This article was downloaded by: 10.3.98.104 On: 28 Sep 2021 Access details: subscription number Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG, UK

The Routledge Research Companion to Popular Music and Gender

Stan Hawkins

“Where We Going Johnny?” Homosociality and the Early Beatles

Publication details https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315613437.ch3 Matthew Bannister Published online on: 22 Mar 2017

How to cite :- Matthew Bannister. 22 Mar 2017, “Where We Going Johnny?” Homosociality and the Early Beatles from: The Routledge Research Companion to Popular Music and Gender Routledge Accessed on: 28 Sep 2021 https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315613437.ch3

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR DOCUMENT

Full terms and conditions of use: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/legal-notices/terms

This Document PDF may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproductions, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The publisher shall not be liable for an loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 15:51 28 Sep 2021; For: 9781315613437, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315613437.ch3 organic totheory, socialstructuremustbeseenasconstantly linity, forwhichhereferences Connell(1987).Butobserves:“Forhistorytobecome ance toformalrepresentationsofmasculinity”(2013,62),amonolithic,hegemonicmascu- the group’s “groomedappearance”,longhair, and“pre-metrosexuality” demonstrate“resist- with theirfame,culturalcontext,andtosomedegreemasculinity. Kingargues that Mäkelä (2004)andMartinKing(2013)havewrittenculturalhistoriesoftheBeatles,dealing phenomenon; thereislittlediscussionofwhathappenedbeforetheywerefamous.BothJanne Existing academicwritingabouttheBeatlesandmasculinityfocusesonthemasamass-mediated which aresurelysigni discourses. ButMäkelädoesnotdiscusstherelationshipsof theotherBeatleswithLennon, discourses theyemerge from,transform,andaretransformedby. Masculinityisoneofthose contexts inwhichrepresentationsofLennonand The Beatlescirculateandthemultiple male groups,intermsofwhatmendoandhowtheyrelatetoeachother. is anongoingoperation.Masculinityinthischapterdiscussedtermsofinteractionswithin model tendstoassumethe‘normality’ orinevitabilityofhegemonicmasculinity, wheninfactit an openquestionwhether. . . theywillsucceed”(1987,44;italicsinoriginal). The resistance reproduced. . . . Groupsthatholdpowerdotrytoreproducethestructure . . butitisalways ‘leader’ status,giventheUSpredilectionforassassination. tragic demise,althougheventhecircumstancesofhisdeath couldrelatetohisperceived 1987; Goldman1989; Weiner 1991;Riley2011). PerhapsthisispartlybecauseofLennon’s exceeds thataboutanyotherBeatle(Hunter1978;Coleman 1984; Thomson andGutman answer issimple:Lennonwastheleaderofgroup. The bodyofwritingaboutLennon far (2004, 75).But,ifthiswasreallythecase,thenwhydiscuss Lennonseparatelyatall? The the grouprepresentedthemselves,orwererepresented, as anegalitarian“brotherhood” reliable sources areavailable(Mäkelä2004, 7–8).Moreover, critically investigating The cusses, thenthereisnogood reasontodiscussoneattheexpenseofother, aslong at alllevels,frominter-personal relationships tothemediatedcontextsthatMäkelädis- about relations“betweenmen” (Sedgwick1985),andifweacceptthattheserelationsoccur ulation, ofpresumingprivileged entryintosubjects’ minds(2004, 7).Butifpatriarchyis Mäkelä focusesonJohnLennonasaproductofthe“starnet”–multipleplanesand Mäkelä wantstoavoidtheproblemheidenti “WHERE WE GOINGJOHNNY?” HOMOSOCIALITY AND THE AND HOMOSOCIALITY ficant forunderstandingtheirmasculinity. Instead,heobserveshow EARLY BEATLES Matthew Bannister Bannister Matthew 3 35 fies inbiographies,ofpsychological spec- constituted 1

ratherthanconstantly Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 15:51 28 Sep 2021; For: 9781315613437, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315613437.ch3 or Other]morelesspretenceisnecessary”(Meuser2004,397). a placewheremencanbeauthentic,whileinheterosexualinteraction[i.e.withthefeminine linked tothatofthegroupwho‘own’ orproduceit:“thehomosocialgroupisexperiencedas latter construction‘homosocialauthenticity’:thewaythatauthenticityofmusicbecomes as rockmusic,whichactivelyproducethemselvesmasculine(Cohen1997).Itermthis the Beatlesasagroupor‘gang’ withLennonasitsleader, but alsotoculturalformssuch other hierarchicallytoexcludeeffeminacy. The conceptofhomosocialitycanbe appliedto a thirdpartyavoids(supposedly)thepossibilityofhomoeroticism,memberspolicingeach a commongoal(Rubin1975;Sedgwick1985). Their projectionofdesire,viathegaze,onto angular Oedipalstructureinthatrelationsbetweenmen(kinship)aremediatedbypursuitof formation ofhierarchicalmale-malecollectivitiesinthepublicsphere,whichrepeattri- interprets thisprimalsceneaspatriarchal(Connell1995,10),arguing thatitleadstothe to thefather’s worldofpowerandachievement(Easthope1986,119–120). Gendertheory (Kilmartin 2004).However, bysubmittingtopaternalauthority, thechildcangainentry described byFreud,inwhichfatherandchilddesirethemother, butfatheralwayswins can beconceivedasapublicmanifestationofthefamilialOedipaltriangularstructure, selves andothersagainstbyaccusationsofeffeminacy (Sedgwick1985).Homosociality structure inwhichmencompetetogether‘asateam’,whilstsimultaneouslypolicingthem- process ofcontestation. groups, thusdemonstratinghowpatriarchyisneveranaccomplishedfact,butalwaysa of egalitarianismandhierarchyastypicalthepowerrelationsoperatinginhomosocial Beatles’ ‘brotherhood’ intermsofhomosocialitycanexplaintheparadoxicalco-existence were “the of authenticitythatLennonwasnowusing to deridehisownpast.Gouldnotesthatthey Beatles’ collectivitywasessentialtoboththeirearlyimpactandalso totheveryconcepts and claimingtheindividual autonomy characteristicofhegemonicmasculinity. Butthe a group,con re-defi the otherBeatles,whoreceivednotoriouslyshortshrift fromLennoninthisperiodof needed todifferentiate himselfnotjustfromthe‘Beatlesphenomenon’,butalso from some different conclusions. and African American atthesame time?Iwouldagreewiththispoint,butalsodraw series ofOthers–hissingleselfwasalways/alreadymultiple –howcanyoubeyourself how ’s senseofauthenticselforindividualitycouldonlybemediatedthrougha to measuretheBeatles’ creativeachievementsandfailings(Wenner 1980).Middletonshows of theform,whichmainlymeant African American music,usingthisasayardstickbywhich was infullflightasheclaimedallegianceonlytoearlyrockandroll,the ‘primitive’ origins to ‘JohnBeatle’”(2006,200).Bythetimebandbrokeup in1970,Lennon’s revisionism formulate hiscreativeambitions[as]asearchforthe‘realme’ –‘JohnLennon’ asopposed from feminine.“AlmostassoontheBeatlesbecamesuccessful,Lennonwasbeginningto honest fromfalse. . . original from. . . copy”(2006,200),and,Iwouldadd,masculine authenticity, thatis,ways ofmusicallydistinguishing“genuinefrom. . . counterfeit . . According toMiddleton,JohnLennonisan“exemplary” In thischapter, Iconsiderthe earlyBeatlesintermsofmalehomosociality, ahierarchical Lennon, nowasoloartist(hehadjustreleased nition (Wenner 1980). Hewasdenying,ineffect, thattheBeatleshadeverbeen fi rst . fl ating thatcollectivitywiththe mediaandculturalphenomenonitbecame, group inthehistory ofmassentertainment to elicitthesortofromantic Homosocial authenticity authenticity Homosocial Matthew Bannister 36 Lennon/PlasticOnoBand figure inthedevelopmentofrock [1970]), first Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 15:51 28 Sep 2021; For: 9781315613437, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315613437.ch3 were dealtwithandinhowortowhatdegreetheseprocesses relatetomusicalauthenticity. ing theserelationships,bothintermsofintra-groupinteractions, inhowother tural environment. As Ihavealreadysuggested,homosocialityisausefulwayofunderstand- the earlyinteractionsamongBeatlesto-beandhowthey relatedtotheirsocialandcul- setting upstructuresandnetworkswhichwouldbeessential forsuccess.Lewisohnreveals ertoire, howtheybegantoapproachsongwriting,creatinga commerciallyviableimage,and debunks some‘authenticity’ myths,describingindetailtheemergent group’s changingrep- (2013) wentbacktoprimarysourcesandrevealedawealth ofnewinformation.Hisresearch Documentation ofthisvitalphaseintheBeatles’ careerhadbeensketchyuntilLewisohn whether orhowsuchinfluencesproblematizethe‘homosocialauthenticity’ ofthegroup. nine voiceswereincreasinglyprominent,especiallygirlgroups,andthischapterconsiders ferent musicalstylesinresponsetodifferent audiences.Inbothmusicandaudience,femi- when thegroupwerepeculiarlyopentoin “I maneuver[sic]people,that’s whatleadersdo”(Lennonquotedin Wenner 1980,63). ment ()forhisdeadmother, heusedhertobreakupthegroupthathadstarted: responding especiallytofemalevoices.Finally, Iseektoshowthatwhenhefoundareplace- of maternalabandonment,whichhere-enactedinmusic,bothhisandothers’,listeningto then byarguing thatthegangwasa‘magical’ solution(Cohen2005)tohischildhoodtrauma to occupybothmasculineandfemininepositionsasastrategyforadvancingthegroup, answer thisquestionbyshowinghowLennon’s leadershipoftheBeatles‘gang’ allowedhim on earth”(Wenner 1980,37).Sohowcouldheholdbothpositionsatthesametime?Iwantto cent morethanIeverwasbyanybodyoranything.Shemakesmusiclikeyou’veneverheard a new, femininein Crampton 1996,4;Gould2007,58–68).However, atthesametime,Lennonwasalsotouting graphies: “withoutChuckBerry, BuddyHollyandLonnieDonegan,noBeatles”(Dafydd affi (Wenner 1980,46).Citingacanonofearlyrockandrollgreats,allmale,Lennonapparently istic mythofrock’s originsreducestheBeatles’ ownevolutiontoa“sellout”oftheirroots ence onindividualitydeprecatestheimportanceofgroup,andhisadoptionaprimitiv- dream isover”(God1970). possible inanagedominatedbyrationalindividualism.ButnowLennonwassinging:“The counterculture –theideathatauthenticcommunity(amongyouthatanyrate)wasstill that theywereagroupratherthananindividualhelpedspawntheutopianismof1960s but alsoevolvinginanapparentlyindividual,organic manner(Willis 1978,155). The fact ideology –writingtheirownmaterial,presentingthemselves(orbeingpresented)asaunit, pioneered theconceptofautonomous,homosocialgroupwhichbecamecentraltorock fascination andidenti to beapproved byhim,astheirabilitytocontribute tothecommongoal had tobebalanced (Quarry MenmemberColinHanton, quotedinLewisohn2013,105). All new membershad hejustled” logical extensionofthis(Davies 1978,36).“Johndidn’t say ‘Iamtheleader’, days onwards(Davies1978, 25; Lewisohn2013,55)andformingamusicalgroupwas a a malegang,withJohnLennon astheirleader. Lennonledgangsofboysfrom hisschool- , like manypopularmusicgroups,andespeciallyrock canbeviewedas This chaptertracksthedevelopmentofBeatles,focusingonearly1960s,atime Lennon’s revisionismfalsi rms thesamepatrilineageofrockreproducedinmanystandardhistoriesandbio- fl uence, namelythatof Yoko Ono:“I’min fi cation thatde fi Homosociality and the early Beatles andtheearly Homosociality es theBeatles’ ownhistoryinanumberofways–hisinsist- Meet thegang fi ned thepowerofastar”(2007,10). The Beatles fluence –absorbingandexperimentingwithdif- 37 fl uenced byhermusic1000per- fluences Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 15:51 28 Sep 2021; For: 9781315613437, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315613437.ch3 ture, bymaking itsubjecttoapublicgaze,incited further‘actingout’.Lennon hadreadinthe time aggressivetowardsany kind oflook(Brake1980,73).Mediacoveragethesubcul- was spectacularinappearance, a“proletariandandy”(Hawkins2009,46),butatthesame incite violencebecauseofthe tabooonhomosexuality. The paradoxofthe Ted wasthathe of time. Apart from competitionoverwomen,justthefactoflookingwasin itselfenoughto group ofmen(forexample, Teds) wouldlookatothermenonstage for anextendedlength (although itwasa‘tough’ environmentingeneral)(Lewisohn2013,87–88,98)becauseone gaze itself.LiveperformanceinLiverpoolthisperiodwas aparticularfocusforviolence group entersthepublicspherebyperformingmusic,forexample, itbecomessubjecttothe so farasitisinhisinterest. is tomanagethissystemofinwardandoutwardglances his advantage,andtothegroup’s, ality isalsoaninversionoftheincestuousOedipalfamilial model.Partoftheleader’s role within thegroup. The leaderisbothsubjectandobjectofdesire,thusexogamoushomosoci- homosocial groupbyitsprojectionofdesiretowardsacommon goalalsoworkscovertly assessing eachother’s potentialdesirability. The triangular, Oedipalstructurethatde of glances,eachmale(butespeciallyLennon)bothinviting thegazebutalsodisavowingit– 2007, 45).Onegetstheimpressionofthesedevelopingrelationshipsasacomplexsystem me” (Lewisohn2013,130). At thesametime,“Iidolizedhim”(McCartney, quotedinGould attractive atthattime”(Miles1997,49);“Iwouldn’t lookathimtoohard. . . incasehehit McCartney hassaid:“We lookeduptohimasasortofviolentteddyboy[sic],whichwas styled himselfasa Teddy boy–asimultaneouslyintimidatingandfascinatingpersona. all theDanger”,[1995])(Lewisohn2013,178). confessed later:“IwassuchabullyIdidn’t evenletPaulsinghisownsong”(“InSpiteof (Lewisohn2013,374–375,441–442,445).Oftheir 311, 313,420)andincited 191). Heverballyharassedbandmembers Tommy MooreandStuSutcliffe (Lewisohn2013, funny fortherecipients”(Lennon’s girlfriend Thelma Pickles,quotedinLewisohn2013, frailty insomebodywithalaser-like homingdevice.Ithoughthewashilarious, butitwasn’t 2013, 381–382).Generally, Lennonwasmoreverballythanabusive:“He’ddetectanyminor whom Lennonthoughthadaccusedhimofbeing‘queer’ (Davies1978,197;Lewisohn attempting to‘roll’ asailorinHamburg, assaultingLiverpoolDJandfriendBob Wooler, they get. (Lewisohn 2013,159),showinghowinhomosocialgroups,membersmustgiveasgood Lennon: “Hewasverysarcastic. . . butIeithertooknonoticeorgavehimthesameback” me yearsto.startconsideringhimasanequal”(Lewisohn2013,158).Harrisonnotesof on ,accordingtoLennon,was:“akidwhoplayedguitar. . . Ididn’t dighim the group: against thethreattheyposedtoleader. Lennon commentsonPaulMcCartney’s joining Male homosocialgroupsarede However, intimidationisnotenough. To becomegangleaderalsorequirescharisma.Lennon Lennon wasanotoriousbully–hittingwomen(Lewisohn2013,208, 241)andmen: first sight. . . Icouldn’t bebotheredwithhim;heusedtofollowmeround. . . ittook have tokeephiminlineifIletin,buthewasgood,soworthhaving. . ItwentthroughmyheadthatI’d . make thegroupstrongerorletmebestronger?. Was itbettertohaveaguywhowasthan thepeopleIhadin. . . ornot? To fights betweenSutcliffe andMcCartney, and Tony Sheridanand fined byhowtheyprojectthegazeoutwards,butoncea Matthew Bannister 38 (quoted inLewisohn2013,132–133) first recordingin1958,Lennon fines the Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 15:51 28 Sep 2021; For: 9781315613437, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315613437.ch3 papers abouttheyouthviolenceassociatedwith surely toimpose JohnandPaul’s songsintothe[audition],because theythemselveswere standards”) (Davies1978,146), Lewisohnargues that: “If Briandidhaveahanditwas Beatles playedmainlycovers. Contrarytoreceivedwisdom(“Brianadvisedthemstick to their manager(Lewisohn2013, 513). At thedisastrousDeccaauditioninearly 1962,the had writtenafewsongs,the BeatlesdidnotplaythemliveuntilafterEpsteinbecame nership, whichhadbeendormant sinceabout1960,wasrevivedin1962. Although they things werequitedifferent. would appeartocon much-quoted dismissal,“You sticktoyourpercentages,Brian. We’ll lookafterthemusic”, locus oftheBeatles’ “homosocialauthenticity”(Mäkelä2004,66).Lennon’s witheringand of thisarrangementwasthatEpsteindidnotinterferein themusic,whichremained package us,itwasn’t theotherwayround”(Lewisohn2013,554). The supposedcorollary in suitsandencouragingonstageprofessionalism.Lennon claimed: “We allowedEpsteinto group (Lewisohn2013,550).EpsteinbroadenedtheBeatles’ audiencebyputtingthegroup 2013, 503). At thesametime,Lennon’s approvalofEpsteinwaskeytohisacceptancebythe knowledge, andbusinesssensethegrouplacked. attracting gaymenlike Wooler andmanagerBrianEpstein,whoalsohadtherespectability, 499). Lennon’s “roughtrade”(Lewisohn2013,502)charismahelpedadvancetheband,by girls upfrontwouldbelookinghislegs,keepingawatchoncrotch”(Lewisohn2013, way hestaredandstood.Hislegswouldbewideapart. . . verysexualandaggressive. The collection (Gould2007,109).HedescribeshowLennon“commandedthestagewith a closetedgaymanwho,asCavernDJandMC,gavethebandaccesstohisextensiverecord Sutcliffe (Astrid’s lover)(Gould2007,96–97). Another transitional submit. SheandJürgen Vollmer alsointroducedtheBeatleshaircut,tryingitout itive photographsofthem–shewasthe was Astrid Kirchherr, whomthegroupmetinHamburg in1960andwhotookfamous,de and improvetheirappearance(Miles1997,34;Lewisohn2013,333). Another intermediary intermediaries. McCartneybecamegroupambassador, makingearlyattemptstomarketthem edging theimportanceofaudience,sopublicrelationsweremanagedthroughaseries very attractivepeople.Ilikedbeingwiththem”(Davies1978,178). on todescribehowtheircollectivewitandcharmmadehimchangehismind:“Ifoundthem . the leadsinger.. ing for. When Imetthemrealisedthatwouldneverwork”.Martingoes desperately wantedmyownCliff (Richard). That washowmymindworking.look- producer-to-be George Martinattested,youhadtotakethemasagroup,theywere.“I around theindividualstar, whowaspoliteandrespectfultothepress. With theBeatles,as a waythatwasquitenovelinpopularmusicandjournalisticdiscourse,whichorganised 2013, 159). An editedversionofbanterbecame keytothegroup’s image,presentingthemin “Laughing atcrueltywasabigpartof. . . JohnandPaul’s sharedsenseoffun”(Lewisohn also aperformativeact. The Beatlesroutinelytradedjokesandinsultsamongstthemselves: ing thebondoflovebetweenmenwhileappearingtodenyit”(Easthope1986,88),butis aging theirrelationshiptothegazeofaudience.Itseemsauthentic,“awayaf nobody joinedin”(Lewisohn2013,99). featured BillHaley’s ‘Rock Around The Clock’,and“wasallsettotearuptheseatstoobut It wasthroughEpstein’s encouragementthattheLennon-McCartneysongwritingpart- The BeatleswerepreparedtoacceptEpstein’s gazeifithelpedtheircareer(Lewisohn As leader, Lennoncouldnotbeseentohave‘soldout’ (Wenner 1980,46)byacknowl- Banter, whichisanothercharacteristicofhomosocialgroups,canalsobeawayman- firm this(Norman1981,273).Butthequotedatesfrom1967. In1962, Homosociality and the early Beatles andtheearly Homosociality first outsidertowhosegazetheywouldwillingly 39 film Blackboard Jungle figure wasBob Wooler, (1955),which first onStu firm- fin- Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 15:51 28 Sep 2021; For: 9781315613437, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315613437.ch3 2013, 361).In August 1961,the BeatlesFanClubstarted(Lewisohn 2013,472)andthe RhoneandCynthia Powell.Fromthelatter’s account,Lennonwrotetoherdaily(Lewisohn (Dot) and McCartneybecamededicated letterwriters, writing wasthatoftheirfans. DuringtheirHamburg excursions from1960–1962,Lennon they drewoncoverversionsforideas.However, anotherin 1994) wasanumber“John them remainsopen.Forexample,‘IJustDon’t Understand’ (Ann-Margret 1961; The Beatles girl groupcoversthroughhisleadershipofthegroup,question of 400, 419–420,706,733).However, whileIhaveexplained riously, Lennonwoulddisrupthisperformancesbymockingandjeering(Lewisohn 2013, ‘A Taste ofHoney’,and‘OvertheRainbow’ (Lewisohn2013,419,526,539–540).Noto- Washington’s ‘SeptemberintheRain’ (1961),‘Till There Was You’ byPeggyLee(1961), lower status.McCartneytendedtoperformthisgenre,including showtuneslikeDinah was . . the worship ofUSR&Bprobablycountedformorethanthe putative genderofthesinger, or social policingappliedmoretothegenrethangenderoftheirrepertoire:Beatles’ sing songsbywomenandgirlgroups,whilepolicingothersforsimilarpractices.Homo- ability tobreaktherules.Hence,Lennoncouldidentifywithfemininesubjectpositionsand an absolutebanoneffeminacy, becausedominantmembers ofthegrouparede Beatle? Homosocialityiscontradictory–iteffectively says‘doasIsay, notasIdo’.Itis 1962); and‘LoveisaSwingin’ Thing’ (theB-sideof‘SoldierBoy’)(Lewisohn2013,621). Me Tomorrow’ (TheShirelles1960;Lewisohn2013,408,706);‘SoldierBoy’ (TheShirelles Baby’ and‘TheLoco-motion’ byLittleEva(1962a,1962b;Beatles1994);‘Will You but Lennonfrequentlyperformeditlive)(Lewisohn2013,409);‘Keep Your HandsOff My and ‘Boys’ (Shirelles1961a,1961b;Beatles1963a)(Ringosangontherecordingoflatter, The Marvelettes’ ‘PleaseMr. Postman’ (1961;Beatles1963b); The Shirelles’ ‘Babyit’s You’ ‘To KnowHimIstoLoveHim’ (TheBeatleschangedthegender) Teddy Bears1958); temporary R&Bwasthegirlgroupgenre,andthesenumbersweremainlysungbyLennon: women, whichwasaptforthepredominantlyfemaleCavernaudiences.Prominentincon- been playingin. Their changedrepertoirefeaturedmorecoverversionsofsongssungby effectively theirhomeandasafervenuethanthesuburbanhallsHamburg barstheyhad pool andenvirons,especiallythroughregularlunchtimegigsat The Cavern,whichwasnow Hamburg; itboredthem(Lewisohn2013,796). They werebuildingkeyaudiencesinLiver- R&B, and Tin Pan Alley –butincreasinglyeschewed therockandrolltheyhadplayedin The Beatlesperformedarangeofcoverversionsinthisperiod–rockandroll,contemporary of ‘homosocialauthenticity’ isrevealedasaruse. ‘originality’ becomesapointofdifference (Straw1999).Onceagain, thesplendidisolation ticity, usuallyopposedtothemarket,isthusrevealedasamarketingstrategy–musical 2013, 540).SongwritingbecamepartofthedevelopingBeatlesbrand. Authorial authen- rary musicindustryorthodoxythatartistsshouldrelyonestablishedsongwriters(Lewisohn round thegroup’s novelty–henceoriginalmaterial wasessential,despitethecontempo- still hesitantaboutplayingthem”(Lewisohn2013,539–540).Epstein’s marketingcentred Lennon/McCartney’s songwritingwascentraltothegroup strategyfrom1962on,and So, whydidLennonsingsomanysongsbywomen,givenhisreputationasthe‘macho’ words ofthesong(Miles1997,82).“Genderdidn’t stop The Beatles. . . agoodsong . enoughforthem”(Lewisohn2013,408). Tin Pan Alley, ontheotherhand,hada had tosing”(Lewisohn2013,477). This Iwilladdresspresently. showThe gang Matthew Bannister 40 fi rst and foremost to their girlfriends Dorothy rst andforemosttotheirgirlfriends Dorothy how Lennonwasabletoperform fluence ontheBeatles’ song- why Lennonperformed fined bytheir Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 15:51 28 Sep 2021; For: 9781315613437, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315613437.ch3 trality of their songs,mainly writing. McCartneynoteshowtheyincorporated“personalpronouns”(Lewisohn1988,9)into So theremaybesomecontinuitybetweentheBeatles’ letterwritingtotheirfans,andsong- 2013, 611). Writing totheirfanswasgoodpublicrelations,butalsohadotherbene spondence [hadbeen]openlycourtedfrom The CavernstageonFanClubnight”(Lewisohn split theBeatlesbetweenus. . . weallgotlettersback”(Lewisohn2013,611). This “corre- remarked: “Theythoughtwe’dforget themandmovetosomeothergroup!MyfriendsI Beatles encouragedfanstowritetheminHamburg (Lewisohn2013,599).FanLindyNess Me (1963a)hesingsleadonhalfthesongs andisthemainwriteron Throughout (1963–1964), Lennon’s dominancecontinued.On ever, thisidenti wanted to Building songwritersGerryGoffinandCaroleKing:“WhenPaulI A “She toldmewhattosay”(“SheLoves You”), could acterised girlgroupsongs,althoughthewayBradbydiscussesreportedspeechinBeatles, this isimplicit–Beatles’ songsarenotdialogicinthewaythatBarbaraBradby(2005)haschar- an eschewalofthegazeforamoredialogic,auralmodelconversation,althoughadmittedly, people, ratherthanapublicrelationbetweentwomalesgazingatthirdparty. Itcouldsuggest letter writingseemedtomitigateagainsthomosociality–itisaprivateactivitythatconnectstwo this wouldbeaproblem.However, thesuccessofgroupwouldresultinnewchallenges. long asLennonremained‘boss’,andthegroupservedhis needs,itseemedunlikelythat the sharedvaluesandcollectivelabourofgroup(Straw 1999).Ontheotherhand,as but authorshipinvestsintheindividualvoice,whichmay diverge fromorevenappropriate seems to‘speak’ foraparticularsocialgroup–the‘folkculture’ or‘homology’ argument – authenticity discourse,thatoftheauteurorprivilegedindividual. ‘Homosocialauthenticity’ ‘homosocial authenticity’ ofthegroupwascompromisedbyintroductionasecond 778). Henceforth,Lennon/McCartneycompositionsdominated theband’s repertoire.Sothe also jostledoverwhosenameshouldcome and youtwojustwatchit’”(Harrison,quoted in Lewisohn2013,705). McCartney and unless theywrotethemselves:“AnattitudecameoverJohnandPaulof‘We’re thegrooves of publishingroyalties,makingStarrandHarrisonsidemen,whowouldnotreceivecredit songwriting creditsbetweenthem,LennonandMcCartneyguaranteedthemselvesthebulk 13 songs,also co-writing George’s vocalcontribution‘I’mHappy JusttoDancewith You’. originals. On final influenceontheLennon/McCartneysongwritingpartnershipwasNew York Brill lot ofoursongs–“FromMe To You” isanother–weredirectlyaddressedtothefans that alotofgirlswhowroteusfanletterswouldtakeitasgenuinethankyou.So We wroteforourmarket. We knewthatifwewroteasongcalled“Thank You Girl” fi rst andsecondpersonpronounsalsobroadenedthepotentialaudience. The Beatles’ be theBritishGof A Hard Day’s Night (1964a),hesingslead andismainwriterofnineout fication alsocreatedasplitintheheartofgroup.Byagreeingtoshareall fi rst andsecondpersonsingular, asyouwouldinaletter. The genderneu- fin andKing”(Lennon,quotedinLewisohn2013,706).How- Homosociality and the early Beatles andtheearly Homosociality Gang busting busting Gang Gnig up Ganging (McCartney, quotedinLewisohn1988,9). 41 first; Lennonwon(Lewisohn2013,704,716, fi t the epistolary model. t theepistolarymodel. first gottogether, we five outofeight Please fi ts: Lennon Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 15:51 28 Sep 2021; For: 9781315613437, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315613437.ch3 and ‘play’ (literally, inthiscase)withfemininity. it, thusprovingonceagainthatonlytheleaderinahomosocialcontextcanchangerules for themtocarryon.Hebeganthegroup,andnow, ratherthancedecontrol,hewasending By bringingOnointothegroup,Lennonatoncereassertedhiscontrolandmadeitimpossible ing thegroupup.Itfeelsgood.likeadivorce”(Coleman1984,46;Riley2011, 463). Beatles’ collectiveimage.InSeptember1969,heannouncedtotheotherBeatles:“I’mbreak- appearing naked,gettingbusted,married,withLennonsystematicallydismantlingthe (Gould 2007,481).Forthenextyear, LennonandOnobecameamediacircus,protesting, and Ono’s inseparabilityalsoeffectively endedtheLennon/McCartneywritingpartnership Gould 2007,480–481). The otherBeatleswere“ Ono notonlyobserved,sheoffered comment,criticism,andparticipation(Coleman1984,37; social authenticity”(BrownandGaines1983,261;Coleman1984,37;Lewisohn1988,135). a newmember, admitting herintotherecordingstudio,lastbastionofgroup’s “homo- ‘Goodbye totheboysinband’”(Coleman1984,28).Lennoneffectively enlistedOnoas 1968. Why? Lennonframeditthisway:“whenImether, Ihadtodropeverything.itwas matters. Yet, everythingchangedwhenLennon’s relationshipwith Yoko OnobeganinMay 1984, 36;MacDonald2005,172,192;Riley2011, 428). The deathofBrianEpsteinworsened created apowervacuumwhichMcCartneyincreasingly 1983, 193ff; Coleman1984,8;Riley2011, 288–291),increasinglywithdrawnandsolitary, he tial tohissenseofself-identity. Taking LSDcopiously(Wenner 1980,76;BrownandGaines 1978, 317–318;BrownandGaines1983,193–194;Gould2007,321). The groupwasessen- . Ihavetoseethemestablishcontactwithmyself”(Davies . then thereissomeonelikeme. process. Lennonfeltthisseparationthemost:“Ihavetoseeothersmyself.Irealize lated, andoncetouringendedin1966,theyonlyhadregularcontactthewriting/recording paradoxically, bybreakingitup.Oncethegroupattaineditsgoal,membersbecameiso- are onlyafewcasesofdisputedauthorship.) [2005], althoughSheff andGolson [1982]andMiles[1997]shouldalsobeconsulted. There (The precisequestionofwhowrotewhatisreasonablyaccuratelyestablishedbyMacDonald elaborated inbiographiesand Ono, hefoundhisnewfamily. Basicallyanorphan,Lennon’s childhoodtraumashavebeen the group],justlikedivorceIgotfromCynthia!”(Brown andGaines1983,321).In his psychologicalneeds–hencerepeateduseofmarital imagery:“Iwantadivorce[from But itwasnotonlyapowerplay. Lennonjettisonedthegroupbecause itnolongerserved her boyfriendina‘one-bed’ raised byhisauntMimiaftershediscoveredhimlivingwith hismotherJuliaLennonand Boy 2009;Riley2011). Handedaroundbyrelativesasasmallchild,from1946,hewas ment (Lewisohn2013,77–78, 189,191,606–611). Gouldargues: (Lewisohn 2013,76,184,601). Notably, Lennon’s bullyingworsenedaftereachbereave- father George in1955,birthmotherJulia1958,andclose friendStuartSutcliffe in 1961 started spendingmoretimewithJulia.Hisyouthwasscarred bysuddendeaths– offered stability, security, andintellectualstimulation,buttheadolescentLennon But from1965to1969,Lennongraduallylost andthenregainedcontrolofhisgang, initial impulse was todominateanysocialsituation . . . “Iwasaggressive because Like otherstrong-willedchildrenwhohavesuffered rejectionorneglect,[Lennon’s] flat andinformedtheauthorities(Lewisohn2013,40).Mimi films (Hunter1978;Coleman1984;Goldman1989; asfamily The gang Matthew Bannister 42 fl abbergasted” (Coleman1984,37).Lennon fi lled, toLennon’s chagrin(Coleman beloved step- rebelled and rebelled and Nowhere Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 15:51 28 Sep 2021; For: 9781315613437, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315613437.ch3 ‘magical’ solution,bywhichmembershangontofamilialidenti what isrelevanttotheearlyBeatles.Cohentheorisessubculturesasaholdingpatternor this latterideaofreproducingfamilialcommunityintheformpeerrelationshipsis ‘private’ aspectsofsubcultures’ attemptedtransformationoftheirparentculture,but theory focusedonthe‘public’ aspectsofresistancetothedominantcultureratherthan tures” suchasdress,music,argot, andritual(banter)(Cohen2005,90).Subcultural socially cohesiveelementsdestroyedintheirparentculture. . . throughsymbolicstruc- incarnations (Gould2007,98,133)canbeviewedastryingto“retrievesomeofthe early marriageandtheemergence ofyouthsubcultures. ofcommunitystructures”(Cohen2005,88).Cohennotes tworelatedresponses– disintegration . abattleground,majorfocusofalltheanxietiescreatedby . rity forbothnowbecame. was onparent/childrelationships.“Whathadpreviouslybeenasourceofsupportandsecu- which destroyedJuliaandFredLennon’s marriage(Lewisohn2013,35). The mainimpact working-class communities,destabilisedbytheeffects ofmodernity, suchas World War II, ical ratherthangenderterms.Cohen(2005)describesacrisisofleadershipintraditional male gangs.Itprovidesanalternativeperspectivetohomosociality, theorisedinsociolog- both initssetting(post–World War IIBritishsociety)andsubjectmatter:working-class esting guy.andsuddenlyhe’s gotallthese in-laws” (Ono,quotedinGould2007,480). avoiding theneglecthehadsuffered. The Beatleswerehissubstitutefamily:“Imetaninter- Lennon’s gang-formingwasawayofcontrollinghisimmediatesocialenvironmentand fuck it,it. That’s reallyfucked everything,I’vegotno responsibilities toanyonenow’” . Ithought‘Fuckit, . Golson 1982,140).Herdeath “wastheworstthingthateverhappened. her renditionof‘I’m Wishing’, from inspiration fromJulia’s repertoire:‘Do You Want to KnowaSecret?’ (1963a)wasbased on roll, Juliaalsotaughthim“sweet songsfromheryouth”(Lewisohn2013,82).Lennondrew 1982, 140).Shetaughthimto playthebanjo(Lewisohn2013,82). As wellas earlyrockand 2013, 82–83).Juliaencouragedhimmusically–sangto andwithhim(Sheff andGolson for anadolescentboy(Lewisohn2013,82–83).Lennoneven contemplatedincest(Lewisohn John’s dreams”,witty, irresponsible,andsexuallyattractive,a“sourceofendlessconfusion” while Julia,hisbiologicalmother, wasmorelikeanoldersister, infactshewas“thegirlof prohibition andcontrol(whilealsointroducinghimtothe worldofcultureandliterature); emphases). Hewasraisedinamatriarchalsetting:Mimi broadly tookthepaternalroleof beautiful role models:“Therewere the subculturalmodeloffamilybreakdown.Hehadfew‘father the magictriangleisbroken. father, theotherBeatles functioningassiblings.But socialisation –thefamilymodelisdisplacedintogangLennonbecominghisown 2005, 93). Thus hedrawsaparallelbetweensubculturesandhomosocialityastypesof uation tosiblingrelations,whichthendevelopsintothegangoutsidefamily”(Cohen show ofdifference fromthefamily:“theOedipalcon The nascentBeatlesgang,whichwentthroughrecognisably Ted, Rocker, andMod Birmingham Schoolsubculturaltheoryprovidessupportforthisview, beingrelevant Lennon’s childhoodandadolescencecanbeinterpretedbothOedipally andintermsof at myjokesandletmebetheboss”. I wantedtobepopular. . . Iwantedeverybodytodowhattoldthem . . tolaugh women.Onehappened tobemymother”(Sheff andGolson1982,136;author’s five womenthatwereinmyfamily. Five Homosociality and the early Beatles andtheearly Homosociality Snow WhiteandtheSevenDwarfs 43 fl fi ict isdisplacedfromthetriadicsit- nally, Lennonbringsin Ono, and figures’, butmanywomen fi cations, whilemakinga (Gould 2007,48) strong, intelligent, (1937)(Sheff and Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 15:51 28 Sep 2021; For: 9781315613437, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315613437.ch3 (1964a), and‘SheLoves You’ allshowgirlgroupin Love Me’ (1961; Williams 2003).‘You’re GonnaLosethatGirl’ (1965a),‘Tell Me Why’ is Over)’ (JohnLennonand Yoko Ono,1971)resemblestheParisSisters’ ‘ILoveHow You resembles theMarvelettes’ ‘I Want aGuy’ (1961;Brocken2005)and‘HappyXmas(War (DeNora 2000).Lennonappropriatedmelodicallyfromgirlgroupmusic:‘There’s A Place’ voice (andotherwomen)infemalesingersandcarriedthese and thatmusicmemoryareoftenconnected,Lennoncouldhaveheardechoesofher by women.Giventhatmanyofhismemoriesmotherwereassociatedwithmusic, voices tofantasiseabout(likeJulia)?Hencehisfascinationwithrecordingsofsongssung distinguish betweenthem–weretheyvoicestoidentifywithandrespect(likeMimi)or and ‘MyMummy’s Dead’ (Lennon1970;MacDonald2005,327). (Lennon quotedinDavies1978,52).Headdresseshermemory‘Julia’ (1968),‘Mother’, is enactedattheendof“God”on for another:theBeatles’ collectiveforOnoandrockroll. This realisationoromission individuals” (Wenner 1980,45)–perhapshewasonlyswappingonesetofdependencies his splitfromtheBeatlesastraditionalindividuation–“They rememberedtheywerefour gesting thatidentityisalwaysincomplete,asMiddletonargues. Although Lennonpresented child, lookingforhismother. Lennon describesasauthenticinhisworkispreciselythemoment inwhichheisafrightened ple ‘Help!’ (1965a):“Itwasjustmesinging‘Help’ andImeantit”(Wenner 1980,115). What work, theemergence ofanindividualvoice,istiedtotheadmissionweakness,forexam- delic period,whenLSDwasfurtherchallengingLennon’s ‘ego’. perspective: ‘LucyIntheSky With Diamonds’ (1967)–thelatterespeciallyinhispsyche- was aboy”(‘SheSaidSheSaid’),“WhenIyounger”(‘Help’ 1965a),orfromachild’s tor, justasLennonbullied hispeers.Lennonoftensingseitheraboutbeingachild:“WhenI Heavy)’ (1969)allfeaturepowerfulbutelusivefemale (1966b), ‘Don’t LetMeDown’ (1970),‘SexySadie’ (1968),and‘I Want You (She’s So ’Norwegian Wood’ (1965b),‘Girl’ (1965b),‘SheSaidSheSaid’ (1966a), ‘Day Tripper’ Cry Instead’ (1964a),‘IDon’t Want To Spoil The Party’ (1964b),‘Ticket toRide’ (1965a), the predominantaffect ischild-likedependence,withthefainthopeofreciprocation.‘I’ll ‘You’ or‘Her’. Although seasonedwithoccasionaljealousy(‘You Can’t Do That’ [1964a]), ‘Please MisterPostman’.Butmorefrequentisaninsecure‘I’ inthralltoanall-powerful songs: in‘It Won’t BeLong’ (1963b)thenarratorsitsathome,waitingandhoping,like 2005, 175). of ‘IPutaSpellon You’ (1965)tosupplyamiddleeightforMcCartney’s song(MacDonald MacDonald 2005).For‘Michelle’ (1965b),heborrowedalinefromNinaSimone’s version (Coleman 1984, 189),suggestingthatpartof himwouldalwaysremaina smallchildwhose incompleteness transferreditself toOno,thewomanhehenceforthaddressedas‘Mother’ original). Butwasitstillreal in 1970? Authenticity onlyexistsinthepast.Finally, Lennon’s ised that“Rockandrollwas the past–recreatingthatoriginal, youthfulmomentwhenheheardLittleRichardandreal- about herabsence,thepast, justashisidenti [dramatic pause]. Yoko andme”.It’s asifheforgot herforamoment. While itislikelythatLennonwassensitisedtofemalevoices,hecouldnotnecessarily This subject positionheadoptsisnotfeminine–itaboutthe To returntoMiddleton(2006),theemotionalauthenticitythatLennontalksaboutinhis In termsoflyricalpersonae,Lennonoccasionallyimitatessituationsfromgirlgroup Lennon stronglyidenti fied with real . Everythingelsewasunreal” (Lewisohn2013,90;italicsin loss – hewasnotsingingabouthismother, hewassinging Plastic OnoBand Matthew Bannister 44 fication withrockandrollwas also about fl whenhesings:“Ijustbelieveinme uence (Warwick 2000;Bradby2005; figures whobullythehaplessnarra- fl uences intohisownwork loss ofthefeminine, sug- Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 15:51 28 Sep 2021; For: 9781315613437, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315613437.ch3 ‘outside’ tohomosociality, andtoexplorethis Iintroduceanalternativetheory of‘gangs’ – attracted tofemalevoices? Why didheneedtoformagang inthe allowed himtobe‘weak’,it is anothertoexplainwhyhefeltthatneed. Why wasLennon necessarily explainwhy. ItisonethingtosaythatLennon’s ‘strong’ position inthegroup how femininityismanagedand relatestothehierarchicalstructureofgroup,itdoes not these samedistinctionswerepoliced homosocially).Butalthoughhomosocialitycanexplain distinctions aboutmaterialperformedonthebasisofgenre ratherthangender(although this couldbeseenasthepatriarchaldividend–alongwith possibilitythatthegroupmade and intheformofcovers. the groupchangingtheirrepertoiretoincludemore‘female-friendly’ material,bothoriginal audience andhowtowritefor/tothem. A processofcollaborationwithaudiencesevolves, tinction ofmaleartistandfemaleaudiencebreaksdownas theBeatlesseektoexpandtheir ated –musicaloriginalitybecomespartofthegroup’s image.Similarly, thehomosocialdis- and substance,imagemusic,apparentlyimportantto homosocial integrity, are negoti- the leader, whilehehimselfseemstobealooffromthisprocess.Distinctionsbetween form them thesubjectofagazewhichmustbemanagedthrough variousmediators,permittedby and rejectingthegaze. These contradictionsramifyasthegroupperformsinpublic,making these contradictions,thusLennon’s adoptionofa Ted persona–simultaneouslyfascinating by acontradictorystructureofhomoeroticdesire.Itisfunctiontheleadertomanage within thegroup.Farfrombeingauthenticallyhomosocial,groupisriven subject tothegazehimself,sothattriangularstructureisrepeatedinaninvertedform other forsignsofeffeminacy. Butparadoxically, inordertolead,theleadermustbecome angular structureofhomosociality, projectingtheirgazeanddesireoutwards,policingeach was presentingin1970. The BeatleswereaganginitiatedbyLennon,conformingtothetri- to beconsistent. and thisisanaspectofthecontradictorynaturehomosociality–thatpowerdoesnothave rewrite history–heistheexceptiontorulesthatothergroupmembersmustabideby, main perpetrator. At thesametime,itisrightofleaderhomosocialgroupto on Yoko Ono,makinghimselflooklikethevictimofphenomenonwhichhewas individual voice,alternating authenticity whiledisparaginghisowngroup,settingitagainsttheemergence ofhis‘true’ music. At thesametime,Lennon’s positionwascontradictory–allyinghimselfwithrock ance ofhomosocialmasculinitywiththedevelopmentauthenticitynarrativein1960s homosocial groupintersectedinimportantwayswiththeideaofrockauthenticity–alli- important bothtohimand1960sculture.Iargued thattheemergence oftheBeatlesasa ter Lennonin1970,revisinghishistorytominimisetheroleofgroupthathadbeenso chronological approach,whileatthesametimeinsertingaloopbywhichwe the adolescentgangtheybeganasandmusicalgroupbecame,followingabasically and Lennon’s roleinthem.Byfocusingontheir earlycareer, Ishowedcontinuitiesbetween group andargued thatthisinterpretation allowsustore-evaluatethemeaningofBeatles In thischapter, IhavediscussedthephenomenonofLennonasleaderahomosocial temporary supportstructurethatallowedLennontogoonfunctioninguntilOnoappeared. life wassavedbyrockandroll. The Beatles’ ‘homosocialauthenticity’ isrevealedasa Lennon inparticularseemedtorelishperformingmaterialbywomen,and,someways, If wegobacktotheBeatles’ beginnings,we fighting talkwithnakedconfessionsofloveanddependence Homosociality and the early Beatles andtheearly Homosociality Conclusion 45 find adifferent storytothatwhichLennon first place? There isan first encoun- first Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 15:51 28 Sep 2021; For: 9781315613437, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315613437.ch3 Bradby, Barbara.2005.“She Told Me What toSay: The BeatlesandGirl-GroupDiscourse.” A Beatlescatchphrase,adaptedfromthe 1 control overthegroupinordertodestroyit. he foundasuitablemother/lover(Ono),usedhertoprisethegroupapart,reassertinghis that canbetracedbacktotheimportanceofmaternal tenet isthatLennon’s songwritingandlyricsshow ahiddenhistoryoffemininein ing hischildhoodtraumasandconsequentlyshakysenseofself-identity. Finally, mycentral gesting thatLennonformedagangpartlyasfamilysubstitute,wayof‘magically’ solv- subcultural theorythathelpsteaseouttheconnectionsbetweengangsandfamilies,sug- Brown, Peter, andStevenGaines.1983. Brocken, Michael.2005.“Some Other Guys!Some Theories aboutSigni Davies, Hunter. 1978. Dafydd, Rees,andLukeCrampton.1996. Brake, Mike.1980. Lewisohn, Mark.1988. Goldman, Albert. 1989. King, Martin.2013. Hawkins, Stan.2009. Gould, Jonathan.2007. Easthope, Antony. 1986. Connell, Raewyn.1987. Coleman, Ray. 1984. Cohen, Sara.1997.“MenMakingaScene:RockMusicandtheProductionofGender.” In Cohen, Phil.2005.“SubculturalCon Kilmartin, Christopher. 2004.“SigmundFreud.”In DeNora, Tia. 2000. Connell, Raewyn.1995. Mäkelä, Janne.2004. MacDonald, Ian.2005. Lewisohn, Mark.2013. Meuser, Michael.2004.“Homosociality.” In Miles, Barry. 1997. Norman, Phillip.1981. Middleton, Richard.2006. Riley, Tim. 2011. sions.” Kegan Paul. Music &Society Paladin. Barbara: ABC–Clio. Historical Encyclopedia,Vol. 1, A Groove: PopularMusicandGender , ed.Sheila Whiteley, 18–34.London:Routledge. ed. KenGelder, 86–93.London:Routledge. ingstoke: Macmillan. Lang. ABC–Clio. ical Encyclopedia,Vol. 1, A delinquency. Thanks toMeganBerryforherassistancewiththischapter. Popular Music&Society . 2009.DirectedbySam Taylor-Johnson. UK:EcosseFilms,Channel4,UKFilm Council. Lennon: TheMan, theMyth,Music–TheDe 20(3):359–390. Music inEverydayLife Paul McCartney:ManyYears from Now The SociologyofYouth Culture andYouth Subcultures Men, MasculinityandtheBeatles John OnoLennon,Vol. 2 . London:Sidgwick&Jackson. The BritishPopDandy:Masculinity, PopMusicandCulture John LennonImagined:TheCulturalHistoryofaRockStar The Beatles: Authorized Biography Revolution intheHead:TheBeatles’ Records andtheSixties Shout! TheTrue StoryoftheBeatles Can’t BuyMeLove:TheBeatles,Britainand America The CompleteBeatlesRecording Sessions Tune in:TheBeatles– All TheseYears, Vol. 1 The LivesofJohnLennon Masculinities Gender andPower . Cambridge:Polity. What aMan’s GottaDo:TheMasculineMythinPopularCulture Voicing the Popular:OntheSubjectsofPopularMusic –J , ed.MichaelS.Kimmel and Amy Aronson, 396–7.SantaBarbara: 20(4):5–38. flict and Working-Class Community.” In –J , ed.MichaelS.Kimmeland Amy Aronson, 319–21.Santa . Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress. The LoveYou Make: An Insider’s StoryoftheBeatles Matthew Bannister Encyclopedia ofRockStars Bibliography . Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress. film Men andMasculinities: A Social,Cultural,andHistor- Note Note 46 Violent Playground . New York: Bantam. Men andMasculinities: A Social,Cultural,and . ana: Ashgate. Farnham: . . London:HamishHamilton. figures inhislife,andthathow, once . New York: HenryHolt. . St. Albans: GranadaPublishing. . London:Hamlyn. finitive Life (1957),adramaaboutjuvenile . New York: Crown Archetype. . New York: D.K.Publishing. fication: BeatlesCover Ver- . London:Routledgeand The Subcultures Reader . New York: Hyperion. . London:Portrait.

. London:Routledge. . ana: Ashgate. Farnham: . . London:Pimlico. . New York: Peter Sexing the . London: . Popular fluence . Bas- . , Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 15:51 28 Sep 2021; For: 9781315613437, chapter3, 10.4324/9781315613437.ch3 Sheff, David, andBarryGolson.1982. Sedgwick, EveKosofsky. 1985. Washington, Dinah.1961.“SeptemberintheRain.”Mercury, single. The Teddy Bears.1958.“To KnowHimIstoLove Him.”Era/Dore,single. Simone, Nina.1965. ———. 1962.“SoldierBoy.” Scepter, single. ———. 1961b.“Boys.”Scepter, single. ———. 1961a.“BabyIt’s You.” Scepter, single. The Shirelles.1960.“Will You StillLoveMe Tomorrow.” Scepter, single. The ParisSisters.1961.“ILoveHow You LoveMe.”Gregmark,single. The Marvelettes.1961. ———. 1962b.“TheLoco-Motion.”Dimension,single. Little, Eva.1962a.“Keep Your HandsOff MyBaby.” Dimension,single. Lennon, John,and Yoko Ono.1971.“HappyXmas(War IsOver).” Apple, single. Lennon, John.1970. Lee, Peggy. 1961.“Till There Was You.” Capitol,single. ———. 1995. ———. 1994. ———. 1970. ———. 1969. ———. 1968. ———. 1967. ———. 1966b. ———. 1966a. ———. 1965b. ———. 1965a. ———. 1964b. ———. 1964a. Straw, Will. 1999.“Authorship.”In Rubin, Gayle.1975.“The Traf ———. 1963b. The Beatles.1963a. Ann-Margret. 1961.“IJustDon’t Understand.”RCA/Victor, single. Thomson, Elizabeth,andDavidGutman.1987. Wenner, Jann.1980. Warwick, Jacqueline.2000.“You’re GoingtoLose That Girl: The BeatlesandtheGirlGroups.”In Willis, Paul.1978. Williams, Richard.2003. York: ColumbiaUniversityPress. enoaks: NewEnglishLibrary. an Anthropology ofWomen Thomas Swiss,199–207.OxfordandMalden:Blackwell. Jyväskylä, DepartmentofMusic. ger, Sheila Whiteley, Terhi NurmesjärviandJouniKoskimäki,161–8.Jyväskylä:Universityof Beatlestudies3:Proceedings oftheBeatles2000Conference Penguin. Anthology 1 Live attheBBC Let ItBe Abbey Road The Beatles Sgt. Pepper’s LonelyHeartsClubBand Revolver Help! Parlophone,LP. A Hard Day’s Night . Parlophone,LP. A CollectionofBeatlesOldies Rubber Soul . Parlophone,LP. Beatles forSale With theBeatles Profane Culture Please Me Lennon Remembers:TheRollingStoneInterviews /PlasticOnoBand I PutaSpellonYou . pl, LP. Apple, . . al, LP. Tamla, Please Mr. Postman. . Parlophone,LP. Phil Spector:OutofHisHead . pl, LP. Apple, . . pl, LP. Apple, . . pl, CD. Apple, . , ed.RaynaReiter, 157–210.New York: MonthlyReview. fic in Women: Notestowards aPoliticalEconomyofSex.”In . pl, LP. Apple, . . Parlophone,LP. Between Men:EnglishLiterature andMaleHomosocialDesire . Parlophone,LP. Homosociality and the early Beatles andtheearly Homosociality . London:Routledge. Key Terms inPopularMusicandCulture . Parlophone,LP. The PlayboyInterviewswithJohnLennonandYoko Ono . Phillips,LP. . Parlophone,LP. Music The LennonCompanion . Basingstoke:Macmillan. 47 . pl, LP. Apple, . . Parlophone,LP. . London:Omnibus. , ed. Yrjö Heinonen,MarkusHeu- . igod Vcoi, Australia: Victoria, Ringwood, . , ed.BruceHornerand Towards . New . . Sev- .