Thursday, 27 February 2014

Paul is ..... ?

Further into high arcing eyebrows, and how someone dying in November 1966, shouldn't still be hanging around a month later. 

Below is an illustration in why I have problems with the McCartney interviewed in August 1966.

The first set of stills are from an interview on 3rd April, 1964. It's the high arc right eyebrow McCartney. I have at least 70 images of him speaking, laughing, making different facial expressions. In each one, he couldn't bring that high arcing right eyebrow down if he tried. He'd have to scowl/frown so obviously you'd know he was doing it on purpose.
The second set of stills is from August 1966, Memphis, TN. His hair is brushed over his forehead, but you can still see some inconsistencies. The first two images are from the FIRST part of the interview, before they cut away to Lennon. The last image is from when they cut back to McCartney.
Call me mad (I've been called worse) but I think we're looking at two different McCartneys in the same interview. The first has the low brow. 1964 tells you with his hair brushed down that low on his forehead, seeing his right eyebrow is going to be difficult. But it's not. It's permanently hanging low no matter what expression this person keeps. 

Then you get to the second stage of the interview where that eyebrow seems to be doing exactly what it's supposed to be doing, or what we're familiar with. You shouldn't be able to see it covered by that much hair. And you barely can in that last image. This is what you'd expect to see throughout. You're not getting that in Memphis. 

These are stills from two separate interviews. The first one is the 20th December 1966, which many mark as the first appearance of "Faul". But his eyebrows, and the high arc tell you he's the same person you're seeing back in April 1964, and who you see very frequently. You're more familiar with this McCartney than any other.

19th July, 1967 shows you something different, and more in line with who appears in August 1966 in Memphis, TN. A man who cannot raise his eyebrow if he tried, to get the "trademark" high arc right eyebrow of Paul McCartney © 1942 (?????)

Now what I've seen for years is that LSD Paul in question anyway. Practically everyone notices something's amiss with the person speaking as Paul McCartney. This automatically makes a case for "Paul died in 1966, and was replaced by a lookalike for the remainder."

December 1966 tells you you're wrong. You've still got McCartney hanging around after November 1966, or any death date. The high arc eyebrow Paul makes appearances everywhere, in publicity photos, in promotional films, you see that high arc eyebrow more often than any other "shape or form". 

So who exactly is this "other" Paul that I'm seeing possibly in 1964 in A HARD DAY'S NIGHT, on the rooftop of Savile Row in Let It Be, somewhere around the RAM era of 1971/1972, conducting interviews in Memphis, TN, but NOT Los Angeles, CA, in 1966, and talking about LSD in 1967. He also seems to be hanging around in April 1969, but I even have question about that one.

Beatles Book Monthly.
The following images all come from various issues of this magazine, and is yet another post illustrating a fluctuating eyebrow status. From left to right/top to bottom:
1962 gives us the "trademark" high arc right eyebrow. You find the end of his right eye with your mouse cursor, and go straight up. This is where the eyebrow reaches its highest arc point, then curves back down again to border the eye. Many photographs/interviews will show you he does NOT have to raise this eyebrow to achieve this "look".
1963, collarless shirt, is a very plausible "I pluck my eyebrows". Following that guideline end right eye/arc peak, IF he plucked his eyebrows, this photo would not prove anything other than he most likely plucked.
1969 (April) -- An anomaly, only questionable as to whether he is purposefully scowling/bringing his eyebrows down.
1969 (August) -- shows if he DOESN'T pluck them, how much hair he has there to pluck from. What should be observed is the very noticeable gap between his eyelids, and where that arc comes around to border. There is a LOT of skin there between these two points.
1969 (April) -- shows that no amount of plucking can give him this appearance. Too many discrepancies.
1969 (April) -- the SAME photo shoot, and apologies for the quality of image. But it can be seen that the guideline can be followed, the arc peaks right at the end of his eye. Which it does NOT do in the other shot from the same session.

Paul Is Dead. Or we have an example in passing off two people as one person, and making a game out of it. And that April 1969 Paul, with an eyebrow that doesn't match high arc, or low brow; confounds the whole issue. He's weird. 

Wednesday, 12 February 2014

M Y T H O L O G Y 1 0 1

This was a Note (published at Facebook) from 8th January, 2014, which is now a blog entry. 

The main thrust of most of my research into PID, and The Beatles, tends to be going straight to the horse's mouths. If you want to find something, you let people talk. And as soon as they start talking, you watch where they trip up over themselves. The more they trip, the more likely you are to find the hole they fell in. 

When it comes to PID as hoax or marketing ploy, is where I see many holes. I've discussed it before at my blog, and feel no need to really reiterate it once again. Neither of these scenarios seem to have much weight behind them. And the more you look into PID (by way of horse), the more it seems evident that a grand design is at play. Why do I say this? Because people stick to a script within the Beatles organisation like glue. And information that conflicts with that script gets either buried, or washed under the constant media regurgitation OF that mythology. It is hard to hear a tiny voice saying waitaminnit, when another MOJO magazine hits the stands announcing some guitar picks were found that might be Beatles guitar picks. 

This is Mythology. My research states that you cannot believe a single thing that comes out of these people's mouths about their story. Because their story has more holes than Blackburn, Lancashire. 

George Martin states the Beatles had nothing to do with Yellow Submarine, and the idea was abhorrent to them because the director was only known for The Flintstones.

Which he had nothing to do with. He worked on The Beatles cartoon series. Then you have John Lennon stating that producer Al Brodax got most of the ideas from Lennon FOR the Yellow Submarine movie, including the hoover sucking monster. So did The Beatles have anything to do with this movie, or didn't they. You decide. 

My latest fascination is Postcards. Postcards sent from a Beatle to another, or a Beatle to a Beatle Friend. These things not only stick with the script, but also tell you, these are stories too impossible to take seriously. Unless you like Soap Operas a lot. In a recent post at a group for PID I brought this postcard to people's attention. 

It's a postcard dated 27th January, 1969, from Paul McCartney to Ringo Starr. Please read below the postcard for Ringo's recollection of events that may have inspired McCartney to stick a stamp on it.

The card is dated 27th January 1969.

Harrison quit The Beatles on the 10th January 1969.
The Brookfields meeting was on the 12th January 1969. Harrison did not return to the band after this meeting.

The SCRIPT says that McCartney is to be blamed entire for Harrison's departure. Transcripts from the Get Back taped and filmed sessions dictate that the argument that truly sent Harrison out the door, was between himself and John Lennon. What was FILMED was the argument between McCartney and Harrison that causes all to say his departure was McCartney related. 40+ years later, both McCartney and Starr stick to this script like glue, even though all evidence states Harrison and Lennon were in fueled disagreements, enough to cause Harrison to quit. 
by Doug Sulpy and Ray Schweighardt

Harrison shows up late to rehearsals, as the live show planned is still being voted on. (This was one of the conditions Harrison demanded on his return to the Beatles, that the live show would be scrapped if he was going to return.)

Harrison runs through For You Blue, which had been introduced as a song days earlier (7th January 1969) but when playing it to Lennon (who has shown up late for rehearsals as well) McCartney introduces the song to him like it's just been written the previous night, completely forgetting it was around before that. And he was around to hear it. After an improvisation, Lennon suggests they work on For You Blue, which Harrison agrees to, but McCartney vetoes it in favour of the routine they've been in of performing familiar/working songs at the start of sessions, and newer / unrehearsed material at the end of sessions. So it's right back to McCartney tunes once all 4 are present to perform, starting with "Two of Us".

After a pretty shambolic rehearsal of material the previous day (For You Blue eventually gets played, but no greater than it was before, and it's back to familiar material. It's pretty much that Harrison is being ignored throughout sessions in favour of whatever Lennon and McCartney are inclined to do.)

Much of the taping this day has been lost, fragments of conversations exist, but important exchanges are edited out, or missing, What happens is that something happens between Lennon and Harrison during a lunch break, and Harrison walks out right after. Lennon, McCartney and Starr continue on rehearsing afterward. This argument had nothing to do with McCartney, Let It Be (the film) just showed you a portion of the tensions that existed during the sessions, thus regulating blame for it on McCartney, where everything else says this confrontation, heated enough to cause departure, was between Lennon and Harrison. It has been edited out of their history like a tape reel, and the SCRIPT comes into play where what's edited in is a simple version of events, which lays the blame on the wrong party, and keeps details discreet and hidden as to their true cause.
Let's see what the recollections are according to Anthology.
PAUL: If I made a suggestion and it was something that, say, George didn't want to do, it could develop quite quickly into a mini-argument. In fact George walked out of the group. I'm not sure of the exact reason, but I think that they thought I was being too domineering.

Paul can't remember the exact reason. He should ask Ringo.
RINGO: George left because Paul and he were having a heated discussion. They weren't getting on that day and George decided to leave, but he didn't tell John or me or Paul. There'd been some tension going down in the morning, and arguments would go on anyway, so none of us realised until we went to lunch that George had gone home. When we came back he still wasn't there, so we started jamming violently. Paul was playing his bass into the amp and John was off, and I was playing some weird drumming that I hadn't done before. I don't play like that as a rule. Our reaction was really, really interesting at the time. And Yoko jumped in, of course; she was there.

None of them realised until they went to lunch that George had gone home. Which is strange, because it's that lunch that has missing transcripts, film, tapings where an argument occurred between Harrison and Lennon that caused Harrison to announce he was leaving. British newspaper The Daily Express even picked up on this argument in its interview with Harrison on the 16th January, 1969. It even reported that George and John did NOT come to blows in this argument (even though John would state he wanted to hit George because of the way Harrison treated Ono, but we'll get to that later.) Judging by the evidence gathered going through the Get Back tapes, Harrison was through putting up with Lennon's unwillingness to engage in rational communication, and that Ono seemed to be doing most of his talking for him. As an Apple partner, to have Ono step in speaking on anyone's behalf, especially when you've been a member of the band since 1958/1959, and have enough trouble getting songs on albums, would be the final straw. 

Considering Harrison between 1965 - 1968 was essentially PAYING Lennon and McCartney to get his songs on Beatles albums. (His share in Northern Songs was set at 1.6%, Lennon and McCartney somewhere at 15% each. Therefore, all mechanical royalties earned from having a song appear in a collective album gets dispersed to those in ownership of the publishing. Taxman earns more for Lennon and McCartney, than it does for its composer.) Considering Harrison had his OWN publishing company back in 1964 and did not go with it immediately, but instead writes no songs after the ownership of Don't Bother Me is sold right along with Lennon and McCartney's tunes. The ones they wrote before forming Northern Songs. He writes nothing for the band again until he's offered 1.6% in Northern Songs, even though Harrisongs Ltd is established by December 1964. He stands to earn 80% of the royalties, and full ownership of the songs he composes, but he ... goes into contract for 3 years. This is a mystery why he does this. It proved wise when 1968 rolled around. Until McCartney sued them in 1970.

So the argument is between George Harrison and John Lennon. And personally, in that Mythology, in that Soap Opera, their relationship forever changes. Probably why Lennon in 1976 wrote in one word answers to a fan's questions regarding Beatles -  GEORGE: Lost. RINGO: Friend. PAUL: Extraordinary. Shame, as it seems in that mythology, Harrison and Lennon are the closest of allies when it comes to creativity, avant garde exploration, transcendental meditation, and keeping their mouths shut when they take LSD. And they both despise Maxwell's Silver Hammer. 

PAUL: These things had been going down in Let It Be: George leaving because he felt he was being told what to do (I think  that's why he left). Ringo had earlier left because he didn't think we liked him as a drummer. That wasn't as difficult to solve as maybe George's thing was, but at the same time John was looking to get out of the situation, and I think we were all really feeling that some cracks were appearing in the whole edifice.   

Like glue. Paul STILL isn't sure why George left, but he's pretty sure why Ringo left. (But George isn't sure why.) From my research, and the thing that tells me Paul McCartney CAN'T be the drummer who does the solo at the end of Dear Prudence, because he can barely keep in time during the simple verses, the problem Ringo had may have stemmed from McCartney himself. 

But he won't tell you. Because it's not in the script to say so. 

So let's go further into the Mytholopera. 

Here's another postcard. This one from Paul McCartney to Cynthia Lennon (nee Powell) in 1985. 

She states:
“It seemed that John had cut me off not just from him but from the whole Beatles family. The only person who came to see me was Paul. He arrived one sunny afternoon, bearing a red rose, and said, ‘I’m so sorry, Cyn, I don’t know what’s come over him. This isn’t right.‘ (…)Paul stayed for a while. He told me that John was bringing Yoko to recording sessions, which he, George and Ringo hated. (…) He joked about us getting married – ‘How about it, Cyn?’ – and I was grateful to him for cheering me up and caring enough to come. He was the only member of the Beatles family who’d the courage to defy John – who had apparently made clear that he expected everyone to follow his lead in cutting me off. But Paul was his own man and not afraid of John. In fact, musically and personally, the two were beginning to go in separate directions so perhaps Paul’s visit to me was also a statement to John. He drove off, promising to keep in touch, but a month or two later he got together with American photographer Linda Eastman and his life began a new phase. It was many years before we met again.”  Cynthia Powell

So sweet. Anyway let's look at her statements one by one. 

It seemed that John had cut me off not just from him but from the whole Beatles family. The only person who came to see me was Paul. He arrived one sunny afternoon, bearing a red rose, and said, ‘I’m so sorry, Cyn, I don’t know what’s come over him. This isn’t right.

Cutting her off is an understatement. But here we have Paul as the do right hero. What's come over our Johnny. 

Paul stayed for a while. He told me that John was bringing Yoko to recording sessions, which he, George and Ringo hated. 

It seems that from Get Back transcripts, Paul in fact plays the diplomat. It's Harrison that has issues with it. But let's see what Lennon's take on it was. 

JOHN: Paul was always gently coming up to Yoko and saying,Why don't you keep in the background a bit more? I didn’t know what was going on. It was going on behind my back.

GEORGE: Lost. RINGO: Friend. PAUL: Extraordinary. 

He joked about us getting married – ‘How about it, Cyn?’ – and I was grateful to him for cheering me up and caring enough to come. He was the only member of the Beatles family who’d the courage to defy John – who had apparently made clear that he expected everyone to follow his lead in cutting me off.

He was the only member of The Beatles to visit you BEHIND JOHN'S BACK. By all accounts, from the looks of things, Lennon had no idea McCartney visited you privately whatsoever, or made complaint about Yoko Ono, or Lennon's behaviour.

But Paul was his own man and not afraid of John. In fact, musically and personally, the two were beginning to go in separate directions so perhaps Paul’s visit to me was also a statement to John.

How is it a statement to John if Paul doesn't let him know he visited you. Seeing as how he's not afraid of Lennon, but avoids the wrath of him that Harrison seems to have gotten should he dare question who Yoko Ono is, and why does she do all his talking for him. It seems to me, that Paul making a bold statement to Lennon about the "cutting off" would be to drive him out there with him, and say, this is how I feel about you leaving her on her own with Julian. And asking us to leave her alone too. That doesn't happen. But George quits The Beatles and no one knows why he does apparently. Except for the canteen staff, and The Daily Express. 

In fact, musically and personally, the two were beginning to go in separate directions so perhaps Paul’s visit to me was also a statement to John. He drove off, promising to keep in touch, but a month or two later he got together with American photographer Linda Eastman and his life began a new phase. It was many years before we met again.

Seeing as it took 17 years for McCartney to show up back in your life again, and this time, just sending you a postcard, I guess he pretty much cut you off too didn't he. I mean, it seems really sweet, that you're portraying this man as a man who does not live in fear of John Lennon, and was the only one of 3 to come and see you and ask if you were okay, but then he drops you for nearly two decades. It's painting a portrait of a man who does not exist. And he also advises 5 year old boys in songs to "go out and get her."

So all I can gather from this is, John Lennon was completely blind to the actions of Paul McCartney, because any actions McCartney did against him, he did behind his back and without knowledge of. And John Lennon is totally aware of the actions of George Harrison, because he did them right to his face. And if you're going to be that truthful to someone about themselves, and their effect on others, you can go get lost. 

So ends today's lesson in Mythology. Watch how it works, because Paul Is Dead makes much much more sense when those who say something happened, are lying through their teeth about it in the first place, and no one can remember anything. Is it airing dirty laundry, or what goes on in private stays in private. Well if you're going to go so far as to say The Beatles are bastards for treating Yoko so badly, then what they did deserves to be aired to see how much bastards they can be. That's where you need a Mal Evans keeping a diary of things. 

Damn. He got shot. And they cut him off in Death as much as they cut him off in Life. Oh well.

Saturday, 28 December 2013

Miles To Go

I'm just saving this for my own personal records, because I know I'm notorious for finding something and never bookmarking, or saving the link. 

And then months or years later that thing comes up again and I say, now where did I see that? And I have to remember exactly the steps I took to find the thing in the first place. It's a long, arduous battle. And I never learn.

This is just my favourite chronicler of all things Beatle, Barry Miles, ripping Rush a new asshole in 1978. Amongst accusations that they were Reich Rush, he lays into Neil Peart and his Ayn Rand fandom heavily. As I harken back to Miles review of "The Beatles" where he mistitles songs, gives McCartney credit for almost the entire work and just basically sleeps through the critique, I can't help but feel some contempt. Not because he's slamming into Rush, which is a favourite band of mine, and is how all bands should be. Just because Barry Miles is a blatant liar, and unless you're Paul McCartney, he just has no time for you. Peart even throws out an accusation at John Lennon, and Miles barely bats an eyelash, nor defends Lennon's political activism. Not an eyelash. 

I say Rush is how all bands should be simply because they genuinely seem to get along with one another after nearly four decades in business and pleasure. And you look back at bands like The Beatles, where they're suing eachother, and sniping at eachother in the press, and John and Paul take credit for almost everything, but then fight over who should get the most credit, and then one dies and there's still fighting going on, and they don't let one of their bandmates get much shot at composing (and essentially Harrison, between 1965 - 1968 is PAYING Lennon & McCartney to get his songs on Beatles albums. It's how it works out to be. They earn more money from his compositions than he actually does.) and it's all a mess. And you get no sense that they actually like eachother. You get a sense they may love one another, but they definitely don't like eachother. This seems not to be the case with Rush, and they've kept it going for almost 40 years. It's the way bands should be. 

Anyway, the article in question. For my own records.

Sunday, 3 November 2013

Flew in from Tunisia

Just a brief blog about more "where did Paul go in November 1966."

This can just be seen as a reporter's error, but since they mention the place a few times, they seem pretty sure about where he went. 

He'd announced they were going to write something for Mills movie. So we know this movie is The Family Way. From other sources we know that this plan came about just before he went off to Nairobi, and while Lennon was still in Spain. So somewhere before the 6th November. At this writing, they say the film is bearing the title The Family Way, and we know it was released on the 18th December, 1966. We know this because the music was only finished 2 weeks before the film was released. 

The property McCartney moved into was 7 Cavendish Avenue, St. John's Wood, London. Purchased in April of 1965, he moved in by March 1966. So in this article we have jumped from what seems to be late November, early December, then back to March, all the way back to ... a moustache. So this has to be somewhere in December this article is being written. As Paul hung on to this moustache long after his return from .... Tunisia. 

Just a geographical reference to where Tunisia is if you're a holiday planner. 

Well.It's kind of close to Spain. But pretty far away from Kenya. I wonder why they're saying Tunisia so imploringly. Probably just an error. We'd have to go to the Beatles camp for the REAL story and location. 

Oh wait. We cant even go to them, because Paul's pretty insistent he met Mal Evans on the 12th of November, 1966, where Mal says they met on the 8th of November, 1966, making that ten day holiday with a return on the 19th November, 1966 make much much more sense. Considering the literal thousands of miles they covered taking it. And all the groovy things that happened. 

Thursday, 17 October 2013

Planned Parenthood

“If you cannot get rid of the family skeleton, you may as well make it dance.”
― George Bernard Shaw, Immaturity 

Okay, back to what I prefer doing.  Showing whomever reads this blog that The Beatles are making this stuff up as they go along, especially when it gets to what Paul McCartney's supposed to be doing at any given point in time. Whether getting into a moped crash, or buying a dog. Or whatever. 

We bring up the instance of THE FAMILY WAY soundtrack. 

That thing. 

So I bring you over to the Varese Sarabande website regarding this recording and the liner notes of Chip Madinger. I'm going to highlight some issues of contention with the dramatic history of this recording. THE FAMILY WAY

The Complete liner notes by Chip Madinger
A dry and dramatic comedy of errors, The Family Way is the saga of a young couple (newlyweds Jenny Piper {Hayley Mills} and Arthur Fitton {Hywell Bennett} seemingly unable to formally accomplish their marital duties.  Directed by Roy Boulting and produced by his twin brother John, production began in 1966 under the possible working titles, “Wedlocked” and “All In Good Time,” the name of Bill Naughton’s play on which the film was based. 

In the U.K., the film earned an X-certificate (intended for those over 16 years of age) from the British Board of Film Censors, for a combination of the film’s subject matter, heavily-cloaked innuendo and extended views of a former Disney child-star’s fundament.  However, viewers of the film not only witnessed Hayley Mills’ cinematic coming of age, but also heard the first tangible evidence of Paul McCartney’s independence from The Beatles.

Paul spoke of his initial foray into composing for film to the NME: “It was most unglamorous really.  I rang our NEMS office and said I would like to write a film theme, not a score, just a theme.  John was away filming [How I Won The War] so I had time to do it.”  The Beatles’ producer, George Martin, was key to the project and assumed a familiar role, as Paul told the Sunday Times: “He is the interpreter I play themes and chords on piano or guitar, he gets it down on paper.  I talk about the idea I have for instrumentation.  Then he works out the arrangement.  I tried to learn music once with a fellow who’s a great teacher.  But it got too much like homework.  I have some block about seeing it in little black dots on paper.  It’s like Braille to me.”  To begin, Paul composed 15 seconds of the opening theme and played it on piano to Martin, who transcribed the notes and arranged the melody, merging a church organ, brass band, string quartet and percussion.

It was more than a fortnight later (with Martin back from a cruise to New York aboard the Queen Mary, and McCartney having returned from an extended holiday through France, Spain and Africa) that the duo regrouped to complete the requisite love theme for the film, as Martin recounted for the NME: “I told Paul, and he said he’d compose something.  I waited but nothing materialized, and finally I had to go round to Paul’s house and literally stand there until he’d composed something.  John was visiting and advised a bit, but Paul created the tune and played it to me on guitar.”  Again, Martin took away the melody, this time arranging it for woodwind and strings.  Five sessions at CTS Studios followed, spread over the course of three days and nights, all in the midst of recording The Beatles’ “Strawberry Fields Forever.”  In the end, the music was completed only two weeks before the film’s Sunday night premiere in London’s Warner Theatre on December 18th, leaving the editors little time to complete the soundtrack.  The Daily Mirror reported Martin as having told the Boulting brothers: “If it sounds as if it was done in a hurry, it’s because it was done in a hurry.”

Decca Records (U.K.) purchased the musical rights to the film, and although George Martin had been led to believe that only a soundtrack album would be issued, a single by “The Tudor Minstrels” (the soundtrack’s session musicians, so named after the Boulting brothers’ production company, Tudor Films) was scheduled for release on December 15th to tie in with the film’s premiere.  This would seem to have been of little consequence, except that Martin had plans to issue his own single on the E.M.I.-affiliated United Artists label.

In order to level the playing field, Decca’s release was put back for a week, while Martin prepared his recording.  And so on December 6th, before a Beatles’ session for another McCartney original, “When I’m Sixty-Four” (which Martin had also scored), George made tape copies of a handful of cues from the just-finished film soundtrack to assist in preparing the arrangements for his own orchestra.  In between Beatles’ sessions for “Strawberry Fields Forever” and “When I’m Sixty-Four,” Martin found time to prepare his score, and in a three-hour session at E.M.I. on the morning of December 15th, recorded, mixed and mastered both sides of the single.  Both discs (each coupling “Love In The Open Air” with “Theme From The Family Way”) were released on December 23rd, and failed to make any impression on the charts in the weeks that followed.
Having witnessed Britain’s lack of response to George Martin’s wistful treatment of “Love In The Open Air,” United Artists in America requested a more up-tempo, beat group sound for their forthcoming single.  Martin dutifully re-arranged the theme, and recorded the re-make at E.M.I. over three days in early February 1967.  Coupled with a new B-Side, “Bahama Sound” (a Martin composition unrelated to the film), the American United Artists single also went unnoticed.  Meanwhile, Decca’s U.S. counterpart, London Records (the American Decca Records having established itself as an independent label in 1942), left The Tudor Minstrels’ disc unchanged, with their efforts mirrored by its lack of chart success.

As for the soundtrack album, Decca issued the disc (in both mono and stereo) on January 6th, 1967, but, despite the prominent position of Paul’s name on the cover, sales of the album fell short, and the disc failed to make an appearance in the British album charts.  When issued in the States by London on June 12th (with revised artwork), the American release followed suit and did not chart.

All 24 of the McCartney/Martin musical cues appearing in the film were bundled into 13 tracks on the soundtrack album, with six of the tracks banding together a number of shorter musical cues.  There is reason behind the cryptic cue IDs, as they roughly correlate to the film reel on which each cue appears, and the sequence of the cue on that reel.  (For those keeping track, there are a few gaps in the sequencing: there is no Cue 2M2 or 2M3, film reels 3 and 9 contained no musical cues, and Cue 6M1 is the brief appearance of the theme music from the television drama, Coronation Street.)

And so, nearly 45 years after the soundtrack was recorded, this is the first compact disc release to feature the original 1/4″ stereo master tapes.  Also included is a previously unreleased stereo mix of ‘Theme From The Family Way,‘ the B-Side to both the British and American singles by The Tudor Minstrels.

Chip Madinger June 2011
Chip Madinger is the co-author of Eight Arms To Hold You, the authoritative guide to the Beatles work as solo artists.  He is also the author of Lennonology, a forthcoming reference series that will extensively detail the life and artistry of John Lennon and Yoko Ono.  For more information regarding these books, please visit

Plenty to be highlighted there. Plenty. 

Released the 6th January, 1967 The Family Way soundtrack was composed with the benefit of moustache.

He's got a moustache in Nairobi, so we have to assume he has a moustache when he lands back in London - this gives him between 20th November, 1966 and 31st December 1966 to get this score composed! Unless George Martin truly was the one to get this film score done, which I think would be the case. I mean McCartney's got The Escorts to produce, and him and Mal have to kick his resident housekeeper out without 2 weeks notice. So much to do! What else does he have to do between the 20th November, 1966 and the 31st December, 1966.

Brian Epstein holds a party for The Four Tops in London
6.00pm, Sunday 20 November 1966 (46 years ago)

The Four Tops had performed at the Savile Theatre in London on 13 November 1966. The venue was owned by The Beatles' manager Brian Epstein, and the backdrop for the performance was said to have been designed by Paul McCartney. Seven days later Epstein held a party for The Four Tops at his home at 24 Chapel Street, London. It was attended by John Lennon and George Harrison.

Well McCartney had to have designed it before the 6th November, unless he posted the design to Epstein from his car (I believe the DB5)

Recording: Strawberry Fields Forever
7.00pm, Thursday 24 November 1966 (46 years ago)

Studio Two, EMI Studios, Abbey Road
Producer: George Martin
Engineer: Geoff Emerick

With touring behind them, The Beatles retreated from public view to begin work on their eighth album. They were keen to use the studio to its full potential, experimenting with different sounds with the intention of producing their best work to date. The first song of the late-1966 sessions was John Lennon's Strawberry Fields Forever, which was issued as a standalone single along with Penny Lane in February 1967.

I came back to England [from India] towards the end of October and John got back from Spain. It was all predetermined when we'd meet again. Then we went in the studio and recorded 'Strawberry Fields'. I think at that point there was a more profound ambience to the band.

George Harrison

Following considerable discussion and rehearsal, just one take of Strawberry Fields Forever was recorded on this first day. The Beatles performed the song in the key of C, as had Lennon on his most recent home demos of it. It began with a Mellotron introduction performed by Paul McCartney, and featured Lennon and George Harrison on electric guitars, and Ringo Starr on drums. Onto track two Lennon recorded his first lead vocal, with the tape running fast so it was slower and at a lower pitch upon playback, and Harrison simultaneously added a slide guitar part.
Now we were off the road and in the studio with new songs. Strawberry Fields is the song that John had, about the old Salvation Army home for kids he used to live next door to in Liverpool. We related it to youth, golden summers and fields of strawberry. I knew what he was talking about. The nice thing is that a lot of our songs were starting to get a little bit more surreal. I remember John having a book at home called Bizarre, about all sorts of weird things. We were opening up artistically and taking the blinkers off. We used a mellotron on Strawberry Fields. I didn't think it would get past the Musicians' Union, so we didn't advertise it; we just had it on the sessions. It had what would now be called 'samples' of flute, which are actually tapes that play and then rewind. We had eleven seconds on each tape, which could be played on each key.

Paul McCartney

Track three was filled with double-tracked vocals by Lennon during the first chorus and the third verse, and the fourth track featured harmony vocals by Lennon, McCartney and Harrison. These latter two parts were omitted when the song was remixed for Anthology 2 in 1996.

Hmmm if it was predetermined when they'd all meet, why was there so much confusion with knowing when Lennon was back, where McCartney was and when, different stories from two guys who'd know, Neil Aspinall and Mal Evans, and be made very aware of those predetermined dates of meeting and work. This whole story is just that. A story.

So there's the 21st thru 23rd unaccounted for so far. We know MM said McCartney worked with The Escorts and this was reported on the 19th November, 1966. So when the hell he did it is a mystery because he's been out of England for 13 days. Probably when he found time to design a backdrop for a concert!

Recording: Pantomime: Everywhere It's Christmas
12.00pm, Friday 25 November 1966 (46 years ago)

Dick James House, 71-75 New Oxford Street, London
Producer: George Martin

The Beatles' fourth Christmas record, Pantomime: Everywhere It's Christmas, was recorded on this day at the first floor demo studio owned by their publisher, Dick James. Each member of The Beatles sang on the recording, with Paul McCartney also playing piano. A number of songs and skits were recorded, which were edited into a 10-part, six-minute piece on 2 December. The songs included Everywhere It's Christmas, Orowainya, and Please Don't Bring Your Banjo Back, and the sketches included Podgy The Bear And Jasper, and Felpin Mansions.

We worked it out between us. Paul did most of the work on it. He thought up the 'Pantomime' title and the two song things.

Ringo Starr

The Beatles' Fourth Christmas Record – Pantomime: Everywhere It's Christmas was edited by The Beatles' press officer at Abbey Road on 2 December 1966, and was sent to members of The Beatles' UK fan club on 16 December.

2nd December, same day as The Escorts single on Columbia was due out. Wow, McCartney sure starts working fast when he has to. The title, the two songs, a backdrop for a concert, producer for an album, an upcoming soundtrack, he's barely been back in the country 5 days and he's going crazy workaholic. Has he seen Jane at all? Is there time? How about Maggie (I'd see Maggie personally.)

John Lennon films a sequence for Not Only... But Also
8.00am, Sunday 27 November 1966 (46 years ago)

John Lennon filmed a second appearance on the comedy television show Not Only... But Also on this day. Lennon played the role of Dan, a doorman at the fictional nightclub Ad Lav. The name was a spoof on the Ad Lib Club, a venue often frequented by The Beatles and other leading showbusiness personalities of the mid-1960s. Dan the doorman.


That's two days unaccounted for on McCartney, the 26th - 27th. The 28th November finds them working on Strawberry Fields Forever again, beginning at 7pm that evening. And then again on the 29th. The 30th thru 2nd are unaccounted for, but mixing and release of the Christmas Record was finished by the 2nd. The 6th finds them recording When I'm Sixty Four and their radio Christmas messages. The 8th December finds them working again on Strawberry Fields Forever and When I'm Sixty Four. McCartney did two sessions that day, one on his own for Sixty Four, and then returning with the other three for Fields.

9th December finds the release of A Collection of Beatles Oldies. And work again on Strawberry ...

Six day hiatus, the Beatles return to the studio again for work on Strawberry on the 15th December. Martin has to score the string & brass arrangements and get the musicians. Busy man.

I drew the cover myself. There's a sort of funny pantomime horse in the design if you look closely. Well I can see one there if you can't.
Paul McCartney

He's also designing The Beatles' Fourth Christmas Record – Pantomime: Everywhere It's Christmas. Which is released on the 16th December. Shame that the death of Tara Browne would be on the horizon within the next day and a half. Count your blessings. Browne dies on the 18th, December 1966 in a car accident.

Paul McCartney and Jane Asher attend the première of The Family Way
6.00pm, Sunday 18 December 1966 (46 years ago)

Paul McCartney and Jane Asher attended the première of the film The Family Way at London's Warner Cinema.

The cinema was located at 1 Cranbourn Street in central London. Asher appeared in the film, and the soundtrack had been written by McCartney and scored by George Martin.

If you are blessed with the ability to write music, you can turn your hand to various forms. I've always admired people for whom it's a craft - the great songwriting partners of the past, such as Rodgers and Hammerstein, or Cole Porter. I've admired the fact that they can write a musical and they can do a film score. So film scores were an interesting diversion for me, and with George Martin being able to write and orchestrate - and being pretty good at it - I got an offer through the Boulting Brothers for him and me to do some film music for The Family Way. I had a look at the film and though it was great. I still do. It's very powerful and emotional - soppy, but good for its time. I wanted brass-band music; because with The Beatles we got into a lot of different kinds of music, but maybe brass band was a little too Northern and 'Hovis'. I still loved it. My dad had played trumpet and his dad had been in a brass band, so I had those leanings. For the film I got something together that was sort of 'brassy bandy', to echo the Northernness of the story, and I had a great time. We got an Ivor Novello Award for the score - for the best film song that year, a piece called 'Love In The Open Air', which Johnny Mercer was nearly going to put lyrics to, but I didn't know who he was. Later I realised, 'Oh, that Johnny Mercer! You mean the greatest lyricist on the planet!' I should have done that. Never mind - it fell through - but it was good fun doing the music.

Paul McCartney

Excuse my language but when the FucK did you find time to do this? The film already premieres by the 18th, December. You've been back in London since the 19th November, and so far in online diary of events, I'm not sure when you and George Martin found time to get together to do such things. When? When did you take a look at the film? When was it ready for viewing for you to know what the film score should be? It must have been ready quite soon because it was already out in theatres before Christmas, and we all know what the rush to Christmas is like around the world, forget the entertainment industry, think how hard it is to book places and get tickets and all sorts of things in the final weeks leading up to that festive event. The 20th December, 1966 finds The Beatles, all with moustaches being interviewed in front of EMI studios. I don't know about you, but Tara Browne's been dead for 2 days, and these people don't seem to show any trace of sadness or not being up for interviews. Maybe they're ultra-professional. Let's say they are. But they don't seem down or anything. I would be if my friend had just crashed into a lorry, and had a wife and two children left behind, regardless whether he was on the outs with them or not, it's almost Christmas. I mean, yes they don't have to show any emotion to reporters, but they don't seem all that sad either. His death was less than 48 hours previous. And then it's back to work on When I'm Sixty Four.

Let's see. In a month of being back, The Beatles have only worked on two major songs, a Christmas project, apparently a film soundtrack, appeared in a television skit, a friend dies, and ... what. The 21st finds them again working on Strawberry, which is by now a labour of love. The 29th December finds them working on Penny Lane, Strawberry and When I'm Sixty Four.

When you look at it day by day, it seems like they're doing a lot. When you bunch it all up in a block, they don't seem to be doing anything. They're NOT writing more than they actually are writing. They seem to be taking more time off and away from the studio than actually spending in it, and spending a lot of time on one particular song in general. But you can say that's the art of it. I'd agree. They're trying to expand what they do in the studio, so this can take time. I don't have any argument with that whatsoever.

At the same time when the hell did Mccartney work on The Family way soundtrack, in time for it to be edited in to the movie? It had to have been done long before the 18th December rolled around. So when did he and Martin begin this work????

It was more than a fortnight later (with Martin back from a cruise to New York aboard the Queen Mary, and McCartney having returned from an extended holiday through France, Spain and Africa)
------ that brings you to the 19th November, 1966. A fortnight is two weeks / 14 days. This is more though. So let's say they got together on the 20th November, or the 21st. The original, let's hear what you got Paul, wow 15 seconds, occurs at least 2 weeks before.
19 - 14 = 5. So let's say the 5th November as a mean date.

But it's more than a fortnight, so lets say McCartney first got wind of the project in late October, early November. But he's gone by the 6th. He had time because Lennon was in Spain. Why such a hurry then to get out before he comes back then! Anyway.

The 30th thru 2nd are unaccounted for, but mixing and release of the Christmas Record was finished by the 2nd. The 6th finds them recording When I'm Sixty Four and their radio Christmas messages. The 8th December finds them working again on Strawberry Fields Forever and When I'm Sixty Four. McCartney did two sessions that day, one on his own for Sixty Four, and then returning with the other three for Fields.

9th December finds the release of A Collection of Beatles Oldies. And work again on Strawberry.

So let's clean that up:
November 30th - December 2nd - no entries, but the Christmas Record is worked on.
December 6th - When I'm Sixty Four / Christmas Messages
December 8th - Strawberry Fields Forever / When I'm Sixty Four. For McCartney this almost equates to a 12 hour working day these two sessions.
December 9th - Strawberry Fields Forever.

Five sessions at CTS Studios followed, spread over the course of three days and nights, all in the midst of recording The Beatles’ “Strawberry Fields Forever.” In the end, the music was completed only two weeks before the film’s Sunday night premiere in London’s Warner Theatre on December 18th

The film premiered on the 18th December, 1966. The music was completed only two weeks before it was shown to the public. Two weeks is 14 days. 18 - 14 = December 4th 1966.

It took them 3 days and nights to finish the recording over five sessions. This is to be completed by the 4th December 1966.
Well, they weren't working on Strawberry between the 30th November and December 8th. So that's just trying to make it into this great race against time and look how wonderful it came out amongst all this activity. But they ARE working on The Christmas album, and When I'm Sixty Four. George Martin's all instrumental LP "The Beatles Girls" is released on the 28th November, 1966 in the USA. When did he find time for that???? He's just back from holiday as well, but of course, he's had the summer of 1966 to do such a thing.

I see no mention anywhere of recordings at CTS studios over a 3 day period, consisting of 5 sessions. Strawberry was NOT being worked on at the same time, and for this soundtrack to be finished two weeks before the premiere, it needs to be composed, scored, recorded, mixed ALL BY THE 4TH DECEMBER 1966. But I can find head nor tail of when Paul McCartney & George Martin got together between the 20th November 1966 and the 4th December 1966, with the story they're telling of how quickly things were put together. Well yeah! So quick it seems you didn't even do it, it was that quick!

It was more than a fortnight later (with Martin back from a cruise to New York aboard the Queen Mary, and McCartney having returned from an extended holiday through France, Spain and Africa) that the duo regrouped to complete the requisite love theme for the film, as Martin recounted for the NME: “I told Paul, and he said he’d compose something. I waited but nothing materialized, and finally I had to go round to Paul’s house and literally stand there until he’d composed something. John was visiting and advised a bit, but Paul created the tune and played it to me on guitar.” Again, Martin took away the melody, this time arranging it for woodwind and strings. Five sessions at CTS Studios followed, spread over the course of three days and nights, all in the midst of recording The Beatles’ “Strawberry Fields Forever.”

This whole paragraph bothers the hell out of me. Especially with the DECEMBER 4th cut-off date for this entire soundtrack to be assembled. McCartney gave him 15 seconds of material before both left on holiday. Martin goes off and does who knows what with that 15 seconds. They reconvene after holidays and McCartney still has nothing. So Martin makes him write something, and gets John to kick him if he doesn't come up with it quick (just joking). Then it's off to CTS studios for three days and nights ....................................... WHEN??? When they were doing the Christmas Album? It has to be done before the 4th ....

Wednesday, 16 October 2013

Eyebrow Archetypes

"The problem is all inside your head", she said to me 

The answer is easy if you take it logically 
I'd like to help you in your struggle to be free 

There must be fifty ways to leave your lover 

Hopefully this will be one of the last times I go the photo excursion route. There's enough discrepancies in the months of September 1966 through April of 1967 in the Beatles tale to fill two volumes. Like, how did Paul McCartney & George Martin get time to do The Family Way? That's been bothering me the past week or two. But here we are again anyway. 

In Paul Is Dead mythology, the concept states that the replacement is taller, parts his hair to his left, and doesn't look like the real James Paul McCartney. In effect, you get the below:

That works of course. It explains the years 1962 through 1966 very plainly. Until you get to :


Which throws the whole thing off. And there's plenty of evidence gathered to say that McCartney's hair naturally parted to the left anyway, and it was subverted over to the right in the beginning. Kinda lending to a theory that Paul was always going to be in question right from the start.

What's wrong with my eyebrow??? What do you mean???

Okay, let's say Paul McCartney is not a series of manufactured items on a treadmill. Let's say he's just a mad mother plucker. Then we need to identify what to look for when he goes on his plucking frenzies. Which can happen within the space of year.

ARCHETYPE I : The Loop the Loop
This is the high arcing, am I raising this up on purpose to be cool, or is this how my actual eyebrow is shaped right eyebrow.

ARCHETYPE II : What Goes Around Comes Around

This one is a variation on the arc, but it comes around to border the eye. Not seen as often, but it makes appearances.

ARCHETYPE III : The Straight and Narrow

This one shows up various times, making rare appearances it seems. Must be a mood thing.

So let's say it's a plucking frenzy for the sake of argument. I mean, it suggests to me multiples. I don't know about you. But don't you think this guy's height, facial features and general appearance is all over the place, and not in that David Bowie kinda cool way, but in a no wonder they said he was dead way? I mean, how strange does this have to get before someone actually realises, there's a reason they said he was dead, over and over again. And it ain't about the money. And it ain't for laughs. 

If you ask me, it's one of the greatest deceptions ever undertaken. I rank it right up there with, I don't know, the discovery of America by Christopher Columbus. Yeah. That big! 

Or maybe he just plucks his eyebrows and wears 3 inch heels on occasion. Maybe he was glam before glam was glam. Pre-glam. With the way The Beatles get credited for inventing everything from heavy metal to polka music, I wouldn't be surprised they'd get more accolade. (And if you ask me The Kinks were the prototype for most of what came after the British Invasion. Even with the glam thing.)

But here I am talking about music and culture and influence, while I'm looking at a guy who could be two people. Or even three. What's up with that!!! And if it is true, how deep does that deception go into the subconscious. Are there little Lady Madonna think packets littered amongst the brain cells? How much does this influence the way we behave, interact, take reality as it is in this world. Didn't Lennon say Nothing Is Real? Well Paul McCartney is a good indication to believe him. There seems to be nothing real about him. And when you get to that period between September 1966 and April 1967, the stories told don't seem real at all. They seem like outright lies. So whether he died or not, something is still amiss. If the photos are being tampered with, something is still amiss. No matter which angle you come in from, something is still amiss. 

There must be 50 ways to leave it. Must be. 

Friday, 11 October 2013

Paul Together Now

This is truly just re-emphasising to one and all. 

To be the same person, certain things have to be consistent. And in these two images, one from 1972, the other from 1970, the INCONSISTENCIES are too many to not bring up question as to who this is supposed to be. Especially if he "died" in 1966. 

Our source images. 

The 1972 image has been converted to black & white. The 1970 image has been rotated so that his face will fall in line with where things are supposed to be on Paul McCartney. The dimensions are set by his right iris, but also can be set by the width of the eye, his nostrils, or his lips. 

So what's wrong with 1972 Paul and 1970 Paul? A lot. For one, 1972's ear is massive. Their ears don't match outright. We then get to that right eyebrow. How that's achieved, without 1970 Paul appearing scrunch faced and scowling I don't know. And even if 1972 Paul is raising his eyebrow, the shape it makes is inconsistent with the eyebrow he's got back in 1970. The nostrils don't match up. They are farther apart in 1970. He could be "flaring his nostrils" but this would only widen the shape of the nostrils themselves, not the connecting cartilage between them, which as said, is wider in 1970 than 1972. 1970 also has a wider mouth, and you can tell this even with the beard. 

It's the ear that should concern everyone. It's totally wrong.