What books have you been reading lately?

Conversations with Wilder by Cameron Crowe.

It's transcripts of their conversations. Wilder wasn't interested in doing the book. He thought no one would want to read it. He was so WRONG. It's excellent.

My favorite part about it, can really apply to all artistic forms. Crowe is going into the minutiae of directing, and "Did you know when you did this...", "That was brilliant. You must have spent so much time..." To all these type questions, Wilder's response was "I tried to make the best picture I could. I didn't think too hard about it."

People read so much into the arts, that frankly the creator didn't think of.

1635868473619.jpeg
 
Orson said:
I find McCartney interesting in many ways Mick.

Lennon became a pain in the rear throughout the 70's which is something overlooked today. Ringo drank and spent his time hell raising having fun. I'm not sure what George did.

But McCartney pulled himself up from a drunken oblivion and just got on with it and 'proved' he could do it without the others. Living on the farm at Mull in Scotland.
Click to expand...
Yes...I find him very interesting as well. But in a way....I think he sort of puts a "McCartney favorable" spin on his tales of the Beatles. I could be wrong but I've seen many interviews with him and one thing for sure is that he really dislikes / avoids giving Lennon equal credit for his contribution to the success of the Beatles when it comes down to it.

The book only reaffirms that feeling for me. John sure was a sharp edge....and a smart ass and maybe worse.....and I think his talent was at least equal to Paul's but so diametrically opposed as to widen the Beatles view of music creation in such a way that neither one could not have been a wild success without the other.

That's not to say that either one couldn't have been successful......but it was the Beatles sound as a whole that got them noticed to begin with and who knows if either one of them would have broken through alone. Maybe...maybe not right?

In any case.......the book is a good one and any true Bealtes fan owes it to himself to read it.

As always.........just my 2 cents worth.

Mick
 
Mickster said:
Yes...I find him very interesting as well. But in a way....I think he sort of puts a "McCartney favorable" spin on his tales of the Beatles. I could be wrong but I've seen many interviews with him and one thing for sure is that he really dislikes / avoids giving Lennon equal credit for his contribution to the success of the Beatles when it comes down to it.

The book only reaffirms that feeling for me. John sure was a sharp edge....and a smart ass and maybe worse.....and I think his talent was at least equal to Paul's but so diametrically opposed as to widen the Beatles view of music creation in such a way that neither one could not have been a wild success without the other.

That's not to say that either one couldn't have been successful......but it was the Beatles sound as a whole that got them noticed to begin with and who knows if either one of them would have broken through alone. Maybe...maybe not right?

In any case.......the book is a good one and any true Bealtes fan owes it to himself to read it.

As always.........just my 2 cents worth.

Mick
Click to expand...
I never really was in to them that much in the 70's. I was just a teenager then and wanted something a lot heavier. I remember the press hated Linda.

But then I saw the docu about them living on Mull in the late 60's and 70's. I know that is true. I know the pitfalls and how you live and survive. I know he was telling the truth there. It can be a hard place to dig yourself out from and I can understand the veggie thing as well from them being in that situation.
 
Last edited:
grimtraveller said:
How are your eyes doing after the surgery ? Did you notice improvement straightaway ? I'm going to be facing the cataract thing in a few years.
I read the Geoff Emerick book some years back. Like you, I thought he was really harsh towards George {actually, both Georges} and revealed himself to be a bit of a Paul fanboi. Mind you, George Martin and John Lennon were also kind of harsh/contemptuous towards George in their time. Aroud the time I read it, there was a spate of books from or involving engineers that had worked with the Beatles, such as "Abbey Road to Ziggy Stardust" by Ken Scott, "John Lennon called me Normal" by Norman Smith {rare as hens teeth, that one}, plus the two "Behind the glass" books as well as "Good Vibrations ~ a history of record production." There's also Glyn Johns' autobiography.
Click to expand...

I had cataract surgery on the right eye several years ago. They say you're not put completely under, but I remember nothing other than vague dreamlike few moments of kaleidoscope visualizations. After surgery I could see clearly right away, and read. The only drawback which has caused me to consider carefully getting the other eye done, lights(such as oncoming auto headlights at night) have a star affect. Impossible to count, but probably hundreds. Apparently my brain tries to sort it out. For example, if I look at a street light the starry rays slowly rotate back and forth before eventually becoming stable. Similar to disturbing water in a pail until it eventually settles. Occasionally in sort of the peripheral, best I can explain it looks like I am momentarily looking through water towards light, but merely an oddity that doesn't present a problem. Going to get the other done very soon, hopefully won't experience the same. Like MadAudio I went the budget route and still need readers for close vision. Here in the US the budgets ran me about $700 with insurance, if I remember correctly. The Cadillac replacement lens where I (supposedly) would not need readers was several thousand dollars, per eye. Seems ridiculous. Pretty sure the procedure is no different, price differential is on the lens manufacturer.

What's the deal with being harsh on George? I've never heard that. As time has gone on, in some ways George has become my fav Fab. Less drama, or so it would seem.
 
MadAudio said:
The right eye went off without a hitch, and yes I could tell the difference immediately, especially colors being more vivid
Click to expand...
Thanks for that.
I was talking to my colleague a few days ago and she said exactly the same thing about the vividness of the colours and the clarity. Almost made me want to have the op now !
But not quite.
I have a horror of any needle or scalpel going into my eye while I'm conscious. There again, I felt the same way about the idea of injections to the testicles and was dreading the snip, but when it came to it {back in 2007}, I didn't feel a thing.
 
Mick Doobie said:
I had cataract surgery on the right eye several years ago
Click to expand...

Mick Doobie said:
Going to get the other done very soon
Click to expand...
My colleague that I was talking to had one eye done in 2019 and hasn't had the other done yet. I'm curious, with you, is it a cost issue that's made you wait for a few years ? How has it been having one eye much better and the other one not quite up to the same quality ? Is it very noticeable ?
Mick Doobie said:
What's the deal with being harsh on George? I've never heard that
Click to expand...
Because I've always really appreciated George, I found myself getting quite irritated at the way Geoff would talk about him. In the latter part of the book, he sort of stops it, but he makes George seem like a real dufus that couldn't work out solos and whose musicianship was of lesser quality.
His fellow engineer, Ken Scott, was none too pleased with Geoff Emerick over the book. I can't remember if it was him, but one of the former EMI engineers questioned much of what Emerick "remembered" by saying that he had quizzed a number of them for their recollections.
Mick Doobie said:
As time has gone on, in some ways George has become my fav Fab
Click to expand...
Being me, I'm one of those people that ascribes equal weight to all 4 Beatles. So I could talk about George all day and night. I find it a travesty when so many writers don't give his early songs the credit they deserve, or the part he played in the construction of songs like "And I love her," "Help !", "She said, she said," "I'm only sleeping" and "We can work it out." Straight off the bat, those are 5 songs that would be completely different without George's arranging and compositional skills. And his instrumental colouring of a number of songs in the '65~'68 period, as well as his Indian timing that bled into particularly John's songs {later solidified by Yoko} makes him a Beatle par excellence. Mind you, they all were.
I even like his voice ! Very distinctive as a soloist, glorious as a harmonist and backing singer.
 
Don't laugh, and I'm aware that revealing this may tarnish my reputation as Grumpy Mod, but I am reading Anne of Green Gables. The grandkids had been reading it, and I recalled having done so myself when I was their age. However, I could not remember a thing about it. So I picked it up and started reading.

It is a very engaging and heart-warming story, and I can see why it has become such a favourite.

Even more important for me is that Anne is a character with flaws, but who develops and becomes able to manage those flaws throughout the course of the story. This is a pleasant change from many contemporary female protagonists who seem to be born flawless and show no character development.
 
Y'all do the audiobooks? Like reading a novel for enjoyment is too limiting. I started the audiobooks, and it reminded me of talk radio. Or theatrical radio. It is weird how much a radio can capture the imagination an pull you into a story. Better than a TV show. No pictures. Body still free to do busy work.

I listen while I mow the lawn, or wash the dishes, or clean..

So they had all the classics I enjoyed in my early 20's, and got to re-experience them. Hunter S. Thompson, Bukowski, some Jules Verne. Even a little Twain.

Hunter and Buke, I identify with and they remain relevant today.

But Twain had no coming of age thrill or excitement in it. Unlike when I was young. I fear Adams Hitchhikers Guide would suffer the same fate and read like nonsense..

Last book was...The Curse of Lono...HST.
 
Last edited:
Yep audiobooks are the way things will be from now on. No one wants to read anymore or even look at pictures. It is all audio and video.

We make audiobooks and it is great if you can add all the noises relative to the story but masses of work than just narration.
 
Orson said:
Yep audiobooks are the way things will be from now on. No one wants to read anymore or even look at pictures.
Click to expand...
The way the audiobook is paced works for me. One thing I didn't like about reading was the bad habits you pick up. Reading a thick book, in the middle I speed up . I rush through too much. Until the final pages , and then I slow way down. Almost trying to savior them. Bad habits. The audiobooks run pretty well. I like universal dialect. No accents. So i can increase the reading speed, only a little..Accents sound quacky sped up..

Orson said:
It is all audio and video.
Click to expand...
Sight and sound
 
That is a big part of it Beaky. Unfortunately we all have accents. So learning to speak clearly is a major part of editing. Dropped 'H's' are something I correct all the time. Also some accents allow 2/3/4/5 words to be all linked together which causes problems for the listener. Accents allow people to do that. So speaking clearly and precisely stops it.

'Got to do' can end up as 'Gotodoo' or 'Gotadoo' with an accent, and some people listening may not understand it if they aren't used to the accent.

An audio story has still to be interesting to get the listeners attention. So just as with reading, the story has to be good and of interest.

Reading books...........I can't read. I can't even read a page of instructions. My attention span lasts little more than a sentence before I start skipping. Always been the same even at school. I will re-read this post several times to digest it and I wrote it.

Show me something or tell me about the same and I will digest and reproduce with ease.
 
Last edited:
Orson said:
Yep audiobooks are the way things will be from now on. No one wants to read anymore or even look at pictures. It is all audio and video.

We make audiobooks and it is great if you can add all the noises relative to the story but masses of work than just narration.
Click to expand...
Paper or nothing for me, I don't like Kindle or even audiobooks. I can't seem to stay into the electronic versions.
 
Eric V said:
Paper or nothing for me, I don't like Kindle or even audiobooks. I can't seem to stay into the electronic versions.
Click to expand...
I have to agree. I tried the Kindle approach to book reading once. I read the downloaded book, but it didn't quite feel right. I purchased the same book a few weeks later (hard copy) at B&N and it was a better read on the second read when I held the book in my hands.
Weird? Maybe so, but I prefer real books that I can hold in my hands, thus avoiding the internet connection.
 
I think even Kindle may have had its day with audio books. Real books are a bit like vinyl. They have a strong fan base.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top