Here There and Everywhere - my life recording the Beatles
-
Wondering if anybody else had read this book by Geoff Emmerick. I'm halfway through it , and am thoroughly enjoying it in the main , but it annoys me how obvious it is that Paul was the guy in the Beatles he was closest to. Paul is my favourite beatle too, but that wouldn't lead me to belittle the other band members contributions, which he does regularly. George is his prime target - he may as well not have been there much of the time according to Geoff ! He also seems to fairly subtley show a bit resentment towards George Martin too at times. Anybody else get those impressions ?
-
Yep, great book. One of the best IMO, and you're right, he favors Paul and seems overly critical of George's guitar playing, if I recall correctly
-
Yes, I have it, but read it quite a while back so I don't remember specifics. If Geoff was closer to Paul it was probably because they just "hit it off" and you know how much of a people-pleaser Paul is anyway!
-
This is the book to read if you need your Paul-fan devotion re-enforced!
-
Nancy R:
Yes, I have it, but read it quite a while back so I don't remember specifics. If Geoff was closer to Paul it was probably because they just "hit it off" and you know how much of a people-pleaser Paul is anyway!
Paul reminds one of the "Ultimate Teacher's Pet." I'm sure he batted his eyes now and then at Brian Epstein to get his attention as well.
-
Slanted view of it all, but that's pretty much expected: Geoff's book and his account. Ken Scott has some major criticisms, and he is often forgotten. So too, Richard Lush, Ron Richards and others. Tragically, Norman Smith's valuable contribution has been almost totally forgotten or dismissed. If you listen to the dream team of Martin and Emerick, you'd be forgiven for thinking only those two steered The Beatles recording ship.
-
Beatles4Ever&Ever:
Nancy R:
Yes, I have it, but read it quite a while back so I don't remember specifics. If Geoff was closer to Paul it was probably because they just "hit it off" and you know how much of a people-pleaser Paul is anyway!
Paul reminds one of the "Ultimate Teacher's Pet." I'm sure he batted his eyes now and then at Brian Epstein to get his attention as well.
No chance! Not while Johnny was around!
-
Emmerick actually has quite a few sly digs at George Martin too. His book is excellent to read from a point of view that no other book gives so much access to the studio. George Harrisons guitar playing was great right from the start. The solos on I Saw Her Standing There or Till there was you are fantastic. That's why his criticism of George's playing cuts no ice with me. Also imo The Beatles never sounded better than on Rubber Soul, and Geoff had nothing to do with that record.
-
Paul seemed head-and-shoulders above the other 3, including George Martin, as a musician and then a producer. As soon as Rubber Soul, Paul was basically the leader in the production room. John seemed more an experimenter in the studio, wanting to try different things to be unique. George Martin certainly was the facilitator, taking the ideas from the group & implementing them. But, Paul was the one telling Ringo how to drum on Ticket to Ride & how George should play the sitar on Norwegian Wood. Amazing prodigy.
-
JoeySmith:
Paul seemed head-and-shoulders above the other 3, including George Martin, as a musician and then a producer. As soon as Rubber Soul, Paul was basically the leader in the production room. John seemed more an experimenter in the studio, wanting to try different things to be unique. George Martin certainly was the facilitator, taking the ideas from the group & implementing them. But, Paul was the one telling Ringo how to drum on Ticket to Ride & how George should play the sitar on Norwegian Wood. Amazing prodigy.
Are you sure you are not Geoff Emmerick? Ha ha!!
In some areas, Paul was above the other three. But not in all areas. He was no where near as good a drummer as Ringo. Guiding a drummer on a song is what ALL songwriters do. In EVERY band. Paul was not as good a guitar player as George. By Abbey Road, one could argue George had become as good a song writer as Paul and John. Paul was a more complex melody writer than John, but John was always the better lyricist, even in their solo careers. As far as being above George Martin, in what way? The only reason Paul knew anything about producing was because he learned it all from George Martin. Did Paul excel? Certainly. He was a workaholic compared to the others, and very talented. But was he above them? No. Not at all. In fact, John was above Paul in a lot of ways. That's why he was the de facto leader of the Beatles. Paul only became the leader when John LET him. -
Top post Rmartinez. I certainly don't recall Paul ever giving George advice on the sitar either!
-
"I don't see how they can remember when they weren't where it was at."
-
I remain sceptical, yet open in ways, of anyone who writes a book from their front of (really) playing just one cog/role in a major machine.... I'm old school, but if I was entrusted in any position, no matter the things I heard or saw, I would never write a book in order to make money. Not that I am saying that is the case here. I am just so wary of every book written on any of the Beatles. I almost fell for it decades ago. I was just a darn fool kid. Will now need a lot of convincing to embrace the words of people who write "accounts".... The people outside of the Beatles who know most are, I hope, the ones who don't write books about it. 'Cos they appreciate THE TRUST.
-
Hasn't just about everyone written a book? Well, except Jane Asher and Heather Mills.
The former because she's an honorable private person, the latter I'm surprised she hasn't! -
Heather is deterred from writing by a gag order in the divorce settlement, I believe (and hope). Freda Kelly is one who hasn't written a book, and I respect her for it. Same for the ever-classy Jane Asher. The film makers had to beg Freda to do the project. I read Geoff Emmerick's book about five years ago and definitely came away with the impression he had an axe to grind with George.
-
I have no beef with a book about their work in the studio. I infact welcome it. There's nothing sensationalist in the book, but I don't understand his unnecessary lack of respect for George Harrison, and his petty point scoring against George Martin.
-
stuartshire:
I have no beef with a book about their work in the studio. I infact welcome it. There's nothing sensationalist in the book, but I don't understand his unnecessary lack of respect for George Harrison, and his petty point scoring against George Martin.
I agree. A book about the Beatles in the studio is cool. There are a couple already, and very good ones at that. And while I can appreciate Emmerick's "insider" take, why take cheap shots? I doubt George Harrison was a passive player in the studio, that's one reason they broke up. He was not going to do that. Musician's can sometimes be difficult. All of the Beatles, even Paul, fit that bill at some point.
-
I'd rather read Geoff Emerick or George Martin's take on things than someone like Peter Brown.
