The Act You've Known For All These Years

by Clinton Heylin

The story of one of the most iconic albums ever, Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band , and its cultural impact In 1967, The Beatles unleashed their seminal album on an unsuspecting world. This new edition of The Act You've Known For All These Years explores the huge impact the album had on The Beatles and their contemporaries—Bob Dylan, The Beach Boys, Pink Floyd, and The Rolling Stones. It was part of the reappraisals of Sgt. Pepper's cultural impact during 2007's 40th anniversary, and the considerable press coverage that generated. Clinton Heylin reveals the inspirations and explodes the myths behind the album and the "Summer of Love" itself. The book also explores the history of the album as a cultural phenomenon, and reappraises its status as one of the classic albums of all time, from 1967 to the present day. Features interviews with those who were there at the time and those who followed in The Beatles' wake.

Genres: Music, Nonfiction, Biography

352 pages, Paperback

First published November 1, 2007

Reviews

[Karl · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read this as much for the interesting parallel stories of Brian Wilson's Smile project, and the roughly contemporaneous recording at Abbey Road of Pink Floyd's Piper at the Gates of Dawn.

=====================

Just re-read this, and found both (1) that the musical interest was even more than on a first reading, and (2) that the author's musical antipathy to Sgt Pepper (a sort of positional hostility stemming from his long-term investment in Dylan and punk) results in (a) his getting occasionally tiresome through the course of the bulk of the book, and (b) an especially tendentious and jettisonable concluding chapter. No one objects to his preferring Dylan or punk, nota bene, but criticize the Beatles for not being Dylan, and you mighy as well criticize Dylan for not being the Monkees.

Heylin repeatedly expresses his disappointment with the song-writing (overall) of Sgt Pepper (which over time, starts to look simply like a Dylan fan's adoption of Dylan's expressed "didn't think much of it"). Whether we can really design the scales which will demonstrate that "And Your Bird Can Sing" and "Got to Get You Into My Life" are genuinely superior songs to "Good Morning, Good Morning" and "Fixing a Hole," I don't know. Heylin seems to wish that the Beatles would get beyond 'simple pop songs', yet when Harrison has a go at doing so ("Within You, Without You") — nope, Heylin doesn't like that, either, dismissing it as "a turkey." Some of the nagging is a little rougher to forgive on a second reading.

The general premise of the book (as I see it), though — that there is value in stepping outside the space cadet glow with which this iconic album has been imbued — does hold up; truly, there is hype ripe for the puncturing. Heylin quotes a "perhaps the most creative 129 days in the history of rock music"; puffery which only begins to crumble when one considers that those 129 days were the period that Ringo remembers learning how to play chess (though that is arguably a creative way for him to have passed the time).

All in all, though one might wish that Heylin had had the chops and the fairness to write the book in some respects otherwise than he did, a worthwhile read.

[Sean · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found this in a used book shop and for the price, couldn't pass it up (hardback, too!). Heylin attempts to scale the monumental hype and legend surrounding "Sgt Pepper's..." and cut it back a bit. Does he succeed? Well, yes and no. The guy clearly knows his stuff and there's loads of info on contemporary acts (The Pink Floyd - when they still used "The", The Beach Boys, Dylan, Cream, The Rolling Stones, etc.), who were creating their own 'far-out' albums around the same time The Fabs were tinkering in Abbey Road Studios. There's a helpful list of singles and albums from 1966 and 1967 that Heylin recommends listening to.

I found his writing style a bit smarmy and condescending, so that put me off of the book a bit (he refers to Meredith Hunter, the man killed at Altamont in 1969, as a 'coloured gentleman'...ouch!). If you can get by that, though, it's a worthwhile read about one of the most (depending on your view) important records of the 'rock and roll' era.

[Jason Coleman · Rating 2 out of 5]

A depressing book. Sgt. Pepper's elevation by a generation starving for the credibility of great art is a worthwhile subject—even a Beatles worshipper like me can admit that its Citizen Kane-sized rep is a bit inflated—but Heylin is too full of bile, and too selective in his history, to make much of a case. He's diplomatic at the start, allowing some small victories among the album's 39 minutes, but over the course of the book he shows his hand as that dreariest of rock-critic roles, a Beatles hater. You finish the book wondering why anyone would want to write a hit piece on such a delightful record.

[Vincent Coole · Rating 3 out of 5]

Re-read after having originally read it at the time of publication. I'm a fan of Heylin's research on Dylan, but with Beatle research (and releases) having an expanded in the last 10 years, this book is now out of its depth. The early chapters on the underground scene and Paul's involvement in it hold up surprisingly well, and the scene setting for 1967 and its key players is enjoyable. However, one can't escape the feeling that the only reason Heylin has written this book is because of his obvious irritation (as a Dylan scholar) of Pepper's status. So be warned: if you are a fan of the album then this may not be the book for you! If you are a fan of early Pink Floyd, then you are on safer ground, as clearly the only reason for near-entire chapters on them, is to make the point that Piper is better than Pepper (although the Floyd are conspicuous by their absence in the retrospective end chapters).

The book really falls away in the closing chapters, and the constant 'told-you-so' spotlight on Pepper's negative critic reviews (and the incredulity that meets the positive ones) becomes over-laboured and waring. I rather enjoy Heylin's bouncy but sneering writing style (although does he have to give his verdict on every single subject mentioned??). I did discover some great music along the way, but certainly Heylin's expertise firmly remains in the Dylan world, rather than the Beatles (no, Clinton, Paul did not give the Get Back tapes to Phil Spector...). To use a repeated phrase from the book, his work on Dylan is certainly 'not-so-flawed' as this.

[LexIconDevil · Rating 2 out of 5]

Do you think all the music recorded before 1964 was crap, useful only as a stepping stone to the excellent music of the psych era? Do you think the Beatles only became (intermittently) interesting once Dylan showed them pot? Can you quickly rattle off two dozen better, more innovative 1960s bands than the Beatles at the height of the powers? Then you might enjoy this book.

The book follows several bands as they move from the early British invasion into the psych era. It’s an interesting topic, and I’m totally on board with the theory that the Beatles played a lot of catch-up during the period. But the author obliterates the fact/opinion line throughout. Bands, albums and songs are held up as objectively superior or inferior, or even mock-worthy. There are good facts, stories and quotes here, but I quickly grew weary of the author’s point of view sharing space with them.

[Phil Brett · Rating 2 out of 5]

An odd book. It sets itself out to place Sgt. Peppers in context and in doing so devotes lengthy accounts of early Pink Floyd, Move and Cream. Obviously, no piece of art, and yes I'm including pop albums in that category, is an island, and referencing what was happening musically elsewhere is important. How much this is done may depend on how interested you are in the other bands. Personally, I find Cream: an ugly band with ugly opinions, who made ugly music. But that's just my view. Others will passionately disagree. It's subjective.

Not that Heylin really accepts that; there are lengthy attacks on people who rate Pepper highly and who have written books on the Beatles. Now I spent my teenage years enjoying the biting reviews of Punk period NME so I don't have too much of a problem with bitchiness; it's just that it gets a little repetitive and boring here. I did enjoy his humour and his acid asides (his comments on the Grateful Dead made me laugh out loud).

Generally, I did enjoy the setting out the musical context but feel that it could have been edited a wee bit. I also rather puzzled how the outside world was only used in the context of drugs or music. The social and political upheavals are not interested. Yet, whilst it is not a political record in any shape, society surely had an impact on the mentality of those people making it? Surely, that might be at least mentioned to give context. Say, delete one of the many paragraphs attacking Best Album Ever books (you want to say, chill out Heylin, don't take them quite so seriously, people in the real world don't) and put the album in its social context.

So an odd book, but at times enjoyable. Personally, I'd say: listen to the album and make your own mind up.

[Nick H · Rating 3 out of 5]

I think that this book does a great job of framing the time period by talking a lot about what the Beatles main competition were doing at the time (Dylan, Brian Wilson, the Stones, Pink Floyd, etc.) You really get a feel for the atmosphere of the music scene in the 66-67 time period. What I can't figure out is the motivation for Heylin to even write the book, as he never really reveals his direct opinion about the album, only other peoples. If I were to formulate a guess based off of the material, I would guess that he is not a big fan of the album as a whole. Which leads me to further ponder his reasoning for writing it, other than it being a pivotal album for the pop/rock scene at the time, and it's affects on the music industry in it's aftermath. There is a great deal of pages spent bemoaning the numerous lists that have been published over the decades, and the ranking at which Pepper had attained at the time of each list's publication. These tyrades go as far as to try to discredit the folks who took part in them as being unqualified to vote Pepper as their favorite album of all time. Apparently, there is no room for subjectivity in Heylin's eyes when it comes to listening to music. My only other complaint is that Heylin utilizes parentheses FAR too much to try to inject "witty remarks" within the text, which only serves to break up the continuity of the information he is sharing. All in all, it is still an interesting piece, mainly in that it is not another tome solely focused on the Beatles, but focused on the music industry at a whole at the time of Pepper's release.

[Adam · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed the fact that the author is at times critical of Sgt. Pepper, w/o somehow turning this into proof that the Beatles suck, but at times I felt he was too critical of pre-Pepper Beatles. The book is well researched in the sense that I learned things about the Beatles I didn't know, but when it came to the author's anaylsis, the "ROCK is great, but POP sucks" unstated theme that seems to run through is shit to me. I like "Love Me Do" and I don't feel bad about it. I like "A Day in the Life" more, but I'm not ashamed of the fact that "I Want to Hold Your Hand" makes me smile either. If the author wants to argue that ROCK music was a huge cultural phenomina that touched all phases of life and elevated rock and roll artistically, then he's preaching to the choir, but the idea that everything that came before the Beatles smoked a joint or Hendrix plugged in is for dumb ass teenagers is crap and I can't get behind it.

[Craig Stoll · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book has quite a few interesting tidbits about the years 1965-1967, with some revealing insights via interviews and quote pulls that cover the development of several seminal albums.

But the author is clearly not much of a Beatles fan. He repeatedly slags off the Beatles accomplishments and attempts to lessen their place in the pantheon of rock bands. His arguments aren't very convincing. Also, if you're thinking of reading this, it'll help if you're a fan of early Pink Floyd and The Move. There are at least 50 pages devoted to these two acts, as well as a couple of Beach Boy related chapters, about the development and ultimate abandonment of Smile.

Overall, not as compelling as I thought it might be.

[David Ward · Rating 2 out of 5]

The Act You've Known For All These Years: A Year in the Life of Sgt. Pepper & Friends by Clinton Heylin (Cannongate Books 2007) (780+/-) is a strange book. Apparently written to explore the Beatles' "Sgt. Pepper" album and phenomenon, the author meanders for three hundred pages, and the book never goes anywhere. I learned nothing new about the Beatles, about Sgt. Pepper, or about any of the other artists who are peripheral to the main tale (Dylan, The Dead, Pink Floyd, the Beach Boys). It's not that the book is poorly written, for that is not so. I just wish I had back the time I wasted reading this when I could have re-listened to Sgt. Pepper instead. My rating: 4/10; finished 2/11/14.

[Rob Branigin · Rating 3 out of 5]

not much here i didn't already know, but this starts out a unique sort of conglomerate perspective on the london pop scene of 1966 and 1967. degenerates, though, in the later chapters to regurgitations of previous criticism (mmmm), and (yet more) boring predictable musings on the aesthetically inviolate status of Punk Rock (with bizarrely compulsive references to bob dylan). 300+ pages of "what the fuck is your point?"

[Thiago · Rating 1 out of 5]

Esse livro é um saco. O autor (que é um chato de galochas) é talentoso a ponto de conseguir transformar beatles num assunto chato.



Não recomendo de jeito nenhum.

[Malcolm Pinch · Rating 2 out of 5]

The selection of other bands at work at the same time was arbitrary to me and did little to provide real context. Lot of sniping that was occasionally funny but as often as not gratuitous.