Being There's Mailbag

Hello Lisa,
In 1998 when I created the Alan Freed website, I had no idea the future that was in store.
The article is wonderful. It is well written and has a cutting edge and young perspective of the launch of rock ‘n’ roll.

I will have Greg Pollard link the article on the website. Yours will be the first in English. El Tiempo was our first in Spanish.

Take care.
Judy (Judith Fisher Freed, Alan Freed's daughter)





I have been a Steve fan since 1979 and am seeing him March 11, reading this sweet review made me smile, laugh, and look forward even more to his performance!
Thanks, for such a sweet review,

Rachel




I enjoyed Mr. Miller's article and would like to add these points:

1)John vs. Paul - If you add "Performing" to your most talented question, there's
no question Paul would win hands down. From everything I've read and seen
John didn't like performing nor was he comfortable with it. Just look at the
first Ed Sullivan show. Paul sang lead on the 1st 3 songs, 2 of which were
his compositions. John on the other hand, looked like a deer in headlights.
Like Paul, John had a huge ego. Do you think he would have let Paul have
such a lead on their 1st American TV appearance if he didn't have more
than a little stage fright? Paul, on the other hand, always loved the camera
and performing.

And their Solo Careers prove it further. Paul formed a new band and toured
all over the world. John preferred the studio and staying at home. I heard
John say in an interview in the mid 70's that he might play a New York
or Los Angeles show but never all those cities in between. Again John
didn't care for performing while Paul thrives on it. We are lucky as Beatle
fans that Paul is the one who is still alive and healthy. John and George
in their older years would have never toured like Paul and that's a fact. It
takes a special talent to perform and Paul never backs down even on
something with as much pressure as the Super Bowl. In this regard, Paul
is the greatest Beatle. John nor George were tremendously talented as
songwriters, but at 62 years young, they would have never take on something
like the Super Bowl.

2) Paul's Post Beatles Work - Like John and George, Paul's Solo work is
underrated. Afterall, how do you follow the Beatles? I think because
John and Paul got the overwhelming credit with the Beatles (and the
dominant album cuts) George was in the best position to have immediate
success and he did with All Things Must Pass. He enlisted great musicians
and had some great songs "waiting" to be heard. Paul, more than John
and George just started over and formed a new band of unknowns. While
the critics put down his early stuff because of its simplicity, I believe in time
the genius of albums like McCartney and Ram will stand out. Band on the
Run, in my opinion, is one of the greatest Pop albums of all time and will
continue to get praised the older it becomes. I think because he was the
most prolific of the Beatles and he has lived longer than John and George,
more of his great songs from the 80's to the present will get recognized at
some point. Paul has so many great songs that just have never received
any radio airplay. They're too good not to get exposed at some point. Just
look at a song like Here Today which Paul resurfaced on his recent tours.
Paul has many of these and at some point some will appear in a movie and
experience rebirth. If a song like Calico Skies or Little Willow (both from
Flaming Pie) would have been on the White Album, they would be
considered Classics. That's the exciting part in my opinion. The next
generation will discover them. I guarantee it.





Thanks for the credit on the Album Cover 24 Images, for Exile On Main
Street

I am finishing a poster for the CREAM, Royal Albert Hall Reunion Event
in May.

Thanks Again,

JOHN VAN HAMERSVELD