I bought 'Revolution In The Head' when it first came out in the mid 1990s, and was blown away. When 'Live At The BBC' and the 'Anthology' albums were released a couple of years later, MacDonald revised it to cover all the Beatle material that had suddenly become canonical. The great virtue of this book, IMO, is the extraordinary job MacDonald did in synthesising all the available knowledge about how the Beatles recorded their music and presenting it as part of his account of their rise and fall. He goes on a song-by-song basis, and his judgments about which Beatle songs are more inspired than others are hard to argue with. (Personally I like 'If You've Got Trouble', though.) This book's only rival in the how-they-did-it stakes is Walter Everett's monumental two-volume technical study, 'The Beatles as Musicians'.
MacDonald sees the Beatles' career as rising to a peak with 'Sgt. Pepper', from which it then gradually slopes downwards, reaching a nadir with 'Free As A Bird'. This is the best presentation of what might be called the English Version of the Beatles' creative arc. He is bracingly caustic about what he sees as the generally negative effect of the Beatles' heavy drug use and embrace of randomness, feeling that little was gained by them consciously abandoning their judgment of what worked and what didn't, and he's usefully respectful of what other writers criticise as Paul McCartney's bossiness. MacDonald rightly perceives that if McCartney hadn't been so nannyish and overbearing in the final years, they might not have lasted even as short a time as they did. He is not afraid to dismiss a song as 'sniggering nonsense' (Maxwell's Silver Hammer, in case you were wondering - fair comment, I'd have said.) Elsewhere, he can be oddly blinkered; he ridicules pianist Glenn Gould's dislike of the Fabs, saying that Gould, one of the greatest musicians of the century, was here displaying 'an embarrassingly tin ear'. But this fails to engage properly with Gould's case, which in fact was quite a coherent argument and which raised the question of how much one's 'ear' is a matter of cultural expectation rather than natural musicality.
However, I think he over-emphasises the long-term damage done by some of the more avant-garde elements in Sixties culture. His criticisms of postmodernism seem a bit dated now; does anyone still talk about 'postmodernism' anymore? The closer he stays to his subject, the better and more insightful he is, but when he turns to the present, he just gets cranky and nostalgic (e.g. his foolish dismissal, in another book, of the late Bill Hicks as an unfunny Lenny Bruce wannabe. Bruce at his worst was far less funny than Hicks at his.)
It's clear by the end that, for MacDonald, Western culture had been declining in quality since the Beatles' breakup. For someone like me who was born after the band split, an attitude like that is far from helpful, or even meaningful. However, those who find MacDonald's pessimism convincing might want to reflect that he was prone to depression, and indeed took his own life only a couple of years after the final edition of this book was published. A tragic footnote to one of the great rock books ever.