Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I'm a little surprised by the ratio of good reviews for this book. I have to chime in with a strong negative for Norman's book. I appreciate the research and craftsmanship that went into the book and the portrait of the Beatle's years in Hambug is vivid and well done, yet frankly Norman's bias undermines the credibility of the writing in certain chapters, it's uneven in places. Honestly, I even suspect John Lennon would have been dismayed by the mythologizing that goes on in Norman's book. I feel that Norman's book added the mythologizing of the relationships between Lennon, McCartney, Harrison and Starr. Lionizing Lennon while treating Paul as the shallow, soppy, conservative one, or treating Harrison as a lucky third party with passable talent. That's not to say that any member of the band is above criticism, John was very much about being honest and being honest about oneself. Have people forgotten that Lennon's solo out-put could be surprisingly uneven and inconsistent? Mind you, this is coming from a huge Lennon fan, who wasn't a part of that era, I'm 39. So, I look at this with a different take. Frankly I'm tired of third party books about the Beatles from writers whom, because they had limited access to the band in the Apple years, convince themselves they know what went on privately between them. The best example of the problem with Norman's book can be found with the new chapters concerning the post years, the portraits of McCartney is often overkill. Yes, Paul can be a little much, you could say he's guilty of attempts to re-write history. Yet, Paul does deserve some credit for what's he's accomplished outside the band. Paul's biggest crime after the Beatles was wanting to remain a pop star? I noticed that all of the post Beatles careers leaned towards a lighter pop faire, including Lennon's "Double Fantasy". What does it matter. Norman treats Paul's dabbling in classical opera as though it's a sacrilege. I just don't care for Norman's dismissive attitude about George Harrison. A man who completely re-invented his sound after the Beatle break-up with "All Things Must Pass", As well as financing Handmade Films, a studio that helped the British film industry at a time it needed help and jump started Terry Gilliam's career. Harrison's solo career I found to be the most interesting, there's a consistent evolution of his albums that makes sense, even if some never cared for Harrison's spiritual hymns or his leanings towards ballads. It's also true that Harrison's solo out put could be uneven, yet the tendency is to dismiss him without any objective assessment. Harrison managed to co-front one of the more enjoyable super groups produced, The Traveling Wilbury's, mostly because they didn't take themselves too seriously and it was refreshing. Every band members post career had their share of great, good and bad songs, that's reality. Furthermore, Norman seems to feel Harrison had no right to criticize a band like Oasis for their own swipes. Sorry to say this, I like Oasis, but the band simply is not innovative enough to believe they are above criticisms from Harrison. The Gallagher brothers are a little too arrogant to place themselves on equal par to the Beatles. Their recent track record for memorable hits, proves this. Yet, what really raises my hackles is the portrait of Allen Klein. Many biographers give Klein a pass. First everyone vilified Yoko and Linda, and then the trend has been to the vilify Paul. Yet if there was anyone who cemented the nail in the coffin of the Beatles, it was Allen Klein, a man who was a ruthless, manipulative bully. There was ample evidence that Klein was fleecing the Beatles fortunes. If Klein had gotten his way with his business negotiations, there might have been little left to the offspring, heirs of Lennon, McCartney, Harrison and Starr. McCartney's legal suite against Klein and the band members was rather brave and McCartney's instincts about Klein were correct in hindsight. It's overkill to rely on Lennon's bias on this issue. Norman's book was first published in 1981 and you would think that some hindsight or wisdom would have filtered through the recent revisions, yet Norman maintains the same cynical tone and demonstrates little growth. There's the adage - Three sides to every story, yours, mine and the truth. All of the members of the band were complex individuals, adding to the stereotypes, or myths about The Beatles and their career doesn't help. Norman's ignorance about music and what it means to be a musician doesn't help either. You'll get more from 'The Beatles Anthology' book or Barry Miles / McCartney book 'Many Years From Now', or even Bob Spitz's biography, Tony Bramwell's 'Magical Mystery Tours'. Mark Lewisohn's 'Beatles Recording Sessions'. I cannot in good conscious recommend this, don't bother. Unless of course you're exclusively a Lennon fan then you'll probably love it. I'd rather seek more and objective material. there's too many false myths about the band, I'd rather move on.