| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 9/17/2009 10:18:30 AM | | I think some light needs to thrown on The Beatle's original manager, Brian Epstein. He was a tragic figure in The Beatles legacy. While John used to hurt Brian's feelings by calling him a "Fag Jew", (Lennon wasn't one to mince words.) I think John (and the rest of The Beatles) had a great deal of affection for Brian. (Just not the kind he hoped for.) The Beatles probably still would have made it big, but there might not have been all that "Beatle-mania" without Epstein. Brian was a great promoter. When The Beatles were on top and had decided to quit touring, Brian wasn't needed anymore. Yet, even though The Beatles had outgrown him, it's clear that they were crushed by the news of his death. Epstein was sweet on both Lennon and McCartney. His inability to secure a lasting relationship in his personal life led to his suicide. He hadn't even turned 30 yet. I think this thread would serve its purpose if it brought Brian Epstein a little more of the recognition he deserves. Of all the people behind The Beatles, Brian is by far the most mysterious. Does anyone have any insights into this secretive man? | |
|
| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 9/18/2009 9:58:56 AM | | Hmmm. It appears people don't have anything to say about Brian Epstein. It's understandable. Brian was a shadowy character. I remember him as something of a spokesman for The Beatles in the early days, but little is known about him as an individual. One of the things I recall about Brian is that when Beatle-mania was is full swing, the cameras would sweep over the frenzy of hysterical girls creating such a uproar that The Beatles couldn't even hear themselves play, occasionally you could catch a glimpse of Brian standing calmly in the crowd. I couldn't help wonder what he was thinking as he stood amidst all that hysteria. He was probably thinking, "Wow, we wanted to make it big in America, but this is way beyond anything we could have imagined." Anyway, those were the good days for Brian. One can only speculate how his world turned upside down just a few years later. | |
|
| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 9/18/2009 5:20:36 PM | Yes, I agree that Epstein was hugely instrumental in launching the Beatles career. However, in later years after Brian had died, it was discovered that he had screwed up immensely with regard to the Beatles finances - particularly royalties. At the peak of their success , it was discovered that they were still being paid the same royalty percentages from sales that they were getting when they signed their first record deal years ago! Brian hadn't gone back to negotiate a higher royalty when the Beatles became huge, because he felt that it had been a "gentlemen's agreement" and he couldn't go "back on his word". He had also pissed away the rights to tons and tons of endorsements for manufactured goods.... things like Beatles lunchboxes, figurines and many other things that were netting these companies that were making them, millions and millions of dollars.
I credit him for having the vision to believe in the Beatles and to help launch them. I think he had the right stuff. But I feel that George Martin was much more instrumental for their success as far as the music is concerned. | |
|
| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 9/19/2009 8:45:18 AM | Balboa 4 U said:
but little is known about him as an individual.
Not really true. As an important figure in Beatles' biographies, quite a lot is known about him. One or two biographies go into quite a bit of detail. He came from an affluent Jewish family, was completely devoted to his mother, and became addicted to a huge variety of pills which ultimately led to his death. Albert Goldman's "The Lives of John Lennon" provides quite detailed information about Brian, his upbringing and early history, as well as details about his personal life and homosexuality. There are other biographies as well that provide considerable insight into "The Man Who Discovered The Beatles". | |
|
| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 9/19/2009 4:14:37 PM | You seem to be a good source for information so if you have the time to write down some of the details from those books, I'd certainly be interested in reading them.
Thank you. | |
|
| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 9/20/2009 12:00:28 PM | | "The Love You Make" is a far more credible read about the Beatles than the Albert Goldman book... I believe it was written by Mark Lewishon | |
|
| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 9/20/2009 12:41:21 PM | metaldog said:
"The Love You Make" is a far more credible read about the Beatles than the Albert Goldman book
I disagree. "The Love You Make" while insightful, was dangled in front of everyone that was involved in the book for their endorsement and approval. Do you really think that you're hearing the whole story? Or just a play-it-safe censored/toned-down version of what really happened? Goldman's book was harsh and didn't paint many of the people in it in a particularly good way. That's why it was received so negatively after its release. People just didn't want to read any negativity about their heroes. But I believe it was a more honest book than "The Love You Make" Goldman would have had his ass sued to the hilt, if his version and account of what happened could be proven as untrue or slanderous. It never happened. There was some rumblings from Yoko Ono's people about legal action - but it never happened. Don't get me wrong - the Beatles were gods to me growing up, and that never really left me. But I don't want to be spoon-fed syrupy, sugar-sweet information about people I admire. I'll read the information and decide for myself how I feel about a particular artist or band, and whether there's a ring of truth to it. "The Love You Make" was less of a goody-two-shoes approach that other biographies that I have read, and I did find it a reasonable read. But I still maintain that there's a lot less of the whole story there.
I believe it was written by Mark Lewishon
Nope. Peter Brown with Steven Gaines. I'm reading it again right now. | |
|
| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 9/20/2009 5:21:49 PM | i dont think they needed brian epstein, if nothing else he held the beatles back.probably why they couldnt get a record deal in america, because of his homosexuality. i always thought he was the weird one becasue he was gay.
in 1984 there was a documentry called "the compleat beatles" narrated by malcolm mcdowell. john and george were asked about epsteins death and both seemed stunned.
if im going to read a book on the beatles,
i would prefer one that is pleasent and comforting and reassuring. almost like a bedtime story.
i agree with metaldog "the love you make" would be a more enjoyable read.
as far as anything else ..... so what | |
|
| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 9/20/2009 10:57:09 PM |
i always thought he was the weird one becasue he was gay.
Clearly your stance on Brian Epstien's role in the Beatles is based on his sexuality, and your homophoboa.
if im going to read a book on the beatles,
i would prefer one that is pleasent and comforting and reassuring. almost like a bedtime story.
The Beatles' story cannot exclude their many fallacies and wrong turns. Unless you want to read the early sixties Pop mags that would indulge the readers with what favourite Ice-cream Ringo likes, and the colour of Paul's hair.. (While I'm sure they are having flings, popping uppers to finish exausting tours, and smoking up with Bob Dylan) | |
|
| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 9/21/2009 4:48:55 PM | hdready09 said:
thought he was the weird one becasue he was gay.
And you actually carried that opinion with you all the way in your journey from the Nineteenth Century. Amazing.
So you're saying that weird=gay? Brian Epstein's homosexuality had nothing to do with his prowess as the manager of a band. And The Beatles couldn't get a record deal because of the narrow-minded muttonheads that ran the music industry at the time. None of them would have known a good thing if it reared up and bit them in their backsides.
i agree with metaldog "the love you make" would be a more enjoyable read.
Have you actually read Goldman's book? I have my doubts. | |
|
| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 9/21/2009 5:54:58 PM | I wonder how far The Beatles would have gotten without Brian Epstein. They were drawing big crowds at The Cavern which then attracted his attention.
No doubt that he knew how to mix and socialize with the people who ran the music industry, but he sure didn't have a clue about the financial end...and neither did the Beatles themselves for that matter. Just look at the Apple situation.
The best decision they could have made to save their sanity was to hop off the tour/treadmill circuit and explore other interests and that's what they did.
Sadly, Brian didn't have anything to do anymore. One day he's the most important person to talk to on the tour and suddenly it's all over.
His once all important role in the Beatle universe is over.
That had to hurt.
The Beatles legend is filled with numerous tragic tales. Can you imagine how Pete Best, the original drummer felt watching Beatlemania? Or the guy who filled in as a drummer for a tour while Ringo was laid up in the hospital? Or even Ringo himself who was judged not good enough to drum on the recording session of "Love Me Do".
Like the Beatles said themselves... "You had to be a real **stard at times to be a Beatle." | |
|
| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 9/21/2009 6:22:51 PM | | From what I've heard, it wasn't that Ringo wasn't good enough to drum on "Love Me Do." He showed up at that session at the request of John and Paul but George Martin didn't even know who he was. Martin already had a session drummer scheduled and he had the final say. Nevertheless, Ringo was crushed. He was already playing in another successful band, (Ringo was already a professional drummer at that point.) but he made special arrangements to come because he was doing John and Paul a favor. As for the guy that stood in for Ringo on tour when Ringo was in the hospital, he knew he was temporary. I'll bet he was thrilled to have the chance to play with The Beatles just once. I would be. Can you imagine the bragging rights there? That being said, I do agree that Pete Best got the shaft. I heard that The Beatles wanted him out because he was too good looking and the girls wanted him more than they wanted the other guys. It's an ironic twist of fate that in the beginning, Ringo was the most popular member of the band due to his cuteness factor. Does anyone remember The Beatles cartoon? Nearly every plot revolved around Ringo. Uhh-huh.. yeah. Even Yellow Submarine was mostly about Ringo. | |
|
| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 9/23/2009 3:45:22 PM | For the record, when Epstein was going to write his book, Lennon quipped that it would be called "Queer Jew". When Eppy called it "A Cellar Full of Noise", Lennon called it "A Cellarful of Boys".
Epstein was instrumental in their success, but was a naive and short sighted business man, IMO. They most certainly would have been nothing without him though. But he didn't realize that he could've called any shot he wanted and gotten it from 1964 onward. That is if the Beatles agreed to go along with it.
If you really want to know who was important, let's discuss George Martin. Now without him, they would've been good, but not the icons we see them as today.
Yesterday with no strings? Tomorrow Never Knows w/o tape loops? Mr. Kite w/o the chopped up fairground music? Strawberry Fields w/o the edit? | |
|
| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 9/23/2009 5:20:03 PM | I agree that George Martin would make a more interesting discussion. I chose Brian Epstein because unlike Martin, few seem to know enough about to discuss. But hey! I’d love to hear more about George too! Anyone who feels like discussing George Martin, be my guest! It was good to see George, Paul and Ringo sitting together and watching Cirque du Soleil. I liked how Paul recalled as he watched the extravaganza unfold on stage how some of the lyrics featured in that show were originally scribbled down on the back of a used envelope. Now he proclaims with wonderment, “it’s all this!”
Ain't life grand? | |
|
| |
| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 9/30/2009 5:33:18 PM | | Balboa....I think Epstien was essential and I think he blew Lennon....and it takes two to tango...not that there's anything wrong with it... | |
|
| How important was Brian Epstein?
Posted: 10/4/2009 1:42:44 AM | I'm not so sure The Beatles would have been successful without Brian's enthusiasm. Without him, they likely would not have gone as far as they did. It was Brian who got them signed to EMI and inadvertantly got them involved with George Martin.
Brian almost single-handedly created Beatlemania in the USA, convincing Capitol to release "Meet The Beatles" and "I Want To Hold Your Hand", and getting them a gig on the Ed Sullivan Show while the LP and single were very high in the US charts.
And his death was instrumental in their gradual disintegration. Without Brian they no longer had the "father figure" their career needed, which resulted in the Lennon vs McCartney feud. Paul tried to take charge and John and George resented it, I think.
Brian was indeed important. | |
|
Home
login 
