Archive for the ‘Footnotes’ category

Pepper Pot

November 30, 2007

Sgt. Pepper’s Pot Plants

pot-plant.jpgpepper-plant.jpgaluminum-plant.jpg
One of the most irritating things I know of is when a complete error is repeated ad nauseum! If you think the flowerbed on the Pepper cover looks like an “open grave” I suppose that’s your choice. Having seen a good many open graves in my life, it looks like an odd flower border to me. (I do think the floral clock in Paul’s design would have looked a great deal better.) However, it’s the endless repitition about the “pot plants” shown on the album cover that makes me want to recommend that the writer change his focus to George W. Bush where mythology is a requirement.

Of course, I suppose city people may never have actually seen a marijuana plant and therefore be unable to recognize the leaves, but a very little research of T-shirts could quickly amend that ignorance! For one thing, cannabis is a rather tall, rangy plant; one as fully leafed-out as those on the album would be two or three feet tall. For a final thing, these plants in no way resemble pot.

The first photograph at the head of this entry is of a marijuana plant; the center graphic is an enlargement of one of the plants on the Pepper cover; the third photo is of Aluminum Plant, Pilea cadierei, a popular house plant originally from tropical Southeast Asia. There are a couple other common houseplants that might be the ones we see on the cover but they are far less common and a good deal less likely.

I’m sorry to disappoint all you heads out there but this is one of the stupidest Beatle myths going, possible even less rational then the Paul Is Dead hoorah. At least this one is so very easily shown to be mistaken while proving that someone is alive is difficult unless you can arrange to meet them face to face – and Despite the fact that hundreds of thousands of people actually have met Paul face to face since 1967 (or whenever) there seem to be a few people who still treasure the idea.

In the case of the pot plants on the cover of Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band, please remove it from your mind. No doubt the living adults in the room at the time the photograph was taken would have liked the idea of using cannabis plants, but they didn’t.

Was Paul a Social Climber?

May 8, 2007

mama-knows.jpgIf you read any of the published biographies of the Beatles sooner or later you are very likely to run into the comment that Paul was a “social climber.” It is true that Paul’s family hovered on the line between working class and middle class and that his parents wanted very much for him to “better himself.” Certainly they didn’t think that was social climbing. Meanwhile the family lived in council houses (what in the US would be called public housing) provided at little cost as a part of the pay for Mary McCartney’s job as a nurse. They moved several times to better and safer locations and the last house was so “modern” for Britain at the time that it had an indoor bathroom.

John Lennon, as most of us know, grew up in a good neighborhood in a nice, middle-class home (also with an indoor bathroom) despite his later claim of being working class. Both John and Paul were urged to study hard so they would be able to get good jobs and were constantly pressured to avoid using the Liverpool accent but to speak more correctly. Once John hustled his Aunt Mimi out of an art exhibit where Stu’s winning painting was hung when she said, “What’s that supposed to be?” Both John and Paul spoke with a scouse accent deliberately and both were easily able to assume a more posh accent.

I feel that the best way to look into the question of whether or not Paul was a social climber is to examine his record in contrast to John the self-declared workingman.

Paul’s first serious girl friend seems to have been Dot Rhone. Dot lived in a good neighborhood only because the house had been left to her parents and living there was less expensive then renting a place. There seems to be no doubt that Paul knew of the family’s problems including her father’s drinking.

At about the same time, John began dating Cynthia Powell, who lived in quite a good neighborhood. Her father had been quite well off although after his death she and her mother had little money to spare. Cyn dressed very well and spoke posh.

John hung out with Stu at art school and followed him in admiring the American “Beat Poets” and other intellectual activities. Paul occasionally joined them at parties where he tried to disguise his youth and inexperience by projecting a “French” air.

George, in Anthology [Tape 1, 37:300] “We didn’t have uniforms and Johnny Gentle had this posh suit…” The band also bought matching jackets before leaving for Hamburg for their first gig there. Earlier, the Quarrymen had a prescribed outfit that included white sport coats for John and Paul. Brian’s switching them into suits was not as major a change as John later makes it sound.

John, as well as Paul and George, thought that Brian Epstein’s air of the upper class (and his money) would be good for the Beatles.

Astrid, who became Stuart’s fiancé (John was also very interested in her) came from a good family and lived in a good neighborhood. She was another art student and her good taste and interest in the modernist movement in Europe gave her a very elegant air in herself.

I believe that the first surfacing of the accusations that Paul was a social climber came when he began dating Jane Asher (and living in her house though this wasn’t widely known). The Asher’s did live in a nice neighborhood particularly favored by doctors, very middle class. Every member of the family worked but they don’t seem to have lived in a particularly expensive manner. Mrs. Asher cooked though they no doubt had someone come in to do the housework. Dr. Asher used the house as his office as well as the family home. Their friendships appear to have ranged very widely from middle class “country” to London intelligencia (Peter Asher, the son of the family and a good friend of Paul’s was very much a part of this crowd.) Jane and Paul went to theatrical first nights and stayed with friends of the family in the country but the aristocracy doesn’t seem to have been a feature of their life.

All the Beatles knew Marianne Faithful and Tara Brown who had aristocratic connections but who were part of the club scene in London.

John, George and Ringo all bought houses in what was called the stock-broker belt – in other words the new rich making up part of the upper middle class. John and Ringo’s houses were decorated professionally in “early rock star.”

Paul’s house in London is in an area called “St. John’s Wood.” It appears to have been a nice but not particularly upscale neighborhood. I’m sure that now it’s very, very expensive now due to its location. It’s my impression that the house was a good buy although it did need work before Paul could move in. Paul and Jane chose the furniture that is described as good but neither expensive nor necessarily in matched sets. Most biographers mention that Paul kept a lace cloth over the dining table; a custom not usual in the middle or upper classes. If Paul failed to realize the class distinction of this I’m sure it would have been noticed and mentioned by Jane.

Paul’s farm in Scotland was at least in part an investment and tax advantage. It remained unimproved until late 1969 when he and Linda stayed there for several months. I believe it is on the plain side still.

Linda Eastman’s father was a self-made man who lived very well on his earnings as a lawyer specializing in representing artists and musicians. Her grandfather immigrated to the US from Poland. Linda’s mother was one of the heirs to a department store chain and died when Linda was in her teens. Linda may have had an allowance, in any case her father expected her to either go to school or support herself, which she did, becoming a free-lance photographer. Some time after they married, Paul bought a home outside the city, feeling it would be more suitable for their children. It was neither large nor fancily decorated.

Yoko Ono, on the other hand, was the daughter of a wealthy samurai family and in school she was friends with the son of the Emperor pf Japan. After their marriage, John bought a very large manor called Tittenhurst Park and spent a great deal of money in alterations. After he and Yoko moved to the US they owned several houses in various parts of the country, a yacht, and as many as 6 apartments in the very expensive luxury Dakota complex.

None of the Beatles appear to have used their fame as an entry into a posh social life – the primary goal of most social climbers. While Paul was inarguably impressed with the Asher’s lifestyle, it wasn’t their social lives but the way they organized their day and their interest in what was new and interesting that most caught his attention. Although if any of the Beatles had been interested in social climbing, John appears to be well in the lead, it’s my conviction that they retained their earlier focus on money enough to support personal choices and lifestyle without any thought of achieving some special rank in society. They turned down invitations to star at Royal Command Performances after the first and totally avoided invitations from ambassadors and the like. They did once accept an invitation to attend an event connected with the university at Oxford. Barry Miles’s impression of Paul’s social life shows him primarily participating in the club scene like many of the other British rock musicians and with the people involved with the Indica bookstore and gallery.

” Bettering yourself” unavoidably has some tinge of social climbing although the immediate rewards in more money and a better home in a less violent neighborhood are the more important. True social climbing tends to be about going to fancy parti es and hobnobbing with the rich and famous. The Beatles were the rich and famous but they show no signes of seeking to mix socially witih either the aristocracy or old money — which they certainly could have done if they wanted to.

I suspect the whole thing about Paul’s alleged social climbing began with one of the early magazing or biography writers making the comment and everyone from there on out copying it without a thought of whether there was any evidence to support it or not.

Mull of Kintyre

February 26, 2007

kintyer.jpgMull is a very strange song to be a tremendously popular one. It isn’t a bit catchy, there is no “lick” or even any real “hook”. It’s one anyone can sing but it doesn’t flatter the singer’s voice. I suspect that an examination of the newspapers for a couple of months before it’s release (11/11/77*) might provide some clues as it seems to me it must be one of those songs that found it’s own perfect time and place. A perfect moment when it countered an insecurity felt by many or fulfilled a fairly specific need.

The song does invoke “indestructible Britain”; it says that some things don’t change or disappear as so much does in our times. It’s not that it invokes the past but that it places the security of a part of the past in the now.

I by no means intend to imply that Mull isn’t a good song. It simply doesn’t seem to me to be the kind of song that becomes a runaway best seller. The more usual mega-hit either is sprightly and catchy or has a hood that sinks deep into human experience/emotion, like Yesterday. Mull is practically a novelty song, particularly at a time when Folk was pretty much dead. It’s very simple, folky, in tune and lyric. The bagpipes contribute a strong pull on the sort of emotions that are very difficult to express in words and I’m sure they contributed despite the fact that you’d think they’d put the English portion off.

By the way, there may be a very simple explanation as to how Paul got the pipes in tune for recording this song: he tuned the guitars TO the pipes. Guitars are much easier to tune!

*It was the Queen’s jubilee year, she toured what was left of the Empire and then attended celebrations in various portions of Britain; EMI fired the Sex Pistols during the summer and firemen went on a national strike 3 days after the release – for what the info is worth.

History, Imagination and the Slippery Nature of Truth

November 14, 2006

I am not going to reprise the biographies of any of the individual Beatles nor the history of the group. This information is widely available both on the internet an in numerous books – admittedly of variable accuracy. I will mention specific events as they shed light (or not) on my deductions and reactions.

The One True and Only history of the band and the individuals in and around it is obscured first by the agreed-upon responses to questions beginning at their first news beatles2.jpg conference/interview. I don’t know who was smart enough to realize that they wouldn’t like having everything about their lives exposed but all in all it was a very smart move despite the problems it may cause us now. Like anyone, they did have things to hide; things that wouldn’t fit into the nice clean image Brian Epstein was building for them. Beatle mysteries are being, is not solved, at least illuminated, all the time and anyone citing an event is in danger of finding it exploded the next day. That’s just the way things are.

I won’t generally be providing footnotes in this blog. If I dispute a published authority I anticipate including a citation. I won’t be able to go back and correct everything that might someday prove to be incorrect but I welcome comments pointing out such errors. Many “facts” about the Beatles and the times are legitimately a matter of discussion and belief and I do not apologize for the choices I have made.

However, most of my deductions have been made from a large number of moments – facts – rather then being based on a single event and I don’t and won’t feel that finding that one is a non-happening will do a great deal to change my ideas. On the other hand, my ideas and understanding of the people and events changes daily and sooner rather then later I will no doubt contradict myself. Interestingly enough, peoples’ behavior is frequently contradictory. Essentially, everything in Miss Marple’s Beatles is my opinion, nothing more and nothing less. I don’t expect you to agree with everything I say. I do expect you to disagree politely.

I think this is the last of my background posts — though I suppose questions will arise that will need a background type of answer. Luckily, I can catagorize posts so those of you interested in such things can read them and the rest can just enjoy whatever is current. *smiley* I plan to make posts in this blog relatively short. The post of one day may or may not relate to the post of the day before. I recommend using the Comment search function to put the parts together. I plan to have a new post every day for those of us who must have our Beatle fix. Obviously this isn’t going to work 100%. Yes, there will be an occasional post on current events including Paul McCartney’s divorce. Will there be any exposes? Possibly. Mostly the shocks will come from different angles of vision. Mostly this blog is intended to interest and amuse you.Only time will tell if I succeed.

All entries in this blog are © Copyright M. Marshall 2006. You may quote me on your own website or blog but you must place quotes in quotation marks and credit them to me. Otherwise readers will think you said it and you’ll have to take the heat!