I like how we have a practically perfect understanding of the dynamics of these four personalities as they catapulted out of the 50s, created a great firebally comet in the firmament of the 60s and came splat thunk blackened hole trees blown down down down in the 70s. How the balance of power so tellingly and decisively tipped from Lennon, the pushy braggart who wrote nearly all of A Hard day's Night album, the nervy insecure one, over to McCartney the guy with the work ethic who actually thought the Beatles should do stuff and not just lay in bed all day eating acid and not writing songs. I like how Lennon would complain that McCartney would call them all up and say okay lads, time to make an album, and McCartney would have 8 songs already written, and Lennon would have none, NONE, but just this halfbaked little scrap which would turn into A Day in the Life -
sample dialogue - McCartney is ranting on about what the Get Back project should be, they should end up doing the whole album live on tv, yeah, and Lennon says
"I get it! You want a job!"
and later McCartney says "I didn't understand why he didn't!". I can see how by 1969 they just couldn't stand McCartney any more. No offence, but really! You can see the balance of power shifting over in the A sides of the (British) singles - first they're all Lennon, then they're all McCartney. It was a subtle coup. You could say that first they were a group of four, then three as George got bored and dropped out and wanted to deincarnate, so Sgt Pepper was made more or less by the Threetles (plus Lieutenant Martin), then just two left as Lennon swanned off with that foreign woman, and then there was just a guy sitting on his jack jones playing her majesty's a pretty nice gal but she doesn't have a lot to say. I like how the best solo album was made by the third best songwriter immediately after they split up as a dramatic demonstration of what they had overlooked. I like the idea of George Harrison being the third best songwriter in a group. I like the weird greatness-strikes-where-it-pleases quality of their background, I went and saw their houses up in Liverpool and George and Ringo's houses, let me tell you, were rough, I think Americans would not have used them as kennels for their pet dogs, when they got famous in 63 all the fans used to sit on george's parents' back wall and watch members of George's family walk from the house to the outside toilet at the bottom of the garden and back again. I like the idea of two of the greatest pop composers of the 20th century living a few streets away from each other in a provincial rundown English town. I like the way that Lennon the radical was living in a prim stockbroker's house in a prim stockbroker's town during the swingingest part of the 60s, married with a kid, whilst his straight fellow Beatle was living in the middle of London having a fruity time of it. I like how they did very few crap songs, yes, Rocky Raccoon and Yellow Submarine and Run for your Life are indeed crap and about ten others but that's not bad given the speed they cranked it all out, everything over and done with in seven years, the whole thing over before any of them were thirty.
I like how when they talked at length about who write what, even in the middle of bitterness, and being interviewed seperately, they only disagreed about one song (In My Life - both J & P think they wrote the melody.)
I like how you can hardly talk about the Beatles' story without running into uncuddly un-moptoppy stuff - the pills, hookers and trannies of the Reeperbahn - the gay manager who was in love with John and liked rough trade - the heaps of drugs, especially acid - the various John-inflicted scandals like him and Yoko stark bollock naked on the front of Two Virgins album - heh! Not cuddly.
This is a treat of a book but don't give it to your frail Beatle-loving granny because she'll topple over as she lifts it up and will be crushed under its weight, which would be a sad end for the old dear. It's massive. So only give it to strong Beatle fans.