Log In
Register
12.33pm
18 March 2013
Offline
There is this series of books called "Top Tens" and one of them, "Top Ten Innovative Bands", has The Beatles as Number 1, and in it there is a fact box that lists The Beatles' top charting singles, and they misprinted "She Loves You " as "She Loves Me".
Anyone else found a Book with Beatle fact errors?
1.20pm
5 November 2011
Offline The Beatles by Bob Spitz has a lot, one of them being he called Ringo George in a photo caption.
All living things must abide by the laws of the shape they inhabit
1.30pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline Most Beatles books will have errors if you look closely. The Beatles Encyclopedia by Bill Harry is full of them; the one i always remember is omitting Penny Lane from the Blue Album tracklisting.
Not a book but i have a pack of official Beatles playing cards that dates the Revolution promo as 1966!
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
1.54pm
9 August 2011
Offline
Errors can be typos or can be the result of an untrue story gaining popularity over time or may not be errors after all.
Whom you can completely trust??? Even the people you are writing about (in this case the Beatles) have imperfect memory and/or wish to present things differently; so even THEY aren't always 100% trustworthy.
My own book has had inaccuracies and still does. As noted in the book's thread, there's a third printing coming up and I'm happy to send the book to anyone wishing/willing to look for errors. (I plan on tweaking the section on "I Wanna Be Your Man ")
"Into the Sky with Diamonds" (the Beatles and the Race to the Moon – a history)
6.27pm
1 December 2009
Offline
There's an old post somewhere in the forum where somebody mentions reading some sort of schoolbook which refers to a Beatles album entitled Rubber Ball. I still get a giggle when I think of that.
That story about John throwing bricks through Paul's windows after he sued John, George & Ringo? You Never Give Me Your Money says it happened; Howard Soames' bio of Paul titled Fab claims it didn't. (Or vice versa...I can't remember.) One of them has to be wrong, right?
GEORGE: In fact, The Detroit Sound. JOHN: In fact, yes. GEORGE: In fact, yeah. Tamla-Motown artists are our favorites. The Miracles. JOHN: We like Marvin Gaye. GEORGE: The Impressions, Marvin Gaye. PAUL & GEORGE: Mary Wells. GEORGE: The Exciters. RINGO: Chuck Jackson. JOHN: To name but eighty.
8.55pm
8 November 2012
Offline vonbontee said
That story about John throwing bricks through Paul's windows after he sued John, George & Ringo? You Never Give Me Your Money says it happened; Howard Soames' bio of Paul titled Fab claims it didn't. (Or vice versa...I can't remember.) One of them has to be wrong, right?
That story amuses me because depending on the general drama-queen tendencies of the author, the story gets wilder and goofier. One version had Ringo, George and John hugging each other after John threw the brick. Hugging.
parlance
9.45pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline I think i read John, George and Ringo going round to Pauls and smashing a window in a Keith Badman book first but may be wrong, personally i dont believe it, smacks of sensationalisation. Wasnt it after the Judge sided with Paul in his lawsuit against his ex-bandmates in 1971? I wonder if the others apologised to and thanked Paul after they found out Klein was shafting them. John did say Paul was right.
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
11.36pm
26 March 2012
Offline I first read of the brick incident in Geoffrey Giuliano's Blackbird Singing, which also spins this highly dramatised and sensationalised yarn.
During the recording of Abbey Road Paul on one occasion chose not to attend an early-evening session as it was apparently the first anniversary of his initial meeting with Linda. John, reasonably enough, felt this a rather lame excuse to inconvenience so many people, and after hanging about a couple of hours for the delinquent Beatle, finally raced around the corner for a confrontation.
Screeching to a halt out front, Lennon didn't even bother ringing the bell, opting instead to climb up over the eight-foot-high gate in a fit of fury. Once inside the cobblestone courtyard, he sprinted up to the large red door and began banging without cessation for several tense minutes. Eventually Paul opened up. "Just what the bloody hell are you playing at, McCartney!" John shouted, pushing his way inside the front hall. "You must have fuckin' known before now that you couldn't make it. What about us lot then? Ringo, George and I all drove in from the country for this thing and you don't have the motherfuckin' decency to turn up?"
"But it's our anniversary tonight," McCartney replied weakly.
"Bollocks!" Lennon screamed. "You don't see me canceling anything for my anniversaries with Yoko. Why don't you grow up? Those fuckin' bastards at the studio have all got to be paid as well, you know. None of it comes cheap either."
With that the irate Lennon bolted into McCartney's living room and snatched from the wall a favorite painting he had done for his partner and ceremoniously put his foot through it. "Happy anniversary, mate!" he said as he turned to leave. For Paul it was a deeply hurtful and embarrassing episode.
The incident itself is difficult enough to envisage (would the Paul of 1969 really abandon plans for a session on a whim and leave everything in the hands of the others? Would John really be that infuriated by this?), but the way it's told here takes it to an entirely new level of implausibility. I particularly like the profane gangster-speak the author has carefully tailored for John, not to mention the lame feed-the-audience-everything-they-know dialogue ("you don't see me canceling anything for my anniversaries with Yoko!"). Obviously this altercation could have actually happened, but when I read it I couldn't help but groan. The brick-throwing part is dolled up in the same kind of nonsense.
The following people thank Ben Ramon for this post:
Mr. KiteSHUT UP - Paulie's talkin'
1.21am
8 November 2012
Offline ^^ I was going to add that the brick-throwing incident tends to get mixed up with the favorite painting incident. There are photos an Apple Scruff took of John scaling Paul's wall, but they weren't taken the same date as the March '71 hearing decided in Paul's favor, and who knows what actually happened once John got inside anyway. Paul denies that John destroyed the painting, but from what I recall, Paul didn't show up for a session for whatever reason and there was some sort of confrontation.
I think, vonbontee, it was indeed Doggett who debunked the brick incident, but I don't have the book on me at the moment. Whoever debunked the story said that John et al didn't attend the hearing that day, so the idea that John would have immediately retaliated doesn't track.
parlance
12.58pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline From Keith Badman's 'The Beatles After the Break-Up 1970 - 2000: A day-by-day Diary':
"Friday March 12 1971
"...When John, George and Ringo are told of the result [me: that the Judgement of Paul's lawsuit against his ex-bandmates and Apple goes in Paul's favour] they leave the court and head back to Saville Row in John's white Rolls Royce, telling reporters in their trail, "No comment!". According to the Apple Scruffs , the three ex-Beatles then drive to Paul's home in Cavendish Avenue in St. John's Wood where John grabs two bricks from his car, scales the wall of Paul's home and proceeds to throw them through his windows. John, George and Ringo return to Apple's headquarters where again they face a barrage of questions from the press waiting outside their offices.""
So going by that the story originates from the Apple Scruffs and im willing to bet to at least some of their stories were exaggerated. Hasnt this whole story actually been disproven? Has anyone got access to Dogget's 'You Never Give Me Your Money ', im sure thats one that does?
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
5.00pm
Reviewers
29 November 2012
Offline At first I thought this thread was dedicated solely to Bob Spitz' putrid biography from several years back 
I'm reading Many Years From Now right now and while excellent, there are some glaring errors in it, such as claiming that either Wait or Run For Your Life (can't remember which) opened Revolver ! 
"I know you, you know me; one thing I can tell you is you got to be free!"
Please Visit My Website, The Rock and Roll Chemist
Twitter: @rocknrollchem
Facebook: rnrchemist
5.01pm
Reviewers
29 November 2012
Offline unknown said
The Beatles by Bob Spitz has a lot, one of them being he called Ringo George in a photo caption.
That entire book is one huge error, bound in hardcover and written by a real prick.
"I know you, you know me; one thing I can tell you is you got to be free!"
Please Visit My Website, The Rock and Roll Chemist
Twitter: @rocknrollchem
Facebook: rnrchemist
5.26pm
1 December 2009
Offline DrBeatle said
unknown said
The Beatles by Bob Spitz has a lot, one of them being he called Ringo George in a photo caption.That entire book is one huge error, bound in hardcover and written by a real prick.
LOL I'm the only one on this entire forum who enjoyed the Spitz book, errors and all! (My copy's not hardcover, however.)
GEORGE: In fact, The Detroit Sound. JOHN: In fact, yes. GEORGE: In fact, yeah. Tamla-Motown artists are our favorites. The Miracles. JOHN: We like Marvin Gaye. GEORGE: The Impressions, Marvin Gaye. PAUL & GEORGE: Mary Wells. GEORGE: The Exciters. RINGO: Chuck Jackson. JOHN: To name but eighty.
6.40pm
Reviewers
29 November 2012
Offline I had a bad feeling about it the second I opened it up (my mum got it for me for Christmas the year it was released). The picture caption errors tipped me off, as did the numerous goofs in the text. But what killed it for me is what an absolute grade-A asshole he was to the fans who (at first), gently pointed out the (numerous) errors to him and his publishers. His responses were so nasty and he was such a prick that the fans brutalized him, which only made him angrier. Google his name and his Beatles book together ("Bob Spitz Beatles") and read some of the things he wrote back to fans who pointed out errors.
Here's a taster: http://www.beatlesnews.com/new.....rrors.html
The following people thank DrBeatle for this post:
Mr. Kite"I know you, you know me; one thing I can tell you is you got to be free!"
Please Visit My Website, The Rock and Roll Chemist
Twitter: @rocknrollchem
Facebook: rnrchemist
7.49pm
4 July 2012
Offline Not exactly a Beatles book, but in my chorus class one of the music history textbooks says Let it Be was written by John for his own mother... Needless to say I got a red pen and fixed it.
The following people thank nowhereland for this post:
Mr. Kite8.20pm
Reviewers
29 November 2012
Offline nowhereland said
Not exactly a Beatles book, but in my chorus class one of the music history textbooks says Let it Be was written by John for his own mother... Needless to say I got a red pen and fixed it.
That's as bad as a Facebook wallpaper I saw the other day that someone made that had a sillhouette of the Beatles and the quote underneath read "And in the end the love you take is equal to the love you make" - Lennon
I set that straight QUICKLY!
"I know you, you know me; one thing I can tell you is you got to be free!"
Please Visit My Website, The Rock and Roll Chemist
Twitter: @rocknrollchem
Facebook: rnrchemist
9.09pm
14 October 2012
Offline Dot Rhone's name is spelt wrong in Many Years From Now, but that's a pretty insignificant mistake (no offence to Dot)
"I don't think we were actually swimming, as it were, with shirts on, 'cos we always wear overcoats when we're swimming,"-
George Harrison, Australia, June 1964
9.09pm
1 November 2012
Offline DrBeatle said
I had a bad feeling about it the second I opened it up (my mum got it for me for Christmas the year it was released). The picture caption errors tipped me off, as did the numerous goofs in the text. But what killed it for me is what an absolute grade-A asshole he was to the fans who (at first), gently pointed out the (numerous) errors to him and his publishers. His responses were so nasty and he was such a prick that the fans brutalized him, which only made him angrier. Google his name and his Beatles book together ("Bob Spitz Beatles") and read some of the things he wrote back to fans who pointed out errors.
Here's a taster: http://www.beatlesnews.com/new.....rrors.html
Interesting report by Trina Yannicos and Shelley Germeaux. However, one of the errors they picked up isn't proven to be an error, and they make an unwarranted inference implying an error:
"p612: George Martin recorded Spike Jones!
I guess he's older than we thought."
Actually, had they done minimal research, they would have learned that Spike Jones was recording nearly right up to his death in 1965 -- his last recording was in 1964. George Martin was born in 1926, so in the mid 1960s he was in his late 30s, and thus he certainly would have been old enough to work with Spike Jones (let alone even a decade earlier).
Faded flowers, wait in a jar, till the evening is complete... complete... complete... complete...
9.30pm
18 March 2013
Offline 
" 'She Loves Me' was #3 "
11.26pm
5 November 2011
Offline vonbontee said
DrBeatle said
unknown said
The Beatles by Bob Spitz has a lot, one of them being he called Ringo George in a photo caption.That entire book is one huge error, bound in hardcover and written by a real prick.
LOL I'm the only one on this entire forum who enjoyed the Spitz book, errors and all! (My copy's not hardcover, however.)
I enjoyed the Spitz's book. I only noticed a couple errors, too since it was only the second book I had read about them, and I didn't know too much at the time.
All living things must abide by the laws of the shape they inhabit
