April 10, 1970—It fell to The Cute One to say that
the Fab Four were history. Inevitably, the announcement by Paul McCartney ignited a debate that continues to this day about
who or what was really responsible for the breakup of the Beatles.
The Beatles bassist (“Macca,” as the British
tabloids have called him over the years) felt aggrieved that many fans blamed
him for the split in the band that, since their landing in the United States
six years before, had transformed world culture. From his perspective, he
was the last person in the quartet who should have taken the rap for this. All
three of his bandmates had, at one time or another in the last year or so,
walked out on the group as they found it increasingly impossible to work
together. The prior September, in fact, John Lennon had to be talked out of revealing his decision to exit because the other members were finishing negotiations for a longed-for better deal on past royalties.
It had simply been his lot to state publicly (albeit
coyly, in a promotional “self-interview” for his first solo LP) what had become
increasingly apparent to those in the know: that he did not expect to work with
the other three again
So who or what drove the four apart?
1) Drugs.
How trite, I can hear you say, Faithful Reader: What rock ‘n’ roll group hasn’t gotten involved in drugs? True.
But there are levels upon levels of drug use that make a huge difference, in
productivity and interpersonal relations. In the case of the Beatles, McCartney
might have been a pothead, but that didn’t interfere with his habit of doing
something creative every day, instilled while he had dated former girlfriend
Jane Asher by her mother. But Lennon had started taking acid and heroin, leaving him in little condition
to match his ostensible songwriting partner in writing tunes or leading the
band. The other members were stunned by
what was occurring. “This was a fairly big shocker for us," McCartney
said, in Mikal Gilmore’s revealing Rolling Stone analysis of the split
nearly 40 years after the fact, "because we all thought we were far-out
boys, but we kind of understood that we'd never get quite that far-out."
2) Infuriating musical sessions.
The death of manager Brian Epstein in 1967 left the Beatles rudderless—a void
that McCartney sought to fill. That tendency might have been resented by Lennon,
but he was in little shape to offer an alternative direction because of his
heroin abuse. All he could do was go into passive-aggressive mode in his
withdrawn, inert state. Recording sessions at their Abbey Road studios took
forever to start and, often, just as long to finish. McCartney, getting little
feedback from Lennon, as he had in the old days, now indulged to the hilt his
control-freak tendencies, particularly irking George Harrison by telling the masterful lead guitar not to play on
one song. Just how fragile things had become became apparent when Ringo Starr,
the most easygoing of the four, walked out on the group became of these rising
studio tensions. Matters reached a truly awful state while preparing for a lunchtime concert atop their Apple headquarters in 1969. The so-called "Get Back" rehearsals were so lifeless and uncollaborative that the group feared for its reputation. Their attempt at a solution--hiring "Wall of Sound" producer Phil Spector--only further contributed to tensions. John, delighted that someone could do anything with with this mess, would turn to Spector for several subsequent solo LPs; McCartney, appalled by all the strings added to his song 'The Long and Winding Road," released his alternative version more than 30 years later, Let It Be--Naked.
3) Women.
Those men who ascribe the faults of the universe to the female of the species
had a field day with the women closest to the Beatles. Only this time, other
women, jealous at the ones who made off with one of the desired Fab Four, often
joined in the pileup. For awhile, it was Linda Eastman, wed to Paul in
1969, who bore the brunt of much scorn, particularly when Paul, dispensing with any
possible conflict of interest, turned to her brother for financial advice. But
before long, Yoko Ono took the full wave of public opprobrium—for stealing
Lennon away from his wife; for joining him in group recording sessions that had normally been closed to outsiders, becoming, in effect, a fifth Beatle; for distracting her husband with all kinds of
extramusical adventures (e.g., a “bed-in” for peace); and sometimes (but not
always) mixed in with this, simple racism.
4) Money.
They might have been the world’s most popular entertainers, but the Beatles
were increasingly finding themselves hard-pinched. With their Apple venture,
begun with high hopes, bleeding them dry, they sought financial advice to get
them out of the morass. Their attempt to extricate themselves with a manager
who would look after their interests only became a source of further division,
with McCartney bitterly opposing their selection of Allen Klein to represent them. (They might have been better off simply to ask Dave Clark to chuck the music business for good and concentrate on their work-he was perhaps the most money-savvy of all the British Invasion musicians.)
5) Different Places in Life.
When they started, the Beatles were four young guys hoping to make enough from
whatever talent they had to emerge with something more than they had in
Liverpool. In the years since, fame, the world, their aspirations, and life
itself had gotten between them. John was giving full vent to the rebel
tendencies that had been apparent even as a teenager, even as the collapse of
his first marriage was bringing to the surface all kinds of guilt he would increasingly
try to expunge through unconventional forms of psychotherapy. Paul, less
interested in social statements, was concentrating on his recently started family with Linda. George had grown tired of having John and Paul, the group’s two principal songwriters, vetoing one song
or another of his from the group’s albums. Ringo was displaying an entirely
non-musical interest: acting.
Just before the end of the year, a writ would be
filed on McCartney’s behalf in High Court in London to extricate him from the
Beatles. As with most legal wrangles, it created an ancillary set of tensions
and resentments that would linger even after the case was settled in 1975.
With time, the hopes for a reunion grew so wild and
hyped that the group members, even when they visited each other or helped on individual projects, came to see that any possible return concert or project could only be viewed as anticlimactic.
No comments:
Post a Comment