The Walrus Was Paul: The Great Beatle Death Clues (Paperback)

~ (Author) "The Beatles were the musical messiahs of the turbulent sixties..." (more)
Key Phrases: death clues, black carnation, black walrus, John Lennon, Abbey Road, George Harrison (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Review

Jim Zippo ABC Radio Network The Walrus Was Paul is loaded...[with] mind-blowing stuff....The best Beatle book yet! -- Review

Review

Jay FoxABC Fab Four FridaysA must read for any fan of the Fab Four.

Jim ZippoABC Radio NetworkThe Walrus Was Paul is loaded...[with] mind-blowing stuff....The best Beatle book yet!

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 208 pages
• Publisher: Fireside (October 29, 1998)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0684850621
• ISBN-13: 978-0684850627
• Product Dimensions: 8.2 x 5.4 x 0.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 8 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (26 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #97,060 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in this category: (What's this?)

  #2 in

  Books > Entertainment > Pop Culture > Music > Beatles > Paul McCartney

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

21 of 26 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars The long and winding book, May 6, 1999

By	Dan Amrich (Bay Area CA) - See all my reviews

In total, this isn't an irresponsible examination of the hoax, but the book's pacing is unsteady, it seems that Patterson believes the hype a bit too much, offering links and connections that neither engage the reader nor make much sense. I'm sorry--the bare feet on McCartney's "Off the Ground" album are not related to Paul's barefoot stroll across Abbey Road. Fans of the Paul death clues should be prepared for outlandish theories, I suppose, but many examples in the book simply prove how far some people will go to see what they want to see, to believe what they want to believe--and you can't help but feel like an outsider as a result.

The book is peppered with neat summaries of non-death-clue-related Beatles history along the way (which turn out to be more enjoyable, smooth reading than anything else), but they do sidetrack the Paul-is-dead narrative somewhat, and eventually the book degenerates into a psuedo-religious, semi-sociological essay. The repeated first-person voice/name dropping ("My good friend so-and-so gave me an interview...") shifts focus from subject to author in a most jarring fashion.

The topic is worthy of examination and Patterson does sometimes hit his stride, but as a whole the book falters. A less critical/more tongue-in-cheek look (or, perhaps, a shorter book) would have been welcomed. Speaking words of wisdom, let it be.

7 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Some good information hidden by horrible writing., October 6, 2003

By	David Damari "visiondoc" (Germantown, TN United States) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

There is some interesting information contained in this book. I had heard most of the "death clues" given in this book when I was in high school (over 20 years ago) but it was interesting to have them brought to my attention again, especially now that my daughter is interested in the Beatles and was curious about the album cover photography. The most interesting material in the book was about how the rumors got their start in Detroit and spread like wildfire through the radio and then the print media. The history of this rumor would certainly suggest that the news industry hasn't changed all that much in 40 years.
My biggest difficulty with this book is the writing. I would say that the problem is with the editing but it would appear that a competent editor never saw the manuscript before publication. Most sentences are incoherent and awkward. Thoughts are suggested in one sentence and dropped in the next. In fact, the author seems incapable of completing one line of thought before continuing on to the next. Finally, the organization of the book would seem to be chronological but in fact is anything but logical.
I would recommend this book for the content but certainly not for the delivery of that content.

8 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars One of the worst Beatle books, May 17, 2006

By	Leggo Ami (Richmond, VA USA) - See all my reviews

This is not a serious examination of the "Paul is Dead" clues and should not be mistaken for one. The credibility of the book is nil because it is full of obvious factual errors such as...

Pg 14: Glen Campbell spells his name with one "n" not two. It's Bruce Johnston with a "t". Page 65: Though an early working title for the Stones lp was possibly Her Satanic Majesty's Request, the actual title of the final release was Their Satanic Majesties' Request. (Neither title makes a whole helluva lotta sense)

Pg 21: Robert Fraser is misidentified as a "photographer," when in fact he was Paul's heroin-addicted gallery owner friend, a business partner with the actual photographer for the Sgt Pepper sessions, Michael Cooper. All this is detailed in the book, Paul McCartney: Many Years From Now by Barry Miles, released after Patterson's book, but Cooper is clearly noted as photographer on the back cover of Sgt Pepper!

Pg 27: Though Lennon may've said that Paul's major contribution to "A Day in the Life" was the "I'd love to turn you on" bit, surely his major contribution is the well-known middle eight, the "woke up, fell out of bed" bit. Paul wrote that exclusive of John and Paul sings it.

Pg 40: The assertion that it "took a full night" to record the "inner groove" is wrong. It was a fairly quick effort on Friday 21 April, part of a session that also included mono mixing for "Only a Northern Song." Surely the mixing took up most of the time. Why, when Patterson's own bibliography lists the Lewisohn book, The Beatles Recording Sessions (univerally admired for its accuracy), did he go to the suspect Dowlding for the lowdown on this issue? (See page 109 of Lewisohn).

Pgs 99-100: The Question and Answer session described as a "press conference" is no such thing. Those questions and the answers were authored by Paul McCartney as part of a promotional insert given away with some early copies of the McCartney lp. There was no real press conference, just a self-serving fake one by a recently solo Beatle.

There's too much reliance here on bad secondary and tertiary sources, and no fact checking. It's just plain awful. This odd pop culture phenomenon deserves better treatment. (Comments are based on an earlier edition by Dowling Press)