Posted on 07/07/2017 1:11:52 PM PDT by Mariner
The fabled day that John Lennon met Paul McCartney at a church social in Liverpool 60 years ago — on July 6, 1957 — can appear less-than-fateful from a chronological distance of six decades.
After all, what are the odds that two teenage boys obsessed with the nascent sound of the rock ’n’ roll music that was exploding across the Atlantic Ocean would not cross paths sooner or later?
Beatles biographer Mark Lewisohn provides invaluable context to that question in his 2013 book, “Tune In: The Beatles All These Years,” the first of his projected three-volume authoritative look at the creation and lasting influence of the four lads who created what is often cheekily yet aptly described as “the band that changed the face of pop music as we know it.”
The Beatles of course evolved out of the Quarry Men, the skiffle group Lennon had formed with several chums, skiffle being the rootsy, largely acoustic, folk-driven precursor to British rock.
“Quite how many skiffle groups were active in the summer of 1957 was, it seems, everyone’s guess,” Lewisohn wrote. “Between four and five hundred in the London area alone, the press reckoned. No one really knew the true number, or ever will, but five thousand groups for the whole of Britain might be about right, something like twenty to thirty thousand players.”
With that in mind, McCartney finding his way to Lennon that summer starts to have more in common with the search for a needle in the proverbial haystack.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
When I saw him standing there....
I guess the concept of "synergy" would explain that.
“Guitar’s fine, John, but you’ll never make your living’ at it!”
Today is Ringos birthday.
I was in a book store earlier today and they were playing a satellite radio station that was all Beatles.
There wasn’t a single person in there that wasn’t singing along. It was awesome. :)
Their producer, George Martin, was a big reason why the Beatles were so good as a group.
The Beatles were most definitely more than the sum of their parts.
Paul was amazed John had a band. John was amazed Paul knew how to tune a guitar.
CC
A far more interesting story (and this one is Ok, but not too surprising- lots of “greaser” Brit teens liked rockabilly and blackabilly music which were majorly promoted to that generation in the UK)— is how exactly the Beatles became a band, and began to play out as amateurs. It was all due to the original drummer, Pete Best’s mother. She was the Indian native wife of Pete’s dad, who was a British officer serving many years, during and from WWII in India where they were married.
They returned to UK and lived in a sad little flat, and she really wanted a house the size they had in India. She put her life savings on a horse race— and won (to Win) quite a pot of money. Bought a large house and encouraged Pete and his friends, John Lennon and Paul McCartney to paint and fix up the basement into a coffeehouse/club, which was much safer for them than wandering around late at night in “adult” club scene. That’s how it started— there is a real nice documentary on it, and how Ringo came on later. All because a Mum believed in her son, and in taking care of the kids in the neighborhood.
I really have to press my GIFA$HIT button. Never cared for them and never bought an album. So why is this a big friggin’ deal?
Had an interesting argument with a young man still in high school about Richard Starkey,He insisted Richard wasnt a good drummer.But when I asked him to name one single group that would say no,If Richard asked to sit in for a session,,he finaly had to admit no group would have the cajones to tell him no.Nobody says no to a Beatle.
In hindsight. But who is to say what would have happened if Lennon & McCartney had seperately hooked up with other talent that was kicking around during that time?
Many of the better players eventually found eachother in their 2nd (or 3rd) bands. Reputations earned, and helped a log by record execs, have a way of doing that.
I think I remember reading in that book that Paul admitted he was aware of John and had seen him around prior to the church fete. Remember that Paul is almost 2 years younger than John, so it would be very unlikely John would have accepted an approach had Paul not been more knowledgeable and musically adept at the time.
And then w/ Brian Epstein they fired Pete Best and hired Ringo. Josh said it best about Ringo - “ he might not be a great drummer, but he is a great ?Beatle”
John gave them bad boy edge
Paul made them musicians
George was their soul
Ringo was their clown prince
And it worked.
Today is Zeppelin’s last live show with John Bonham, 1980 Berlin.
I am writing a team building leadership paper to be published ?I call The ?Yoko Factor - or how adding a member without expectations on roles can wreck everything. Add her, exit Brian
In other words, you're not a Beatles' fan. So, do you feel better now that you've gotten that off your chest?
Paul was a better guitar player than John and George. Some even think he was a better drummer than Ringo.
I loved "Ram". Perfect blend of pop and a bit of avant-garde. Love the song "Smile Away", silly lyrics but just a fun listen.
Interesting! I’d never heard this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.