Mark Lewisohn really wants to overturn narratives and “Get Back” accidentally gave us incredible insight into how little it takes to make him smoothly and confidently wrong
Great AKOM. Maybe too good because it left basically nothing to add on the primary topic. This show followed my own notes more than any so far—but I had not caught the John quote being about the Maharishi—chef's kiss. 👩🍳💋
However... it does give me a chance to riff off something they touched on that I've also been thinking about for awhile: Mark Lewisohn's big desire to overturn narratives, and how wrong he gets it when he runs into a fact check we can all see with our own eyes.
Pre-“Get Back” Mark Lewisohn previewed some of the narratives he was itching to overturn, and off the top explained that no one had really told the Get Back sessions correctly. By trying to ingest all that Nagra audio on a sort of anniversary-tribute calendar schedule—(which is insane, impossible, and hubristic beyond words)—he was prepared to make news on a few fronts. (All clips of him are from 2019.)
First of all, no one has told the "Get Back" sessions story right. Yet.
But after binging the Nagras once the expert is ready to “write it differently”
In this tweet is a hidden wink-wink-hint at the new Magic Alex storyline Lewisohn was queuing up. Although if he hadn't tipped us off in the podcast the “not so bad then” would be meaningless. As it is, we have the key.
Magic Alex has been slandered, his studio was fine, and the Nagras — especially George's good vibes — prove it.
Honestly, just imagine what we would be reading from him if “Get Back” didn't exist. This is the flimsy nonsense he builds entire storylines around. Because he prioritizes flipping narratives second only to deifying John. And like a reporter with a thesis he interviews and searches out sources to prop up that thesis. But unlike a reporter he has no checks. No imperative to give competing evidence. Answers to no one. Is wholly opaque about sources. And most certainly doesn't concern himself with adhering to even the most basic UK and US ethical guidelines for historians.
And so this is possibly the best peek we will ever get into how his process works and just how incredibly flimsy it is.
Paul didn't want to go up on the roof—he was the one who had to be persuaded—because it wasn't enough of a climax
Apparently even Anthology was trying to pull the wool over our eyes about Paul and the rooftop concert, but Lewisohn was ready to rewrite history and tell the truth about Paul not wanting to go up on the roof.
The last clip isn't of Mark Lewisohn, but references him as an expert. The final arbiter of fact. And it fits. Because at this point if Mark Lewisohn says it, no matter how ridiculous it is, it becomes cannon. And it pains me to see anyone—especially Beatles' fans—parroting nonsense and looking foolish.
Mark Lewisohn, heroin expert
It is so clear that Mark Lewisohn is going to handle John and Yoko's heroin issue by feigned expertise blended with apologia and creepy idolatry. (See Prellies in Tune In.) How he thinks he's expert enough to opine on the effects of heroin is beyond me, but that's never stopped him before. I really don't think he ever even questions himself or his superior knowledge of anything, despite zero experience or study. His expertise at extricating John from all hard truths is enough, and will make us all stupider. (Also playing now because I am inching up to pointing out something on those Nagras.)
Repeating Mark Lewisohn: the "Two Junkies" interview (where John literally had to stop to throw up) was from a heroin hangover because John and Yoko weren't messed up enough to actually be doing heroin on set
*I posted this last night and Tumblr disappeared 90% of the post then wouldn't let me post more audio because it counted the disappeared audio against me. Therefore I forced myself to repost it this morning before listening to the bonus (Womak/Mal Evans) AKOM I've been so looking forward to and may now go revel in my reward without guilt. 😌
