What do you think?
Rate this book
Help!: The Beatles, Duke Ellington, and the Magic of Collaboration
The fascinating story of how creative cooperation inspired two of the world’s most celebrated musical acts. The Beatles and Duke Ellington’s Orchestra stand as the two greatest examples of collaboration in music history. Through his highly original examination of these two musical legends, Duke University musicologist Thomas Brothers delivers a portrait of the creative process at work, demonstrating that the cooperative method at the foundation of these two artist- groups was the primary reason for their unmatched musical success. While clarifying the historical record of who wrote what, with whom, and how, Brothers brings the past to life with a breadth of musical knowledge that reverberates through every page, and analyses of songs from Lennon and McCartney’s Strawberry Fields Forever to Billy Strayhorn’s Chelsea Bridge. Help! describes in rich detail the music and mastery of two cultural leaders whose popularity has never dimmed. “This is musicology with taste as well as ears.” ― Wall Street Journal “Adds significantly to our knowledge of popular music and iconic musicians of the 20th century.” ― Philadelphia Inquirer 30 illustrations
- GenresMusicNonfiction
416 pages, Paperback
First published October 23, 2018
16 people are currently reading
86 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
March 11, 2019
Help!: The Beatles, Duke Ellington, and the Magic of Collaboration by Thomas Brothers illustrates the value, in two different styles of music, of collaboration. Brothers is contributing to the growing scholarship, resisted by some who bought the early "composer genius" story hook, line, and sinker, that Ellington's genius was far more in his ability to recognize, bring together, and market music than in his ability to compose it. He also brings out the importance of collaboration in The Beatles all the way to the end of their time together.
In the case of Ellington doing research, which many have done before Brothers, only goes so far. A great deal of what is uncovered are press releases and interviews supporting the original script. What makes Brothers' analysis more complete and far more compelling is the inclusion of interviews with more of the musicians who openly acknowledge that Duke did not "compose" nearly as much as he organized and helped arrange. Those musicians as well as Brothers readily acknowledge Ellington's brilliance in this area. Brothers also brings a musicologist's ear to the study, recognizing the "fingerprints" of the various musicians and composers involved. This supports the stories from the musicians that were largely ignored previously. Simply doing massive amounts of research can only do so much, and if most of that research was simply finding more and more reports putting out the same story, well, quantity does not always equal quality.
Brothers also makes it clear for both societal and cultural reasons that Ellington's model, which today would likely be frowned upon if enough credit wasn't given to others, was both accepted and functional for the period. Having the single front man, especially one with the talent of Ellington, worked in everyone's benefit There is no denying in this book that Ellington was a genius, it is just that the emphasis is placed where it belongs, on his organizational, big picture, and talent finding abilities rather than on his good, but far from genius level, composing skills.
As for The Beatles, one of the beliefs among some fans is that when they were working on their last albums there was a lot less collaboration. That certainly would make sense if one looks at what was going on in their private lives. Brothers again uses both interviews and written accounts along with his trained ear to show the extent of collaboration that continued to the end.
Anyone who thought either John or Paul was the main creative force was coming from a position of what they liked about the music rather than from the music itself. Brothers here does not so much place any Beatle above the other as he simply demonstrates that each had his own strength and his own weakness. Particularly in the case of Lennon-McCartney songs it becomes clear they needed each other to temper each others extremes and fill out any holes. Brothers seems to consistently show that songs popularly considered to be from Paul's genius was made complete by what John (and the others, including Martin) brought to the work; and that any considered to be from John's genius was made complete by what Paul and the others brought. In other words, in spite of their growing differences, when they were in the studio creating they were collaborating until the end.
Also, I found Brothers' breakdown of the play between Rubber Soul/Pet Sounds/Sgt Pepper to be among the best I've seen. In addition to the usual comments about influence and inspiration there is a great deal of song by song, and even instrument by instrument, comparing and contrasting. This is perhaps the most grounded and concrete discussion of that fertile period for both bands.
I highly recommend this to any fan of Ellington, The Beatles, jazz, rock, music history and musicology. Brothers goes deeply into specific compositions while also providing contextualization from personal lives and society as a whole. These artists did not create this music in a vacuum and Brothers helps us to place this music in both music history as well as world history.
Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via LibraryThing Early Reviewers.
In the case of Ellington doing research, which many have done before Brothers, only goes so far. A great deal of what is uncovered are press releases and interviews supporting the original script. What makes Brothers' analysis more complete and far more compelling is the inclusion of interviews with more of the musicians who openly acknowledge that Duke did not "compose" nearly as much as he organized and helped arrange. Those musicians as well as Brothers readily acknowledge Ellington's brilliance in this area. Brothers also brings a musicologist's ear to the study, recognizing the "fingerprints" of the various musicians and composers involved. This supports the stories from the musicians that were largely ignored previously. Simply doing massive amounts of research can only do so much, and if most of that research was simply finding more and more reports putting out the same story, well, quantity does not always equal quality.
Brothers also makes it clear for both societal and cultural reasons that Ellington's model, which today would likely be frowned upon if enough credit wasn't given to others, was both accepted and functional for the period. Having the single front man, especially one with the talent of Ellington, worked in everyone's benefit There is no denying in this book that Ellington was a genius, it is just that the emphasis is placed where it belongs, on his organizational, big picture, and talent finding abilities rather than on his good, but far from genius level, composing skills.
As for The Beatles, one of the beliefs among some fans is that when they were working on their last albums there was a lot less collaboration. That certainly would make sense if one looks at what was going on in their private lives. Brothers again uses both interviews and written accounts along with his trained ear to show the extent of collaboration that continued to the end.
Anyone who thought either John or Paul was the main creative force was coming from a position of what they liked about the music rather than from the music itself. Brothers here does not so much place any Beatle above the other as he simply demonstrates that each had his own strength and his own weakness. Particularly in the case of Lennon-McCartney songs it becomes clear they needed each other to temper each others extremes and fill out any holes. Brothers seems to consistently show that songs popularly considered to be from Paul's genius was made complete by what John (and the others, including Martin) brought to the work; and that any considered to be from John's genius was made complete by what Paul and the others brought. In other words, in spite of their growing differences, when they were in the studio creating they were collaborating until the end.
Also, I found Brothers' breakdown of the play between Rubber Soul/Pet Sounds/Sgt Pepper to be among the best I've seen. In addition to the usual comments about influence and inspiration there is a great deal of song by song, and even instrument by instrument, comparing and contrasting. This is perhaps the most grounded and concrete discussion of that fertile period for both bands.
I highly recommend this to any fan of Ellington, The Beatles, jazz, rock, music history and musicology. Brothers goes deeply into specific compositions while also providing contextualization from personal lives and society as a whole. These artists did not create this music in a vacuum and Brothers helps us to place this music in both music history as well as world history.
Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via LibraryThing Early Reviewers.
May 12, 2023
Very good book about Duke Ellington and his compositional style and the Beatles' compositional style. Brothers quoted many members of the Ellington band, saying that their music was the basis of an Ellington tune. I had heard about Johnny Hodges making gestures on stage, inferring that Duke owed him money. Brothers includes many more band members. I think that I would be on the side of Duke is the master and his extra payments to his band members was enough.
I very much enjoyed the Beatles section and how Lennon and McCartney shared the compositional duties, according to their strengths. I really liked Brothers' interpretation of Harrison's contributions to the later Beatles music and Harrison's strong interest in Indian music and Indian philosophy and how that contributed to many Beatles songs.
I very much enjoyed the Beatles section and how Lennon and McCartney shared the compositional duties, according to their strengths. I really liked Brothers' interpretation of Harrison's contributions to the later Beatles music and Harrison's strong interest in Indian music and Indian philosophy and how that contributed to many Beatles songs.
March 22, 2020
HELP! The Beatles, Duke Ellington and the Magic of Collaboration (2018) by Thomas Brothers. This is a classical study of the art of working together. I am reminded of the father handing a single twig to each of his many children and, when they broke them easiiy, handed around a bundle of the same type of twigs that none of the children could break. The power of collaboration, of working together and off of each other.
With the first half of the book, Duke Ellington and the various incarnations of his bands through the decades is examined, While Duke took the vast majority of the credit for what the band performed, Mr. Brothers digs into the reality of what individual, often uncredited members of the band brought to the music. A born organizer and administrator with trunks full of tact, Mr. Ellington managed to create a long standing, highly successful orchestra that remained in the forefront of popular music for more than five decades.
There were many players in these ensembles and each gave something more than just musicianship to the process. While the “Duke” probably took far more credit for the actual music than he should have, you can’t argue with the results.
We all know the Beatles. Lennon, McCartney provided the shared basis for the start of the music writing while both Ringo and George provided many songs along the way. It was the genius of trying to outperform each other in the writing phase that helped propel the music of the Beatles to its place of prominence. It was the well honed musicianship and ability to share the spotlight that made the collaboration really work.
Mr. Brothers has done his research to a great degree. The information he provides feels well founded and he manages to write in a style that is informative and inviting. A solid investigation.
Of course, the way to breadths is with suitable music in the background. A finer pair of bands to listen to would be hard to find.
With the first half of the book, Duke Ellington and the various incarnations of his bands through the decades is examined, While Duke took the vast majority of the credit for what the band performed, Mr. Brothers digs into the reality of what individual, often uncredited members of the band brought to the music. A born organizer and administrator with trunks full of tact, Mr. Ellington managed to create a long standing, highly successful orchestra that remained in the forefront of popular music for more than five decades.
There were many players in these ensembles and each gave something more than just musicianship to the process. While the “Duke” probably took far more credit for the actual music than he should have, you can’t argue with the results.
We all know the Beatles. Lennon, McCartney provided the shared basis for the start of the music writing while both Ringo and George provided many songs along the way. It was the genius of trying to outperform each other in the writing phase that helped propel the music of the Beatles to its place of prominence. It was the well honed musicianship and ability to share the spotlight that made the collaboration really work.
Mr. Brothers has done his research to a great degree. The information he provides feels well founded and he manages to write in a style that is informative and inviting. A solid investigation.
Of course, the way to breadths is with suitable music in the background. A finer pair of bands to listen to would be hard to find.
February 23, 2019
The author handles his thesis fairly well. He wants to make the point that collaboration was at the heart of the music of, first, Duke Ellington, and then the Beatles. He gives us a lot of history to try to establish that a lot of collaboration was in fact happening. With Ellington this is tricky because the composer credits on the songs don't always include everybody who contributed to the composition. This uncertainty comes into play with the Beatles also, and figuring out the details of who contributed what in a composition is further complicated by the policy established early in the Beatles' career that songs written by John and/or Paul would always be credited to "Lennon-McCartney" regardless of who the primary creator may have been.
Speculation can only carry us so far, though, and once we get into the Beatles half of the book I sometimes find myself knowing better than the author, thanks to years of paying attention, how some pivotal point in the Beatles' creative process came about. The cover of Rubber Soul, for example, which shape-shifts the guys' photo slightly, our author thinks "must have been" inspired by the cover of Bob Dylan's Subterranean Homesick Blues album. Only I've read the story of the Beatles being shown slides from their photo session and when they saw the photo accidentally distorted by the projector-to-screen angle, they immediately said "Oh, that's cool! Can we do that?"
So let's beware the phrase "must have been."
I guess I know too much about the Beatles already, and have had too many years to form my own opinions, to entirely agree with anybody about the qualities of their music. Nevertheless, I enjoyed reading the author's analyses, and I did learn quite a bit about how Duke Ellington's career developed. The collaboration thesis gave an interesting perspective to the discussion.
Speculation can only carry us so far, though, and once we get into the Beatles half of the book I sometimes find myself knowing better than the author, thanks to years of paying attention, how some pivotal point in the Beatles' creative process came about. The cover of Rubber Soul, for example, which shape-shifts the guys' photo slightly, our author thinks "must have been" inspired by the cover of Bob Dylan's Subterranean Homesick Blues album. Only I've read the story of the Beatles being shown slides from their photo session and when they saw the photo accidentally distorted by the projector-to-screen angle, they immediately said "Oh, that's cool! Can we do that?"
So let's beware the phrase "must have been."
I guess I know too much about the Beatles already, and have had too many years to form my own opinions, to entirely agree with anybody about the qualities of their music. Nevertheless, I enjoyed reading the author's analyses, and I did learn quite a bit about how Duke Ellington's career developed. The collaboration thesis gave an interesting perspective to the discussion.
November 7, 2019
Brothers follows, ever so briefly, the careers of Ellington and the Beatles and their success through collaboration. The book is meticulously researched and easy to read (as long as the reader has some familiarity to the artists). The first half of the book highlights Ellington's career and shares insight into his success as an organizer more than an inventor. Ellington is portrayed more as a savvy businessman than as a great composer especially in his later career as Billy Strayhorn becomes the strength that carries Ellington. The second half of the book briefly jaunts through the Paul and John collaboration through the Beatles. Although Brothers focused on that partnership, this half felt rushed. Help! captured enough of these artists to allow Brothers theme of collaboration to work. It doesn’t hold up to some of the larger biographies of these artists but definitely should be put on the bookshelf of any Ellington or Beatles fan.
February 15, 2019
This review was written for LibraryThing Early Reviewers.
The Beatles and Duke Ellington's Orchestra stand as the two greatest examples of collaboration in music history. Duke University musicologist Thomas Brothers delivers a portrait of the creative process at work, demonstrating that the cooperative method at the foundation of these two artist-groups was the primary reason for their unmatched musical success.
I found this book to be very enlightening about the history of the music of Duke Ellington and the Beatles. Ellington's period of history allowed him to take credit for music and lyrics from his band. At the time of the Beatles both Lennon and McCartney shared the collaboration of their songs which worked for them. Lots of info that I never heard about. This is a must read if you love music.
The Beatles and Duke Ellington's Orchestra stand as the two greatest examples of collaboration in music history. Duke University musicologist Thomas Brothers delivers a portrait of the creative process at work, demonstrating that the cooperative method at the foundation of these two artist-groups was the primary reason for their unmatched musical success.
I found this book to be very enlightening about the history of the music of Duke Ellington and the Beatles. Ellington's period of history allowed him to take credit for music and lyrics from his band. At the time of the Beatles both Lennon and McCartney shared the collaboration of their songs which worked for them. Lots of info that I never heard about. This is a must read if you love music.
April 19, 2019
If any one book seems to have been written with me in mind, it would be a book on Duke, Billy Strayhorn, and the Beatles. This is not the book, though. A huge disappointment. Brothers spends most of his time in the Ellington section disparaging both Duke's talent and character. It's not that he was a magical collaborator, as the title of the book implies, but more someone who took advantage of the talent of others. His chapter on Strayhorn was mostly a summary of Hajdu's classic bio, Lush Life. As for the Beatles, Brothers shows us how Lennon and McCartney developed their process. Which was fine. But better examinations have been written about all that.
The idea for this book was good. The execution is left wanting.
The idea for this book was good. The execution is left wanting.
May 30, 2020
I wanted to like this book; I really did. Frankly much of it was over my head. And that might be my own deficiency. Filled with some very technical musical language, terms that I didn't know; I just found it often inaccessible. By the end I thought this would be a good audio book interspersed with cuts of music just discussed. I would do some of that, particularly with the Ellington songs, but again I just am not versed in musical structure.
Again, I acknowledge this may be my own shortcoming.
Again, I acknowledge this may be my own shortcoming.
October 14, 2022
Read this book! A deep, thoughtful examination of the power of collaboration and how it resulted in some of the finest music ever made. Prose matches the composers' power. Excruciatingly researched and written with awe, but with a clear view on problems.
January 6, 2019
I am very familiar with collaboration and this viewpoint is astounding. Great book!
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews