Listen HERE
SYNOPSIS: This episode explores Tune In’s unequal treatment of John Lennon and Paul McCartney’s childhoods, with particular attention paid to the disparate coverage of their childhood stressors and the deaths of their mothers, Julia and Mary.
We go pretty deep into what we know of John and Paul’s boyhoods and how those experiences shaped their personalities and affected their adult behaviors,
Does Tune In do the same? For both? We’ll see!
SOURCES
Thank You Very Much by Mike McCartney (1981)
“Portrait of Paul” by Mike McCartney for Woman Magazine (1965)
Howard Stern Interview w/ Paul McCartney (2001)
Rolling Stone Magazine w/ Ringo (2015)
The Macs Family Album Mike McCartney (1981)
Many Years from Now Barry Miles (1997)
McCartney: the Definitive Biography Chris Salewicz (1986)
The Beatles: the Authorized Biography Hunter Davies (1968)
PLAYLIST
In the Still of the Night THE FIVE SATINS
Boys THE BEATLES
Stairway to the Stars ELLA FITZGERALD
Five Long Years EDDIE BOYD
Love Hurts THE EVERLY BROTHERS
Peter and the Wolf (SERGEI PROVOFIEV) NEW YORK STADIUM SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA
Please BING CROSBY
I’m Wishing SNOW WHITE
Blue Moon ELVIS PRESLEY
Are You Lonesome Tonight? ELVIS PRESLEY
Crying in the Chapel THE ORIOLES
Crying in the Rain THE EVERLY BROTHERS
Sorrow PETER PAUL & MARY
I’ll Be On My Way THE BEATLES
ANOTHER KIND OF MIND 
Love your show. So glad I found it.
In defense of Mark Lewisohn’s take on John and Paul. – I am a first generation Beatle fan. They landing in my life when I was five and have been with me ever since. When the Beatles broke up John took center stage and Paul (“Died”) an’ kinda disappeared. John went after Paul and suddenly all this behind the scene info came to light from John’s point of view. John was everywhere and Paul was relegated to lightweight status. His – though I love a lot of it – didn’t really do a lot to dispel that take on him. I loved Paul and I love his solo music too – but it became a kinda guilty pleasure in the seventies. And admittedly Paul’s work was spotty. Ram was great but the McCartney album was just okay (at the time as a teen it was disappointing). Wild Life (Though I love it now) was somewhat embarrassing. This continued through the seventies. We all chose sides and most of us die-hard Beatle fans chose Johnny. It was not cool to be found listening to Silly Love Songs (that isn’t’ true anymore. It’s my ringtone now). Then John was assassinated. And our Beatle world was turned upside down. Since then Paul has grown in my esteem tremendously. I have seen him 12 – 13 (?) times in concert. I love him and I find him amazing in so many ways. It’s so nice to see him just having fun and enjoying his life and his glory. I love all of the things you have shared with us about Paulie and Johny. So great to get a another kind of mind on things. And for me I find that I really love Paul’s Post Beatle work more than his Beatle work except like ten of his Beatle songs. One of my favorites is Silly Love Songs. I LOVE IT. Any case I think Lewisohn was still trapped in the old mind set that John was the leader of the band and the genius behind all of it. I felt that way and anything that confirmed my bias I jumped on the bandwagon with them. I have since realized that Paul is amazing as was John and George and Ringo (still is). So I am enjoying the series. Forgive Mark his bias. Maybe the next one will be more even handed. Hard not to see how brilliant and talented Paul is and it’s great to hear him talking off the cuff now without all the practiced Paulisms. I wish he would do a few more of John’s songs in concert. They are actually in his range now – She’s a Woman is not!
Last note. I know you will do Now and Then soon. It is so amazing and such an unbelievable end to the Beatle story. For years I was hoping Paul would do a whole Beatle album of songs like Free as a Bird, but this is perfect and I am glad George left it for him to finish. Having heard the rough cassette bootleg of it I am amazed at how much Paul realized in it. And I think this song tells a story about Paul and John, about their love how it resonates through the clouds. It has an eerie celestial quality to it. A fitting end and reunion beyond the grace. I think Paul thinks it was for him and it’s hard not to hear that as John was with Yoko when He wrote and recorded it. It is a moving finale.
LikeLike
I find it frustrating when I’m reading YouTube comments from people who argue that Paul had an idyllic childhood and that that explains his lack of depth as an artist.
I would argue that Paul had a very traumatic childhood and I would even argue that it was marked by instability, perhaps even the most unstable of the four. Both John and Ringo lost their fathers at a very vulnerable age (at an age sometimes called “the family romance” where kids pattern their sexual identities and can get jealous of their fathers and hope that they’ll go away, so that if they actually do, that child will feel guilty and also become prone to magical thinking), so I’m not trying to minimize their respective traumas. However, many years ago, I read a book on childhood trauma and how it affected personality. I didn’t find John in that book, but I did find Paul. His personality resembled that of a foster child who had been serially abused in multiple homes. Why would that be? He came from a loving nuclear family, right? Well, what people forget about Paul and take for granted is that his family was moved around constantly for his mother’s work. They moved like 7x in the first 8 yrs of his life. This has a very disruptive affect on a developping child and is considered by psychologists as a trauma in and of itself. So not only was he trying to appease his parents (yes, plural), but also neighbourhood kids who would be suspicious of an interloper in communities where people often live cradle to grave.
There is less information on Mary, but there is enough to suggest that she may have been a narcissist. Paul’s childhood friends say that she would wear a fur coat in summer and ride her bike through the neighbourhood, that the neighbourhood kids found her intimidating, that she would punish Paul and Mike when they spoke like the local kids, that Paul and Mike were always immaculately dressed and clean even when playing outside. Paul himself says that she would give them enemas which he described as “torture”. But the word he uses to describe her the most is kind (hmm, also the word he uses to describe Linda the most).
But there are two more telling stories regarding abuse. There is the story you touched on in the last episode about the nudie drawings — that Paul lied about it for 3 days to avoid punishment. And there is the story about Paul taking revenge on his parents by making tiny tears in the lace curtains. This story is often used to show that Paul was petty and vindictive from a young age. But what drives a kid that young to do that? Feeling completely powerless. That’s what.
Mike has also mentioned that Jim was a gambler. So money would’ve been a stressor and impulse control a factor. Both Paul and Ringo grew up in families which did parlour singalongs. Ringo has admitted that these were drunken affairs in his family, whereas Paul has used them to promote how loving and close his family was. However, Paul has suggested that he had “an alcoholic uncle” who attended. Paul also made a joke about family alcoholism after a 1979 concert in Liverpool, which I thought was telling. There was a reception afterward, which his family attended. The interviewer asked if he came from a tight [close] family. Paul laughed and replied, “They soon will be [tight meaning drunk].” He also included a family pub scene in his self-titled 1973 TV special.
You highlight some brotherly adventures to show their bond. And indeed, Mike tells these stories in a fun way. But these “adventures” are also traumatic experiences. They almost drown together. They are locked in a shed by someone who had already threatened to break Paul’s arm. What was he going to do with them? They must’ve been so scared. Paul also set a fire which could have killed Mike. Trauma. There are stories that he got rolled by some older boys and then had to give evidence in court. Some accounts suggest he may have been assaulted. Trauma. Their parents worked long hours and they got into trouble. Lots of trouble.
LikeLike
I had meant to conclude that for Paul, friendliness and charm is a literal survival skill. If I can get you to like me, maybe you won’t hurt me. If I can get you to really like me, maybe you will protect me from those who will.
LikeLike
Thanks for going in depth into the effect that John and Paul’s mothers’ deaths had on them. One of the things that every Beatle fan knows is that this created an inseparable bond between them. Less spoken about, but equally true, Uncle George’s death would’ve affected John in a similar way to Paul’s mother. They were both 14 when they lost a significant parental figure and so the psychological effects would be similar. Paul would always be seeking surrogate mother figures and John would always be chasing gurus and mentor figures. I think those drives come from those losses.
You touched on the effect that Julia’s death had on Paul and George, pointing out that Lewisohn neglects to ask this question and only includes a quote from George’s mother to suggest that it may have had a profound effect on him. You give him kudos for this, but he doesn’t deserve them. Lewisohn introduces this quote by saying that Paul doesn’t remember anything from this time and goes on to speculate that he may not have been around much that summer. He then paraphrases Mrs Harrison’s words to suggest that she sent George round to John’s house so that he wouldn’t be alone, when what she actually said was that she sent George around to John’s in order to fetch him [for rehearsals]. While she doesn’t actually mention Paul by name, it is implied that he is there at the Harrison’s house too. It’s about keeping John engaged, not about keeping him company. So Lewisohn is not trying to show us how Julia’s death may have affected George, he is trying to tell us how it did not affect Paul. Even a quote by George Harrison’s mother is not really about George at all in the hands of Lewisohn. The takeaway that Lewisohn wants his reader to get from this is that PAUL WAS NOT THERE FOR JOHN WHEN JOHN NEEDED HIM THE MOST, which flies in the face of everything we know about their relationship at this time.
When I first read Tune In, the bias was palpable, but it felt more pro-John than anti-Paul, more neglect than malice. But this is more than bias. It is character assassination. What did Paul do to this guy? He is often complimentary to Paul in interviews, if a little backhanded at times, so what gives?
LikeLike