Customer Reviews

Revolver: The Secret History of the Beatles

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(11)

 

 

Every book this guy writes is mostly created in his head with no facts to back him up. He writes his own Amazon Reviews and I'm sure he's his own fact checker. He is poorly regarded by The Beatle community almost as much as Albert Goldman. Save your money and buy "Here, There and Everywhere : My Life Recording the Music of the Beatles" by Geoff Emerick. At least you'll read the truth.

This book is very poorly written from a number of perspectives.

The timeline is atrocious. For example, you'll read about the death of Brian Epstein, then 50+ pages later he appears again in another section with no indication that the timeline has changed. This jumping is very frequent, and appears all over the book. Poorly organized.

Opinion is everywhere. The author feels the need to inject his commentary on the Beatles' behaviors. Of course, don't expect any analysis of WHY Lennon was so moody, or WHY McCartney was dominating, or why Starr and Harrison were resentful. Don't even expect to get enough information to let you make some of your own conclusions either.

Another key failing in this book is the way it quickly glosses over key events leaving you wanting to know more - just one example is the whole period during which they recorded Revolver - the very title of the book! Another example is when Ringo is quoted as not thinking Sgt Peppers was their best work. Well, why not and what was Ringo's favorite? Mr, Guiliano, you opened the door for us, so why not let us walk through?

On the other hand, there is FAR too much detail on their time with the Maharishi and the general workings of that organization. Enough already! I want to read about the Beatles, not some controversial religious figure! There's also a lot of tawdry details on the love affairs, drug use/abuse, drug busts, and other seedy aspects of their career that are pure tabloid fluff.

Unforgivable beyond all others, there are obvious factual errors everywhere. I've just finished reading Geoff Emerick's incredibly intriguing book and I can easily tell where Guiliano has either not done proper research or is simply inventing stories that will sound interesting. There are several contradictions.

Overall, this is written like a collection of articles from People magazine (or whatever they had back then), with no real substance or depth to the content. I'm sorry I spent the money on it.

Other reviewers on the US board have said it quite well - this book is nothing but a waste of money and time. Geoffrey Giuliano has fed off the Beatles' fame by digging up hearsay and inaccurate statements at best, malicious gossip and rumors at worst. George Harrison was no fan of Mr. Giuliano and I have no doubt the Messrs. Starkey and McCartney feel the same way. John Lennon did not suffer fools gladly and I have absolutely no doubt he would be disgusted with this work. This book is on a par with poorly written tabloid pieces. If you do decide to read this, check it out at your library or read it in your local bookstore and DON'T waste your good money on this. I am tired of Mr. Giuliano using the Beatles as a grindstone for his axe.

The Beatle Literati are extremely displeased with this book as well. Many Beatle Literati have read this so as to base an accurate opinion. My issues with this execrable work are as follows: the inconsistent time line; the nonlinear sequence in reporting; the subjective tone of the writing; relying on hearsay, e.g. "a friend of a friend said the following...;" the judgmental statements such as hostile John and controlling Paul. Horse manure! People are much more complex than this author would have his readers believe.

I agree with another reviewer on the US board who would rather read about the Beatles than the Marharishi! The overemphasis on the Fabs' sex lives is tiresome and tawdry; the tiresome dissertation on their drug use and busts is drawn out to the point of beating a dead horse.

This book lacks the research that so many others have provided, such as Andy Babiuk; Geoff Emrick; Joshua Greene; Pat Kinzer Mancuso; Alan Clayson and Ray Coleman, to name a few. Giuliano is notorious for his execrable hatchet jobs about the Beatles. Any man who would fake his own death as Mr. Giuliano did in 2001 would apparently stoop to any low level to hawk such tawdry trash.

I was pretty dissapointed with this book. All the "inside information" has been pretty much common knowledge. Although "taking sides" is pretty much a natural in doing Beatles books, the author seems particularly anti Paul/Linda. It seemed to me the author's main interest wasn't even the Beatles, but Hare Krishna.

I'd suggest "Magical Mystery Tours, My Life With the Beatles" by Tony Bramwell. It was a much more detailed and enjoyable read.

Much of what appears in this book is largely based on second or third-hand, suspect information. Don't waste your money on this poorly-written, self-absorbed, speculative (at best) tabloid in hard cover. Rather, spend your money on works like "Shout", I Me Mine, or the Hunter Davies treatise on the Beatles.

Don't waste your time on this drivel. This writer has unjustly thrived over the years consistently raking up false malicious muck on the Fabs.

True Beatles scholars know Giuliano for what he is - he was despised by George Harrison and I'm sure Paul feels the same way.

Is it me or did the author of the book in question most likely write that last review? The writer ran out and bought 5 copies to give to his friends? You have got to be kidding me.

I haven't read the book, it may very well be good, but I highly doubt that last review was by someone that is not connected somehow to profiting by this books sales.

I have read Giuliano's books before and have enjoyed them, but he is seen with such skepticism by most who know anything about the Beatles that I find it hard to believe that anyone not connected to the book would dish out such over the top praise as the last review.

In all honesty, I haven't read the book-and you've given me a good reason to not read it. If you look at my purchase history, I've helped keep Paul in hair dye for years(although I'd do the same thing if I had enough hair). Anyway, generally Giuliano's books seem to be written by a "wannabe". However, here is something you might want to check out-it could be another mistake the author made-or it could be a clerical error by one of your reviewers. Although, I wasn't present in the summer of 68 at Abbey Road,in all my Beatle related books that I have that address the topic, it is Paul who erased Ringo's drums-and Paul who played them on Back in the USSR. And in all the accounts I've read, when Ringo heard the playback the next day, he knew it wasn't his work, but he said nothing. Correct me if I'm wrong-but I'm basing it on what I've read in the voluminous Beatle books that have taken over my dining room-which is okay because I don't have a dining room table, but I do have a chandelier. Would you like one? Philip R. McCrea...the retired teacher.

How is this guy still able to find a publisher? It's sad to think someone like this can churn out the same old tired lines, stick a photo on the cover and become a 'best selling Beatles author.' If you want to read about The Beatles, buy Mark Lewisohn books, or better yet - The Beatles Anthology.

To quote Olivia Harrison from "The Guardian" newspaper dated October 10, 1992: "To rate himself the world's greatest rock and roll biographer (a laughable title in the first place) is nothing but delusion. He has only been in the vicinity of my husband for about 10 minutes and considers himself an expert.

...

His life is a 'curse' to himself and perhaps his admitted 300 acid trips by the age of 19 has something to do with it. I'm sick of this guy"

Aren't we all?

In this "book" you can read stories like the Beckett - Lennon interview (probably from the totally fictional website The hapeless dilettante) and then ask yourself; is John Blake a serious publishing house? Having also read Alistair Taylors "With the Beatles" also by J.Blake, the question feels accurate. In the latter you will discover breathtaking new "facts" like dope-smoking Beatles in 1963, Michelle performed live in -64, that is, if you bother to machete yourself through the incredible amount of spelling errors in the text (most significant Brain instead of Brian - Epstein).