#from philip norman's 'shout!' | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

torchlitinthedesert · 2 months

Text

Kenneth Tynan and the Beatles

Shout out to @mmgth for noticing Beatle mentions in the letters of Kenneth Tynan - including working with John Lennon, Paul's 1960s reputation, and glimpses of the breakup. (Alas, no George or Ringo.)

Tynan was a drama critic and later worked with Laurence Olivier at Britain's National Theatre. Philip Norman calls him "the most rigorous cultural commentator of his age": he championed working class plays in the 1950s, supported progressive art (and was widely believed to be the first person to say "fuck" on British television). So he's an interesting perspective: well connected, arty, eager for cultural change, but from an older generation, and outside the immediate rock/pop world.

The first mention is 1966, when Tynan is already working at the National Theatre.

28 September 1966

Dear Mr McCartney,

Playing 'Eleanor Rigby' last night for about the 500th time, I decided to write and tell you how terribly sad I was to hear that you had decided not to do As You Like It for us. There are four or five tracks on 'Revolver' that are as memorable as any English songs of this century - and the maddening thing is that they are all in exactly the right mood for As You like It. Apart from 'E. Rigby' I am thinking particularly of 'For No One' and 'Here, There and Everywhere'. (Incidentally, 'Tomorrow Never Knows' is the best musical evocation of L.S.D. I have ever heard).

To come to the point: won't you reconsider? John Dexter [theatre director] doesn't know I'm writing this - it's pure impulse on the part of a fan. We don't need you as a gimmick because we don't need publicity: we need you simply because you are the best composer of that kind of song in England. If Purcell were alive, we would probably ask him, but it would be a close thing. Anyway, forgive me for being a pest, but do please think it over."

Paul replied that he couldn't do the music because, hilariously, "I don't really like words by Shakespeare" - he sat waiting for a "clear light" but nothing happened. He ended, "Maybe I could write the National Theatre Stomp sometime! Or the ballad of Larry O."

It's interesting that Tynan approaches Paul individually - because they had theatre connections in common? Or did Tynan assume that John wrote the words and Paul the music, so Paul's the guy to ask for settings of Shakespeare lyrics? (Though he does correctly identify Paul songs in his letter, plus the musical setting of Tomorrow Never Knows, so he might just be asking because he's a Paul girl. He also wants Paul to know that he's cool and hip and has done acid.)

Tynan definitely is a Paul girl. On 7 November that year, he pitched possible articles (I think for Playboy). He offers articles on the War Crimes Tribunal (set up by Bertrand Russell on the US in Vietnam), an interview with Marlene Dietrich, or:

"Interview with Paul McCartney - to me, by far the most interesting of the Beatles, and certainly the musical genius of the group."

It's a reminder of how drastically Paul's reputation changed, between cultural commentators of the 1960s and post-breakup.

Tynan didn't get his Paul interview, but he worked twice with John.

On 5 February 1968, he's sorting out practical details for the National Theatre's company manager about about the stage adapation of John's book In His Own Write (which had already had a preview performance in 1967). It's a very Beatle-y affair:

Victor Spinetti and John Lennon will need the services of George Martin, the Beatles A & R man to prepare a sound tape to accompany the Lennon play. Martin did this tape as a favour for the Sunday night production, but something more elaborate will be required when the show enters the rep, and I feel he should be approached on a professional basis as Sound Consultant, or some similar title. I have written to him to find out if he is ready to help and will let you know as soon as he replies.

...John Lennon says that as far as his own contract is concerned, we should deal directly with him at NEMS rather than his publisher.

So John prefers to work within the Beatle structure: George Martin, Victor Spinetti, plus NEMS, rather than pursuing closer ties with his book publisher.

On 16 April 1968, Tynan writes to John about his ideas for a wanking sketch.

Dear John L,

Welcome back. You know that idea of yours for my erotic revue - the masturbation contest? Could you possibly be bothered to jot it down on paper? I am trying to get the whole script in written form as soon as possible.

John's reply is very John:

"you know the idea, four fellows wanking - giving each other images - descriptions - it should be ad-libbed anyway - they should even really wank which would be great..."

Oh John.

Tynan still wanted to interview Paul - and was noticing changes in Beatle dynamics. On 3 September 1968, Tynan pitched another feature on Paul, this time for the New Yorker:

In addition to pieces on theatre, I'd love to try my hand at a profile (I remember long ago we vaguely discussed Paul McCartney though John Lennon is rather more accessible)...

Accessible because Tynan had already worked with him, or because John was already flexing his PR muscles? The New Yorker was interested, because Tynan follows up on 14 October 1968:

4. A few days in the life of Paul McCartney (which we agreed should come at the end of the series of articles, because of the current overexposure of the Beatles.)

Why does he see the Beatles as "overexposed" in autumn 1968, when he hadn't in 1966? Was it the Apple launch? The JohnandYoko press campaign? The cumulative impact of a lot of Beatle news?

Tynan was still trying on 17 September 1969:

...I'd like to go on to either Mr Pinter [playwright Harold Pinter] or Paul McCartney... I incline towards McCartney who has isolated himself more and more in the past from the other Beatles and indeed from the public: he seems to have reached an impasse that might be worth exploring. On the other hand Pinter is a much closer friend and would be more accessible to intimate scrutiny."

I'm fascinated by this - that Paul's isolation was visible to those outside the Beatles circle (the letter is dated three days before the meeting of 20 September 1969, where John said he wanted a divorce).

But Tynan was right about Paul being inaccessible. On 5 January 1970:

I'm saddened to have to tell you that Paul McCartney doesn't want to be written about at the moment - at least, not by me. I gather that for some time now the Beatles have been moving more and more in separate directions. Paul went to a recording session for a new single last Sunday which was apparently the first Beatles activity in which he'd engaged for nearly nine months. He doesn't know quite where his future lies, and above all he doesn't want to be under observation while he decides.

So while Paul "doesn't want to be under observation", he's surprisingly open about the breakup - less blunt than "the Beatle thing is over", which he told Life in November 1969, but still frank.

Trying to persuade Paul to open up to "intimate scrutiny" in 1969 does suggest another reason why 1970s interviewers adored John. Tynan works for an older, more established press, but he's offering the kind of profile John would make his own - discussing his inner life and personal/artistic conflicts with cultural commentator who respects him as an artist. And Paul can't run away fast enough. As a journalist, you'd absolutely go for the guy who makes himself accessible and is eager to bare his soul, over Mr Doesn't Want To Be Written About At The Moment.

#kenneth tynan #the breakup #john lennon #paul mccartney #george martin #victor spinetti #oh! calcutta #john's pr genius is so underrated #tag for mine or my addition

64 notes · View notes

gardenschedule · 5 months

Text

Perceptions of Paul as calculating & John's paranoia

“McCartney’s mistake, which he now admits, was to seem invulnerable. […] And yet, he says, the contrast between himself and Lennon, so assiduously cultivated by journalists, was a fabrication. “I wasn’t brilliant at school. I was trouble, just like John. I got caned practically every day, and the only exam I ever passed was Spanish. John and I weren’t black and white, although people took John, for all his aggression, to be the good guy, because he showed his warts. I’ve only just realized, after all this time, that people like to see warts. It makes them sympathetic. I’d always though that, in order to be liked, you had to be unwarty.””

Living with The Beatles’ legacy, the smears that Lennon left behind… and the battle to win my babies back, The Times Newspaper, Monday January 4, 1982.

Paul was the easiest to talk to. He had such energy and such keenness and, unlike John, enjoyed being liked, at least most of the time. I don't see this as a criticism; John himself could be very cruel about Paul's puppy dog eagerness to please. The irony was, and still is, that John's awfulness to people, his rudeness and cruelty, made people like him more, whereas Paul's genuine niceness made many people suspicious, accusing him of being calculating. Paul does look ahead, seeing what might happen, working out the effect of certain actions, but he often ends up tying himself in knots, not necessarily getting what he thought he wanted. I think there is some insecurity in Paul's nature, which makes him try so hard, work so hard. It also means he can be easily hurt by criticism, which was something that just washed over John.

Hunter Davies, Western Mail: The Beatles. (April 9th, 2004)

Even Paul’s immaculate manners could not thaw her. ‘Oh, yes, he was well-mannered–too well-mannered. He was what we call in Liverpool “talking posh” and I thought he was taking the mickey out of me. I thought “He’s a snake-charmer all right,” John’s little friend, Mr Charming. I wasn’t falling for it. After he’d gone, I said to John, “What are you doing with him? He’s younger than you… and he’s from Speke!”’ After that, when Paul appeared, she would always tell John sarcastically that his ‘little friend’ was here. ‘I used to tease John by saying “chalk and cheese”, meaning how different they were,’ she remembered, ‘and John would start hurling himself around the room like a wild dervish shouting “Chalkandcheese! Chalkandcheese!” with this stupid grin on his face.’

Philip Norman, Paul McCartney: The Life. (2016)

“He always suspected me. He accused me of scheming to buy over Northern Songs without telling him. I was thinking of something to invest in, and Peter Brown said what about Northern Songs, invest in yourself, so I bought a few shares, about 1,000 I think. John went mad, suspecting some plot. Then he bought some himself. He was always thinking I was cunning and devious. That’s my reputation, someone who’s charming, but a clever lad. “It happened the other day at Ringo’s wedding. I was saying to Cilia [Black] that I liked Bobby [her husband]. That’s all I said. Bobby’s a nice bloke. Ah, but what do you REALLY think Paul? You don’t mean that, do you, you’re getting at something? I was being absolutely straight. But she couldn’t believe it. No one ever does. They think I’m calculating all the time.

Paul and Hunter Davies, 1981

In the wake of his death you didn’t tour for most of the ‘80s. People suggested that you were scared to go on the road. Was that true? No. People speculate about anything. They always credit me with motives I haven’t even dreamed of. It’s interesting, the way they sort of perceive my life and analyse it for me. In that case, I never thought about touring much. People used to say, “Oh, it’s 10 years since you’ve toured.” I’d go, “Is it? Y’know, I’m not counting.” That’s all that was, really. I don’t know why. Maybe I didn’t fancy it.

The Q Interview, 2007

Astrid in Germany was always a bit suspicious of Paul at first, though his relationship with Stu was also bound up in this. 'It used to frighten me that someone could be so nice all the time. Which is silly. It's ridiculous to feel at home with nasty people, just because you feel that at least you know where you are with them. It's silly to be wary of nice people.'

The Beatles (Updated Edition) (Hunter Davies)

Paul is the easiest to get to know for an outsider, but in the end he is the hardest to get to know. There is a feeling that he is holding things back, that he is one jump ahead, aware of the impression he is giving. He is self-conscious, which the others are not. John doesn't care, either way, what people think. Ringo is too adult to think about such things, and George in many ways isn't conscious. He is above it all.

The Beatles (Updated Edition) (Hunter Davies)

Paul today is still the public Beatle, giving interviews at fairly regular intervals, being open and honest about himself and his past, his worries and his pleasures. Naturally, as ever, there are people who suspect his motives, putting him down for being too charming. Paul may be a bit of an actor, acting the part of Paul McCartney, the charming superstar, still loved by every mum, which can make him sound rather prissy at times, but I believe he does tell the truth about himself.

The Beatles (Updated Edition) (Hunter Davies)

“My problem is to me, I come over as this very together guy, always got his finger on top of everything: the man with no problems. School – a doddle, got all the exams. This is the sort of image of me. Actually, I had murder getting through exams, like I was saying about being on tour during my GCEs. I was like the kid who was getting the cane. Just like John was, but he [Phillip Norman] makes me the very shrewd, always-going-to-succeed guy, and John is the kind of cute, working-class hero. In actual fact though, John was just as shrewd and ambitious as I was. What does me in is he adds to this image I’ve got; I resent that, because I know I’m not that, and I know I’ve never been that.

Paul McCartney’s thoughts from 1983 on Phillip Norman’s ‘Shout!’

The funny thing is, when Apple [started], everything was laid out on the table, it’s like a Monopoly game. We saw who had what. I suddenly had more Northern Song shares than anybody, and it was like, oops, sorry. John was like, “You bastard, you’ve been buying behind my back.” John saw everything like a Harold Robbins movie, you know, which it was. He’s not incorrect. I couldn’t get over the fact that we were really involved in all this. I think to this day, he’ll not understand. I don’t think he would accept right now, my naïveté in it. I think he still suspects me of trying to take over Apple. He still suspects that when I offered the Eastmans as [managers] instead of Allen Klein, he naturally assumed that I would be taken care of better than the others, and that the Eastmans could never be moral enough to be equal in their judgment and do the Beatles’ thing rather than Paul’s thing. I think they still suspect to this day.

The point I was trying to illustrate is that it wasn’t so much John being a bastard as it was his being suspicious towards me, always being suspicious towards me. There was Northern Song shares. And I swear on any holy book you want, I know he won’t believe it, but I know for sure that I didn’t buy them with the view to— If I was really trying to do it, I could have bought an awful lot more. So it does hurt a little bit that there’s someone who still thinks, like, I’m out to get them, or that I always was. That’s one of the nice things about it— It’s a pity [I never said to John, “Fuck off, I’m not trying to do it”—and never was]. But he knows I was kind of— We were behind the scenes, and we did a few little [things] that we had to do, and our ambitions, and it was never a kind of terrifying skeletons in the closet. It was always just normal—but, uh, they …

All You Need Is Love – Peter Brown & Steven Gaines

SG: Were the other Beatles anti-Linda? PMcC: Uh, yeah. I should think so. Like we were anti-Yoko. But you know John and Yoko, you can see it now, the way to get their friendship is to do everything the way they require it. To do anything else is how to not get their friendship. This is still how it is with John and Yoko. I know that if I absolutely lie down on the ground and just do everything like they say and laugh at all their jokes and don’t expect my jokes to ever get laughed at, and don’t expect any of my opinions ever to carry any weight whatsoever, if I’m willing to do all that, then we can be friends. But if I have an opinion that differs from theirs, then I’m a sort of an enemy. And naturally, paint myself a villain with a big mustache on, because to the ends of the earth, that’s how they both see me. They’re very suspicious people [John and Yoko], and one of the things that hurt me out of the whole affair, was that we’d come all that way together, and out of either a fault in my character, or out of lack of understanding in their character, I’d still never managed to impress upon them that I wasn’t trying to screw them. I don’t think that I have to this day.

All You Need Is Love – Peter Brown & Steven Gaines

I was never out to screw him, never. He could be a maneuvering swine, which no one ever realized. Now since the death he’s became Martin Luther Lennon. But that really wasn’t him either. He wasn’t some sort of holy saint. He was still really a debunker. “For ten years together he took my songs apart. He was paranoiac about my songs. We have great screaming sessions about them.

Paul and Hunter Davies, 1981

SALEWICZ: Oh, he was presumably very paranoid. PAUL: I think so. I mean, he warned me off Yoko once. You know, “Look, this is my chick!” ’Cause he knew my reputation. I mean, we knew each other rather well. And um, I felt… I just said, “Yeah, no problem.” But I did sort of feel he ought to have known I wouldn’t, but. You know, he was going through “I’m just a jealous guy”. He was a paranoid guy. And he was into drugs. Heavy.

September, 1986 (MPL Communications, London)

Miles says, “I think Jane was always a bit irritated by John. Because he was so acerbic and difficult to get on with. And paranoid. He didn’t make life easy. I suppose it’s a sort of rapier wit, but it was usually just plain ordinary rudeness. There was nothing special about it.”

Paul McCartney profile for FAME Magazine (March 1990)

“They [Lennon & McCartney] saw each other again in 1977. The Lennons and McCartneys ate dinner together at Le Cirque, Paul’s favourite French restaurant in New York. John regretted going; it was a loathsome night. Paul and Linda blathered on and on about how perfect their lives were, how they had everything they’d ever wanted, and how they were as happy as they’d ever been. Something very paranoid suddenly occurred to John. Maybe Lorraine Boyle was spying on him for the McCartneys! He woke up the next morning still feeling disturbed; he consulted the Oracle. Swan assured him that Paul and Linda were frustrated and unsatisfied. Their marriage was in trouble, he said, predicting it would break up within the year. Lately Swan’s visions had been astonishingly accurate. Relieved, John began composing a song—a little ditty, really, that would never be released—in praise of the Oracle’s powers. But he still couldn’t understand why Paul and Linda had been together for as long as they had. There appeared to be a psychic connection between John and Paul. Every time McCartney was in town, John would hear Paul’s music in his head.”

Robert Rosen, Nowhere Man: The Final Days of John Lennon, (2000)

JOHN: […..] And he’s (Jagger) goin’ on about “he never calls. Do you think he ever calls? He never calls me. And he keeps changing his phone number all the time… And he’s hiding behind the kid.” I was hurt by it! You know… The fact that… A, I never call anybody. It’s not pride, it’s just that I never, ever have. REPORTER: Why? JOHN: I never call the other Beatles, I never call anybody. They always call me. REPORTER: Why? JOHN: Cos I’m self-involved! I’m paranoid, too. I don’t like phones… There’s nobody on this earth ever got a call from me that isn’t related, probably. Or a very old friend…

Sept 1980 – John

“Yoko was an extremist and was even more intense than John taking any idea or comment of his to the limit. If, for example, he complained about any of his fellow Beatles she would hint that that Beatle had always been an enemy implying that John should never deal with that person again. Her extreme positions fascinated John and help him take his mind off himself but when she became self-involved and paranoid herself -her paranoia usually dealt with her career, her fame and the fact that even though she had always been famous everyone conspired to keep her from getting even more famous- he had no place to turn. His insecurity about his solo career, his childhood, his relationships with the other Beatles, the way the public perceived Yoko overwhelmed him and he became more and more involved with drugs.”

May Pang, Loving John (1984)

John was lucky. He got all his hurt out. I’m a different sort of a personality. There’s still a lot inside me that’s trying to work it out. And that’s why it’s good to see that wedding-funeral bit, because I started to think, ‘Wait a minute, this is someone who’s going over the top. This is paranoia manifesting itself.’ And so my feeling is just like it was at the time, which is like, He’s my buddy, I don’t really want to do anything to hurt him, or his memory, or anything. I don’t want to hurt Yoko. But, at the same time, it doesn’t mean that I understand what went down.

Paul McCartney: An Innocent Man? (October, 1986)

Some three year later, during the making of Abbey Road, Lennon installed a twin bed in the studio so that Yoko, recuperating from a car crash, could survey proceedings and pass comment though a mike he had suspended over her. The other Beatles positioned themselves around the room as best they could. Yoko would later tell Paul that if, for any reason, he’d seemed to be standing too close to her, all hell would break loose when John got her home. Lennon, she said, was ‘very paranoid’ like that.

McCartney by Chris Sandford

But we were actually quite supportive. Not supportive enough, you know; it would have been nice to have been really supportive because then we could look back and say, “Weren’t we really terrific?” But looking back on it, I think we were okay. We were never really that mean to them. But I think a lot of the time John suspected meanness where it wasn’t really there.

Paul McCartney, interview w/ Chris Salewicz for Musician: Tug of war – Paul McCartney wants to lay his demons to rest. (October, 1986)

#the beatles #paul mccartney #john lennon #mclennon #i wonder how much of their issues were due to john suspecting paul of things that just weren't true #then again maybe paul is secretly an evil mastermind #can't put it past him

91 notes · View notes

harrisonarchive · 3 months

Note

Hello! Am I correct in understanding that there was no fight between John and George on the day George left the Beatles? They sort of confirmed this in the film, and everyone says that everything was calm, except George Martin, who wasn’t even in the studio at that moment..

Hi! From George to Ringo, to anyone speaking about the alleged fight, everyone says that nothing aggressive happened; the only mention of an actual physical altercation is, as far as I know, in a book by Philip Norman, and well, I'll refer to George's opinion on that particular author. Here's Mal's insight, as published in The Beatles Monthly at the time:

“If you read certain national newspapers at the time you may well have believed a load of rubbish about George having a punch-up with the others. It wasn’t like that at all. There WASN’T a fight, physical or verbal. There WEREN’T any tempers or shouting. I just couldn’t believe it when I read the press afterwards. So, to set the record straight, here’s the truth behind George’s ‘walk out’ and the canceling of the TV Special. Of the four Paul was the most enthusiastic all along about doing the ‘live’ show. John would have gladly taken the whole production unit to Africa or America to find the right location. John and Ringo had mixed feelings about the plan, agreeing with Paul on a lot of the ideas but feeling this might not be the best way of making a 1969 Beatles TV film. George wasn’t keen at all. Ever since the last Beatles tour of America in the summer of 1966 he has considered ‘one night stands’ a thing of the past, a backward step for the group he believes should concentrate on perfecting recordings rather than churning out the same program of too-familiar songs on stages here and abroad. So on Friday at Twickenham George stated his case. Singing and playing together would always be fine with him and the last thing he was suggesting was any break-up of The Beatles. So that day, January 10, George didn’t want to stay at Twickenham rehearsing for a show he couldn’t believe in. We were all having lunch when George came over and said very quietly that he was going home. With that he went off, climbed into his car and headed for Esher. Later he told a bunch of press people: ‘Look, we’re old enough and wise enough to be past all this punching-up rubbish. We’ve been through everything together for so long we don’t need that sort of row. We discuss things and finish up agreeing or disagreeing and that’s the finish of it.’ So George’s departure made it impossible to continue with the original project. If there HAD been a real row the others might have gone ahead. But Beatles don’t work like that. If all four are not united on anything it’s dropped in favor of an alternative that everyone likes and wants to be enthusiastic about.” - Mal Evans, The Beatles Monthly, March 1969

For a meticulously detailed look at the Get Back sessions in general, and all that transpired on January 10, 1969 (as far as the public knows) specifically, I'd highly recommend the excellent They May Be Parted.

Thank you for asking; and I hope this sheds some light on the subject.

#George Harrison #John Lennon #Ringo Starr #Paul McCartney #Mal Evans #The Beatles #Get Back #asks #anonymous asks #fits queue like a glove

47 notes · View notes

menlove · 2 months

Note

I suspect that after paul's passing, the beatles writers will become more bold in their analysis of johnandpaul

Like even philip norman went from saying in shout! mess of a book that john and paul were not close and strictly professional -> to saying that they were more to each than friends and brothers (lovers, say it out-loud). but ofc had to add the caveat that john's attraction was one-sided to avoid libel hit and drama in general

But I wouldn't be surprised if we eventually learn that they were lovers, even if paul never tells himself

oh when paul dies it's going to be a MESS. like i have no doubt if anything happened it WILL wind up coming out after his death. and also the discourse will beeeeee insane like everyone and their brother will buckle down 1000x on "it's disrespectful to speculate!" after he's gone like oh brother! dreading it honestly it's gonna be a disaster of epic proportions

also can't find it so if anyone knows where tf i saw it lmk but i'm fairly sure i've seen a paul quote saying there's things about john that he wouldn't say until after yoko and cyn were dead which is.... wild to say the least

#take that last one w a grain of salt bc i cant find it and im too tired to go digging to find where i saw it and if theres a source on it

13 notes · View notes

mydaroga · 10 months

Text

I Read some Beatles Books, AMA

So ever since college, I've had a HUGE problem with like. Reading. I majored in reading and it killed reading. For twenty years. But here's what I've read since January 29 of 2022: Shout! by Philip Norman Love Me Do! The Beatles Progress by Michael Braun 150 Glimpses of the Beatles by Craig Brown The Beatles by Hunter Davies Many Years from Now by Barry Miles John: a Biography by Cynthia Lennon You Never Give Me Your Money by Peter Doggett Riding So High: The Beatles and Drugs by Joe Goodden Tune In (the expanded edition) by Mark Lewisohn currently working on The Beatles and the Historians by Erin Torkelson Weber Basically my point is, the Beatles cured my inability to read. Ask me anything or tell me what to read next!

#kris talks a lot #beatles books

6 notes · View notes

dateinthelife · 2 years

Text

1 January 1959

Colin Hanton, drummer, quits the Beatles mid-bus ride (before his stop, even) because they had scuttled a possible cinema gig by drinking too much beer at intermission.

At the beginning the night went really well. We were all in a good mood – pulling George’s leg and saying, ‘There’s George’s dad; where’s his bus?’ It was a real stage they’d put us on, with a curtain that came up and down. The curtain got stuck, so we played six numbers, not five, in our first spot. The busmen and clippies were all cheering, they really dug us.

In the interval, we were told, ‘There’s a pint for you lads over at the bar.’ That pint turned into two pints, then three. When we went on for the second spot, we were terrible. All pissed. The bloke from the Pavilion [cinema] never booked us. There was a row about it on the bus going home, and I thought, ‘Right. That’s it. I’ll not bother playing with them again.’

-Colin Hanton [Philip Norman, Shout!]

#the beatles #today in the life #colin hanton #beatles bible #philip norman #1 january #1959

16 notes · View notes

docrotten · 1 year

Text

X THE UNKNOWN (1956) – Episode 149 – Decades Of Horror: The Classic Era

“I’m going to kick your head in if you don’t get it down! That’s what I’m going to do!” A kick in the head turns out to be an effective management technique for Sgt. Grimsdyke. Join this episode’s Grue-Crew – Chad Hunt, Whitney Collazo, Daphne Monary-Ernsdorff, and Jeff Mohr – as they discover all the known unknowns and the unknown unknowns of Hammer’s X the Unknown (1956).

Decades of Horror: The Classic Era Episode 149 – X the Unknown (1956)

Join the Crew on the Gruesome Magazine YouTube channel! Subscribe today! And click the alert to get notified of new content! https://youtube.com/gruesomemagazine

ANNOUNCEMENT Decades of Horror The Classic Era is partnering with THE CLASSIC SCI-FI MOVIE CHANNEL, THE CLASSIC HORROR MOVIE CHANNEL, and WICKED HORROR TV CHANNEL Which all now include video episodes of The Classic Era! Available on Roku, AppleTV, Amazon FireTV, AndroidTV, Online Website. Across All OTT platforms, as well as mobile, tablet, and desktop. https://classicscifichannel.com/; https://classichorrorchannel.com/; https://wickedhorrortv.com/

A radioactive, mud-like creature terrorizes a Scottish village.

Directors: Leslie Norman, Joseph Losey (uncredited)

Writer: Jimmy Sangster (story) (screenplay)

Music by: James Bernard

Special Effects: Bowie Margutti Ltd. (Les Bowie, Vic Margutti), Jack Curtis

Make-up and Special Make-up Effects: Philip Leakey

Production Manager: Jimmy Sangster

Selected Cast:

Dean Jagger as Dr. Adam Royston

Leo McKern as “Mac” McGill

Edward Chapman as John Elliott

William Lucas as Peter Elliott

Peter Hammond as Lieutenant Bannerman

Anthony Newley as Lance Corporal “Spider” Webb

Ian MacNaughton as Haggis

Michael Ripper as Sergeant Harry Grimsdyke

Michael Brooke as Willie Harding

Frazer Hines as Ian Osborne

Norman MacOwan as Old Tom

John Harvey as Major Cartwright

Edwin Richfield as Soldier Burned on Back

Jane Aird as Vi Harding

Neil Hallett as Unwin

Kenneth Cope as Private Lansing

Jameson Clark as Jack Harding

Marianne Brauns as Zena, the Nurse

Brown Derby as The Vicar

Anthony Sagar as Security Man (uncredited)

It’s time to explore early Hammer Sci-fi films with X the Unknown (1956). The film is part of a trilogy of Cold War sci-fi features along with The Quatermass Xperiment (1955, aka The Creeping Unknown) and Quatermass 2 (1957, aka Enemy From Space) that firmly transitioned Hammer from B-movie thrillers to solid horror/sci-fi excellence. The only thing missing is Bernard Quatermass himself, but not without Hammer trying – writer Nigel Kneale would not agree to the use of the character in this film. Regardless, X the Unknown is notable and well worth the watch. Hammer fans will appreciate an early appearance of fan-favorite character actor Michael Ripper as Sergeant Grimsdyke. Let’s see what the Grue-Crew make of directors Leslie Norman’s and Joseph Losey’s, and writer Jimmy Sangster’s black-and-white creepy classic.

With this episode, The Classic Era Grue-Crew say adiós a nuestra querida amiga to Whitney Collazo. She has more opportunities than time to pursue them and will be stepping away from her podcast hosting duties. Whitney has participated in over 100 episodes of Decades of Horror: The Classic Era. Grue Believers and Grue-Crew alike will sorely miss her insightful comments, her unique movie choices, and her loving persona. We love you without reservation, Whitney. You will always be welcome here! And if you find a movie you’d like to discuss with us or have a movie you’d like to hear us discuss, just give us a shout-out. Buena suerte, mi querido amigo!

Gruesome Magazine’s Decades of Horror: The Classic Era records a new episode every two weeks. Up next in their very flexible schedule, the Classic Era Grue-Crew wanted a fitting topic for their 150th episode. They decided on a film often considered one of the best horror films of all time, Rosemary’s Baby (1968), written and directed by Roman Polanski, based on the book by Ira Levin, starring Mia Farrow who is supported by an Oscar-winning performance from Ruth Gordon. You won’t want to miss this one! There is lots of “stuff” to discuss.

Please let them know how they’re doing! They want to hear from you – the coolest, grooviest fans: leave them a message or leave a comment on the Gruesome Magazine YouTube channel, the site, or email the Decades of Horror: The Classic Era podcast hosts at [email protected]

To each of you from each of them, “Thank you so much for watching and listening!”

Check out this episode!

0 notes

pleasantlyinsincere · 2 years

Text

When was the Two Virgins night, May 3rd vs May 19th 1968?

Since the topic of when the Two VIrgins night supposedly happened comes up every now and again, here’s a post argueing the two dates and giving, in my opinion, the most plausible timeline for May 1968.

May 19th 1968 seems to be the most widely accepted date today (e.g. Wikipedia, Beatles Bible…) to put John and Yoko’s first night together. Since none of these websites gives any source or reason for the date, I started trying to find out how people got there. I looked through quite a few Beatles books to try to find a clue where and for what reason it was first introduced.

Surprisingly it wasn’t dated at all for a few decades. From what I could find, the first mention happened by Barry Miles in Many Years from now nearly 30 years after the Two Virgins night . Here’s a list of which books place the date when, sorted by publishing date: (I didn’t look at interviews, magazines or other sources.)

John Lennon. One Day at a Time, Anthony Fawcett (‘76): May 1968

The Beatles Forever, Nicholas Schaffner (‘77): May 1968

A Twist of Lennon, Cynthia Lennon (‘78): no date given, placed before the NY trip

Shout!: The True Story of The Beatles, Philip Norman (‘81), no date given

The Ballad of John and Yoko, The Editors of Rolling Stone (‘82): May 1968

John Lennon. In My Life, Pete Shotton/Nicholas Schaffner (‘83): May 1968

The Love You Make, Peter Brown/Steven Gaines (‘83): no date given

Lennon. The Definitive Biography, Ray Coleman (‘84); May 1968

The Beatles. Day by Day (‘87), Mark Lewisohn: no mention

The Lives of John Lennon, Albert Goldman (‘88): no date given, Cyn leaving for Greece “just two weeks after her return from India”

The Lost Lennon Tapes, Radio Show, a few weeks after NY and a few days prior to May 22 (Added in edit)

In My Life, John Lennon Remembered, Mark Lewisohn/Kevin Howlett (‘90): May 1968

A Day in the Life, Mark Hertsgaard (‘95): exact date is unknown, sometime in the latter half of May 1968

Many Years From Now, Barry Miles (‘97): May 19 1968 (they Jesus meeting on the 18)

The Beatles. Off the Record, Keith Badman (‘00): May 19 1968

John, Cynthia Lennon (‘05): no date given, placed before the NY trip

The Beatles. The Biography, Bob Spitz (‘05): no date given, places after the NY trip

John Lennon. The Biography, Philip Norman (‘08): May 18/19 1968 (also places Cyns Greece holiday and the NY trip at the same time)

The Beatles Diary, Barry Miles (‘09): May 19 (Cynthia's return on 26th May)

Lennonology, Chip Madinger/ Scott Raile (‘15): May 3 “almost certainly”

Arguements and timeline behind the cut, because this got annoyingly long.

As you can see most authors didn’t date it any further than sometime in May 1968. Even by 1995 Hertsgaard still wrote that the exact date wasn’t known. Two years later however Barry Miles put it down as being May 19 and from then on more authors went with it.

If anyone has come across an earlier mention of the May 19 date, or someone explaining how they arrived at that date, please share. I would be really interested in that.

Disappointingly Barry Miles doesn’t give any reason why dated it as May 19. It’s easy to refute his assurance that the Jesus meeting happened on the 18, though. Every source I read for that puts all four Beatles there. However Ringo and George were in Cannes at the time and only returned on the 19. Therefore Miles certainly is wrong giving that date.

Here is Ringo and Mo dancing on the evening of May 18 in France:

On May 19 Ringo and George returned from Cannes. The same day George and Pattie travel to Liverpool to go to a christening. It is possible that they could have traveled back to London the same day, for George to go to the Apple meeting. It just sounds very stressfull.

For the Two Virgins night to happen Cyn has to be in Greece at the time traveling with Jenny, Alex, Donovan and Gypsie. Magic Alex is with John and Paul during their New York business trip. They return to London on May 16. We can already exclude Philip Norman’s timeline of the NY trip and the Greece holiday happening at the same time, because Alex can certainly only be at one place at the time.

It is possible that Alex kept his bag packed and he left with Cynthia for Greece on May 17. A two week holiday would mean that they returned on May 31, while Miles dates it to being 26 May. (If they didn’t immediately leave and only left a day or two later, the return day should move also.)

Jenny Boyd however has another court date on the 16. Originally when everyone returned from India her passport was taken, so that she wouldn’t flee the country, after drugs had been found in her apartment. She had it returned for a trip earlier that month but I don’t know if she was then allowed to keep it, or only got it back after her case was decided in June. It is therefore questionable, if she could travel around this time.

On May 22 John and Yoko already have their first public outing attending the Apple tailoring opening. This seems contradictory to the fact that Pete Shotton remembers that during the Greece trip John got angry at their housekeeper Dot for alerting Cyn to Yoko being at Weybridge. If he didn’t want her yet to know, posing for the press would undermine that goal. It would make more sense, if at this time Cyn already knew about the affair.

Cynthia recalls that after her return from Greece and finding Yoko at her home, she moved out for a few days to Alex and Jennys place, before returning to try to reconnect with John again and only then leaving for Italy with Julian and her mother. I assume we should ascribe about a week for this to happen. So even if she already returns from Greece on May 26, after (at the most) nine days instead of two weeks, the earliest it would make sense for her to leave again for Italy would be June 2nd or 3rd. This is supposedly another two week vacation. However Cynthia already sent a telegram home on June 6, that they’ll return on Sunday June 9. That doesn’t match with the alleged lengths of the holiday, which in this case would be barely a week.

Other aspects not quite fitting in:

during the time Cyn is back at Weybridge and supposedly settling again with John, the White Album recordings start with Yoko being in the studio

Pete Shotton travels with John and Yoko looking at a house on June 1. Also unlikely if Cny is still there.

the Italy holiday is listed on the Lennon household expenses for May

Yoko already requested her bank to send a summary of her account to Pete Shotton on May 13

John and Yoko joint art exhibition Four Thoughts is promoted as such in the International Times on May 24 and has its opening night on May 28 or June 2 (date is debated). Unlikely for them to go public in that way and find the time to prepare an exhibition together, if at the same time Cynthia is returning home to settle again with John.

In Lennonology Chip Madinger and Scott Raile have worked out an alternative date for the Two Virgins recording night, they feel almost certain about. They place it on May 3. To me the most compelling reason they give, is fitting in Cynthia’s Greece vacation with Jenny Boyds limited possibilities to travel.

(May 1) Finally, solicitor David Jacobs returned to court today on behalf of Jenny Boyd to request the return of her passport, as "she wants to go to Rome this weekend" (more specifically, her paramour Donovan was scheduled to perform in concert there on Saturday). Her request was granted, but only on the condition that she return to Britain no later than Monday, May 6th.

Jenny Boyd, Donovan and possibly Gypsie were in Rome that weekend in early May and it’s easy to confirm the date of the concert online. With Jenny needing a special permission to travel from court, it seems unlikely that she made multiple trips during that month.

Going with that date, would mean that Cynthia and Alex could have left for Greece around April 25th alone. (That’s also roughly two weeks after returning from India as Goldman implies.) On the way home, they then met up with Jenny and Donovan in Rome and flew home together on May 5th. Thereby placing John and Yoko’s first night together a few days prior. If it has to be exactly the 3rd is debatable.

This date fits more nicely with:

Cynthia quite consistently remembering her finding John and Yoko together happening before John left for New York.

makes more sense this way for Yoko to send her banking account infos by May 13th, if they were already sure about their relationship by that point

Cynthia and Julian leave for Italy around May 20, being absent for John and Yoko to go out together in public to the Apple tailoring event, in the studio, collaborate on their art show and to go house shopping and making the planned return date of June 9 more realistic

And here is a simplified version if my ongoing work-in-progress ‘68 timeline from John’s return from India to early June for a better understanding how everything would fit together:

#team may 3rd #ridiculously long niche interest beatles post #i'm really curious now why miles put the date there #did he work it out somehow and not tell readers or was it for narrative reasone?#thoughts in progress #i'm sorry if this isn't very readable i am tired

75 notes · View notes

no-reply95 · 3 years

Text

“Beyond grief, there was always business. Sunday Times journalist Philip Norman had been working on a Beatles biography for three years, but benefited from his timing: the boldly titled Shout! The True Story of the Beatles appeared to great acclaim in March 1981. ‘John Lennon was the Beatles,’ Norman declared on US breakfast TV, thereby winning an invitation to tea from Ono; McCartney must have seen the broadcast, as he held an otherwise unfathomable grudge against the book.”

Peter Doggett, You Never Give Me Your Money, 2009

Some select quotes from Shout (1981) for reference:

“No two temperaments (John and Paul’s) could have been more unalike.”

“Paul wanted Stu’s job as bass guitarist.”

“Examples of total collaboration (in the Lennon/McCartney songwriting partnership) were rare.”

“Paul developed musically by following rules; a notion altogether repugnant to John Lennon … John’s music was … as honest and powerful and Paul’s ever dared to be.”

“The Ballad of John and Yoko” was “recorded by John, virtually singlehandedly.”

“’Can’t Buy Me Love’” was “perhaps the least memorable of all Lennon/McCartney songs.”

“On “Revolver,” there was Paul’s pretty, self-pitying, ‘For No One.’”

Yep, really don’t get why Paul would have a grudge against this book…

#the beatles #paul mccartney #john lennon #john and paul #yoko ono #philip norman #shout #peter doggett #you never give me your money #otherwise unfathomable…#the mind boggles

79 notes · View notes

muzaktomyears · 10 months

Text

Mimi and Paul

I immediately wrote Mimi of the news [of John leaving Yoko]. “If your news re: Y. is sound, well that’ll please me I can tell you. It’s his only hope of getting on an even keel again,” she responded.

Someone had sent her recently taken pictures of John and they made her sad. She thought he looked lost somehow and might be wishing The Beatles would get back together. It was those times she thought he missed all the happy times the group had together. He began phoning her again and had told her that Paul was coming over and that he would be seeing him. She hoped that happier times would be coming out of their meeting.

Mimi seemed to hear from John on a somewhat regular basis again while he was separated from Yoko. If he didn’t phone, he wrote and she was always pleased when she heard from him. He seemed much more like his old self, she thought, and he had continued hopes that he and Paul might get back together again.

---

Mimi had talked to John (before the Paul [getting arrested in Japan] news had broken) and determined that he would never tour again. He and Paul had just spoken on the phone and Paul had been complaining “how hard the tour was”. So John had asked him “why the hell do you do it then?” The honest answer, according to Mimi, was that he simply could not give up the publicity.

---

“…I was talking to Neil Aspinall – Apple. He too is furious about the book ‘Shout’, such a pathetic liar for money. I had a good ‘shout’ about Paul too. Behold! A couple of hours later a phone call from Paul! He was nervous of me… I told you… many excuses. Thought I was annoyed with him. And so I was. Also Paul seriously thinking of going after Philip Norman over ‘Shout’. If ever I see Philip Norman I’ll pitch into him. Paul advised me not to do it myself. It is monstrous that this scandal monger can write such things.”

---

[re: Paul ringing in April] Mimi had truly been upset that he’d not called her before then and she had bent Neil Aspinall’s ear one Sunday afternoon. Two hours later all was forgiven with a phone call from Paul. She said she scolded him, telling him he should have known she wasn’t thinking of any ridiculous slight he might have been worried about. It had been John who had been killed and Paul should have known she was thinking of nothing else. I don’t know what he said but they both cried, she said, and any resentment was gone.

She said she could hear children in the background and asked him if all those were his. “Yeah, we’re like rabbits around here.”

They discussed the book Shout! by Philip Norman and how they resented parts of it. He told her not to get involved and that he would handle it, though what he intended on doing or what he actually did, I have no idea. Since Norman is now writing a biography on Paul and claims to have received a rather conceptual OK, I would assume all is forgiven there as well.

Before ringing off, Paul said he would be down to visit her one day; something she was still waiting to see happen.

The Guitar’s All Right as a Hobby, John, Kathy Burns (2014)

#mimi smith #paul mccartney #love them bitching about shout! together <3

115 notes · View notes

delightfullyatomicfest · 3 years

Text

Paul McCartney / Beatles books on the Internet archive (free and legal)

Free to access, just need to sign up for account then can borrow for an hour as many times as needed.

(couple more added 13 June 2021)

Beatles

The Beatles Authorised Biography by Hunter Davies (1968): https://archive.org/details/beatlesauthorize00davi

Beatles Monthly Book (1963-1969). Link to first one: https://archive.org/details/beatles-monthly-01_20210217

The true story of the Beatles by Billy Shepherd (1964): https://archive.org/details/truestoryofbeatl00shep [not yet read, of interest due to date]

The Beatles : the real story by Julius Fast (1968): https://archive.org/details/beatlesrealstory00fast [of interest due to date]]

Shout! by Philip Norman (1982): https://archive.org/details/shoutbeatlesinth00phil_1 [know your enemy etc etc]

Revolution in the Head by Ian MacDonald (1997): https://archive.org/details/revolutioninhead0000macd_v3d6

Two of us : John Lennon & Paul McCartney behind the myth by Geoffrey Giuliano (1999): https://archive.org/details/twoofusjohnlenno0000giul [very questionable author]

The Beatles: The Biography by Bob Spitz (2005): https://archive.org/details/beatlesbiography00spit

Added June 2021: Can’t Buy Me Love by Jonathan Gould (2007): https://archive.org/details/cantbuymelovebea00goul

Lewisohn isn't available on there.

Paul

Many Years from Now by Barry Miles (1998): https://archive.org/details/paulmccartneyman00mile

McCartney by Chris Salewicz (1986): https://archive.org/details/mccartney00sale

Paul McCartney now & then by Tony Barrow (2006): https://archive.org/details/paulmccartneynow00robi

McCartney by Christopher Sandford (2007): https://archive.org/details/mccartney0000sand_l3m5

Paul McCartney: A Life by Peter Ames Carlin (2009): https://archive.org/details/paulmccartneylif0000carl

Fab: An Intimate Life of Paul McCartney by Howard Sounes (2010): https://archive.org/details/fabintimatelifeo0000soun

Conversations with McCartney by Paul Du Noyer (2015): https://archive.org/details/conversationswit0000duno/page/n1/mode/2up

John

Dakota days : the untold story of John Lennon's final years by John Green (1984): https://archive.org/details/dakotadays00john_cr2

John by Cynthia Lennon (2005): https://archive.org/details/john00lenn

George

Wonderful tonight : George Harrison, Eric Clapton, and me by Pattie Boyd (2007): https://archive.org/details/wonderfultonight00boyd/

Ringo

Postcards from the Boys by Ringo (2004): (https://archive.org/details/postcardsfromboy0000star_c5h5 [<3 <3 <£]

Associates

A cellarful of noise by Brian Epstein (1964): https://archive.org/details/cellarfulofnoise00epst/

The love you make : an insider's story of the Beatles by Peter Brown (1983): https://archive.org/details/loveyoumakein00brow [of burned in a fire by Paul and Linda fame]

Magical mystery tours : my life with the Beatles by Tony Bramwell (2005): https://archive.org/details/magicalmysteryto00bram/

Miss O'Dell : my hard days and long nights with the Beatles, the Stones, Bob Dylan, Eric Clapton, and the women they loved by Chris O’Dell (2009): https://archive.org/details/missodellmyhardd0000odel

John, Paul, George, Ringo & me : the real Beatles story by Tony Barrow (2011): https://archive.org/details/johnpaulgeorgeri0000barr

Linda McCartney by Danny Fields (2000): https://archive.org/details/lindamccartney00fiel

Added June 2021: The longest cocktail party : an insider's diary of the Beatles, their million-dollar Apple empire, and its wild rise and fall by Richard DiLello (1983): https://archive.org/details/longestcocktailp00dile

Note to self: want to find ‘Love Me Do’ book from 1964

#the beatles #paul mccartney #books #add to this

176 notes · View notes