side I Am The Walrus , that lost out to the A side Hello Goodbye . He insisted it be the A side, but he never got to say yes. At this point it was Paul & George Martin who got to say yes.
P.S. Joko said yes! 
BEATLES Music gives me Eargasms! 
9.27am
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline Bongo said
Ahhh Girl said
I’m standing here contemplating my John Lennon calendar while thinking about this question. He never got to say, “Yes, release these two songs as Beatles tracks.” The songs are interestng exercises in “what if” or “what might have been”, but not canon.
John didn’t get to have his say on some of the singles like his B side I Am The Walrus , that lost out to the A side Hello Goodbye . He insisted it be the A side, but he never got to say yes. At this point it was Paul & George Martin who got to say yes.
Lots of what ifs…..
If he insisted on it then he got his say. He didnt get his way but he got the opportunity to voice his opinion.
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
Ahhh Girl"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
12.53pm
Reviewers
29 August 2013
Offline “Going back to what i post in #4 of the thread the generally accepted definition of the Beatles canon is “
Round and round.
I don’t agree that this is “generally accepted “.
These songs are, for me, just like Queen’s “The Miracle” album which are “generally accepted” as part of their canon. Each of the naysayers here has their own arbitrary definition of the canon – fair enough – but that doesn’t give their definition the validity many seem to be claiming.
The following people thank trcanberra for this post:
Wigwam==> trcanberra and hongkonglady - Together even when not (married for those not in the know!) <==
3.18pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline trcanberra said
“Going back to what i post in #4 of the thread the generally accepted definition of the Beatles canon is “Round and round.
I don’t agree that this is “generally accepted “.
These songs are, for me, just like Queen’s “The Miracle” album which are “generally accepted” as part of their canon. Each of the naysayers here has their own arbitrary definition of the canon – fair enough – but that doesn’t give their definition the validity many seem to be claiming.
Yip.
“Life comes and life goes and as we go round and round in circles.”
You might not agree that its generally accepted but it kind of is. There isn’t much we can do about that.
Why wouldn’t Queen’s ‘The Miracle’ not be canon?
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
3.54pm
Reviewers
29 August 2013
Offline “You might not agree that its generally accepted but it kind of is. There isn’t much we can do about that.”
Except disagree with the statement in italics. There – done!
The following people thank trcanberra for this post:
Zig==> trcanberra and hongkonglady - Together even when not (married for those not in the know!) <==
4.23pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline trcanberra said
“You might not agree that its generally accepted but it kind of is. There isn’t much we can do about that.”Except disagree with the statement in italics. There – done!
Doesnt change it tho.
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
5.27pm
28 July 2015
Offline
Curious because I’ve been going through this thread for a bit, what is a canon Beatles song? Is it like a song that was released and recorded by the group?
Just curious….
6.10pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline A canon song is any Beatles song officially commercially released between ‘Love Me Do ‘ in October 1962 and the ‘Let It Be ‘ album in May 1970 (ie all the tracks found in the 2009 stereo box).
However it is argued that the definition should be expanded to either also include ‘Free As A Bird ‘ and ‘Real Love ‘ and/or even all tracks recorded by the Beatles for the BBC and/or all the outtakes, mixes, live performances, Christmas messages released (and in some cases unreleased).
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
trcanberra, natureaker"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
6.17pm
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline The term “canon”, @natureaker, or “canonical” dates back to early history of the Christian church. In the early days of the church, there were many Christian texts, often wildly at odds with each other. Various leaders of different branches of the church got together to agree upon a “set text” of the most “authoritative works”. Thus the New Testament was born.
In the creative arts, it has commonly been regarded as the central body of an artist’s work which adhere to a common set of rules. For many of us, the “canon” of The Beatles is the body of work they officially released on Parlophone/Capitol/Apple between October 1962 and May 1970, whilst they were an ongoing and active partnership.
There are others who believe that almost anything released under the name The Beatles should be regarded as “canon”.
We consider that the “canon” was wrote in stone with the 1987 CD releases, that those releases defined their career, and while things like the BBC recordings and the Anthology releases are nice additions to have, they are additions to the “core” catalogue, the “canon”.
The biggest disagreements in this area is whether these two recordings of Paul, George and Ringo overdubbing Lennon should count as part of their central body of work or nice additions that are done a disservice by comparing them to those songs the four of them chose to release while they were a band.
(Hope you had a grate berkdave!)
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
trcanberra, natureaker"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
7.35pm
Reviewers
29 August 2013
Offline meanmistermustard said
trcanberra said
“You might not agree that its generally accepted but it kind of is. There isn’t much we can do about that.”Except disagree with the statement in italics. There – done!
Doesnt change it tho.
Very unlikely to change entrenched opinion.
==> trcanberra and hongkonglady - Together even when not (married for those not in the know!) <==
7.37pm
Reviewers
29 August 2013
Offline meanmistermustard said
A canon song is any Beatles song officially commercially released between ‘Love Me Do ‘ in October 1962 and the ‘Let It Be ‘ album in May 1970 (ie all the tracks found in the 2009 stereo box).However it is argued that the definition should be expanded to either also include ‘Free As A Bird ‘ and ‘Real Love ‘ and/or even all tracks recorded by the Beatles for the BBC and/or all the outtakes, mixes, live performances, Christmas messages released (and in some cases unreleased).
For me it’s anything released on their official label with their name on it.
The following people thank trcanberra for this post:
Mademoiselle Kitty >^..^<==> trcanberra and hongkonglady - Together even when not (married for those not in the know!) <==
8.55pm
17 October 2013
Offline It’s correct and apt that in his reply to you natureaker……Nasty explains that the word ‘canon’ has a religious origin. He states:
“The term “canon”, @natureaker, or “canonical” dates back to early history of the Christian church. In the early days of the church, there were many Christian texts, often wildly at odds with each other. Various leaders of different branches of the church got together to agree upon a “set text” of the most “authoritative works”. Thus the New Testament was born.”
You can see I hope the attractiveness of the word ‘canon’ to the pedant and to those accustomed, (like the devoutly religious) to having their thoughts tethered by words.
The Beatles’ canon, Nasty states, was carved forever in tablets of stone ‘in 1987’ and nothing will ever change that………Until someone comes alongs and smashes the stones to pieces……..The inclusions of both songs on another Beatles’ album is already chipping away.
It’s helpful here to see Mean and Nasty as The Vatican trapped in time and accepted liturgical texts………And imagine Canberra, and Zig…and Bongo as……. Copernicus, Galileo, and Darwin.
Galileo stated the Earth went round the Sun and not as the Vatican would have it, the Sun orbited the Earth. Galileo trusted his own observations over religious text and dogma and was tried in 1633 for herasy. He was convicted and put under house-arrest for the rest of his life.
The Vatican apologised in 2000…Better late than never I suppose. But crucially here it proves opinion is not set in stone.
Darwin’s work on evolution was resisted until the 1950s and even to this day, constrained by words and biblical texts the Vatican only grudgingly accepts a theistic view of evolution.
You’re young…… time is on you side natureaker……..
The 2 songs are not, at present in the canon……..But the question asks your opinion as to whether they should be?
Decide for yourself whether you’re going to grow-up as Free As A Bird and decide upon your personal canon playlist driven not by any constraint imposed by a current interpretation of a mere word …….but by being driven by a real love of the Beatles’ music.
The following people thank Wigwam for this post:
trcanberra9.00pm
Reviewers
29 August 2013
Offline I’ve always had a soft spot for Copernicus 🙂
and trc
==> trcanberra and hongkonglady - Together even when not (married for those not in the know!) <==
9.36pm
Moderators
Members
Reviewers
20 August 2013
Offline My answer to the question is still, “No they *shouldn’t*.” They are add-ons, curosities, footnotes…not the core/the main text.
Can buy Joe love! Amazon | iTunes
Check here for "how do I do this" guide to the forum. (2017) (2018)
1 Guest(s)