Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop All Amazon Fashion Summer Savings Up to 25% Off Cloud Drive Photos Learn More Shop now Shop now Shop Fire Shop Kindle Oasis Learn more Shop now Learn more
Customer Review

10 of 13 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars McCartney doesn't like it, 1 Nov. 2013
By 
This review is from: Revolution in the Head: The Beatles' Records and the Sixties (Paperback)
It's become a self-enforcing myth that Ian McDonald offers deep insight into the world of The Beatles. This is what Paul McCartney commented on this book in a Pitchfork interview:

"McCartney: ....But I've seen some of the books, particularly about the Beatles, where they'll say, "This was McCartney's answer to Lennon's barb"-- and so on and so on. Like hell it was!

Pitchfork: Like Ian MacDonald's book [Revolution in the Head].

McCartney: Yeah, exactly. You got it in one, exactly. And you know, unfortunately [MacDonald] is no longer with us. He died, and so I don't want to put him down. But while he was around I must say, I would dip into that book and think, "See now, what's he got to say about this song?" And he'd go, "This is McCartney's answer to-- " and I'd go, "No, it wasn't!" It was just, I just wrote a song."

Dismiss the reviews that tell you that this is the definitive book of Beatles lore. Most of it is contrived and imposes meanings and contexts on to the Beatles' music even in the cases when there wasn't any. A far more reliable and readable Beatles expert is Mark Lewisohn.

The interview I quoted from can be found here: [...]
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
Name:
Badge:
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines ">here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking on the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
 
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in
  [Cancel]

Comments

Track comments by e-mail

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-5 of 5 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 1 Nov 2013 17:45:08 GMT
S Riaz says:
Interesting point. Mind you, both Lennon and McCartney tend to be quite unreliable themselves about events. There are interviews in which Lennon stated McCartney wrote a song by himself, when Paul says it was a joint effort and vice versa. He has a point though, in that nobody really knows what meant what apart from them and, as memory is unreliable, much of even what Paul recalls is probably not completely accurate.

In reply to an earlier post on 1 Nov 2013 22:46:51 GMT
Batuta says:
Thanks for commenting. And I do agree to your point. However, I think that the disagreements between Lennon and McCartney can be narrowed down to a couple of songs, In my Life and Two of Us. Besides, I reckon statements from the horse's mouth counts more than from a reviewer who has only relied upon secondary sources. Especially when McCartney seems to imply that this is a general problem with the book.

I guess that this discussion - like most discussions about the Beatles - could be a never-ending one. :o)

Posted on 2 Sep 2014 14:16:19 BDT
philip says:
"McCartney doesn't like it." So what? Artists have axes to grind and, more importantly, are unreliable critics of their own work. Ringo once complained about contemporaneous commentators "seeing things in our songs we never put there". That's naive. Most creative effort is subconscious, with artists seldom aware of their own processes or the fact they draw on social myths, shared understandings and collective matrices of meaning. We have critics precisely because of that. They are not "less than" artists: simply doing a different job. Some are great at it, others terrible, but the artists they critique should never be invoked as judges of their merit.

I do agree with Batuta's comment that the song by song dissections are often "contrived". In MacDonald's defence, though, the opening essay - insightful, cogent and situating the Beatles in the sociohistoric context of an extraordinary decade - is alone worth the price.

In reply to an earlier post on 23 Sep 2014 12:54:49 BDT
Batuta says:
I agree the artists are not aware of the subconscious creative proces but neither are the critics. We can obviously not trust the artists' view of the quality of their work, but in want of better sources, we would have to rely on what they express about their intention and motives with their work.

Posted on 13 Feb 2016 15:40:30 GMT
I agree with you, Philip; critics are as vital to a full appreciation of the arts as the artists themselves, and because they are one step removed from the creative process they can take a broader view of its results, as the best ones do. Without wanting to sound too precious, the creations of the artists are like their children - and, like the real thing, they have to let them go and make their own way in the world.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›