Get Back: The Unauthorized Chronicle of the Beatles' " Let It Be" Disaster [Paperback]

Indeed, Get Back: The Unauthorized Chronicle of the Beatles' Let it Be Disaster, did not offer any information that has not already been documented in fragments from various authors and publications. And the one thing that Sulpy and Schwieghardt do not dirctely do is answer their question of who or what broke up the Beatles. It is obvious that Yoko Ono played a major role in the breakup (Sulpy and Schweighardt's observations show her overbearing control over John's creativity and attempt at the Beatles' as well, which will play out during the Imagine sessions)along with how John, Paul, George, and Ringo changed and matured as individuals during time in which the Get Back or Let it Be sessions occurred.

The most insightful aspect of the book had been Sulpy and Schweighardt's method of chronologically showing how each track developed and evolved. What the book does is show an inkling on how the Beatles'quickly directed their musical endeavors toward being solo artists. As you read each synopsis of each song that each member was attempting to collaborate lyrically or musically, you also see several of the songs, which will eventually become solo works by each respective member down the road. One unfortunate thought comes to mind, "hey, that could have been a Beatle song." Nevertheless, it was written by a Beatle.

Despite that thought, the Beatles possessed a diverse musical heritage. This was displayed in various parts of the book describing sessions where two or all four members jammed to songs dating back to their youth, and to artists of their time --Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry, Elvis, Bob Dylan, The Band, and various standards. They would later intertwine the melodies of those songs into the songs in which they were working on.

Get Back should not be considered a record of the Beatles' "swan song", but rather a representation of their love for various musical genres and collaboration as four individuals, which contributed to what the Beatles were and always will be: a part of Rock and Roll history and culture.

however, as one other reviewer already stated, the author's need to take a break from reading beatles' minds. it's not so much that they take sides (though Yoko seems to get bashed just because the author's feel obligated to), it's more that they actually believe they know what's going through the beatles' minds. and then sometimes they contradict themselves so obviously that you wonder if the book was ever edited.

for instance, for some reason they decided to say that paul "enthusiastically" reherses everyone's songs, even george's. first of all, several pages earlier, the authors mentioned paul yawning while george explined the chords of "all things must pass." then, one page after they claim how much more enthusiastic paul was, they say how bored paul is with someone else's song and that he really wants to just play his piano numbers. a stupid mistake.

still, get this book and get some GB sessions bootlegs. you'll become a more intelligent beatles fan :)

From the look of it, it does seem like a few myths are debunked, though not the one the authors seem to think. John often complained he was not able to contribute new material because of Paul "hogging" the later records. For this session, at least, Paul appears to keep asking John to bring in new material to work on. Paul seems honestly wanting Lennon to contribute. It is Lennon himself who doesn't seem to want to. The other myth seems to be the common complaint of John that "Across the Universe" was not properly paid attention to. It DOES seem a little like Lennon himself was not that interested in working on the tune as well, so blaming the other Beatles seems a little harsh.

Having said that, I want to explain how there is HUGE flaw in this book committed by the authors. They inject into the book what the Beatles are "thinking" when they do things, something they cannot possibly know. They also give REASONS for actions for Beatles which is plainly just an opinion, but which they treat as a fact.

Case in point; They say that Paul backs up Lennon and agrees with Lennon on some things because he is scared if he does not, Lennon will leave the group. At one point, Paul does appear to not want to confront Lennon about Yoko because he perhaps fears John will just pick Yoko over the Beatles, but they use this blanket statement over all of Paul's actions toward John, something they cannot possibly know. I mean, every single thing Paul agrees with Lennon on should not be assumed to be because of this one angle. I mean, this goes way beyond the bounds of what they can know.

This book also assumes to show that George left the group because of John and not Paul and treat this as if it is indeed some sort of fact. But the truth is, the tapes that lead up to George leaving are missing, so it is impossible for them to simply assume this because of the actions of Lennon against Harrison, which are very evident, but which did not cause Harrison to immediately leave. They state that Paul is helpful, cheerful, etc., in the tapes, so he must not have really been the cause, ignoring the very real fact that Harrison himself said Paul was the reason he left. Just because Paul acted better than John in the tapes that people have does not mean he did not do something atrociously inappropriate in the missing tapes that preceeded George leaving. They say the myth is debunked, and I see no such thing. I've never heard McCartney ever say that it was John and not him that caused Harrison to leave, which is something he would seem to say since he is the always the culprit in the story.

Also, the authors seem to suggest Paul was much nicer than John in this respect, but that fails to explain if he was, why Harrison was brutal in referencing to Paul after the Beatles broke up, with quotes like he would join a band with Lennon anytime but would never join a band with McCartney. So since the tapes leading up to the quitting are missing, and Harrison himself said it was Paul, and his anger about Paul after the Beatles, I think it is safe to assume there was a big blow-up in the missing tapes between Paul and George. The authors try to excuse McCartney, making Lennon the villian. And it is true, Lennon is quite nasty in "Let It Be" to George, but that is no reason to say Paul is innocent. They both are not too nice. But Harrison's attitude is just as well to blame. Lennon could not have missed the dagger thrown at him in "I Me Mine," and we all know how Lennon reacts to such things, as we saw when Paul did the same thing to John in "Too Many People" a few years later.

But if you take out the authors' opinions and read it just as a document of sorts, it is incredibly interesting and I enjoyed every