From: saki (dlm3@midway.uchicago.edu)
Subject: Lewisohn vs. Davies
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Date: 1997/03/08



Scott Raile <spr2262@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>Let's just nutshell it by saying that Davies was commissioned to
>write a heavily whitewashed book that was ridiculed by John Lennon just
>months after its publication (January 14, 1969)....

Just a note here. Davies was not commissioned to whitewash; he got a
commission from his publisher to do a book on a non-fiction subject, and
Davies approached Brian Epstein for final permission to write about the
Beatles. Davies had already talked to McCartney and had gotten support for
the idea. Davies emphasized in his letter to Epstein that this was to be
"not a fan book, but a full study of what happened and why during the last
five years" (meaning 1962 to 1967). 

Davies was not hired by the Fabs to do this book; in fact, he offered to
share some of the proceeds with the Fabs.

All four Beatles were invited to review the book before publication. 
Davies admits that he did not mention their back-stage antics because
neither the Beatles nor their then-wives wanted this done; he also details
the fact that John was the one Beatle who asked for the most revisions,
principally about his mother's freewheeling lifestyle and the effect of
such revelations on his half-sisters. John's Aunt Mimi also read the
chapters on John's childhood and objected to "almost every paragraph which
concerned John's childhood". 

Davies even reprints a letter (in the 1985 edition) from John detailing
the changes John wanted made to the book. It was certainly unfair of John
to accuse Davies of "whitewashing" when it was Lennon who asked for the
changes. :-)

Davies also had difficulty with some Apple employees, after Brian's death,
who also objected to passages in the book, as well as Brian's mother, who
insisted that Brian had not been homosexual and wanted that portion of the
book amended.

I'm not sure I'd interpret these comments as indicative of Davies'
"whitewashing". Clearly it wasn't his idea! But his work inevitably
suffers because it's not as complete as it might have been. He knows that
and admits that in the 1985 Preface, which is worth reading before delving
into their only authorized biography.

>....whereas Lewisohn has
>spent almost twenty years engaged in the deepest kind of documentary
>research, published numerous volumes considered authoritative by the
>Beatles themselves ("Chronicle" was consulted frequently while making
>"Anthology")....

Now I love Lewisohn as much as the next fellow, but it's not quite right
to suggest that Lewisohn spent twenty years in "the deepest kind of
documentary research". He began his first book, "The Beatles Live!", in
1979, as an adjunct project while working with Philip Norman, who wrote 
"Shout!" (Norman borrowed quite heavily from Davies, it should be noted).

"Live!" was published in 1986.

"The Beatles Recording Sessions" was published in 1988, using many of the
session notes begun by Abbey Road engineer John Barrett, who died before
his work could be finished. Lewisohn stepped in (there was really no other
so well qualified) and analyzed session tapes and notes to produce "RS",
which was published in 1988. It became the basis for most present-day
biographical and session commentary, certainly so in r.m.b.

"The Complete Beatles Chronicle" was a welcome amalgam of both "Live!" and
"RS", with additional research and corrections; it was published in 1991.

While Lewisohn has undoubtedly been a Beatles scholar at heart probably
most of his life, his deepest research appears to have taken place during
the period 1979 - 1991. 

And as wonderful as these accomplishments are, I couldn't consider these
to be "numerous" publications. Incalculably valuable, of course; no
argument there! But these are so far three exceptional tomes, plus
cowriting credit for "The Beatles London" and a few magazine articles
around the time of "Anthology". I don't want to be greedy, but I wouldn't
mind more...particularly that book about 1963 that he once talked about
writing. :-)

>Comparing Lewisohn to Davies (who couldn't even be bothered to research
>the day of the Woolton village fete, for example) is a *huge* mistake. 

Not at all. Davies was approaching his task by relying on biographical
methods---chiefly interviews with the main characters and their
friends-and-relations. Paul himself probably gave Davies the erroneous
1956 date for the Woolton fete. Quite frankly, none of the Fabs seemed to
remember the exact date, or year...it was variously reported as June or
July in 1956 or 1957 for a number of years. The Boys were not very good on
details of this sort.

Lewisohn approached his task as an archivist would---almost like a good
archaeologist. He was able to ascertain the correct date for the fete (6
July 1957) by consulting documentary evidence of the event in the "South
Liverpool Weekly News". 

In fact, it was partly because of Lewisohn's distance from his historical
task that he was able to winnow through evidence that others had left
untouched. Having minimal interviews available with the Fabs themselves
(remember, Davies was a frequent participant in the Beatles' life, by
their own agreement, for over a year and a half during 1967 and 1968),
Lewisohn was forced to explore other alternatives. And to our great good
fortune, it brought us all new revelations about the Beatles' past.

Davies and Lewisohn were both serious about their work. They each
approached their books differently, in widely disparate eras, and both
produced useful volumes that contain a wealth of information for Beatles
fans and scholars alike. Each man has his failings as well---Davies must
be read with an understanding of what was omitted (and why); Lewisohn, for
all his thoroughness, was neither a musician nor recording engineer, and
makes mistakes regarding instrumentation and production techniques.

We are blessed to have the works of both available to us. As with all
research, it's up to us to read critically and fairly, with an eye toward
scholarly balance. We have our responsibilities too. :-) 

-- 
"Their music is wild, pungent, hard-hitting, 
uninhibited...and personal".
--------------------------------------------
dlm3@midway.uchicago.edu