The Beatles refused to play to segregated audience in US

[oldironside]

A contract and rider demonstrating both the political sensitivities and the relatively modest personal needs of The Beatles are to be auctioned.

In the documents drawn up ahead of a concert at the Cow Palace in Daly City, California, in 1965, the band stipulates it will not play in front of a "segregated audience".

It also requires the venue to provide "no less than 150 uniformed police officers for protection" and a "special drumming platform for Ringo ".

The requirements for their accommodation appear much less demanding than many modern artists. The band's trailer "is to have electricity and water", the rider says, adding: "In all dressing rooms for The Beatles, the purchaser must provide four cots, mirrors, an ice cooler, portable TV set and clean towels."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2011/sep/15/beatles-refused-play-segregated-audience

[Jeneral2885]

1. Good demands

If I were them I would also demand the same too--espcially the "not play in front of a "segregated audience".

[LeftishBrit]

2. Good for them!

[oldironside]

3. I detect the hand of Brian Epstein here.

As a gay jew in the 60s, he had been on the receiving end of more than his fair share of prejudice. I can heartily recommend Philip Norman's book Shout!

[SwissTony]

4. I'm sure Epstein had something to do with it.

But Lennon had already caused a minor furore in an early interview when asked by reporters "What would you like to do?" Lennon replied "Play guitar like BB King". Of course, the white reporters were saying "Who????"

The Stones did something similar when they agreed to appear on the very white pop program Shindig only if Howlin Wolf could appear on the same episode. They even came and sat on the set behind him.

Radical stuff in them days.

And I thoroughly recommend you recommendation of Norman's book.

[oldironside]

6. Shout! isn't perfect.

It contains a very negative portrait of McCartney. Why do people get so angry with Macca? He's given pleasure to millions and yet I've met otherwise rational, well adjusted people who spit bile at the mention of his name.

Also, Norman's got a habit of wrapping controversial information in absurdly flowery language. I first read it when I was sixteen and it went completely over my head that one particular passage is about Brian Epstein cottaging in Kings Cross.

Having said that, it's still a great read and well worth the two fifty I paid in 1981.

I can also recommend Revolution In The Head for anyone interested. Ian MacDonald tended to over dramatise (the start of the decline of Western Civilisation was when John Lennon sang "One thing I can tell you is you've got to be free", according to him) but it's a mine of information. Did you know that And Your Bird Can Sing is about Mick Jagger constantly bragging about having Marianne Faithfull as his girlfriend? The song makes a lot more sense when you know that.

And the best bit (I never get tired of writing/taling about the Beatles) is his comparison of Harrison's and Macca's working styles. If you've ever been unfortunate enough to hear Not Guilty you will know what a dog it is. Apparently it took 100 hours of studio time to record a song no one in their right mind would listen to in the first place. Compare this to the blazing guitar solo on Good Morning Good Morning.

http://youtu.be/tqmid9MlFSw

(solo begins at 1.16)

Macca just walked into the studio one day while the others were elsewhere and blazed this off in one take (On a Fender Esquire for the technically minded). Maybe that's why people hate him.

[non sociopath skin]

7. Agree about "Revolution in the Head"

It has its flaws - most great books do - but, together with "Last Train to Memphis," one of the best books about rock music I've ever read.

The Skin

[Anarcho-Socialist]

8. Didn't know that about And Your Bird Can Sing

[LeftishBrit]

5. Thanks - will try and get hold of the book.