Alan Clayson

I don't know if it's a case of getting used to Clayson's horrid writing, or if he just liked Paul more than John. Either way, this book was a touch...just a touch, mind you...more palatable than Lennon's.

Still, Clayson's annoying habit of bouncing around in time for no apparent reason, his habit of name-checking other bands to the point where I wonder exactly who the man is writing about, while giving short shrift to the things that actually apply to McCartney...things like the "Paul is dead" rumor, or his fractious relationship with various members of the Beatles and Wings...while focusing more on events or people only peripherally related to him, I found this annoying as hell.

Ah well two more to go. Wonder if he'll break out the same worn expressions yet again for George?… (meer)

I received this set about 10 years ago and somehow never got around to it, so I'm overdue.

John. A fascinating and conflicted man who never fails to engage the reader.

Unfortunately, Clayson is not the best writer, never missing the opportunity for overblown writing. He's also not the most meticulous of researchers. Just one example is when he mentions John and Yoko's second bed-in. It occurred in Montreal, but the author states Toronto. It's things like this that weaken any trust in the rest of the presented facts.

Then there's his obvious hatred for Yoko and love for Cynthia. All well and good, I guess, but his first and only job is to paint a picture of John and the important people in his life in an engaging manner. I truly don't care what the author thinks here.

So, not an auspicious start.… (meer)

Thank God there's only one more left. I don't think I could handle it if the Beatles had had five members. Clayson's snarky, poorly researched writing grates on the nerves. His use of the same phrasing in each of the books...as though he considered that no one would read all four (which, with the poor writing, theoretically is a possibility) just shows him as a lazy hack.

But where he really gets called into question is through his sloppy facts. As mentioned in my review of the John Lennon book, he stated John's Canadian bed-in took place in Toronto, when it was actually Montreal. In the Paul book, he mentioned George's birthday as Feb 24. At least, in George's own book, he got it right as Feb 25. But by this time...how much do I trust Clayson to, a) get anything right, and b) be able to write it down in a fashion that doesn't irritate or insult.

Honestly, as I ground through this third book, I kept asking myself, Does Clayson even like the Beatles?… (meer)

Well that's that. Finished the final book and thank God I'll never have to read anything by Clayson ever again. When I reviewed the Harrison book, I questioned whether Clayson even liked the Beatles. Now I'm convinced...he does not.

He rips great albums like Sgt Pepper, dismisses Ringo's talent as a drummer, and generally portrays him as a lazy, directionless vagabond, lost once he lost his band.

As per usual, Clayson seems more interested in discussing all the other people around the Beatles more than the member who's name is on the cover of the book.

As per usual, Clayson uses the same phrasing from book to book, from section to section. In all four novels, he relates the story of how Pete Best was unfairly attacked by Jim McCartney (Paul's father) when, after a gig, the other Beatles were able to sign a few autographs and escape, but Pete was mobbed by the female fans. Clayson's point? Aside from being a better drummer and a more industrious person overall, he was also the best looking of the group by far...and it's implied that that's why he was tossed from the band.

He also uses the "Ringo's pudding drums" description all four times he gets to the Free As a Bird sessions and equates the weight of the Anthology book with that of a paving slab. Four times.

I've come to the conclusion that Clayson only wrote these four books to muckrake the Beatles a touch while, at the same time, glorifying the bands that didn't make it, such as Rory Storm and the Hurricanes, or those that didn't see the same level of success, such as Gerry and the Pacemakers or the Dave Clark Five and all the others.

At the same time, his favourite Beatles were obviously Stu Sutcliffe and Pete Best.

There's a lot of Beatles books out there. Some are good, some are not. Seek out the good ones, leave the crap like this to the discount bins.… (meer)